Su-57 News and Discussion -version_we_lost_count!-

Read the forum code of contact

Profile picture for user LMFS

Member for

3 years 5 months

Posts: 484


1.Perhaps part of the problem is perhaps that what one man sees as a logical argument is seen by another as an "outright insult to intelligence". The fact that one may be genuinely interested in an aircraft and have a liking for it says nothing about the qualities of that aircraft - as my own personal interest in the Douglas X-3 Stiletto demonstrates.

2. The fact that an argument is not commonly accepted says nothing about whether it is correct or wrong. Many of us are trying to assess the Su-57 (either in an amateur capacity or as part of our professional work), but given the high signal-to-noise ratio of the available data, each item of available information has to be assessed on its merits, and not on the basis of how widely-believed it is.

3. I am not sure how you would define an 'insider'. A manager, engineer, or user perhaps? So I cannot see any 'obvious reasons'. My own professional experience has been that the vibration test table, the test range, and even the weight breakdown of the finished aircraft or missile will rapidly show up any lack of intellectual honesty in the engineers who created it.

4. That is true, but as a result of their profession some people get access to limited information on classified matters, and may choose to provide a little of it here, even if such information cannot be confirmed from publicly available sources and will inevitably fail to convince the 'give-us-a-link' brigade.

5. If a "deeply entrenched complex of superiority" can prevent a realistic assessment of the Su-57, why did it not prevent (for example) initial over-assessments of the MiG-25 and Tu-22M by the West?

Thanks first of all for your civility Mercurius

1. True. I find it nevertheless irrational that otherwise clearly intelligent and capable people insist over and over on the same points that have been discussed hundreds of times. Or to suggest that Russian scientific community ignores what a spherical reflector is. Or to claim as clear "sins against stealth" of the Su-57 design features that are found on supposedly VLO US designs. It is not reasonable that all these are genuine arguments but one or other forms of trolling.

If one design feature conflicts with common knowledge of LO, the logical step would be to wonder why they are doing all that. Maybe the own analysis of the design and involved phenomena is not completely correct. Maybe their theoretical modelling is not 100% the same as ours. Maybe the operational requirements are different. Maybe they have a development roadmap we are not aware of. Assuming the same guys that created the theoretical framework for LO design ignore its most basic consequences is outright bad faith.

2. Yes of course and anybody is entitled to have their opinion. But if I have told you hundred times my arguments and you do not agree on them, why to insist hundred more?

3. I originally meant that this is an issue of common sense (not considering the best Russian scientists idiots) rather than of richness of sources. Regarding the insiders, I mean anybody having access to restricted sources. But such sources do not need to be sincere all of the time if they want to spread information through other guys like officials, servicemen or journalists. This could be easily the case with LO design issues due to the huge impact the mastering of such technologies has in the international perception of Western military power.

4. Agree, we should all take the few opportunities when such a situation like you describe happen. But when I have provided information susceptible of being of this nature, I have been ignored instead of questioned. That is why I say some guys here have an agenda

5. There can be many reasons for this, like for instance getting more money for defence. And since the Western technological superiority is a myth, seeing it at risks generates fear that in time is a great excuse for getting bigger military budgets authorized. We see often this duality between the complete disregard of Russia ("gas-station masqueraded as a country") and its representations as a country powerful enough to control the elections and on the brink of conquering the West. There is indeed a narrative at play in our society, completely beyond facts and rationality. What actual experts believe and what is circulated in the open sources is not necessarily the same. Exactly the same way PR and science differ, I do not think real military experts in the West would be fool enough to disregard the Su-57 the way some guys do here.

Profile picture for user panzerfeist1

Member for

3 years 5 months

Posts: 376

@mig-31bm
"Most modern AESA radar have secondary EW functions. " I was clearly not asking for that. The Niip catalog stated AESA radar with 1-18ghz where did not mention EW systems

"An important line of activity for KRET is the development of
ultrabroadband antenna systems using the AESA active phased array
radar. In the AESA, every element or group of elements has its own
miniature microwave transmitter, working in the frequency band
from 1 to 18 GHz. "

Notice how this statement is not talking about EW systems?

" because you always either exaggerated what you saw or fail to understand it and make ridiculous assumptions. " I was right every time by directly stating what was stated by the sources, along with another source that stated what was completed, and what it was completed for.

"So exactly like I said there is no mentioned of "700 km" inside that page like you claimed, you made up that number because you read "several" and misinterpreted it as "seven" , you also didn't know that it is much easier to jam at long distance because radar energy degraded quicker."

I expected you to read my source like the pages I provided but again for future references i will include a page and citation.

Profile picture for user panzerfeist1

Member for

3 years 5 months

Posts: 376

@Rall

"
Really Uv sensor works well at low height but poorly at medium and high altitudes, because effect of the ozone. So, its good for advice about coming mampads or surface-air missiles, but not against air-air missiles or airplanes. And IR is much better for medium and hight altitudes."

Do you agree with Wikipedia's statement? on the advantages and disadvantages? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_approach_warning_system

The funny thing is it seems to show that UV has more advantages than infrared.

Member for

7 years 9 months

Posts: 2,014

I was clearly not asking for that. The Niip catalog stated AESA radar with 1-18ghz where did not mention EW systems
Notice how this statement is not talking about EW systems?

No, they said "In the AESA, every element or group of elements has its own miniature microwave transmitter working in the frequency band from 1 to 18 GHz". Which may sound the same as the radar has bandwidth from 1-18 Ghz, but it isn't. Bandwidth of individual transmitter isn't neccesary the same as bandwidth of the radar. As i have shown you an example of Northrup Grumman, with an AESA operate at different frequency for radar and ECM.

I was right every time by directly stating what was stated by the sources, along with another source that stated what was completed, and what it was completed for.

You weren't. You did cite some links but it almost always either you exaggerated or misunderstood what they said. Your reading comprehension is pretty bad, this is quite evident in your question in China air power thread.
The cutting-edge missile's control systems need to be extremely efficient and accurate, said Wang Mengyi, deputy head of the Second Academy's General Design Department and former leader of the laboratory.
"Metaphorically put, the mission of these control systems is to guide a needle to fly 1,000 kilometers to pierce the eye of another needle," he said. "For researchers from Zhang Yiqun Laboratory, their mission is to turn this seemingly impossible task into reality."
Does anyone know the RCS of a needle

https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?140394-Chinese-air-power-thread-18/page42


I expected you to read my source like the pages I provided but again for future references i will include a page and citation.

I did, and no mentioned of "700 km" like you claimed, and you still ignoring the fact that for self defensive jamming, extending the distance make it easier.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]261522[/ATTACH]
Attachments

Member for

10 years 10 months

Posts: 1,138

So have we got any news? Is the PAKFA project on its last legs or not? No news ? no whispers ? no interviews ?

Greek aviation site : https://www.ptisidiastima.com/su57-not-quite-dead-yet/ (you need google translate) suggests the project is not quite dead yet, but faces problems with :

Sensors and sensor fusion
software
Radar signature
engines

with the engines being the most important one (which probably condemns the project)-This is confusing to me at least, as the current engines should be powerful enough for operational requirements, especially if they can push the plane to supercruise. Other aircraft have entered service with interim engines in the past. Am I wrong?

comments, opinions, contributions?

Member for

17 years 9 months

Posts: 6,186

Good Details on Su-57 joining squadron service , use translator


Su-57 goes into the army , Air and space forces will begin to develop the newest fighter of the fifth generation in early 2019

https://iz.ru/767944/aleksei-ramm-aleksandr-kruglov/su-57-idet-v-armiiu

In early 2019, the Lipetsk 4th Combat Training Center (PSC) will receive two new production Su-57 aircraft. They will be tested by experienced test pilots, then commanders, pilots and technical personnel for winged vehicles will be trained in the center. Also, the "Aircraft Bible" will be created, which describes all the nuances of his work. According to military experts, the fact of the transfer of fighters to the air center of VKS indicates the imminent adoption of the first Russian fighter of the fifth generation for armament.

Onboard systems for a fighter of the sixth generation will be tested on the Su-57
As told Izvestia to the Defense Ministry, early next year, two serial Su-57 should be transferred to the 4th Center of Combat Training VKS.

Lipetsk Aviation Center is engaged in the development and implementation of new methods of combat use of aircraft systems. Here, the flying and engineering and technical personnel of combat units are retrained to pilot new types of aircraft. Earlier in the center, multifunctional fighters Su-30SM and Su-35S were ridden.

