Su-57 News and Discussion -version_we_lost_count!-

Profile picture for user archangelski

Member for

6 years 4 months

Posts: 2,371

It is not surprising that this thread on the Su-57/PAK-FA is regularly removed ... From pages to pages, each revival becomes more and more the meeting place of children in a sandbox. Everyone tries to brag about his plane by decrying the one of the other simply by looking at it on photographs. Unfortunately the stealthness is not solved by a simple fuselage curve, a HUD reflecting the electronic waves or an outgrowth not inclined enough. The material used, its composition, its coating, its degree of absorption/reflection, …, are all elements to know to define the degree of stealthness. Even a B-2 has non-inclined cockpit uprights seen from the front .... Do not try to compare yourself with engineers from LM, Sukhoi or Chengdu by only pulling your data on the Internet or Wikipedia ... try to connect your neurons without becoming annoying trolls. If there was only one way to do stealth, all planes would look like an F-117 ...none would have curves like the B-2, the F-35 or the F-22...and the Su-57.

Member for

9 years 1 month

Posts: 276

If there was only one way to do stealth, all planes would look like an F-117 ...none would have curves like the B-2, the F-35 or the F-22...and the Su-57

Why would they not have curves? As long as the curves are gradual, the angles low, and as long as the aircraft can be affordably maintained, everyone would build the same thing, and it would be far stealthier than the F-117....oh wait...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]261482[/ATTACH]

nfortunately the stealthness is not solved by a simple fuselage curve, a HUD reflecting the electronic waves or an outgrowth not inclined enough. The material used, its composition, its coating, its degree of absorption/reflection, …, are all elements to know to define the degree of stealthness.

Good shape plus materials will always beat just materials, not disputable.

Attachments
Profile picture for user archangelski

Member for

6 years 4 months

Posts: 2,371

Why would they not have curves? As long as the curves are gradual, the angles low, and as long as the aircraft can be affordably maintained, everyone would build the same thing, and it would be far stealthier than the F-117....oh wait...

No personal attack but you are tiring at always wanting to understand nothing and read the sentences to their first degree ... have you ever looked at the fuselage difference between an F-117 and a B-2 or F-35 ? And it is you who systematically perceive the curves as a possible return of radar waves, like the Su-57's IRST or cockpit frame. But I will stop there to avoid going into "troll attitude"...

Member for

9 years 1 month

Posts: 276

I think you've missed something, my post was not related to curves at all.

BTW it's not my posts that get threads removed, just the children who lose their temper in frustration at themselves because they can't form a mature, coherent and informed argument. Hence why I now backup my posts in case the threads delete. Some people find them informative as they based on science fact rather than fantasy.

Profile picture for user archangelski

Member for

6 years 4 months

Posts: 2,371

I think you've missed something, my post was not related to curves at all...

Bad memory ?

https://i.imgur.com/E5Yx9cS.png

Member for

9 years 1 month

Posts: 276

That is nothing to do with curves, but surfaces and edges which point directly at the source radar. Whether it was straight or curved, no difference, it is not sharply angled. It is a simple fact that that having very little forward facing edge and diverting most of the echos well away from the source radar is a better solution.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]261483[/ATTACH]

Attachments

Member for

10 years 7 months

Posts: 73

@ActionJackson

Your analyse is nice but you forget one important thing and that is F-117:
https://tvrphoto.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/silver_stealth06_f117_798_0972.jpg

Many negatives you wrote about Su-57 you can see on F-117 even OLS problem is there, that thing below canopy is FLIR when it isn't in use it would rotate and backside is made as RAS RAM combo, something like that is also mentioned for OLS-50 in patent I think. If you compare that with F-35 front DAS sensor and EOTS you don't have that luxury they need to rely only on glass film coat to reduce return of their optical system and I doubt it is better then RAS RAM combo.

If you think Su-57 canopy is mass because of metal frame bar and "poorly" design backside well:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/upfiles/10515/8262480959A64B24B9F4915B1C8D2EC6.jpg

So yes Su-57 have some imperfections but it is far more dangerous then what folks thought in 2010, back then people thought it would have exposed fan blades and non stealth nozzles, now we know it isn't case, we saw new nozzle and new engine will have some kind of radar blocker. That is lot more important then some smaller fixes on airframe but to be honest I would love to see they fix them too becuase it isn't something impossible to be done.

Profile picture for user archangelski

Member for

6 years 4 months

Posts: 2,371

That is nothing to do with curves, but surfaces and edges which point directly at the source radar. Whether it was straight or curved, no difference, it is not sharply angled. It is a simple fact that that having very little forward facing edge and diverting most of the echos well away from the source radar is a better solution.

You mean like these ?

https://i.imgur.com/5kh4HW2.png

Member for

9 years 1 month

Posts: 276

See the screen?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]261485[/ATTACH]

The YF-23 was an initial protoype and would most certainly have changed in design during development. Nobody ever said it had a better frontal RCS specifically than the YF-22, just that it was better overall which can be seen clearly by it's way more highly canted sides and hidden exhaust. The F-22's canopy leading edge is different to the YF-22's.

Attachments

Member for

9 years 1 month

Posts: 276

You mean like these ?

You know that's all inside the cockpit right? The canopy's a single, continuous piece of glass. Surface waves travel on... surfaces.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]261487[/ATTACH]

Attachments
Profile picture for user archangelski

Member for

6 years 4 months

Posts: 2,371

You know that's all inside the cockpit right? The canopy's a single, continuous piece of glass.

Nice to know that the OLS and its inside is then invisible if rightly treated...

