Sukhoi Su-57 flight testing, development & operations [2012-current]

[yeetmahboi]

This link shows a little bit about it, albeit I don't know the source's credibility.

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

The source is our own @stealthflanker - I trust him with it. As always, the rule of GIGO remains, but it helps with some layman level of understanding.

 

[Squirrel]

This is not a "very suspicious photo" but screenshot from GLITz anniversary video. It's interesting that you give link to the original Twitter post that has both link to _original video_ and description of actions author made to inlet screenshot to rise lightning level using _Photoshop_, but even didn't care to use Twitter translate to understand that.
'Aah, Photoshop, familiar word. It's PSed then, period.'

As I mentioned PS is not the problem. If someone used PS to 'expose' that radar blocker it's OK ,both of us were right ( 'cause I wrote that ''it is nothing but PS '' of course my thoughts was that someone inserted that grid inside of the air intake....). By the way, here is the 'original of the original.' ( 19:04 )

ÐÐÐЦ. 100 Ð»ÐµÑ Ð½Ð°Â ÐºÑÑлÑÑÑ. ЧаÑовой. ÐÑпÑÑк оÑ 18.10.2020

«ЧаÑовой» оÑпÑавлÑеÑÑÑ Ð²Â ÐµÐ´Ð²Ð°Â Ð»Ð¸ не ÑамÑÑ ÑекÑеÑнÑÑ Ð²Ð¾Ð¸Ð½ÑкÑÑ ÑаÑÑÑ ÑоÑÑийÑÐºÐ¸Ñ Ð²Ð¾Ð·Ð´ÑÑно-коÑмиÑеÑÐºÐ¸Ñ Ñил â ÐÐÐЦ, ÐоÑÑдаÑÑÑвеннÑй леÑно-иÑпÑÑаÑелÑнÑй ÑенÑÑ Ð¸Ð¼ÐµÐ½Ð¸ Ð.Ð. Чкалова, коÑоÑÑй в 2020 годÑ...

www.1tv.ru

Prototype was Bort number 510 blue if I am right. What someone exposed to all is somewhat closest to 'Figure 3' in the Patent doc.

ИЗ №2623031

www1.fips.ru

Now as I wrote earlier ,all of this is not the main issue. From all the photos/videos of the serial Su-57's in the KnAAZ that I have, there is no trace of that grid. From the newest doc. film ( 45:57) ,we can see air intake but there is no radar blocker.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBNhFBQlqEU&t=229s

Some photos of the air intakes we have on this page ( as sequencies from the doc. )

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/sukhoi-su-57-flight-testing-development-operations-2012-current.15626/page-85

So my opinion is that it will be good to found those radar blockers during serial production if it is possible.Then we will be sure that serial Su-57's really have coaxial-radial grids.
I am trying to find that radar blockers during serial production for years now but there is no trace of them.When I first saw that PS -pic from 2020 ,I thought they really had those grids( on the prototypes). After a lot of attempts to find them, see them on the serial Su-57's, I started to think that picture was created as a 'real PS', i.e. that someone drew a grid inside that air intake.

Questions are: are they used radar blockers on the prototypes Bort number 509 and 511 that were in the Syria on Feb. 21-23 2018 and later?
Do radar blockers inside of the air intakes have/had air mas flow issues for the engines?
We don't know many details but as any product these radar blockers have their pros and cons,reducing frontal RCS and maybe,maybe producing some problems with air mass flow in front of the IGV.

 

[Squirrel]

The Su-57's radar blocker has been discussed on this forum for years.

OK,what was conclusion then ?

 

[Deino]

OK,what was conclusion then ?

Just go on on your own and read thru the thread(s)! It's really annoying at the moment that in almost all flagship-threads new members constantly bring up some unfounded stuff, the discussion goes on for pages all about nothing and nonsense, senior members with a long-established credibility are no longer taken as more credible than newbies as if any opinion would have the same value and instead of being able and willing to read, listen and lean one has to accept all their nonsense or at best have to present former discussions since they are too lazy to do it alone!

