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

Ainen said:
6 UV(101ks-u) cheaper than 6 das(DAS).
Two distributed systems of sensors(101ks, n036) in 4 bands is more expensive than just 1.
Click to expand...
The only reason to mention cost, here, would be if The Su-57's defensive systems were on par with, or better than, those in The F-35, which is simply not the case. The DIRCSMs are cool, yes, but ironically, they only serve to further hurt the overall rcs of The Felon - sorry.

Ainen said:
Of course, only if radars are active. Which is why there's maws to track launch events. And so on.
Click to expand...
Again, only if the missiles are burning. That's the entire point of DAS - to continuously track threats from all around the aircraft at all times without anyone having to worry about it "being active" or the sensors being dependent on the motor of an incoming missile to still be, well, burning. It's an all-in-one kind of a setup.
 
Joint Soviet Fighter said:
The only reason to mention cost, here, would be if The Su-57's defensive systems were on par with, or better than, those in The F-35, which is simply not the case.
Click to expand...
Thanks for a fresh breath from f-16.net.
Where this comes from. Priest told you?
Not even mentioning the simple fact, that comparing (what's comparable) is in fact the point. "levels" don't fight, systems do.
Joint Soviet Fighter said:
Again, only if the missiles are burning. That's the entire point of DAS - to continuously track threats from all around the aircraft at all times without anyone having to worry about it "being active" or the sensors being dependent on the motor of an incoming missile to still be, well, burning. It's an all-in-one kind of a setup.
Click to expand...
Same subsystem in su-57 uses at least 3 different band channels, including IR one. Instead of just 1 on F-35.

Uv one here is wide fov warning only, and for that - it is better than IR.
 
Last edited:
Ainen said:
Thanks for a fresh breath from f-16.net.
Where this comes from. Priest told you?
Not even mentioning the simple fact, that comparing (what's comparable) is in fact the point. "levels" don't fight, systems do.
Click to expand...
Yes, & those systems do not have the same capabilities. Come on, man.

Ainen said:
Same subsystem in su-57 uses at least 3 different band channels, including IR one. Instead of just 1 on F-35.

Uv one here is wide fov warning only, and for that - it is better than IR.
Click to expand...
Believe what you want *shrugs*.

Relatedly, is there anyone in Russia who actually understands the realities of modern air combat or even has the most rudimentary grasp of air power as an overall concept?
 
Last edited:
yeetmahboi said:
Going by public literature the Felon intake is barely offsetted laterally and vertically so I honestly doubt it. To fully mask the frontal compressor without changing the ducting path you'd need something like a bump that digs into the current duct line, but a blocker already does that job even if partially.
Click to expand...
Oh.

You mean like this?

1740441386001.png

Or this?

1740439220272.png

We're going around in circles, here.
 
Joint Soviet Fighter said:
Yes, & those systems do not have the same capabilities. Come on, man.
Click to expand...
They do not have *same* capabilities. Different systems, built in different countries, in different conditions, to different requirements have different capabilities This is why we're here.

What exact kind of capabilities (specifications) they have, however - you don't have a way of knowing.
Much less than that, you don't even bother with what's available on both aircraft in public domain - belief is enough.

I.e. it is preaching.

Joint Soviet Fighter said:
Relatedly, is there anyone in Russia who actually understands the realities of modern air combat or even has the most rudimentary grasp of air power as an overall concept?
Click to expand...
I believe that in a rather militant, industrially-developed country of 150 millions, known for rather good education, someone in fact does.
One developing its own combat aviation since the dawn of combat aircraft, too.

I am much less certain about some forum members. Because even without the above - one may write that you just wrote only in one case. That is, if you don't have any idea on how aircraft design process, in any country, is structured.
Including countries that start their respective aircraft industries right now.
 
Last edited:
yeetmahboi said:
Feel free to show us whatever offsets is there in the Felon's intake and not bring up an irrelevant point of discussion.
Click to expand...
If you're talking about the front of the intake, this -

1740455329649.png

is not the same as this -

1740455378501.png

Not sure as to what you meant by "an irrelevant point of discussion", btw, as I was only answering a question.

Oops, almost forgot - the fact that the front section of The Su-57's intake is both not attached to the wing & makes use of an almost semi-upward twisting arrangement with additions to the inside walls that are supposed to generate more "radar bounces", iirc, makes the possible installation of a half carrot/cone quite difficult, at best, given the partial s-duct design & the considerable weight that is already imposed on the airframe. I think.
 
Why is it that they never bring the real thing? The US brought a geniune state of the art F-35 to India
 
AGS-1787 said:
Because they have a few and don’t want the west to get a good look at them. The f-35 is an airplane sold to a load of countries. They were this timid with the su-35.
Click to expand...


There is 99.99% no difference between the prototype and production model from an aircraft design point of view. The only difference is better build quality on the production model.

This is why I stand by what I said earlier about Russian marketing being absolutely awful. You bring your best, not a really poor prototype with awful fit and finish if you want to win over new customers.

In don’t thing there is anything the west can learn from an air shows if they brought the production model anyways, it’s not like it would be flying with its radars in combat mode. It’s RCS can also be masked with a luneburg lense and it’s not like SU-57s are not used over Ukraine with NATO AWACS and ELINT aircraft sniffing around; besides I’m sure the US probably has a mock up of a SU-57 in a anechoic chamber somewhere in Nevada.
 
flateric said:
O RLY?
Click to expand...

Yes, there is no difference at all in airframe besides built quality and materials. The only design difference and its minuscule is a slightly different in the base where the vertical stabilizer is attached. Besides that the aircraft is 100% the same.
 
Production has RAM applied to it, all the systems installed, and better-built quality. So there are differences. About marketing yeah I agree that their marketing dropped the ball, they could have made a high-quality mock-up instead. They could have checked their marketing materials with proper translations. I don’t understand why they don’t use means to mask the real radar signature.
 
Last edited:
flateric said:
I have an impression that you have escaped from kindergarten.
Click to expand...

I have an impression that you ask questions insinuating I’m wrong and you have the answer then why I reply you insult me. If anyone is a kindergarten it’s YOU. The burden of proof is on you. What did I say that was wrong? Is there a redesigned SU-57 that no one knows about except you?

Like I said, the the prototype and SU-57 are 99% the similar in design. The only real difference is built quality and materials.
 
AGS-1787 said:
Production has RAM applied to it, all the systems installed, and better-built quality. So there are differences. About marketing yeah I agree that their marketing dropped the ball, they could have made a high-quality mock-up instead. They could have checked their marketing materials with proper translations. I don’t understand why they don’t use means to mask the real radar signature.
Click to expand...

I was talking about exterior design differences. Having RAM is not a design difference nor are different avionics and I already mentioned build quality.

And yes, the true RCS can be masked. I’m not sure why Russians are so hesitant to show off the real thing and instead bring low quality prototypes…it’s baffling considering SU-57s operate over Ukraine with NATO AWACS and ELINT aircraft trying to learn everything they can about the SU-57.

I look forward to the new engines. Perhaps they will eventually show of a production model to India with new engines.
 
Is the Su-57 truly the production model? The Soviet Union developed the Su-27 (Flanker-A) and produced it in limited qualities (like the Su-57) before adopting the Su-27S (Flanker-B). The Flanker-A was also a development of the T-10 prototypes. Russia developed the Su-35 which was a development of the T-10M prototypes before adopting the Su-35S.

Su-57M might receive significant changes to its design.

Also Russia has been showing off high quality mockups. Look up the Su-57E.
 
Last edited:
Stormingart said:
Is the Su-57 truly the production model? The Soviet Union developed the Su-27 (Flanker-A) and produced it in limited qualities (like the Su-57) before adopting the Su-27S (Flanker-B). The Flanker-A was also a development of the T-10 prototypes. Russia developed the Su-35 which was a development of the T-10M prototypes before adopting the Su-35S.
Click to expand...
Given the current order of 76 airframes, it's pretty much fixed. T-50-11 is the closest to current production model.

Also there is no real "Flanker-A" as what was being serially produced at that time was totally re-designed T-10-17 which the "real" Su-27 we see today. Earlier T-10 does not enter serial. Also there is no real connection between current Su-35S with T-10M tbh as T-10M have canard while Su-35S doesnt.
 
I guess the conversation about being respecftul went out the window.

OT: I wouldn't be surprised by an Iranian purchase of the Su-57 at all. It makes sense that the first fifth-gen they aquire would be Russian considering their close relations and support of many of the same movements in the world. China could step up to that plate too maybe, but I think Russia would be first to do so.
 
stealthflanker said:
Given the current order of 76 airframes, it's pretty much fixed. T-50-11 is the closest to current production model.

Also there is no real "Flanker-A" as what was being serially produced at that time was totally re-designed T-10-17 which the "real" Su-27 we see today. Earlier T-10 does not enter serial. Also there is no real connection between current Su-35S with T-10M tbh as T-10M have canard while Su-35S doesnt.
Click to expand...
Isn’t that my point? Su-57M might be a total redesign. Anyhow we should find out soon as Russia stated the Su-57M (alongside a prototype for Su-75) will be produced this year.
 
Last edited:
Stormingart said:
Isn’t that my point? Su-57M might be a total redesign. Anyhow we should find out soon as Russia stated the Su-57M (alongside a prototype for Su-75) will be produced this year.
Click to expand...

To go beyond the shape of current Su-57 tho... seems unlikely.

You draw wrong parallel tho from T-10 program.. the T-10 was never entering serial production in any real quantity. There was never any "Flanker-A" entering service.
 
QuadroFX said:
It is not a mockup.
Click to expand...

Btw Su-57E is T-50KNS Static Prototype for test on ground maintenance, aircraft handling and aircraft characteristics and yes Mock-up is replica not have avionics or hydrolic control Elevator/Flaps other
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2025-03-02-02-41-14-150_com.google.android.apps.docs-picsay.jpg
    Screenshot_2025-03-02-02-41-14-150_com.google.android.apps.docs-picsay.jpg
    142.3 KB · Views: 71

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom