Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Sukhoi Su-57 / PAK FA 5th Generation Aircraft

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by tariqkhan18, Jun 30, 2010.

  1. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,181
    Likes Received:
    6,295
    The Russians are far more ahead than that.

    India is setting up a full production line for GaN and it will be ready soon, so the Russians should at least be at par, if not ahead.

    http://indianexpress.com/article/ed...ndry-to-produce-wonder-nano-material-4741048/

    Nobody sets up a foundry if a product isn't ready.
     
  2. lexa

    lexa FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    44
    Country Flag:
    Russian Federation
    This patent is the only official statement about rcs. Similar data Davydenko semi-officially said earlier
    Can you explain me the sense "average value 0,1-1"? I repeat the given comparable values of su-27 (and note "in giving angels") specified the frontal aspect range of values
     
  3. lexa

    lexa FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    44
    Country Flag:
    Russian Federation
    That is your estimate, but my proof is a fact. You can know about the progress history from the same source http://www.istokmw.ru/catalog/
    but not everything is available in english. And in some techs India is ahead :)
     
  4. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,181
    Likes Received:
    6,295
    This picture you posted:
    [​IMG]

    The frontal RCS, at 0 deg, is between -10 dBsm and -20 dBsm. That is 0.1 m2 and 0.01 m2. The rear of the aircraft at 180 deg is 0 dBsm, ie, 1m2.

    Whatever's in the center of this graph is not a stealth design. It's at the same level as a Rafale or Typhoon, at least from the front and rear. This kinda looks like what the Su-35 will look like with its massive vertical fins enhancing RCS in the sides. But this aircraft will in no way be less visible to radar, any radar, including the smallest of the X band radars on, say, the Mig-21.

    For average, you simply take the mean of all angles, but you can make it get any value you want.

    Of course, if this is the PAK FA's graph, then it's not a stealth aircraft.
     
  5. lexa

    lexa FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    44
    Country Flag:
    Russian Federation
    Sorry i said unclear. This is diagram of f-22
     
  6. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,181
    Likes Received:
    6,295
    You sure that's a diagram of a F-22? That looks like a Rafale or Typhoon or even the SH.

    The highest RCS is 0.1m2 and lowest 0.01m2 from the front.
     
  7. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,572
    Likes Received:
    3,386
    Not really, since you evidently mix up a lot of things that has no relation to each other.
    For example, the RCS of Su 57 is estimated equal or lower to a "clean" Rafale design. The EW capabilites doesn't change the overall RCS, but try to distract the enemy radar by giving false radar returns.
    So no matter what, we already know that the design of the Su 57 is superior, especially if we take realistic loads for the Rafale to account.

    You also are mistaken that weight has anything to do with the RCS. Size is the first factor that plays a role, since a larger overall size is generally more detectable. But even here, the design advantage of the Su 57, reduces the RCS of a heavy class fighter, below the RCS of a medium class Rafale.

    You also contradict yourself wrt the weapon bay, because it doesn't have a disadvantage, since it's specifically aimed on the roles your mentioned yourself:

    In these missions the weapon bay as part of the stealth design outclass any current gen fighter, because it increases the performance of the fighter multiple times. You detect your enemy earlier than he can detect you, you can get closer to a SAM site without being detected, which both increase the survivability by far

    In roles where external payloads either don't matter (CAS), or are planned (deep strikes with cruise missiles), the Su 57 will carry weapons just as the Rafale too, which then adds to the internal loads.

    A Rafale with maximum fuel and 2 x Brahmos NG can carry 6 x AAMs.
    A Su 57 with full internal fuel and 2 Brahmos NG, can carry up to 10 x AAMs internally and could add up to 6 externally too.

    Of course, because the "looks" as you call it, has a specific aim, to divert radar signals! Even Rafale uses these kind of shapings in it's airframe design, for exactly the same reason (sawtooth pattern all over the airframe), just that it uses this design feature only in addition to it's normal design, that is aimed on aerodynamics, as well as cost and weight reduction (fixed refuelling probe, single vertical tail). That gives Rafale a low RCS compared to other normal fighter designs, but not to 5th gen fighters.

    The rest is just estimates based on the lack of knowledge of both fighters, as mentioned before.
    You should read up the Rafale article in the last Air Force Monthly to get a better idea about the F4, what it might have (if fully funded) and when it comes (hardware changes only planned to come by 2025).
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2017
  8. Locke

    Locke FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2017
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    23
    Country Flag:
    United States
    No, the USAF apparently hasn't seen value in adding the side arrays even though the plane is set up to use them. That should say something about their utility.