 

[Joint Soviet Fighter]

Just go on on your own and read thru the thread(s)! It's really annoying at the moment that in almost all flagship-threads new members constantly bring up some unfounded stuff, the discussion goes on for pages all about nothing and nonsense, senior members with a long-established credibility are no longer taken as more credible than newbies as if any opinion would have the same value and instead of being able and willing to read, listen and lean one has to accept all their nonsense or at best have to present former discussions since they are too lazy to do it alone!

Pretty much beat me to it. There are a number of threads devoted to The Su-57 that go back almost two decades, now, & the intake design & the use of a radar blocker have long been sources of contention depending on your opinion &/or priorities, so...have fun reading .

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

OK,what was conclusion then ?

What is YOUR conclusion?

If there is no "radar blocker", how does the Su-57 prevent radar waves bouncing off the engine fans? How cn it be 'stealthy' if this is the case?

The Boeing X-32 was unable to use an s-duct due to main engine location, so it used a blocker.

 

[Dr.Snufflebug]

OK,what was conclusion then ?

For crying out loud...

Yes, there is a radar blocker there. That's it. See my earlier post.

I'll take the time to compile a selection of relevant photos, videos and docs, in chronological order, to put a definite end to this crap. Perhaps this evening, unless somebody else beats me to it.

Don't understand why that'd even be necessary, but whatever, I guess?

 

[Joint Soviet Fighter]

For crying out loud...

Yes, there is a radar blocker there. That's it. See my earlier post.

I'll take the time to compile a selection of relevant photos, videos and docs, in chronological order, to put a definite end to this crap. Perhaps this evening, unless somebody else beats me to it.

Don't understand why that'd even be necessary, but whatever, I guess?

Nah, just let him read over the threads for himself.

 

[AGS-1787]

Is there a production aircraft video I could use to put this to rest?

 

[Squirrel]

@Deino

Sorry I did not find earlier comments about blocker because there is too much threads and pages.Did not have so much time to look every page.Yes,laziness....

What is YOUR conclusion?

If there is no "radar blocker", how does the Su-57 prevent radar waves bouncing off the engine fans? How cn it be 'stealthy' if this is the case?

The Boeing X-32 was unable to use an s-duct due to main engine location, so it used a blocker.

Hi ! My conclusion, personal conclusion is that there is no radar blocker when we talk about serial/operational Su-57's. As I mentioned earlier ,I'm trying to find that coaxial-radial grid inside of the air intakes for years but there is no trace of them.From all photos and videos from KnAAZ that I have , there is none where we can see it. Maybe this sounds crazy ,but until myself or someone else found/see that blocker ,we can not say that there is radar blocker inside of the air intake of the serial Su-57's.

From what I could understand so far based on the comments of one of my friends, there is a lot to argue about. As I wrote in my earlier comments ,with radar blocker they will decrease frontal RCS but in the same time they will decrease air mass flow.Another problem that could occur inside of the air intakes is that radar blockers could easily become destabilizer of the air flow in front of the IGV. Yet another problem can be vibrations etc.

So they have their pros and cons and maybe it is hard to find some compromise there.With them serial Su-57 will certainly has lower frontal RCS but in the same time it will have degraded flight-maneuvering and kinetic (energy) capabilities. When we talk about Russians, they certainly will not allow or do anything to degrade the flight-maneuvering and kinetic/energy capabilities of a fighter, especially a new fighter of the 5th generation.

Until we find a picture or a video as the best possible evidence, where we can see that grid inside of the air intakes of the serial Su-57's, we cannot say that they really exist inside of those air intakes.

All of us know this old,famous photo.We can clearly see IGV of the AL-41F-1. IGV has RAM.

 

[Squirrel]

For crying out loud...

Yes, there is a radar blocker there. That's it. See my earlier post.

I'll take the time to compile a selection of relevant photos, videos and docs, in chronological order, to put a definite end to this crap. Perhaps this evening, unless somebody else beats me to it.

Don't understand why that'd even be necessary, but whatever, I guess?

