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

Ronny said:
LWIR sensor can see target with cooler temperature but MWIR sensor can see target better in clutter (cloud, background surface ..etc)
In short, for target at higher altitude then LWIR is often better, for target at lower altitude then MWIR is often better
View attachment 759260
Click to expand...

Uh, no. LWIR can see through clouds, whereas MWIR cannot, hence as to why LWIR is used by firefighters, for example. MWIR has better resolution, albeit in ideal conditions, but there's actually an incredibly cheap & easy way to drastically improve both the range & resolution of LWIR. It's really cool stuff.
 
donnage99 said:
That just tells me that these MWIR sensors aren't good enough then. There is inherent physics that scanning range is shorter than focused tracking range. However, If MWIR has good resolution, digital zoom can allow for simultaneous track and scan out to pretty good range (tactically relevant) as with f-35's DAS.

Constant FoV track and scan, MLD in one system rather than this awkward UV based sensors just for MLD on top of IR based apertures.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that UV sensors are useless against missiles, etc., that are no longer burning, but they are cheaper, so...
 
Joint Soviet Fighter said:
Uh, no. LWIR can see through clouds, whereas MWIR cannot, hence as to why LWIR is used by firefighters, for example. MWIR has better resolution, albeit in ideal conditions, but there's actually an incredibly cheap & easy way to drastically improve both the range & resolution of LWIR. It's really cool stuff.
Click to expand...
No, neither LWIR or MWIR can see through cloud. With thick cloud they both get absorbed.
But background like cloud and ground surface emit very little MWIR radiation so you have more contrast, and therefore you can detect target from longer distance (that is why FLIR are generally operate in MWIR).
LWIR is better for high altitude target because there is very few cloud at high altitude and you can also see very cool object with LWIR
IMG_7841.jpeg
IMG_7838.jpeg
IMG_7839.jpeg
 
RadicalDisconnect said:
Front IRST unit of Su-57, 101KS-V most likely not dual band because windows transparent to LWIR are usually germanium which is a dark color and opaque in visible spectrum, or for dual-band MWIR/LWIR, zinc selenide which is yellow color also mostly opaque in visible spectrum. While the 101KS-V bulb is clear and transparent in visible spectrum which probably means MWIR only system.

The L-band IFF antennas aren't unique to Su-57, similar to Band 2 arrays on other fighters.
Click to expand...
N036L arrays are radars first, IFF and EW on top.
donnage99 said:
That just tells me that these MWIR sensors aren't good enough then. There is inherent physics that scanning range is shorter than focused tracking range. However, If MWIR has good resolution, digital zoom can allow for simultaneous track and scan out to pretty good range (tactically relevant) as with f-35's DAS.

Constant FoV track and scan, MLD in one system rather than this awkward UV based sensors just for MLD on top of IR based apertures.
Click to expand...
Several reasons come to mind.
(1)All optics work this way; DAS doesn't replace EOTS either, including its IRST functionality as mentioned above.

(2)101KS-O are DIRCM after all. You have to choose here. Laser turret won't be undirectional, it's the single most directional solution in existence.

(3)If those aren't concerns, see Su-35s. It operates with (single) MWIR MAWS for over a decade...
 
Ainen said:
N036L arrays are radars first
Click to expand...
To be honest, I have a hard time believing N036L are radar array, they are active scanned array but they only has a single line of T/R modules arranged horizontally. That mean they can’t steer vertically. In other words, no ability to determine target altitude. Then with so few T/R working at such low frequency, the beamwidth would be something like 10-15 degrees which is quite unsuitable as fire control system, even value as early warning is somewhat dubious
 
Probably 14.
But if we think in a long-term perspective, including the future gradual replacement of the Su-30MKA fleet, it can be a total of tens to a hundred aircraft.
If the indormation turns out to be true (all the news is based on one Algerian TV report... state TV? private? are they relevant? does anyone here speak Arabic?) this is a real breakthrough for Russia on several fronts.
 
