New combat aircraft will be presented at MAKS-2021

Emirati delegation visiting the #Checkmate

Want Checkmate?

Need cheque book.

There is absolutely no reason for them to have such long side weapon bays unless they are made to fit zn R-77M each.

Which is why i'm rooting for the fact that they could infact house such a missile.
So it can quite probably carry 5 R-77m's total.

They look large enough to hold a KAB-250. Question is, could they drop them from there???

Big_Gazza wrote:Want Checkmate?

Need cheque book.

So, it was not Checkmate as a translation of Shah-mat but Check- Mate in the sense of Cheque-friend?

Being there I will drop the bomb.

Are it possible that the vigorous 8G turning means SUSTAINED turning at 8G?

Atmosphere wrote:There is absolutely no reason for them to have such long side weapon bays unless they are made to fit zn R-77M each.

Which is why i'm rooting for the fact that they could infact house such a missile.
So it can quite probably carry 5 R-77m's total.

In fact it seems every bit as long as the main bay. The side bays being capable both short and medium range AAM would allow the plane to carry a serious strike package and defend itself very capably. Maybe there are even longer range MRAAM with longer fuselages in development capable of using better the 4.2 m available in the ventral bays and the side ones were grown to that size too... there are many good options, specially when the plane has big bays

marcellogo wrote:Are it possible that the vigorous 8G turning means SUSTAINED turning at 8G? pirat pirat pirat pirat pirat pirat pirat

The MiG-29 can already sustain 9 g...

LMFS wrote:

marcellogo wrote:Are it possible that the vigorous 8G turning means SUSTAINED turning at 8G? pirat pirat pirat pirat pirat pirat pirat

The MiG-29 can already sustain 9 g...

Sustained here is to be intended in opposition to Istantaneous turning rate, meaning it can turn at such without losing speed and energy i.e. an excellent performance.

marcellogo wrote:

LMFS wrote:

marcellogo wrote:Are it possible that the vigorous 8G turning means SUSTAINED turning at 8G? pirat pirat pirat pirat pirat pirat pirat

The MiG-29 can already sustain 9 g...

Sustained here is to be intended in opposition to Istantaneous turning rate, meaning it can turn at such without losing speed and energy i.e. an excellent performance.

I think this fighter is based on a new fighter paradign/ideology. It is an omnirole fighter that seems to favor the strike fighter role. Not sure if I am right on this. But it seems like that to me. On the 8g limit I've heard others much more knowledgeable than me discuss it and I am still a bit confused as to what it exactly means.



Also in this pic do you guys think there is some kind of display ordinance  being shown inside? Maybe groms?

Edit: had to add my idea of what the display ordinance might be.

The white one is a Grom.
The other is a Kh-58UShKe i think. I can't clearly see.

Atmosphere wrote:The white one is a Grom.
The other is a Kh-58UShKe i think. I can't clearly see.

Good eye! Damn this single engine fighter can carry two missiles and also carry things like grom, kh 58, kh 69 and many other awesome weapons. I think it could certainly even fit two r 37m long range missiles in its belly weapons bay. They essentially fitted a modified single weapons bay of the su 57 in it! Sukhoi has got some amazing and practical minds.

If the Russian Air Force starts to place large scale order for The Checkmate then it means hardly any Mig 35s and Su 30SM will be purchased.

So in the long term, RuAF will eventually settle for Su-34, Su 35, PAK-FA and Checkmate along with the S-70 Okhotnik-B in a Loyal Wingman role.

RTN wrote:If the Russian Air Force starts to place large scale order for The Checkmate then it means hardly any Mig 35s and Su 30SM will be purchased.

So in the long term, RuAF will eventually settle for Su-34, Su 35, PAK-FA and Checkmate along with the S-70 Okhotnik-B in a Loyal Wingman role.

Most if not all Su-30SM will be modernized to Su-30SM2 (Su-35) standard but I do think you're right about Mig-35's. The Checkmate is not a done deal for the Air Forces of the RF, but I see no reason why they wouldn't buy it in significant numbers yes.