If we talk about prototype Bort number 510 blue ,OK ,we can say ,yes, there is a radar blocker there. When we talk about serial Su-57's we can not say that they have coaxial-radial grids inside of their air intakes because there is no evidence for that. See my earlier analityc post, tnx.

 

[Life of Tyo]

All of us know this old,famous photo.We can clearly see IGV of the AL-41F-1. IGV has RAM.

Btw that T-50-1 on 2010, T-50-1 test the Structure and Characters of desain on real Flight if I remember

 

[flateric]

If we talk about prototype Bort number 510 blue ,OK ,we can say ,yes, there is a radar blocker there. When we talk about serial Su-57's we can not say that they have coaxial-radial grids inside of their air intakes because there is no evidence for that. See my earlier analityc post, tnx.

Can you explain why bother to test radar blocker at Russian analog of USAF AFTC ten years after 50-1 maiden flight on last pre-series aircraft (first flown in December 2017) in 2020 if they are absent on series production aircraft as you think? Why file two patents regarding specifically radar blocker with almost dozen inventor names in each (including chief designer) in 2017 and 2023?
How many mounting points are needed to install grid inside inlet tract and what that hatch at the bottom of tract in front of IGV does serve and how its position corresponds to known patent drawing?
How many Super Bug (630+ built) radar blocker photos made on assembly line can you show me?

 

[stealthflanker]

The advantage of Blockers is real. IGV alone is not enough. Notion that Sukhoi will just let that benefit goes away because "doesnt want to intefere with maneuverability and other stuff" Is just plain BS. Like why the blockers cant be designed to take account of airflow in the inlet ?.

 

[Squirrel]

Can you explain why bother to test radar blocker at Russian analog of USAF AFTC ten years after 50-1 maiden flight on last pre-series aircraft (first flown in December 2017) in 2020 if they are absent on series production aircraft as you think? Why file two patents regarding specifically radar blocker with almost dozen inventor names in each (including chief designer) in 2017 and 2023?
How many mounting points are needed to install grid inside inlet tract and what that hatch at the bottom of tract in front of IGV does serve and how its position corresponds to known patent drawing?
How many Super Bug (630+ built) radar blocker photos made on assembly line can you show me?

Yes, I noticed that there is a hatch at the bottom of the air intake .....



From the Patent doc:

''Решетка в канале может быть установлена таким образом, что расстояние по продольной оси воздушного канала от решетки до входного направляющего аппарата (ВНА) двигателя составляет от 0,7 до 1,2 диаметра d воздушного канала.''

Now the question is , if the grid is attached for that hatch, is it too close to the IGV ?

When we see this pic ,it seems that grid is more distant from the IGV.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarplanePorn/comments/re10kr/su57_inlet_design_1270x769

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/WarplanePorn/comments/re10kr/su57_inlet_design_1270x769/


Second pic is very interesting and shows us the radar blocker.How is it possible that it is so long and that it might be attached to that hatch and it is as long as these red arrows show ?

 

[F119Doctor]

If there is a separate blocker in the inlet, the bottom door is probably for personnel access to inspect the front of the engine during postflight inspection. Normally this is done by crawling the duct from the inlet, but the blocker would block this access.

 

[flateric]

Second pic is very interesting and shows us the radar blocker.How is it possible that it is so long and that it might be attached to that hatch and it is as long as these red arrows show ?

Why for the God's sake it should be attached to that hatch? Did you actually see images in the grid patent you cite in your posts several times?

 

[Squirrel]

Why for the God's sake it should be attached to that hatch? Did you actually see images in the grid patent you cite in your posts several times?

Of course there is a little possibility that grid could be attached to that hatch. Yes I saw those images and have read all of that several times.
Your question.... ''How many mounting points are needed to install grid inside inlet tract and what that hatch at the bottom of tract in front of IGV does serve and how its position corresponds to known patent drawing?'' ....
made me take a close look at every hatch/hole inside of the air intake.

What I 've found so far is this :



Blue arrow shows us that hatch and red one shows us the position where air flow sensor ( or air temp) will be attached.For me it is very interesting that grid is not integrated part of the air intake.

 

[paralay]

Within the framework of the state program of the Russian Federation "Development of the aviation
industry for 2013-2025", in cooperation with the enterprises of JSC UEC
, participates in the implementation of a project to develop
a promising engine, ed. 30, for the T-50 aircraft.
Ed. 30 is a turbojet twin-circuit engine of generation 5+ with
an afterburner. Ed. 30 is an engine the second stage,
designed for installation on a T-50 fighter aircraft. Its use
is a necessary condition for the creation of the T-50, which makes it possible to withstand foreign
analogues. The engine of the second stage will make it possible to realize cruising
afterburner less flight at supersonic speed and provide special
radar stealth characteristics in the forward hemisphere.
The main advantages of this product also include an increase
in specific thrust by 5%, a decrease in specific gravity by 25%, and a reduction in the total
number of steps, which, in turn, leads to a reduction in the cost of the life
cycle.
During the research and development phases, a highly efficient fan was designed
for the second stage engine. Achievement of special characteristics
by
Radar invisibility is provided by an integrated input guiding device made of
the developed composite material.
The uniqueness of the designed fan lies in the synergy
of using the latest digital design technology and innovative
technological solutions in its main details. This approach has contributed to
reducing work time while achieving a fundamentally
new high level of development.
To meet the stringent requirements of the terms of reference on the level of radar
To make it invisible, an integrated input guide device made of
composite material is used in the fan design, which is a steady trend in the global engine industry.

 

[Squirrel]

@paralay

Tnx but as I can see it is description about second stage engine and its composite made IGV.

Btw ,when I first saw this pics I became suspicious that there is AR-grid inside of the air intakes.I saw them about 5 years ago and on the photos is the 1st or maybe the 2nd serial Su-57.We can see that it is serial aircraft because it has differ air intakes below the vertical stabilisers. If I'm right the main fuselage section(centroplane) will be transported to the assembly position where the wings,LEVCON'S ,all 4 stabilisers and of course engines will be attached.

As I could not see any AR-grid I thought ,maybe there is no radar blockers at all.That is the reason why my conclusion was ,hm there's really no AR-grids. As 'stealthflanker' wrote and described ,with radar blockers, Su-57 will definitely has much lower frontal RCS. I must admit ,hope to see them but for now I can't see them on serial Su-57's.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Yes, the 2nd stage engine incorporates the radar blocker into the engine IGV assembly. Enough of the radar blocker topic. @Squirrel is either trolling or deliberately obtuse at this point.

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

A promising sixth-generation engine at the very bottom

This must be wrong. It shows the F119 being similar size as RD-33, only a little bigger?? The F119 is much bigger engine than that, its longer than AL-31FP and AL-41F1.

 

[paralay]

 

[BullpupRafale]

This must be wrong. It shows the F119 being similar size as RD-33, only a little bigger?? The F119 is much bigger engine than that, its longer than AL-31FP and AL-41F1.

Problem is how vague it can be about size as some simply state overall average outer diameter and others only that of inlet or fan blade.

 

[paralay]

 

[Saber]

Is this the official patent of the faceted full 3d thrust vectoring nozzle with thrust reverser mentioned in the infamous Sukhoi Powerpoint public leak?

 

[NovaGA]

Is this the official patent of the faceted full 3d thrust vectoring nozzle with thrust reverser mentioned in the infamous Sukhoi Powerpoint public leak?

Since when are published patents considered “leaked”

 

[Scar]

Since when are published patents considered “leaked”

Right before they became infamous.

 

[flateric]

Is this the official patent of the faceted full 3d thrust vectoring nozzle with thrust reverser mentioned in the infamous Sukhoi Powerpoint public leak?

So infamous that it never existed?

 

[Saber]

So infamous that it never existed?

Bottom right?

Since when are published patents considered “leaked”

You want to tell me that the myriad of document/powerpoints like the one above were meant to become public knowledge? Quite a few were taken down after it became aware that the host links were publicly available and discovered, maybe not the one above, but it wasn't uncommon on Paralay, Balancer, Otvaga and other forums that a Yandex drive link would be found containing material not meant for public release, likely used as a quick and dirty way to transfer files or setup a presentation for executives and such.

Right before they became infamous.

It's just a simple question of what Paralay's post was about, the third picture was confusing in terms of orientation and I just wanted to know the source and subject.

 

[flateric]

Bottom right?

This is UEC UMPO / Lyul'ka design bureau deputy chief designer cleared presentation from 2016 to House of Engineers still available at their site. Those heavy bulky designs (not sure why do you call them 3D) look pretty much like those UMPO Lyul'ka Chepkin and Marchukov were patenting and offering to Sukhoi back in late 00s and hence abandoned.

 

[Saber]

This is UEC UMPO / Lyul'ka design bureau deputy chief designer cleared presentation from 2016 to House of Engineers still available at their site. Those heavy bulky designs (not sure why do you call them 3D) looks pretty much like those UMPO Lyul'ka Chepkin and Marchukov were patenting and offering to Sukhoi back in late 00s and hence abandoned.

Thanks for the correction. As for the 3D, is "rotational/turning mechanism" not referring to a mechanism where you have the standard 2D faceted con-di nozzle, F-22 style, with a rotating ring to give a full 3D thrust vectoring capability? Or am I interpreting it wrong?

Has there actually ever been a true 3D thrust vectoring design meant for VLO/LO? (Publicly released)

 

[donnage99]

"Mom can we have VLO 3D TVC?"
"No we have them at home"

At home:

 

[Red_air]

I don't think that the 3D thrust vector is needed, it seems that 2.5d like the Su30 35 57 is enough.

 

[flateric]

Has there actually ever been a true 3D thrust vectoring design meant for VLO/LO? (Publicly released)

 

[haavarla]

This must be wrong. It shows the F119 being similar size as RD-33, only a little bigger?? The F119 is much bigger engine than that, its longer than AL-31FP and AL-41F1.

One would think RD-33 would be smaller.
As for the RD-33MK

rd-33mk - Bing

Intelligent search from Bing makes it easier to quickly find what you’re looking for and rewards you.

www.bing.com

It has a wider fan section

 

[Alfa_Particle]

Thanks for the correction. As for the 3D, is "rotational/turning mechanism" not referring to a mechanism where you have the standard 2D faceted con-di nozzle, F-22 style, with a rotating ring to give a full 3D thrust vectoring capability? Or am I interpreting it wrong?

Has there actually ever been a true 3D thrust vectoring design meant for VLO/LO? (Publicly released)

The Chinese have this really weird 2D TVC system on steroids with the exhaust converging section being a movable spherical shell that can achieve some yaw control and a really wacky nozzle that can apparently split from the center line to further enhance yaw control. The patents are available for public AFAIK.

 

[Airborne2001]

Russia seems to be pretty bent on getting the Su-57E (and Su-75) to find an export home in India:

After Su-57E, Russia to Showcase its Second Stealth fighter Su-75 Checkmate at Aero India 2025 – Indian Defence Research Wing

idrw.org

Notably, Russia appears to want India to set up its own production lines for these aircraft. (Or at least the Su-75.)

 

[Deino]

Come on, IDRW is juts a piece of shit, only reporting typical click-bait reports and should be ignored!

 

[Airborne2001]

Come on, IDRW is juts a piece of shit, only reporting typical click-bait reports and should be ignored!

Eurasian times is also reporting it:

Aero India: F-35 Demo Team Not Coming But Stealth Aircraft Will Be Present For Static Display, Flyby Demo: U.S. Confirms

Amid swirling reports about the U.S. Air Force pulling out F-35 aircraft from Aero India 2025, the United States Air Force (USAF) has clarified to the EurAsian Times that a fifth-generation stealth fighter will be present at the prestigious airshow. Aero India, held at Yelahanka Air Force...

www.eurasiantimes.com

Though they did make the mistake that I made of saying the one Su-75 photo is of it in transport to India; in reality it's an older photo. The Su-75 is more iffy, but the Su-57 being there seems real (though unlike IDRW the variant is not specified).