Deino said:
And another question! I presume, the production capacity is still not that high enough to produce those for Algeria additionally to an increased batch for Russia this year! So Algeria first in order to satisfy a new customer or am I wrong?
Click to expand...
A russian UAC or KnAAPO official, can't recall now, specifically said they have sufficient capacity to satisfy both VKS requirements and eventual export orders. Obviously KnAAPO has the capacity to produce at least several tens of airframes each year, be it Su-57, Su-35 or a mixture of both. I actually wanted to open a topic discussing the yearly combat aircraft production capacities of the major powers ie US, China and Russia, but considering how riled up, politically provocative and hostile certain western posters/moderators get whenever a discussion involving russian (or chinese) military capacities is attempted, i'll rather do that elsewhere at some point.

PS: Few years back there was a screenshot showing the planned KnAAPO production of i believe both Su-35 and Su-57 for the next several years, but of course can't find it now. @QuadroFX @paralay @flateric could you help if possible? Many thanks.
 
Last edited:
lancer21 said:
A russian UAC or KnAAPO official, can't recall now, specifically said they have sufficient capacity to satisfy both VKS requirements and eventual export orders. Obviously KnAAPO has the capacity to produce at least several tens of airframes each year, be it Su-57, Su-35 or a mixture of both. I actually wanted to open a topic discussing the yearly combat aircraft production capacities of the major powers ie US, China and Russia, but considering how riled up, politically provocative and hostile certain western posters/moderators get whenever a discussion involving russian (or chinese) military capacities is attempted, i'll rather do that elsewhere at some point.

PS: Few years back there was a screenshot showing the planned KnAAPO production of i believe both Su-35 and Su-57 for the next several years, but of course can't find it now. @QuadroFX @paralay @flateric could you help if possible? Many thanks.
Click to expand...


Thanks for your reply and indeed ... a hot topic! However the point is not to look on "how large" a certain facility is but to try to extrapolate a realistic annual production output based on confirmed information (rarely and barely available), known units receiving a certain type & imagery or various means aka at the facility or an operational base (via GE for example) ... but again, a hot topic!
 
Ronny said:
No, neither LWIR or MWIR can see through cloud. With thick cloud they both get absorbed.
Click to expand...

But with thin clouds, depending on what wavelengths they tend to absorb, different wavelengths can travel further. So there are cases where LWIR may be able to see things at distances MWIR cannot.
 
Avimimus said:
But with thin clouds, depending on what wavelengths they tend to absorb, different wavelengths can travel further. So there are cases where LWIR may be able to see things at distances MWIR cannot.
Click to expand...
You are both correct, but the original claim was generalizing that LWIR can see through cloud whereas MWIR cannot, and I think Ronny put out a great explanation for the problem at hand. That's enough to settle it.
 
Scar said:
No, they are not.
Click to expand...
Oh, this one. WIthout going into same dispute over and over, i don't really see contents of the article as somehow exclusive, as array is multifunctional.
Ronny said:
To be honest, I have a hard time believing N036L are radar array, they are active scanned array but they only has a single line of T/R modules arranged horizontally. That mean they can’t steer vertically. In other words, no ability to determine target altitude. Then with so few T/R working at such low frequency, the beamwidth would be something like 10-15 degrees which is quite unsuitable as fire control system, even value as early warning is somewhat dubious
Click to expand...
Simple anwer is that it is most certainly not used for fire control.
L band isn't fire control band, it's airspace control band.
 
Ainen said:
Oh, this one. WIthout going into same dispute over and over, i don't really see contents of the article as somehow exclusive, as array is multifunctional.
Click to expand...
There is nothing to dispute here, the idea of usage of L-band arrays as a RADAR is a pure speculation that contradicts to the facts such as official information from the developers and configuration of the system, which, as Ronny correctly mentioned earlier, be it a RADAR, would have a horrible radiation pattern (i.e. the amount of radiation hitting the target and returning to the receiver) and zero resolution in elevation axis.
 
www.twz.com

Algeria Says It’s The Su-57 Felon’s First Export Customer

Fifteen years after it was first flown, the Su-57 has won its first export in Algeria, according to the country’s state-run media. Fifteen years after it was first flown, the Su-57 has won its first export in Algeria, according to the country’s state-run media.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
 
Scar said:
There is nothing to dispute here, the idea of usage of L-band arrays as a RADAR is a pure speculation that contradicts to the facts such as official information from the developers and configuration of the system, which, as Ronny correctly mentioned earlier, be it a RADAR, would have a horrible radiation pattern (i.e. the amount of radiation hitting the target and returning to the receiver) and zero resolution in elevation axis.
Click to expand...
The link you send as definitive doesn't really mean what you imply. No more than 101KS-O being DIRCM(which it most certainly is). But then, there is some.