LMFS wrote:In fact it seems every bit as long as the main bay. The side bays being capable both short and medium range AAM would allow the plane to carry a serious strike package and defend itself very capably. Maybe there are even longer range MRAAM with longer fuselages in development capable of using better the 4.2 m available in the ventral bays and the side ones were grown to that size too... there are many good options, specially when the plane has big bays

Ventral bay, in high contested air space against western type air forces, will probably host two изделие 610M or much more probably two изделие 810 because those missiles will allow not only to "punish" enemy aircraft attempting and/or capable to run away to avoid short range combat (where will be in terrible disadvantage) but also, avoiding completely initially the enemy air superiority group and destroy AWACS or tankers well behind the enemy OCA lines.

No western built aircraft can do the same for inescapable volumetric limits of theirs internal bay.

The combined effect of:

1) Higher cruising altitude/speed of flight.
2) Superior maneuvrability in anti-missile defence, particularly at high altitude.
3) Wider angle of coverage of the radar complex ,distributed around the whole hull ,allowing to provide information update to launched missiles while proceeding in missile-evading direction
4) Much greater kinematic characteristics of on board missiles (particularly for изделие 810)

will allow ЛТС and even more Су-57 squadrons to adopt widely detached formations forcing the enemy aircraft ,in significative kinematic and maneuver limits disadvantage, to waste quickly theirs load of medium range missiles only to avoid to lose from the beginning the initiative and the positional battle, all of that while in the mean time selecting the missile-delivering enemy aircraft to be attacked from the most advantageous geometrical position with изделие 610M or изделие 810.

After this first phase of long range sniping, capitalizing the opponent's kinematic limits, the enemy air formation will show big coverage's holes that will be used to quickly proceed at close range where surviving enemy units will be destroyed.

Practically domestic philosophy of air superiority and air interdiction combat almost do not include a medium range clash, at least not in the western meaning of the term, but instead a first long range attrition phase followed by a very rapid transition to close combat allowed by the positional advantage that domestic design progressively gain in the first phase.

Also new medium range air to air missile products near to introduction will boast enegagement ranges signicatively superior to theirs western counter parts in observance to what previously exposed.

marcellogo wrote:Sustained here is to be intended in opposition to Istantaneous turning rate, meaning it can turn at such without losing speed and energy i.e. an excellent performance.

Yes, I understood it so. The propulsion in the MiG-29 is already capable of keeping the plane turning at 9 g, F-16 is probably capable too, I would need to check. 4G fighters were very compact and capable in terms of excess power

TMA1 wrote:I think this fighter is based on a new fighter paradign/ideology. It is an omnirole fighter that seems to favor the strike fighter role. Not sure if I am right on this. But it seems like that to me. On the 8g limit I've heard others much more knowledgeable than me discuss it and I am still a bit confused as to what it exactly means.

Well it is indeed the first single engine, "light" fighter with decent cross sectional area / supersonic / A2A performance and still capable of carrying fully sized A2G ordnance. Even beyond that, to carry both that strike weapons and at the same time the AAM loadout needed to defend itself, all in stealth mode and cheap as dirt. The 8 g limit is probably (IMHO) due to the very restrictive empty weight limits posed by both the very big necessary internal volume and the limited propulsion options of the export version. I don't expect that to be the case for the VKS.

Atmosphere wrote:The white one is a Grom.
The other is a Kh-58UShKe i think. I can't clearly see.

Yes, exactly. But in the end it is not so relevant which is the concrete missile displayed, all those new types have been designed with the same rough size 4.2 x 0.4 x 0.4 m and folding fins to optimally use the bays in the Su-57.

TMA1 wrote:Good eye! Damn this single engine fighter can carry two missiles and also carry things like grom, kh 58, kh 69 and many other awesome weapons. I think it could certainly even fit two r 37m long range missiles in its belly weapons bay. They essentially fitted a modified single weapons bay of the su 57 in it! Sukhoi has got some amazing and practical minds.

R-37M are not devised for internal carriage, but there is a long range AAM in development for that, to be used in the Su-57 too (izd. 810). You can bet Sukhoi has amazing conceptual capacity, today I see them clearly ahead of the rest of designers, globally.

RTN wrote:If the Russian Air Force starts to place large scale order for The Checkmate then it means hardly any Mig 35s and Su 30SM will be purchased.

So in the long term, RuAF will eventually settle for Su-34, Su 35, PAK-FA and Checkmate along with the S-70 Okhotnik-B in a Loyal Wingman role.

That is likely so, at least in the beginning. Then Su-34 and 35 will start being replaced too, the Su-57/S-70/LTS combo fulfils all their roles, only cheaper and with more tactical freedom.