And for B-2 ?

https://i.imgur.com/YxPq1pk.jpg

Profile picture for user archangelski

Member for

6 years 4 months

Posts: 2,371

My last post in this thread that will not be directly related to Su-57. I just wanted to show that there are many ways to design stealth without it being seen directly, by nacked eyes, on simple pictures.

Profile picture for user KGB

Member for

3 years 8 months

Posts: 1,168

What ActionJackson does has been the approach of this childish witchhunt all along. Which is the only reason why he does it.

https://img00.deviantart.net/85f2/i/2018/193/4/2/businessins4_4_by_kgb950-dch06sd.png

See if you can spot what's wrong.

It is gutter journalism through and through. And again, this is why ActionJackson does this. He was never an pseudo expert about stealth or anything. He just started doing this to the Pak fa because he seen others doing it.

https://img00.deviantart.net/f11e/i/2018/193/0/6/businessinsider5_by_kgb950-dch073v.png

The National Interest is quoting the Business Insider article which had this doozey in it. Another thing that some pseudo expert made up. Turns out it makes no sense and he looks like a moron. And the National Interest didn't even bother to check. Why ? Because its a witchhunt. Nobody is interested in the truth here.

^Note the sidebar article links.

https://img00.deviantart.net/630a/i/2018/192/3/9/businessins1_1_by_kgb950-dcgyb4o.png

Member for

9 years 1 month

Posts: 276

Nice to know that the OLS and its inside is then invisible if rightly treated...

I think you mistake travelling waves caused by incident beams hitting a surface at a low angle vs direct illumination, front on.

And for B-2 ?

a) Does not have to go head to head against fighters and b) is not as stealthy as the F-117, F-22, F-35 front on. Also, it's designed primarily to penetrate VHF, UHF, L-Band protected areas where small features such as window's etc are not as important due to the wavelength.

I must say it's refreshing being in this thread now with KGB on ignore, it's done wonders to level of the post I read in here.

Member for

10 years 7 months

Posts: 73

@AJ

See the screen?

Screen for FLIR? It was removed later becuase composite RAM backside was enough plus it had impact on picture quality
https://image.slidesharecdn.com/f-117anighthawk-lockheedsstealthfighterusa-150326012628-conversion-gate01/95/f-117-a-nighthawk-lockheeds-stealth-fighter-usa-4-638.jpg?cb=1427351223


The YF-23 was an initial protoype and would most certainly have changed in design during development. Nobody ever said it had a better frontal RCS specifically than the YF-22, just that it was better overall which can be seen clearly by it's way more highly canted sides and hidden exhaust. The F-22's canopy leading edge is different to the YF-22's.

Northrop didn't think it have big impact on frontal RCS of F-23, because pole model and F-23EMD have divaded canopy with metal bar.

All you mentioned as small imperfections which could make Su-57 detectable for longer distance then F-22 but still that distance is very deadly when you need to deal with Su-57 no matter in what fighter is agianst Su-57. F-22 would be best pick agianst Su-57 but it lacks IRST.

Profile picture for user RadDisconnect

Member for

6 years 5 months

Posts: 471

ActionJackson and KGB should get their own thread so the rest of us can have a break from all the nonsense.

All you mentioned as small imperfections which could make Su-57 detectable for longer distance then F-22 but still that distance is very deadly when you need to deal with Su-57 no matter in what fighter is agianst Su-57. F-22 would be best pick agianst Su-57 but it lacks IRST.

The issue is that the PAK FA stealth patent says only the back of the IRST is treated with RAM and it's turned backwards when not in use to preserve stealth.

Profile picture for user FBW

Member for

7 years 11 months

Posts: 3,106

@AJ

Screen for FLIR? It was removed later becuase composite RAM backside was enough plus it had impact on picture quality .

Complete horsh@t.... if you don’t know something, don’t make it up. You and KGB would do well to follow those rules.

Just gives a bad name to Russian posters.

Member for

10 years 7 months

Posts: 73

@FBW

Maybe they are using coatings? But still FLIR isn't present to radar when it isn't in use. And I am not Russian, nor Russia stronk type, if you check my posts you will see how many times I correct KGB with "Su-57 intake = F-23 intake" idea, so I don't think Su-57 is the best stealth but it is good enough to make F-22/35 problems.

Profile picture for user haavarla

Member for

11 years

Posts: 6,438

ActionJackson and KGB should get their own thread so the rest of us can have a break from all the nonsense.

The issue is that the PAK FA stealth patent says only the back of the IRST is treated with RAM and it's turned backwards when not in use to preserve stealth.

Agreed on the first.

Is it not possible to coat the OLS glass as well as the inside or backend of the OLS house.
You know, sinse they bother to spend much resources to find the right coat to the much larger cockpit glass..

And to AC;
have you study the Cockpit bar on the Su-57. How is it shaped inside the cockpit. Is square, rectangular or perhaps trapez shaped?
We know its flat on the outside. The serial birds will get a ticker RAM coating across the glass beam. Much like F-35 around its panels on the skin.

Profile picture for user KGB

Member for

3 years 8 months

Posts: 1,168

Here's just some more objective fact based reporting from Business Insider. This time, with a link to The Diplomat.

https://img00.deviantart.net/0f04/i/2018/193/a/0/businessinsider6_6_by_kgb950-dch0huq.png

So these mainstream outlets are telling everyone that the su 57 has external weapons. Shameless disinformation peddling.

https://img00.deviantart.net/3a94/i/2018/193/b/6/thediplomat1_1_by_kgb950-dch0mdr.png