We know that all those arrays work under same system (and single central processing unit), with different functional subsystems having access to the same multifunctional arrays. One of the whole points of 5th gen design(integrated digital architecture really) is that it allows AESAs work as MFAs（as opposed to the way they were plugged into 4th gen platforms until this point), provided they're physically capable of it.
There is a whole class of radars working in 2D. I don't understand the point of the argument that "there is no resolution in elevation axis" - it is normal for this class of radarsin the first place. Aircraft already has 3(4?) fire control radars, on top of 1(3) IRSTs.

Estimation done by @Silentflanker gives very competitive ranges (comparable to full power of the main N036 array) against LO targets in same ~240 deg field, with very high scan rates. And this didn't come free - there is >twice the real estate (and weight, and power) used, compared to Su-35s IFF.
If angular inaccuracy is conductive to X-band array operating in focused mode (especially under LPI modes, that cuts things significantly) - having volume search radar onboard fighter aircraft is a very big deal.

There is significant basis under why all literature on the plane considers them as such.
 
Last edited:
Twz said in that article su57 production went down to just a few in 2024. But didn't provide any evidence for said conclusion.
Does anyone here know of any indication of that?
 
GizzoJegsaa said:
View attachment 759287
Hi, im new here. I had this picture saved on my phone and knew it would be useful someday. Not sure where i got it from though.
Click to expand...
Might be from wikipedia, or from another forum, i do have it too. There is a more recent version floating around, though i think the 2023-2024 figures must be educated guesswork and probably well below the real figures.
russia10.jpg
 
Deino said:
And another question! I presume, the production capacity is still not that high enough to produce those for Algeria additionally to an increased batch for Russia this year! So Algeria first in order to satisfy a new customer or am I wrong?
Click to expand...
Russian sources stated that more than 10 were made in 2023. Let's assume twelve, a half of an regiment. It wouldn't surprise me that in 2024 they made 18 pieces, and in 2025 they will made 18-24. So even with 6 made it's still likely will be more than original plan of 12 in 2025.
 
Ainen said:
The link you send as definitive doesn't really mean what you imply. No more than 101KS-O being DIRCM(which it most certainly is). But then, there is some.
Click to expand...
The article clearly describes the purpose of L-band AESA - IFF. If you can provide any official or reliable source that tells it's a RADAR, i will be glad to read it and change my opinion. Otherwise, it's just a speculation that contradicts to the known facts.
Ainen said:
We know that all those arrays work under same system (and single central processing unit), with different functional subsystems having access to the same multifunctional arrays.
Click to expand...
Ofcourse they do! It's IFF for FCR! But this doesn't meant it's a radar. That's why it's called "АФАР L-диапазона" / "L-band AESA", and not a "РЛС L-диапазона" / "L-band RADAR".
Ainen said:
One of the whole points of 5th gen design(integrated digital architecture really) is that it allows AESAs work as MFAs（as opposed to the way they were plugged into 4th gen platforms until this point), provided they're physically capable of it.
Click to expand...
MFA doesn't mean RADAR.
Ainen said:
There is a whole class of radars working in 2D. I don't understand the point of the argument that "there is no resolution in elevation axis" - it is normal for this class of radarsin the first place. Aircraft already has 3(4?) fire control radars, on top of 1(3) IRSTs.
Click to expand...
Again, the existence of 2D-radars, all them are huge and powerful ground-based or ship-based - doesn't mean N036L is a RADAR too.
Ainen said:
Estimation done by @Silentflanker gives very competitive ranges (comparable to full power of the main N036 array) against LO targets in same ~240 deg field, with very high scan rates. And this didn't come free - there is >twice the real estate (and weight, and power) used, compared to Su-35s IFF.
Click to expand...
And what source says L-band AESA on SU-57 has >twice of power of the similar system on Su-35?
Ainen said:
There is significant basis under why all literature on the plane considers them as such.
Click to expand...
What literature, exactly? Official article says it's for IFF.
 
