Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #8

I think the entire "generation" branding is highly misleading to begin with. As countries have different contexts for that.
As an example, a highly intellectual avionics complex is a requirment of the fifth generation placed on the Su-57, But the systems on the Su-57 are by virtue of time way more advanced that on the F-22 which, also is classified as fifth gen and also checks the label of advanced avionics for it's own timeframe and context.

By the the requirments of the F-22, the Su-57 would convert more into a 5 plus plus or something, as it exhibits a lot of additional capability. As a somewhat general rule, a generational leap is translated into at least 20 percent increase in effectiveness, at least by russian standards, i can see the Su-57 fullfilling that very well. You have a massive engagement range vs enemy ground installations, highly varied options for AIR to AIR BVR, Extremely advanced ECM, the best multispectral sighting system put into a plane, very short take off and landing, massive cut in parts number compared to Su-27, and the whole range of incremental upgrades brought by being newer, from newer RAM formulas to newer software and computer (10 years is considered an era in that field), and so on.

It's apalling that this aircraft was seen as fifth gen in name only.

And at the same time FCAS or Tempest, which are late 5th gen designs (is the design even ready?) by countries that are traditionally decades late due to their impossibly bureaucratic ways and reduced resource base and which face very significant program risk have to be taken as 6th gen at face value. Or NGAD BTW, which is supposed to be flying now already, but is also supposed to be 6th gen, just because they draw it without tails to make it look "advanced"? Utter nonsense. These planes are not going to have significantly different systems and capabilities to what Su-57 has (they call it 4.5th gen) or will have by the time they are commissioned. The only argument I see is that US has already advanced demonstrators of adaptive engines, but Russia has already them in development and they are supposed to be based on the core of the izd. 30) so maybe not so far in the future. In fact LTS with its digital engineering and unmanned version is already a good step into the 6th gen, but try to tell this to Western fanboys that swallow the Tempest and NGAD hype without hesitation. They live on delusion.

LMFS, of course a person would live in delusion if the tempest being a mockup is no issue, but an actual prototype of LTS would be the target of skepticism and mockery inspite of itclearly showing that it was not a mockup.
The closest thing i can see to an actual sixth gen would be a Su-57 deeply modified to have what the engineers are saying it's supposed to have in later stages of its life.

Atmosphere wrote:LMFS, of course a person would live in delusion if the tempest being a mockup is no issue, but an actual prototype of LTS would be the target of skepticism and mockery inspite of itclearly showing that it was not a mockup.
The closest thing i can see to an actual sixth gen would be a Su-57 deeply modified to have what the engineers are saying it's supposed to have in later stages of its life.

Well, that is the current state of things in the Western collective madness. I have seen them almost outraged when I explained that a LTS with the three stream engine UEC is developing and eventual additive manufacturing (on top of the digital engineering used in its development plus the fact that it is being designed in an unmanned version from the start) would be an arguable 6th gen plane or at least well on its way there, but as it is Russian, seems a real plane and not some spaceship with lasers and other assorted BS, it cannot possibly be advanced, even if the substantive elements are there. I had to read that unlike LTS, there is a solid financial backing for the Tempest and FCAS (and this last from a supposed expert, no joking)... I mean, the complacency driven self delusion has reached such level that even well informed pals are many steps away from understanding how fvcked their militaries are... these people are indignant of the Russian and Chinese "insolence" and more than willing to support their governments "teaching them a lesson"

One more reason to not check secret projects or similar drivel cesspools, in that case.
There haven't been a single piece of legitimate evidence that the Su-57 or LTS lacked funding, it all stems from the days in which people confused FGFA with PAK-FA (which shows a great deal about how educated they are) and started thinking that india bailing out meant no money.

Similarly, i've seen speculations that the exhibits are there to draw money into the LTS program, which is bull since sukhoi said they did it over their own expense since there is a niche in the market.

Everyones perception of a 6th gen aircraft is entirely different but of course what I see being perceived as 6th gen is rather 5th gen + but when your saying one aircraft design is one gen higher there has to be a significant technological edge that it must have to be granted to be called as such. aircrafts with stealth and manueverability are better than non treated stealth aircrafts as we noticed from the su-27 to T-50 patent. however aircrafts that fly near orbit will be perceived better than stealth aircrafts because air to air missiles have to burn alot of fuel to travel up than down and keeping the nose radar pointed at the higher altitude aircraft will be significantly hard. The higher altitude aircraft will get the entire body reflection of the low flying aircraft instead of just the front face where RCS is the lowest.

GaAS radars was all 5th gen now there is a good chance that GaN radars will be called 6th gen with all radar visibility for TFX and NGAD but even the TFX is being offered something similiar in other words i can see both aircrafts being comparable to this at best I would label this as 5th gen plus. The performance for GaN will be better than GaAS and have a little higher bandwidth range but that is about it. Photonic radars have lower background noise levels that the difference is rather drastic especially with EW suppression protection it has. The su-57 in 2014 Rostec book was showcased with GaN EW modules and according to some arguements at times it can be believed that it has 360 degree radar coverage since the back modules by a KRET official stated passive and active detection in which I say he is no fool and says what he means. no idea if these GaN modules can be plug n play for the F-35 https://www.qorvo.com/applications/defense-aerospace/radar#all-cat-products

Data speeds of tempest are the city of Edinburgh, or 10,000 times more than current systems, I dont know what the **** that vague explanation is, but a single photonic component on pdf page 25 https://itech.aorti.ru/upload/iblock/467/rti_ii_4_19_2017.pdf can go 400 gbs per second. Edinburgh with 4 other major cities amounts to 4000+ gbs per second https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_exchange_points_by_size . meaning 10 photonic radar modules would be enough for not just Edinburgh but the other 4 major cities included. this is what I mean by major difference in generation.

Now I cant say shit right now if 3 stream cycle engines determine next generation or gets the 5th gen +, but I will use the baseline range and supercruise capabilities of the Izdelie 30 to help me determine if it goes a generation up or gets a + for example if the range and speed of NGAD or Tempest are like 5-10% more than the 2nd stage engine with a little higher altitude performance i will just give a + if it is significantly more and has like a 10km altitude height difference in performance it deserves to be next gen. Russia will have easier luck with 3 stream engine than operating a detonation engine. We can all forget about the TFX because they want to go domestic on it, the only thing we can compare it to is radar capabilities to NGAD and Tempest

2007 or 2008 there were talks that the F-35 would get DIRCM fastforward to 2022 there is none implemented yet(probably expecting the same kind of shit for MSDM), yet it was promised a 100 kilowatt laser that destroys things physically while the Su-57 only blinds, next they propose MSDM a minauture self defense missile that is 1 meter long, yet no tests are conducted while the pantsir which is to be quadpacked is actually testing 1 meter missiles against small drones. Russia switched to creating their own infrared detection systems instead of being reliant on the French, can't compare IRST but I can compare this https://en.topwar.ru/181736-rosteh-predstavil-novye-kombinirovannye-pribory-razvedki-dlja-specpodrazdelenij.html to this https://www.baesystems.com/en-us/product/target-reconnaissance-infrared-geolocating-range-finder and say I think they caught up. But if Russia wants a MSDM kind of system for their aircrafts I think its more preferable to have UV, infrared and 360 degree AESA or ROFAR(for better targetting precision) all sensor fused on the aircraft before implementing it. But besides the avionics upgrade for the Su-57 we have yet to find out if some capabilities will be disclosed here. Using flares should set you a generation back

Also BAE Taranis, X-47B and Neuron all existed way before the Su-70 was even known fast forward again, you know those said countries developing said 6th gens have no production or in operation plans with any of those 3 yet Russia developed a much larger stealth drone with not only testing air to ground capabilities but also gave it a radar with air to air missile capabilities and are now moving on testing supersonic variants of the Su-75 to be unmanned, Krylo-SV is going to be using runways to fly and land with hypersonic speeds as having drone capabilities so they are closer to having a unmanned 6th gen aircrafts which might add a bonus microwave gun weapon but that we dont know yet.

Russia already has internal hypersonic air to ground missiles planned for Su-57, in before Tempest and NGAD try to promote this as a 6th gen feature

If Western fans are pissed about Pierre Sprey, Christopher miller or General browns replacement plan along with trying to put the F-22s back in service before getting replaced by NGAD, they are going to get more pissed when we run comparisons to the 2nd variant Su-57 to the NGAD or Tempest.

From KTRV publicity for 2022

https://mobile.twitter.com/MuxelAero/status/1475827038648995843/photo/1

So Russia cannot into hypersonic?

That is an old image from long time ago.



It has been posted here - https://www.russiadefence.net/t7618p375-su-57-stealth-fighter-news-5#248375

Or NGAD BTW, which is supposed to be flying now already...

NGAD is not flying. A tech demonstrator was reported to have flown - which means a platform which tests some of the technology that will go into NGAD. Basically, it was the US equivalent of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_X-2_Shinshin

And as we all know the Japanese fighter is still many years away.

I think the entire "generation" branding is highly misleading to begin with.