There is a two-stage system for adopting new aircraft in the air defense system. First serial copies are received by the State Flight Test Center of the Ministry of Defense (GLITS), which is located in the city of Akhtubinsk in the Astrakhan Region. This stage will be completed before the end of this year. After that, the Su-57 will be transferred to the Lipetsk Air Center.

Pilot instructors will first work at the pulp-and-paper plant with the Su-57. They will check the operation of the weapons system, radar stations, and conduct training launches of aviation weapons. Based on the results of the tests, they will have to formulate a combat training program, develop tactical techniques that will make the most effective use of flight characteristics, capabilities of airborne equipment and weapons of new aircraft. Only after that in Lipetsk will begin training pilots of the regimental regiments and squadrons.

In Akhtubinsk, testers will conduct research flights on critical regimes. That is, determine when the aircraft can fall into a tailspin, with what maximum speed and overload it can perform maneuvers safely for the pilot. In the course of these tests, once again check the strength of the Su-57 airframe designs.

Based on the results of the running of the Su-57, a flight operation manual (RLE) will be prepared. This set of reference materials and instructions is called the Aircraft Bible. The pilot should know this document almost by heart and strictly observe it. The manual, in particular, describes the scheme of the pilot's actions in the event of a particular incident or emergency situation. The leadership's knowledge has repeatedly saved pilots in critical situations.

Adoption of a new aircraft is a complex multi-stage process, which has a clear order and it must be observed, Izvestia was told by test pilot Hero of Russia Roman Taskaev.

"At first the planes pass the stage of preliminary tests," the expert said. - The developer is responsible for it. At this stage, the aircraft is run by civilian test pilots with the involvement of military aviation specialists. Then the machine is given a VCS.

In the 4th Combat Training Center, the Su-57's combat operation will actually begin, the former commander of the 4th Air Force and Air Defense Army, Hero of Russia, Lieutenant-General Valery Gorbenko told Izvestia.

- According to the recommendations of test pilots, minor corrections will be made to the instructions for piloting and combat use. The pilots will also inform their instructors about the design and operation of the aircraft itself. Usually at this stage, a serial production of new cars begins, - he explained.

According to the expert, the process of receiving the Su-57 in other parts of the VCS can take place in parallel. He is sure that only a few months will pass from admission to the pulp and paper plant before the delivery of the aircraft to the aviation units.

Member for

10 years 10 months

Posts: 1,138

Excellent Austin!!

Profile picture for user haavarla

Member for

12 years 7 months

Posts: 6,441

This means they already working on two Serial Airframes at KnAAZ.
It has been said that the two latest prototypes will be adopted to the initial serial production i think its a good chance these will get transfered to Lipetsk training senter.

Member for

3 years 2 months

Posts: 333

FalconDude said: So have we got any news? Is the PAKFA project on its last legs or not?

It is way to early to tell. Truth be told, what happens with the "product 30" engines is a better indicator of the health of the program than any commentary on the aircraft itself. ALL of the distinguishing features of the Su-57 are dependent on the engines:

The specified RCS equivalent to "a tennis ball"
All aspect VLO
The ability for Mach 1.6 without reheat
A 900+ mile supersonic endurance

And the new engines likely improve IR reduction and electrical power generation (very important going forward into the future) as well. If the new engine design fails its last tests or if that program is cancelled than the Su-57 program will die. If it succeeds then they will start building them in earnest. But flight tests typically lasts for 2.5-3 years and the Product 30 didn't fly until last December. It's likely to be in testing up till the end of 2020 and so there won't be any substantial orders till the tail end of that year or even 2021.

So pay attention to flight tests with the new engine. If they fly a bird with twin Product 30s (they won't do this unless it has proved itself to be reliable) next year then it is performing well and the Su-57 program is healthy. If they don't then...

Profile picture for user FBW

Member for

9 years 7 months

Posts: 3,106

That really is the billion dollar question. “What is the Russian certification process for turbofans”. If it were a U.S. product, it would have already been bench tested to max hours (not lifecycle testing, that was just completed last year, for the F135 as an example), max power, had various poultry fired at it in a wind tunnel, and been blown apart running it at excess rpm and temp. Then flight testing. So they would have a pretty good idea of any potential issues (though as the F135 fire showed, mating it to the airframe/inlet may expose others).

I don’t think we have a Russian aerospace engineer on here to give insight into their process.