Last edited:
Ainen said:
Simple anwer is that it is most certainly not used for fire control.
L band isn't fire control band, it's airspace control band.
Click to expand...
But for normal early warning radar, if they are only 2D, then they would have decent horizontal angular accuracy. Whereas this L-band array would have bad horizontal angular accuracy and also no vertical accuracy.
I personally think it serve the exactly same purpose as the band 2 array on F-35 leading edge which is IFF and EW system
1.png
2.png
 
Rather if its 360 radar, infrared in different waves or UV the most not talked about advantage is that the entire aircraft can be used as one hell of a powerful EW system with that many antennas everywhere. I heard an avionics upgrade for the Su-57M so I am rather curious if we will get at least a small hint of information from those systems at least for the maks 2025 airshow.
 
Galaxy said:
What about showing off the SU-57s combat record over Ukraine?
Click to expand...
This in particular. I know that there are a small number of operational fifth gen types, but the Su-57 is the first non-US fifth gen fighter to be used in war. Perhaps the Su-57 that was damaged in a drone strike plays a role in why?
 
Scar said:
The article clearly describes the purpose of L-band AESA - IFF. If you can provide any official or reliable source that tells it's a RADAR, i will be glad to read it and change my opinion. Otherwise, it's just a speculation that contradicts to the known facts.
Click to expand...
N036L(name, ffs!) itself is AESA (one of) of N036 - which, together, is radar. Unlike, 4283, which is separate from N035 Radar, and lives under Sh-135 FCS.
It doesn't mean much by itself (IFF integration into radar is normal, but this line of argument doesn't work.

This has potential to turn into rather exhausting "abscence of evidence is evidence of abscene" type of tugboat, so for now I think we can agree to disagree here - I first have to reach my books first anyway. :)
Scar said:
Ofcourse they does! It's IFF for FCR! But this doesn't meant it's a radar. That's why it's called "АФАР L-диапазона" / "L-band AESA", and not a "РЛС L-диапазона" / "L-band RADAR".
Click to expand...
N036B had a badge saying X-band AESA, too. Not X-band radar.
Overall, I think you're going too deep into something, typed by an employee for exhibit in a single second.
Scar said:
MFA doesn't mean RADAR.
Click to expand...
It means multiple functions performed by same array (often simlultaneously, through array or time/phase split), yes. But still, there are multiple.
Now, the question is, why there are several meters of combined multifunctional L-band array per wing, and what they do.
Scar said:
Again, the existence of 2D-radars, all them are huge and powerful ground-based or ship-based - doesn't mean N036L is a RADAR too.
Click to expand...
E-2 series.
Yes, it doesn't guarantee that. It just unlikely to the point of improbability that it isn't, because otherwise this solution doesn't make sense.
Scar said:
And what source says L-band AESA on SU-57 has >twice of power of the similar system on Su-35?
Click to expand...
None, though you can compare exhibits. Just x2(or more) the number of longer and bulkier arrays on su-57, compared to Su-35s.
They may even be empty. It's just unlikely.
Scar said:
What literature, exactly? Official article says it's for IFF.
Click to expand...
It isn't official article. It's research paper, on a specific subject, describing solution from professional perspective of certain group of people.
This is why imho it's better to remain limit to whatever is written there, and not exclude that's not, if not directly denied.
O/l, I think both of us know all the argumentation lines. I'll have access to my Gordon book tonight, let me return with it.
 

Algeria - the first foreign customer of the Su-57 will receive 12 fighters within two years​

13.02.2025, 12:49
Photo: © press service of PJSC "UAC"

The Algerian Air Force plans to start operating Russian fifth-generation Su-57 fighters in 2025, according to Algérie solidaire.
"Algeria will become the second country south of the Mediterranean Sea after the state of Israel, which will operate fifth-generation combat aircraft," the report says.

According to the authoritative Algerian source "Sada El Juyush", the first six aircraft will be delivered in 2025, six more in 2026. The contract for the supply of 14 Su-57 fighters was allegedly concluded in 2021.

But back in 2019, the information resource MENA Defense reported that a contract was signed for the purchase of 14 Su-57 fighters by Algeria. The decision was made in the summer of 2019 after the visit of the Algerian delegation to the MAKS air show in Moscow.

During this visit, organized by the commander of the Air Force Major General Bumaiza, the Su-57 was inspected from all sides, and the former Algerian MiG-29 pilot became one of the few foreigners to test the Russian invisible plane on a simulator. It was he who "made the decision on the future of acquisitions after five years of procrastination and a waste of time".

In November 2024, at the Zhuhai Air Show, Rosoboronexport announced the signing of the first export contract for the Su-57E, without disclosing the name of the buyer. This statement caused surprise in expert circles, as it was previously assumed that the export of Su-57 would begin only after the fulfillment of orders for the Russian army planned until 2028. In addition, Western sanctions imposed after the start of the special military operation in Ukraine could affect the production of the Su-57, limiting access to some important technologies.

However, increasing the production rate of Su-57 to 12 aircraft per year starting from 2023 allows Russia to start export supplies this year and not only fulfill contractual obligations, but also attract additional funds to finance the further development of the Su-57 program. The version of aircraft delivered to Algeria may not be final and require modernization, especially in terms of engines, means of reducing radar visibility, on-board electronics and weapons.

Despite possible limitations in the initial configuration, the receipt of the Su-57 will have a significant impact on the capabilities of the Algerian Air Force. The aircraft will be integrated into the weapons system together with the upgraded Su-30MKA fighters in the SM2 variant. Even in the basic configuration, the Su-57 will significantly strengthen the combat potential of the Algerian Air Force in the face of growing competition from 4++ generation fighters, such as the French Rafale, Eurofighter and F-16V, as well as the presence of fifth-generation F-35 fighters in the region.

The head of Rosoboronexport Alexander Mikheev confirmed plans to start operating the Su-57 as the first foreign customer in 2025. The statement was made at the Aero India 2025 exhibition in Bangalore. The delivery of the Su-57E will be an important stage in the development of Russian-Algerian military-technical cooperation and will strengthen Russia's position in the global arms market.
Click to expand...

https://aviation21.ru/alzhir-pervyj...poluchit-v-techenie-dvux-let-12-istrebitelej/
 
Airborne2001 said:
This in particular. I know that there are a small number of operational fifth gen types, but the Su-57 is the first non-US fifth gen fighter to be used in war. Perhaps the Su-57 that was damaged in a drone strike plays a role in why?
Click to expand...


The Russians usually say little in terms of kills and even sorties unlike NATO which advertises everything even though it may be exaggerated at times. Like how many sorties have the Russians flown? How many tons of munitions were dropped? How many air to air kills? How many SAMs were knocked out? The Russians even kept their MiG aces over Korea secret for decades, for good reasons I suppose.

Early in the war there was a handful of SU-35 aces and some articles about them and recently there was an SU-3SM that knocked out a Ukrainian SU-27 with an R-37M from 130KMs! The Ukrainian even confirmed one of their pilots were killed in combat but this these disclosures from the Russians are as rare as a unicorn.

As for SU-57, there was some vague references to it performing air to ground strikes from both Ukrainian and Russian sources and a video of an SU-57 inside Ukrainian airspace shooting down an S-70 that lost contact. There was also some claims of air to air kills but no real details were provided.

Like I said the Russians suck at marketing and information warfare, the Russians don’t even make counter claims to supposed loses. During the Gulf War the US feverishly denied that Scott Spitcher was shot down by a MiG and instead lied that it was a SAM, lots of other dubious claims from the US and their allies. Meanwhile the Ukrainians clown on the Russians with ‘Ghosts of Kiev’ propoganda (Pakistan did the same thing with regards to lying about downing Indian SU-30MKIs) and the Russians stay quiet by twiddling their fingers and letting negative PR make international headlines.

We may never know anything about the SU-57s real performance…
 
Ronny said:
No, neither LWIR or MWIR can see through cloud. With thick cloud they both get absorbed.
But background like cloud and ground surface emit very little MWIR radiation so you have more contrast, and therefore you can detect target from longer distance (that is why FLIR are generally operate in MWIR).
LWIR is better for high altitude target because there is very few cloud at high altitude and you can also see very cool object with LWIR
View attachment 759276
View attachment 759277
View attachment 759278
Click to expand...
Interesting graphic.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom