- Joined
- 11 February 2010
- Messages
- 1,548
- Reaction score
- 2,326
Aw, i feel bad for losing one of the defining character namely lattice fin on R-77's.
There was talk about a future long range missile with multiple detachable warheads, that may be another option on increase the internal capacity without increasing the number of suspension points, but it would not be so flexible.
The really interesting take-away: The Russians seem to be planning on relying on a very large air-to-air missiles (e.g. 810/R-37/700kg class)! Such a class of missile can have an exceptionally wide seeker head, exceptionally good ballistics, but likely lacks terminal manoeuvrability (...at least the AIM-54, R-33/R-37, and 810 did).
Is that real or a fake?
What happened?
Aw, i feel bad for losing one of the defining character namely lattice fin on R-77's.
Do you remember where you heard this?
Also, Izd.180 at 10:20 in the video, screenshot attached.
Can you please tell me which one of them is R-37M?
Can you please tell me which one of them is R-37M?
Ill certainly share the link once i cile across once more. The man said something in the lines of "internal rockets: 10 pcs"Interesting , wondering if the Iz-180 , being carried in packs of 4 internally , is a limit of the airplane, or is it because of the internal AKU launcher configuration being similar to when they fired the 40 cm wide cruise missiles in syria , Twice as much box width as the article 180.
Seems a bit odd if 2 180's , 20 cm of box width each , are a limit , especially considering that the bay is over 100 cm wide , considering how the same bay held bigger payloads before , and considering how 16 suspension points (thus 6 external + 10 intenal) was mentionned in numerous official interviews. Along with the capacity of carrying 8 folded wing MRAAMS.
The configuration in the picture is the one that has been known since the begining of the program, some of us think there can be developments increasing that capacity in the future, some don't. Sukhoi is to this day extremely secretive with the internal layout of the bays (still no image of their internals has been released, at least that I know) and there is a second stage being developed, so there might be more going on in regards of internal armament than what we know. There was talk about a future long range missile with multiple detachable warheads, that may be another option on increase the internal capacity without increasing the number of suspension points, but it would not be so flexible.
Do you maybe have a link where those 16 suspension points are mentioned by an official source?
Nope, that is supposedly izd180-PD. Not sure if that thing is even alive. Attached is a small, probably old, but helpful guide from mr Unicornski. And 810 was supposed to be tested as far back as 2014-2015 at Akhtubinsk so yeah, weird that there is no mention of it on that particular layout composition. Su-47 did droptests with a mock up of it.Izd180 is ramjet R-77?
Hi there, I am new here and find this threead very interesting. My contribution is related to the statement below-
I suspect that the 9a/9b and 10a/10b may actually refer to different adaptors - rather than the ability to carry two missiles on hard-point using a twin ejector racks.
Icidentally I found this screen capture of a video showing a twin ejector on a Su-57 :
The reference say it dates back to 2017
Keep the good job.
This goes a bit within the lines ive stated. Thanks for the find.Indeed its not just space it may be related to certain ejector configurations.Hi there, I am new here and find this threead very interesting. My contribution is related to the statement below-
I suspect that the 9a/9b and 10a/10b may actually refer to different adaptors - rather than the ability to carry two missiles on hard-point using a twin ejector racks.
Icidentally I found this screen capture of a video showing a twin ejector on a Su-57 :
View attachment 642056
The reference say it dates back to 2017
Keep the good job.
Ill certainly share the link once i cile across once more. The man said something in the lines of "internal rockets: 10 pcs"
Indeed i agree that a lot of info is masked about the weapon bays. Let us not forget that missile ejectors are rated via the weight class that they carry. A missile such as Kh-59mk2 weighs nearly one ton , therefore it would need a beefier , perhaps more size consuming launcher than what the 170-1 may require. Just my thoughts.
framige said:Icidentally I found this screen capture of a video showing a twin ejector on a Su-57 :
Gimme a picture instead of picturing me.
"I was wrong." That simple, yet of course you will never do it because self imposed delusion is that hard to break apparently.
Heh, Tomcat is a nice guy at the end of the day
The real comedy was that loon @ Keypub who argued for years Su-57 would enter service with external weapons only.
Well atleast he was in a good company then - considering basically whole keypub was a bunch of loon's.
Ill certainly share the link once i cile across once more. The man said something in the lines of "internal rockets: 10 pcs"
Great, that would be very interesting. In fact most of what we know about modern Russian armament was disclosed several years ago, lately the sources have dried up massively.
Indeed i agree that a lot of info is masked about the weapon bays. Let us not forget that missile ejectors are rated via the weight class that they carry. A missile such as Kh-59mk2 weighs nearly one ton , therefore it would need a beefier , perhaps more size consuming launcher than what the 170-1 may require. Just my thoughts.
We know there are two different launchers for the ventral bays: the UVKU-L for loads up to 300 kg and the UVKU-U for those up to 700 kg
framige said:Icidentally I found this screen capture of a video showing a twin ejector on a Su-57 :
I saw this before but it is not clear to me whether this is not a simple double pylon for rocket launchers:
View attachment 642082
They resemble that one more than the known double ejector for AAMs:
View attachment 642083
Of course I am not denying that they could use those double ejectors in the last picture in the Su-57 too...
If this is not a static display trick.. would not the left R-77 have to be launched first.. or the right one.. i'm not sure, lol! It would depend on how it seperate from the adaptors?
But they do look to be in conflict with its mesh fins.
If this is not a static display trick.. would not the left R-77 have to be launched first.. or the right one.. i'm not sure, lol! It would depend on how it seperate from the adaptors?
But they do look to be in conflict with its mesh fins.
It would drop or eject the missile, not make a rail launch., I see no problem with it. The missiles are staggered so the fins do not make contact...
If this is not a static display trick.. would not the left R-77 have to be launched first.. or the right one.. i'm not sure, lol! It would depend on how it seperate from the adaptors?
But they do look to be in conflict with its mesh fins.
It would drop or eject the missile, not make a rail launch., I see no problem with it. The missiles are staggered so the fins do not make contact...
If you say so. Most of the Russian A2A missiles launched from wing adaptors are Rail launched. Hense my train of thought
АКУ-170Е относится к пусковым устройствам поршневого типа. Оно состоит из силового корпуса, имеющего узлы подвески к самолету-носителю. Внутри корпуса размещены передний и задний гидравлические толкатели для катапультирования ракеты, приводимые в действие пиротехническим приводом (через механизм синхронизации) при использовании энергии пиропатрона ЭПК-28Т-2.
NAZ workload for the upcoming decade- including PTB-2000, PTB-3400 external tanks, as well as VTB-M and VTB-B internal tanks for Su-57's weapons bays.
Is it fair to say the internal fuel tanks for bays are actually for Ferry missions?NAZ workload for the upcoming decade- including PTB-2000, PTB-3400 external tanks, as well as VTB-M and VTB-B internal tanks for Su-57's weapons bays.
I had not realized before that they specifically talk about tanks for the weapon bays, we speculated about them but now apparently their existence has been confirmed...
Is it known what the difference between the B and M models is?
Is it fair to say the internal fuel tanks for bays are actually for Ferry missions?
yes but how much fuel are we talking about, total now, 13000kg?Is it fair to say the internal fuel tanks for bays are actually for Ferry missions?
Not necessarily. Maybe you want to make a long CAP mission and prefer to exchange AAMs for persistence. Also in case stealth requirements are not mission relevant, externally carried AAMs will have a way smaller drag index than EFTs. Or in case mission weapons are mainly big, externally carried ordnance... the internal tanks can be useful in many occasions I think
A quick calculation shows ca. 1500 kg fuel capacity per bay should be possible
yes but how much fuel are we talking about, total now, 13000kg?
NAZ workload for the upcoming decade- including PTB-2000, PTB-3400 external tanks, as well as VTB-M and VTB-B internal tanks for Su-57's weapons bays.
I had not realized before that they specifically talk about tanks for the weapon bays, we speculated about them but now apparently their existence has been confirmed...
Is it known what the difference between the B and M models is?
Less than two weeks til S-2 will be handed over to RuAF, in theory.
Less than two weeks til S-2 will be handed over to RuAF, in theory.
Good news. and no rush.
Yeah, first one was enough...don’t rush the building of the new aircraft.
Is it fair to say the internal fuel tanks for bays are actually for Ferry missions?
Not necessarily. Maybe you want to make a long CAP mission and prefer to exchange AAMs for persistence. Also in case stealth requirements are not mission relevant, externally carried AAMs will have a way smaller drag index than EFTs. Or in case mission weapons are mainly big, externally carried ordnance... the internal tanks can be useful in many occasions I think
A quick calculation shows ca. 1500 kg fuel capacity per bay should be possible
Having lots if fuel inside AND lots of wepons OUTSIDE does not compute for a 5th Gen platform mission profile.