PAK-FA / Sukhoi Su-57 - Updates and Discussions

[Optimist]

Nah, that's the most informed opinion you heard on this forum, Jack! Once we acquire Su-57s, all of you shall get some hints about its VLO stealth from the horse' mouth(IAF) itself. Till then, as I said earlier, just wait and watch

And Su-57 having Super Hornet like RCS? LOL

Stlll clueless, if the article isn't enough, askme and I will explain it to you

The Su-57 Felon is marketed as stealth fighter but It has the same RCS of a clean Super Hornet (and 1,000 times bigger than that of the F-35). Here’s why.

The Su-57 Felon is marketed as stealth fighter but It has the same RCS of a clean Super Hornet. Here’s why.

theaviationgeekclub.com

 

[Rajput Lion]

Stlll clueless, if the article isn't enough, askme and I will explain it to you

The Su-57 Felon is marketed as stealth fighter but It has the same RCS of a clean Super Hornet (and 1,000 times bigger than that of the F-35). Here’s why.

The Su-57 Felon is marketed as stealth fighter but It has the same RCS of a clean Super Hornet. Here’s why.

theaviationgeekclub.com

Nope. Clean Super Hornet's frontal RCS is -10dBsm or 0.1m^2 while Su-57's is less than -30dBsm or 0.001m^2. Go figure.

PS: Our Su-57MKI version will have better frontal RCS than even F-22 Raptor 2.0(which is forced to fight with IRST/EW/2 EFTs now).

 

[Optimist]

Nope. Clean Super Hornet's frontal RCS is -10dBsm or 0.1m^2 while Su-57's is less than -30dBsm or 0.001m^2. Go figure.

PS: Our Su-57MKI version will have better frontal RCS than even F-22 Raptor 2.0(which is forced to fight with IRST/EW/2 EFTs now).

You're just living the dream

We have the F-35 and we know what the RCS of the Super hornet is with 2 aim 9 wingtips and 2 aim 120d3 on station 5 and 6 is, but you can delude yourself all you want to

 

[_Anonymous_]

You're just living the dream

Yo Pops! Here we're discussing deployment schedules of Photonics & Quantum Radars & you're acting like a stuck record which can't get beyond F-35 & F-22 !

You're breaking my heart! Look I don't mean to rain on your parade but China's claiming it's mastered Quantum technology & will deploy a network of radars shortly , state of the art technologies which a decade back the US would first deploy.

Then there's the 6th Gen All Aspect Stealth Fighter which the Chinese have already begun testing & the US still has to. Tells you how far China's come & the US regressed.

What're you so excited about ? The prospect of the F-35 being detected & tracked 200 kms away by the Chinese ? To make matters worse sweetie the self appointed unofficial spokesperson of LM & DoD & resident pundit of the F-22 & F-35 out here is AWOL. Ja? @Innominate

 

[Optimist]

This gives an overview of block ll, but I know there is other stuff, so that must be classified, The block lll will make you cry

This is one of the reasons, I said the Super Hornet is better than the Rafale



A1-F18EA-NFM-000
Figure 1-3. Radar Cross Section (RCS) Reduction1.1.4 Radar Cross Section (RCS) Reduction. RCS reduction is a significant feature of the F/A18E/F. While the maintenance community is tasked with maintaining the RCS features of the aircraft,it is in the best interests of the aircrew community to take an active role to ensure the survivabilitycharacteristics of the aircraft are retained.

RCS reduction is accomplished through numerous airframe design features. See figure 1-3. Thebaseline feature is planform alignment of as many surface edges as feasible. The outer moldline of theaircraft is treated to make it a smooth, conductive surface in order to reduce radar scattering.Treatment entails metalizing the navigation lights, canopy, and windshield.

Permanent joints andgaps around infrequently opened panels are filled with a form-in-place (FIP) sealant, which is blendedflush and conductively painted. Gaps around frequently opened panels are filled with a conductive FIP(CFIP) sealant, which allows for easier repair. Conductive tape is applied to a few gaps where there isno substructure to support FIP material, such as along LEX edges. Conductive tape can also be usedto quickly repair damaged FIP joints.

Since CFIP in the gaps around frequently opened panels will experience the most wear and tear, acorrosion-proof radar absorbing material (RAM) is applied in front of many of these gaps. RAM is alsoapplied (1) on the inlet lip and duct, (2) as diamond-shaped patches around drain holes, and (3) invarious locations that tend to highly scatter radar energy such as around pitot tubes, vertical tailopenings, vents and screens, flap hinges and fairings, and portions of the pylons and external tanks. Amulti-layer RAM is used in a few locations, such as around AOA probes and on the top, front surfaceof the pylons.

\Gaps around landing gear doors are treated in two ways. Nose landing gear doors use flexibleconductive blade seals on leading and trailing edges; main landing gear door edges are wrapped withRAM. Scattering from trailing edges (i.e., trailing edge flaps and rudders) is controlled by a radarabsorbing boot which is bonded to the surface.

Scattering from the back edge of the windshield iscontrolled by a gray, laminated material called the aft arch termination strip.The engine inlet ducts incorporate a device to minimize engine front face scattering. The edge of thecanopy incorporates a conductive bulb seal to block radar reflections from that joint. Conductive bulbseals are also used where there is significant structural flexure, such as at the wing-to-LEX interface.

Eleven electro magnetic interference shields (EMIS) III radar shields are permanently installed onthe radar antenna hardware. To allow the aircraft to achieve its full RCS reduction potential, amissionized kit consisting of twelve more EMIS III radar bulkhead shields, are installed for combatmissions only. Additionally, SUU-79 pylons can be fitted with a set of low observable (LO) hardware.

 

[babablacksheep]

This gives an overview of block ll, but I know there is other stuff, so that must be classified, The block lll will make you cry

This is one of the reasons, I said the Super Hornet is better than the Rafale

View attachment 49976

A1-F18EA-NFM-000
Figure 1-3. Radar Cross Section (RCS) Reduction1.1.4 Radar Cross Section (RCS) Reduction. RCS reduction is a significant feature of the F/A18E/F. While the maintenance community is tasked with maintaining the RCS features of the aircraft,it is in the best interests of the aircrew community to take an active role to ensure the survivabilitycharacteristics of the aircraft are retained.

RCS reduction is accomplished through numerous airframe design features. See figure 1-3. Thebaseline feature is planform alignment of as many surface edges as feasible. The outer moldline of theaircraft is treated to make it a smooth, conductive surface in order to reduce radar scattering.Treatment entails metalizing the navigation lights, canopy, and windshield.

Permanent joints andgaps around infrequently opened panels are filled with a form-in-place (FIP) sealant, which is blendedflush and conductively painted. Gaps around frequently opened panels are filled with a conductive FIP(CFIP) sealant, which allows for easier repair. Conductive tape is applied to a few gaps where there isno substructure to support FIP material, such as along LEX edges. Conductive tape can also be usedto quickly repair damaged FIP joints.

Since CFIP in the gaps around frequently opened panels will experience the most wear and tear, acorrosion-proof radar absorbing material (RAM) is applied in front of many of these gaps. RAM is alsoapplied (1) on the inlet lip and duct, (2) as diamond-shaped patches around drain holes, and (3) invarious locations that tend to highly scatter radar energy such as around pitot tubes, vertical tailopenings, vents and screens, flap hinges and fairings, and portions of the pylons and external tanks. Amulti-layer RAM is used in a few locations, such as around AOA probes and on the top, front surfaceof the pylons.

\Gaps around landing gear doors are treated in two ways. Nose landing gear doors use flexibleconductive blade seals on leading and trailing edges; main landing gear door edges are wrapped withRAM. Scattering from trailing edges (i.e., trailing edge flaps and rudders) is controlled by a radarabsorbing boot which is bonded to the surface.

Scattering from the back edge of the windshield iscontrolled by a gray, laminated material called the aft arch termination strip.The engine inlet ducts incorporate a device to minimize engine front face scattering. The edge of thecanopy incorporates a conductive bulb seal to block radar reflections from that joint. Conductive bulbseals are also used where there is significant structural flexure, such as at the wing-to-LEX interface.

Eleven electro magnetic interference shields (EMIS) III radar shields are permanently installed onthe radar antenna hardware. To allow the aircraft to achieve its full RCS reduction potential, amissionized kit consisting of twelve more EMIS III radar bulkhead shields, are installed for combatmissions only. Additionally, SUU-79 pylons can be fitted with a set of low observable (LO) hardware.

You're just living the dream

We have the F-35 and we know what the RCS of the Super hornet is with 2 aim 9 wingtips and 2 aim 120d3 on station 5 and 6 is, but you can delude yourself all you want to

Don't know about what degree of RAM treatment SH have, given it still carries external weapons, it will be a waste of resources and time to provide it with stealth fighter level RAM treatment, for little benifit.


As for Geometric stealth alone.

Su-57 Radar scattering simulation

Introduction Su-57 is the first aircraft in Russian military service designed with stealth technology, it is intended to replace Su-27/30/35 family and server as the Russian answer to the American …

basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com

Comment by the maker of simulation.

**VuVuZela
February 22, 2023 at 9:25 am
Of course, Su-57 is a lot stealthier compared to Rafale and F-18E/F. Just because Su-57 is not as stealthy as F-35 and J-20 doesn’t mean Su-57 is non stealthy aircraft.**

**VuVuZela
April 11, 2023 at 7:30 am
Su-57 has lower RCS than F-18E/F for sure , no doubt about that**.

**VuVuZela
April 19, 2023 at 7:02 am
RCS of F-18E/F even without pylon and weapons is higher than 0.1 m2**



SH has probably lowest RCS(clean) out of all the non-stealth fighters, but its still not at the level(clean) of probably the least stealthy stealth fighter, you can also see with you eyes, while it has significant planform alignment, it does not have angular featurez, one of the examples and most obvious is its nose, which is round, not angular like su57,f35,j20 etc.


And SH'z advantage over rafale will be at most,20 to 25% decrease in detection range carrying similar payload, being illuminated by same radar.
Thats assuming SH's RCS is less than half of rafale when, both carrying similar payload.
A meaningful advantage but not anywhere near game changing.

 

[Bhartiya Naagrik Sainik]

Most probably they'll offer something they have (F-35), over something that hasn't even flown yet (F-47). Don't think we'll bite though.

Trump is already trying to push DEAL for F-35, right? But neither it is safe for us nor can we absorb its capitalist ecosystem.
Similarly IDK how USA can offer us even export version F-47 in future. May be it'll make a 1 engine jet like Su-75.
4gen Rafale deal is so costly then true 5gen deal is & 6gen deal is & someone please list point-wise characteristics of UNDEFINED 7gen, better open a new thread for it.

 

[Speedster1]

For a few years now, the Russians have been showing off Su-57 prototypes w/o RAM coatings at airshows across the world.

The West and China + Pak probably know the rcs of the basic airframe all too well by now. So, it's fate in an air battle really hinges on the effectiveness of its RAM/RAS tech of which not much is known outside professional circles.

Secondly, the Russians will likely not give export versions the full spec treatments used on their own jets for obvious opsec/IP reasons.

Otoh, DRDO/ADE would likely have to share data on its homegrown RAM/RAS as part of any MKI program - info that the Russians could misappropriate for their own use.

I wonder how we could possibly firewall indigenous IP in such a complex situation.

We'd be not only funding the final development of Su-57 but also giving away precious IP virtually for free.

 

[_Anonymous_]

For a few years now, the Russians have been showing off Su-57 prototypes w/o RAM coatings at airshows across the world.

The West and China + Pak probably know the rcs of the basic airframe all too well by now. So, it's fate in an air battle really hinges on the effectiveness of its RAM/RAS tech of which not much is known outside professional circles.

Secondly, the Russians will likely not give export versions the full spec treatments used on their own jets for obvious opsec/IP reasons.

Otoh, DRDO/ADE would likely have to share data on its homegrown RAM/RAS as part of any MKI program - info that the Russians could misappropriate for their own use.

I wonder how we could possibly firewall indigenous IP in such a complex situation.

We'd be not only funding the final development of Su-57 but also giving away precious IP virtually for free.

Hence the best solution is not to get into ToT BS a la MKI but buy 2-4 squadrons off the shelf & be done with it . The more we try & navigate this ToT biz the more it'd be like entering into a rabbit hole.

Neither do we have the extra money to spare nor resources in terms of manpower time etc to indulge in MKI zation of the Su-57. Besides such resources are better deployed in realising internal projects of which there are many crying out for attention.

Our only red line ought to be Nyet to their monkey model & Da to the version of the Su-57 complete with sensors & weapons package the VKS would be inducting.

It's called the all or nothing approach. The Russians can take it or leave it.

 

[Optimist]

Don't know about what degree of RAM treatment SH have, given it still carries external weapons, it will be a waste of resources and time to provide it with stealth fighter level RAM treatment, for little benifit.


As for Geometric stealth alone.

Su-57 Radar scattering simulation

Introduction Su-57 is the first aircraft in Russian military service designed with stealth technology, it is intended to replace Su-27/30/35 family and server as the Russian answer to the American …

basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com

Comment by the maker of simulation.

**VuVuZela
February 22, 2023 at 9:25 am
Of course, Su-57 is a lot stealthier compared to Rafale and F-18E/F. Just because Su-57 is not as stealthy as F-35 and J-20 doesn’t mean Su-57 is non stealthy aircraft.**

**VuVuZela
April 11, 2023 at 7:30 am
Su-57 has lower RCS than F-18E/F for sure , no doubt about that**.

**VuVuZela
April 19, 2023 at 7:02 am
RCS of F-18E/F even without pylon and weapons is higher than 0.1 m2**



SH has probably lowest RCS(clean) out of all the non-stealth fighters, but its still not at the level(clean) of probably the least stealthy stealth fighter, you can also see with you eyes, while it has significant planform alignment, it does not have angular featurez, one of the examples and most obvious is its nose, which is round, not angular like su57,f35,j20 etc.


And SH'z advantage over rafale will be at most,20 to 25% decrease in detection range carrying similar payload, being illuminated by same radar.
Thats assuming SH's RCS is less than half of rafale when, both carrying similar payload.
A meaningful advantage but not anywhere near game changingy.

That is an open source website run by fans using basic tools of shaping, it's not even a good guess
Even google search disagrees with you, try it, yes it is a clean frame for best numbers
As I said even when limited to missiles on wingtips and station 5 and 6, it's good

 

[Optimist]

missed the edit
Do you realise they work from photos?
I can show you the basic mistakes they made when they compared the F-16 to the Rafale if you like,

 

[Speedster1]

No country will give us their gold std stuff, not least on a 5G jet that is only just entering service in its own AF. Russia is no exception.

Unlike the Americans, Russia has nothing on the horizon in terms of a next gen jet. So, they'd be cautious about what they sell and to whom.

(Granted they have made exceptions in the past as in the case of the 40N6 interceptor for the S-400 vs the 'E' model export variant. But that's only because they had S-500 in the pipeline)

We'd have to settle for an export model or agree to strict access control/opsec conditions laid down by the Russians.

In any case, our ADGES/IACCS is not compatible with RuAF std IFF, SDR/TDL, mission planning software, etc. So some mods will naturally be required to the std export model.

 

[lmaoxd]

@Optimist mate listen. Why dont i refer you a sub where this topic has been VERY extensively discussed?
for example : Sukhoi Su-57 flight testing and development

you got the entire history of the su57 here although you might want to skip furthur ahead since its from 2012 onwards.

that is a British Sub so no one is particularly fond of the russians there

 

[babablacksheep]

That is an open source website run by fans using basic tools of shaping, it's not even a good guess
Even google search disagrees with you, try it, yes it is a clean frame for best numbers
As I said even when limited to missiles on wingtips and station 5 and 6, it's good

That's the most accurate *Source* we have available. Until and unless you back you claims by a more credible source material, its null no matter how much you try to bring its credibility down with words.

& IDF about basic Google search, if you trust it for these things, you need to do better

missed the edit
Do you realise they work from photos?
I can show you the basic mistakes they made when they compared the F-16 to the Rafale if you like,

Sure, show me, and to what extent the accuracy of their simulation is affected by the *supposed* mistake.

Enlighten me.

 

[Optimist]

That's the most accurate *Source* we have available. Until and unless you back you claims by a more credible source material, its null no matter how much you try to bring its credibility down with words.

& IDF about basic Google search, if you trust it for these things, you need to do better

Sure, show me, and to what extent the accuracy of their simulation is affected by the *supposed* mistake.

Enlighten me.

It's shared work, you put up the link and we will discuss

The aviation sites are far more creditable than a fan blog with 2 hits a day

 

[babablacksheep]

The aviation sites are far more creditable

No. Not in my experience, at all.

It's shared work, you put up the link and we will discuss

The aviation sites are far more creditable than a fan blog with 2 hits a day

View attachment 49981

It's shared work, you put up the link and we will discuss

I take it as you are unable to.

 

[randomradio]

I thought Ghatak is a stealth UCAV programme independent of MUM-T programme(s).

Yes and no. It will function both independently as well as a part of swarms.

Unlike the IN which has officially chosen NRT's Abhimanyu as it's MUM-T component, IAF hasn't selected anything yet, though it has the luxury to choose between HAL's CATS and NRT's Abhimanyu, if they choose to follow the IN's lead.

Yeah, we don't yet know the IAF's decision. It appears the IAF is going for Abhimanyu class, CATS class, and exotic. It's not necessary they will choose the ones we are expecting though. I'm actually still doubtful about CATS, it's expensive and not highly survivable. Only Ghatak is confirmed as of today.

HAL also has the Tejas MK2 to build, after Mk1A. Don't see how or why the IAF will play for an aircraft that doesn't exist outside of the drawing board (Su-57 twin seat). We really to get rid of the mindset of rescuing fledgling foreign aerospace programmes.

S-70 is gonna enter production soon. And twin-seat Su-57 will fly soon.

If the IAF goes for the twin-seat, it will be about 10 years from now. The Russians want it too.

Most probably they'll offer something they have (F-35), over something that hasn't even flown yet (F-47). Don't think we'll bite though.

You never know, it's all a bit odd.

 

[randomradio]

Otoh, DRDO/ADE would likely have to share data on its homegrown RAM/RAS as part of any MKI program - info that the Russians could misappropriate for their own use.

HAL and private sector are doing their own research here too. Stuff going on DRDO projects may not necessarily be used on the Su-57, so there's no real danger of AMCA tech reaching Russian hands.

MKIzation, if done, will also come via a separate tech tree, the one related to MKI's MLU, not AMCA.

 

[Optimist]

No. Not in my experience, at all.


I take it as you are unable to.

No, I'm not willing to do all the work for you to ignore it

 

[babablacksheep]

No, I'm not willing to do all the work for you to ignore it

Sounds like you are at the very least uncertain about how credible your *work* will be.