Member for

3 years 2 months

Posts: 333

@FBW - It passed its bench testing phase already. Everyone does the bench phase before the flight phase. But passing that isn't a 100% guarantee. Engines occasionally do require rework, and with tight budgets it is not certain that the Russian government would keep the program that is necessary.

Profile picture for user haavarla

Member for

12 years 7 months

Posts: 6,441

Think we are talking about 2020, perhaps 2021. New engines are difficult. Would say a military small diameter turbofan is way harder vs PD-14 civil engine development.

Profile picture for user FBW

Member for

9 years 7 months

Posts: 3,106

Yeah I figured that because I recall the press release when they started bench testing. But that’s not the point, what does their bench testing entail? If you some insight I’d like to hear it. I was very surprised when talking with some P&W engineers on F135 testing process. They purposely destroyed and dissected; entire engines, LPC, HPC. Damaged individual blisks and ran engines. You get the point.

Profile picture for user haavarla

Member for

12 years 7 months

Posts: 6,441

^^Imo all the requirements from VKS.
Wonder how the nozzle is shaping up. It too would have a llife cycle run before certification.

Profile picture for user haavarla

Member for

12 years 7 months

Posts: 6,441

Yeah I figured that because I recall the press release when they started bench testing. But that’s not the point, what does their bench testing entail? If you some insight I’d like to hear it. I was very surprised when talking with some P&W engineers on F135 testing process. They purposely destroyed and dissected; entire engines, LPC, HPC. Damaged individual blisks and ran engines. You get the point.

We know they did a destruction test.. or several on the PD-14. But the usual for civil engines is simulated bird strike. Not sure how they do it exactly. There is also the water or hydro testing, how much water it takes before flame out. Other test involve prolonged 125% rpm runs. And then they take it apart again for exam.

So when looking for a millitary engine, with higher requirements. Its the same and then some.

Member for

10 years 10 months

Posts: 1,138

What are the major differences between the current engine and the idz.30 ?

Profile picture for user FBW

Member for

9 years 7 months

Posts: 3,106

Well civilian turbofans have a pretty stringent testing and certification process one that has to meet. EASA/FAA recognize each other’s certification, any civilian turbofan would have to meet those testing requirements. PD-14 will undergo EASA validation, 2019?
A Russian military turbofan wouldn’t, as an aside.

Back to the point, the Izd. 30 engine is in flight testing. I doubt they encountered any serious deficiencies in bench tests/ wind tunnel, which was my original point.

I recall a post from secret projects a long time ago from a credible memeber stating that the original AL-41F was problematic even during bench tests, a bit of a technological overreach for the time (interesting parallel with US concerns about the technological readiness of the YF120).

The type 30 began bench tests in 2016, so they must have gone pretty smoothly for flight testing to have begun a little over a year later. That is a pretty compressed testing period though.

Profile picture for user Marcellogo

Member for

7 years 1 month

Posts: 1,765

@ XB-70

fact is that in Russian/Soviet acquisition process there is nothing like IOC (and consequently LRIP) , full scale serial production begin when the item is fully ready, period.
So, just the bench tests is just not enough to begin it.

Profile picture for user FBW

Member for

9 years 7 months

Posts: 3,106

@ XB-70

fact is that in Russian/Soviet acquisition process there is nothing like IOC (and consequently LRIP) , full scale serial production begin when the item is fully ready, period.

Right on the first part, the second part, fully ready? That isn’t at all the Russian/Soviet acquisition model.

The Soviets basically invented concurrency (hyperbole). The Su-27 went into mass production with unsatisfactory radar performance that took several years to meet requirements. The Soviets would begin mass production before the weapon system was fully operationally suitable. Very apparent in their ship/sub classes. The first few in a production series would basically be mules, each slightly different. Their tank series was the same. Russia seems to be following a similar model, the first three 955 SSBN, the first 885 SSN, first four 22350.

Basically, get it into production and make incremental improvements.

Member for

15 years 6 months

Posts: 2,814

fact is that in Russian/Soviet acquisition process there is nothing like IOC...

I'm sure the Russians have something similar, just under a different name. Certainly there is such a thing as certification tests and certification for final acceptance into service for all military equipment in the Russian military.

full scale serial production begin when the item is fully ready, period.

I wouldn't call 12 Su-57 by 2021 'full scale serial production', period.