    When you consider the fact that other manufacturers are adding repositioners to their radars and not side arrays, that should be indicative that they are considered to be more useful.

    Everything I've read has said the expected loadout is two R-77 per may with the possibility of adding a third in a staggered position. Not eight.

    Yes, I know what it is. The issue is why are you going to spend valuable internal space on a cruise missile as opposed to other munitions? They have a long range...

    That was in response to the claim that the F-22 was all metal construction and thus inherently **less** stealthy.

    The SU-57 stealth issues come from the basic body shaping, not necessarily the materials, though I doubt Russia can produce materials with as good characteristics as the US. There manufacturing base simply isn't up to it.
     
    Sahil ecclstone likes this.
  9. Locke

    Locke FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2017
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    23
    Country Flag:
    United States
    It's not just the rivets which all planes have. It's the joint tolerances, the lack of saw edges and other features. Perhaps these will be changes in the production versions, butthe current models show a lack of attention to the small details which actually make an outsized difference.

    You're assuming that RAM is a paint of some other fluid applied to a surface. While that can be true it isn't the other type available. You're trying to make a distinction between the two that doesn't really exist.



    Unofficial site. I can find others giving different figures.

    Yes, because that what actually works.

    As long as the signals are deflected away from another radar receiver, it doesn't matter where they go. When consider that Russia has no experience building VLO aircraft and has a manufacturing base well behind other Western countries, you seem to be expecting a lot.

    They don't. Plasma stealth is a nice theory going back to 1956 but nothing has come of it despite work by Boeing, Dassault, Northrop and Thales who have a lot more money to spend on the application.

    Active cancellation relies on destructive interference to work, but, oops, you need to send the same signal out from each reflecting surface which isn't possible without covering the entire plane with emitters. And how are this going to work against AESA radars which are changing the frequency, PRF, polarization and scan pattern every few ns? I'd like to know where you're going to find a FPGA that can keep up.


    Maneuverability can only do so much because the missile is much more agile and has much higher g-limits. Of course no missile is 100% accurate, but we're getting close to the days of one shot: one kill. Trading off other capabilities for more than a certain level of maneuverability is waste.

    Right now the R77/73 are the standard missiles. Russia may actually put new ones into production, but based on their track record for the past two decades I wouldn't count on it until they're rolling out of the factory.

    Again, Russia has a very bad history of announcing new wonder weapons that never are produced.


    If the purpose is SLAR the array is really too small to be of much use. I think it's more likely the Russians aren't getting a very good field of regard.

    The Core design did come from Intel's design team in Israel but almost all their CPU fabrication is still done in the US. Some other work like chip sets and communication chips are produced elsewhere.

    Well, no. The Russian semiconductor industry is way behind the West and is stuck using antiquated fabrication technologies which affects the product performance. How well do you think the latest i7 chip would perform is Intel only had 180nm nodes? That's the situation that Russia finds itself in. And there is no real demand for Russian electronics so the industry in general is stunted.

    As to Soviet electronic technology, it was already falling behind the West in the 1980's and that was with the USSR spending a huge percentage of its GDP on it.

    As for COTS, there is a fairly close race between Intel, Samsung and TSMC. Intel generally gets the best yields and lowest costs.
     
    The enlightened likes this.
  10. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,181
    Likes Received:
    6,295
    Too early to say anything.

    [​IMG]

    Incorrect. Neither the F-22 nor the F-35 have it yet. Probably the F-35 has it to some degree, but nowhere the amount the FGFA is expected to have.

    But that's not the only way.

    You will see a time where shaping will become completely irrelevant. We will probably start seeing that on ground vehicles first.

    But the F-22 does not deflect signals away from another receiver, it simply deflects signals.

    The thing about plasma is, it is not what people expect. Just like RAS, it is an absorber. Even aircraft like F-22 and F-35 have absorbers inside the aircraft. So what the PAK FA will do is generate plasma inside the aircraft to act as an absorber. So you get some weight savings that way, that's all there is to it.

    No, you don't need to cover the entire surface with emitters, you only need to design the jet to have a few spikes and then you put emitters where those spikes are generated.

    For the Rafale, that would be the canard edges, inlets and exhaust.

    There is no such thing as one shot, one kill. It only exists in brochures.

    While missiles will get harder to evade, aircraft will also get much more maneuverable, particularly when it comes to climbing, descending etc.

    There are many R-77s and R-73s, which one are you referring to. The basic PAK FA weapons will be the K-77M (R-77M) and R-74M2. But these are just stop gaps for new missiles.

    The Russians have given hints of the existence of two new missiles. One is a new ramjet missile, a model in an office, and the other is a WVR missile that looks similar to the ASRAAM.

    What are these wonder weapons that they don't produce?

    It's big enough. They haven't made it for long distance surveillance.

    [​IMG]

    Dude, this is completely irrelevant. I can make any design I want and power it using an American chip if I want to. Welcome to globalization.

    The SU-30MKI and even the Russian Su-30SM are powered by western designed chips, the PowerPC. The Rafale uses PowerPC as well. Pretty much everybody uses PowerPC.

    http://www.militaryaerospace.com/ar...integrated-avionics-to-a-whole-new-level.html
    "Another difference with JSF is we have learned well the lesson that Moore's Law can work against you if you don't pay attention," Jeffreys continues. "So we have designed for technology refresh, so at the appropriate time we can stop putting in the 1 GHz processor board and swap out to the 2 GHz board without having to go back and do any redesign. We were once required to use a MIL-STD-1760 processor with Ada or other military languages; now we use commercial PowerPC with C++."

    Pretty much everybody uses PowerPC for the mission computers. Civilian technology matters zilch.
     
  11. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,572
    Likes Received:
    3,386
    You own claim was, that it was a cost factor and now are going back. That tells us something about the credibility of your claims. :mrgreen:
     
    Blackjay likes this.
  12. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,181
    Likes Received:
    6,295
    http://tass.com/defense/973625

    Russia may upgrade advanced Su-57 aircraft to 6th-generation fighter jet

    Russia’s cutting-edge Sukhoi Su-57 fifth-generation aircraft has the upgrade potential to become a sixth-generation fighter jet


    Russia’s cutting-edge Sukhoi Su-57 fifth-generation aircraft has the upgrade potential to become a sixth-generation fighter jet, Russian Aerospace Force ex-commander and Chairman of the Federation Council Defense and Security Committee Viktor Bondarev told TASS on Wednesday.

    "This is actually a splendid plane and it can embrace both fifth-and sixth-generation features. It has huge modernization potential. Importantly, it is the best among the existing versions by its stealth characteristics. It incorporates all the best that is available in modern aviation science both in Russia and in the world," he said.


    Time is needed to launch the production of the Su-57 fighter in Russia, Bondarev said.

    "In the first year, the Aerospace Force won’t get 20 or 15 planes. It will get only two or three and so on," the senator said.

    "We have prompted aviation enterprises to organize the production of a certain batch of cutting-edge aircraft and helicopters and now there must be no talk that we do not need them because an irreversible process will begin… Russia has no future without aviation," the Aerospace Force ex-commander said.

    The Russian fifth-generation Perspective Aviation Complex of Frontline Aviation (PAK FA, T-50) fighter jet took to the skies for the first time in 2010. As was reported earlier, the experimental design work on the cutting-edge fighter jet should be completed in 2019 and its deliveries to the troops should begin at that time. As United Aircraft Corporation CEO Yuri Slyusar said, the pre-production batch will consist of 12 such planes. It was reported in August this year, that the T-50 plane had received the serial name (the index) of the Su-57.

    In turn, Bondarev who held the post of the Aerospace Force commander at that time said that Russia had launched work on developing a sixth-generation fighter jet both in the manned and unmanned versions.
     
  13. sunstersun

    sunstersun Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Messages:
    667
    Likes Received:
    387
    Country Flag:
    Canada
    perhaps they should reach fifth generation capability first before talking about sixth generation.
     
  14. somedude

    somedude Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2014
    Messages:
    1,491
    Likes Received:
    1,106
    Country Flag:
    Afghanistan
    By absorbing it. That's how it works. If you have a microwave oven, that's also how it works. The food put in the oven absorbs the EM radiation that's sent at it and this absorption heats it up.

    If you don't have a microwave oven, you can try a different experiment: go outside on a sunny day, and marvel at how the EM radiations originating from the Sun are warming up your skin as it absorbs its infrared and visible light wavelengths.

    Basically, generating heat isn't the way you absorb radiations; it's the consequence of doing so. In fact you generate heat whenever you absorb any type of energy. If you try to absorb kinetic energy? You get heat, from friction and/or collision. If you try to absorb electric energy by making it go through a resistive material? You get heat through the Joule effect.
     
  15. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,181
    Likes Received:
    6,295
    That article talks about what I personally want from the FGFA.

    The Stage 2 PAK FA, when it is fully ready in 2025, is expected to be a 5++ gen aircraft. What I want is for the IAF to spend some more time developing it to 6th gen standards. So this aircraft may become available only in 2030, but in the meantime they can buy 2 squadrons of Stage 2 PAK FA as stop gap and instead spend their resources on the two MII programs.
     

Share This Page