You are right it is. I think it will slowly fade away though, thankfully. The jump from 4th to 5th stood out because the roughly one thousand fold reduction in RCS (in addition to the other approvements) was a true paradigm shift. The differences in the historical 'generations' weren't as substantial though and future ones don't look to be either. The easy pickings with stealth have been worked to death and so there is no substantial gains to be made there. Kinematics is limited by the pilot - and pilotless is experimental. And as for avionics and networking, sure that can be improved. But Moore's Law is dead, and has been for several years, and it's not coming back. The doubling in processing power every 18-24 months is gone for the foreseeable future; improvements will happen more slowly.

I'm sure marketing will keep the hype going for a while, but such days are numbered.

Autodestruct wrote:NGAD is not flying.  A tech demonstrator was reported to have flown - which means a platform which tests some of the technology that will go into NGAD.  Basically, it was the US equivalent of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_X-2_Shinshin

And as we all know the Japanese fighter is still many years away.

The interpretation you mention is one of the ones circulating about that rather vaguely described event and possibly the most reasonable one, regardless the flight of the "NGAD demonstrator" has been hyped quite a bit. And thanks to it, the US MIC has managed to convince the public opinion that the F-22 has transitioned overnight from being untouchable to being obsolete and not worthy of a modest modernization, because NGAD is "almost there". They manipulate their public like they want, this we have to concede to them...

You got a very binary view of things, LMFS. There is no sudden transition. But the F-22 wasn't designed with the sensors and comms necessary to function in the next level of network centric warfare that US planners envision in the next ten to fifteen years. It would be an expensive fifth wheel - when operating, and its older generation stealth technology requires it to be a hangar queen. It's too expensive to be a mere ordinance truck like the F-15EX. And no "modest" priced modernization can change that.

Autodestruct wrote:You got a very binary view of things, LMFS.  There is no sudden transition.  But the F-22 wasn't designed with the sensors and comms necessary to function in the next level of network centric warfare that US planners envision in the next ten to fifteen years.  It would be an expensive fifth wheel - when operating, and its older generation stealth technology requires it to be a hangar queen.  It's too expensive to be a mere ordinance truck like the F-15EX.  And no "modest" priced modernization can change that.

I'll tell you one thing, if you remove your latest fighter from service with half of the normal platform life, while you continue to order, upgrade and operate its predecessor, you have fucked up big time. No excuses and no way to hide it.

F-15 and Su-27 where not designed for AESA, FBW, modern engines with FADEC and much higher thrust, new weapons, completely different sensors, avionics and defensive systems, but they were gutted around half of their platform life (much later in fact in the case of the F-15) and resulted in known platforms with mostly known issues and operational processes, only with vastly upgraded capabilities. Which is, due to unavoidable phenomena derived from the nature of development and troubleshooting processes, way faster and cheaper than creating a new platform from scratch and starting the maturing process of every single possible long term failure mode interaction from scratch.

So, the USAF could take the F-22 and include cheek radars, for which there was space provision, the advanced IRST which was also foreseen, optimize the structure, include EW systems and data links, maybe even gain space in the ventral weapons bay and reduce the size of the side ones which are totally underused to gain fuel capacity, change the RAM/RAS to the type used by the F-35, update the avionics and even change the engines to an adaptive version of the F119 that would bring outstanding kinematic capabilities and substantially increased range. Some of those items were, BTW, the core of that famous "hybrid" between the F-35 and F-22 that they were wanting the Japanese to pay. With such a plane, they would have a serious platform for many, many years to come, at a fraction of the cost of a brand new one, more even if DE is used for the design and preliminary tests, since already existing real world tests can be used to calibrate the digital models. More importantly, they would have a fallback plan in case the NGAD does not work 100% according to the systematically overoptimistic expectations that are also systematically used to trick the congress at program's kick-off in order to gain the required financing under rosy views of the future. I have said this before, this way of doing things is pure negligence at best, outright crime at worst. Risk management works exactly the other way around, by creating alternatives and not by destroying them. US MIC is again selling the dummy and convincing people that is "cheaper" to throw everything that you have been working on for the last 30 years in the trash and start from scratch, than improving gradually. Only someone with no actual experience in any industry or development process of any kind can believe that, because the notion is simply ludicrous.

As to the NGAD, it is still to be seen if the platform (first iteration of the fighter component at least) will indeed be a new design or just another way to make that "hybrid" above palatable for the political class and public opinion. Maybe they enlarge the platform for more range and payload and put 2x F135 or better their adaptive follower, that would be a very serious plane. They probably know it is necessary to update the F-22, they have tried with the restart of the production and with the hybrid already, but they don't get traction among the politicians unless they promise mind blowing capabilities that politicians and media can sell to a public always ready to be fooled in name of maintaining their claimed superiority. It is always the same story and they are tricked always the same, but they don't seem to learn.

The most important and interesting facet of SU57 will be the data linking and ai remote input to drones like S70, orion, helios, grom.

Yup, that and sensors. And that's also why the F-35 will operate for decades to come and the F-22 won't be worth it in 10-12 years. That's just how things are going.

Ok, sorry but I have to answer to that

Data links and avionics are greatly independent from the platform, they have certain space, power and cooling requirements, but nothing that cannot be met even on way smaller UAVs. Due to incremental performance increase of electronics, similar volumes allow for increasing processing and bandwidth performance and are accordingly substituted as the platform undergoes customary modernizations and MLUs. For instance we just learned Su-30SM will receive OSNOD, similar systems were also substituted in the MiG-31BM and in general in all modernized planes of the VKS, even several times along the operational life of the platform. US playing the avionics card to excuse the flawed airframe philosophy of the F-35 for instance is going to be called out soon, when LTS and probably FC-31 have the same avionics-related features with improved dynamics, as there is no clear relationship of dependence between both elements in an aircraft. The air vehicle is the long term investment of the design, the avionics changes way faster and the SW even faster, so you cannot bet in the later two and forget the former.

That being said, the Su-57 as platform is head, shoulders and waist above the 4th gen, I think it will be clear to see when we have actual technical specs.

The Su-57 can't replace the MiG-31... it simply does not have the speed or height performance....

It will certainly make an excellent fighter and interceptor, but for pure interception nothing comes close to the MiG-31 in speed and height and therefore also missile performance... even firing the same missiles the MiG-31 spends most of its time supersonic at mach 2.4... and an altitude the Su-57 wont spend much time at all at.

Su-57 also wont be flying around at speeds greater than Mach 2 simply because it burns too much fuel.

It wont spend all its time subsonic.. super cruise at mach 1.6 or so is likely but not the same as Mach 2.4 out to 750km and back again like the MiG-31.

This means the MiG will be engaging enemy threats earlier and is more likely to shoot down aircraft with weapons on board instead of having to deal with all their launched munitions.

GarryB wrote:The Su-57 can't replace the MiG-31... it simply does not have the speed or height performance....

It will certainly make an excellent fighter and interceptor, but for pure interception nothing comes close to the MiG-31 in speed and height and therefore also missile performance... even firing the same missiles the MiG-31 spends most of its time supersonic at mach 2.4... and an altitude the Su-57 wont spend much time at all at.

Su-57 also wont be flying around at speeds greater than Mach 2 simply because it burns too much fuel.

It wont spend all its time subsonic.. super cruise at mach 1.6 or so is likely but not the same as Mach 2.4 out to 750km and back again like the MiG-31.

This means the MiG will be engaging enemy threats earlier and is more likely to shoot down aircraft with weapons on board instead of having to deal with all their launched munitions.

While it is clear that the Su-57 is not a direct replacement of the MiG-31, I sometimes wonder where the limit really lies between those two. Sukhoi created an platform that can indeed fly very high and very fast, maybe not as fast and high as the MiG-31, but with several relevant advantages:

- Without the need to engage AB
- With substantial RCS advantage
- With incomparably better supersonic manoeuvrability

Those are serious advantages over the MiG-31, which is vulnerable because of them.

To be clear, the MiG has a big advantage over NATO escorts precisely due to its high speed and persistence and use of long range AAM. Guided by the IADS, it can use favourable attack directions and outrun opposing fighters. F-15 is the only Western fighter with chances of competing in speed, but its range is very limited in such conditions, and F-22 the only one that can sustain a high speed for a substantial amount of time, bu it really does not seem nearly as fast as the F-15. The advantage of the Su-57 in such conditions is that it would be able to approach more before being noticed (both planes IMHO would operate in radar silence) and would be much more able to outmanoeuvre incoming AAMs by turning way faster than a MiG-31 could. So it has its own arguments

That being said, we don't know max mil speed, max AB speed, service ceiling, supersonic rage and other parameters which would really tell how capable the plane would be in a role similar to that of the MiG-31. Like said before, I have the impression (due to direct statements, patent explanations and other design elements) that Sukhoi was really ambitious about the supersonic performance of the Su-57 and we may not realise now what the actual limits are. Despite previous discussions with Mindstorm, I would not be surprised if a max cruising speed of ca. 2 M was a design goal with the second stage engine. And without using AB, the range on that flight regime would probably not be that far from  the 750 km supersonic combat radius of the MiG-31. A plane with such characteristics would be able to outclass current fighters and make it almost impossible for NATO to establish air dominance in a potential conflict.