More info about cockpits, I will post the whole interview in the aerospace industry thread:Vzglyad-x-ray, augmented reality and voice control: the su-57 designer spoke about the cockpits of future fighters
According to the designer, vision management systems can also become quite real. And with their help, you can even "click" buttons.
Head of the cabin Department of the Sukhoi design Bureau of the Sukhoi company (part of the UAC) Nikita Dorofeev said about what technology will be used in the cockpits of the fighter jets of the future. He did this on the pages of Horizons, the corporate magazine of the United aircraft Corporation.
"Our future from the point of view of the display is Nova, a helmet-mounted target designation system and display, the system of technical vision and augmented reality. The technical vision system is a system of cameras located around the aircraft, operating in different optical ranges, " said Dorofeev.
This means that the pilot will be able to see in any direction, and not only in "normal" mode, but also in various infrared ranges. This can help in clouds or at night. In addition, all information will be displayed directly on the glass of the flight helmet.
Augmented reality also means that for the pilot, important objects such as the runway, buildings, or even the terrain in General will be "drawn" with bright contours. And in this case, we are not talking about the very distant future - such systems are already available on some civil aircraft.
"The speech control system may be a promising direction. A prototype of such a system was made back in the 1990s, and it was already working steadily at that time. However, our goal now is to teach the system to understand context rather than memorized phrases. So that the pilot does not have to remember convulsively in extreme conditions exactly what phrase he should say," Dorofeev continued the topic of the future.
But the most interesting possibility is not even in this - according to the designer, gaze control systems can become quite real. And with their help, you can even "click" buttons. However, so far, as Dorofeev emphasized, such prototypes are being implemented only at experimental stands. And in real flight, and even more so in air combat, everything will be much more difficult.
Atmosphere wrote:something has attracted my attention about missile capacity.
The R-77 family has the ability to shoot down air to air missiles , making it similar to an air borne hard kill APS , if the Su-57 , or a non stealthy airplane , such as the 35 , carries a big payload , it can shoot down the enemy's loadout. And so , if the fight ends up in a WVR scenario, these fighters may end up very dangerous.
I see it very similarly and that is what I mean when I talk about the relevance of salvos in the conditions of increased awareness, countermeasures and defensive means of newer fighters. The one with the deepest magazine has substantial arguments to win the fight because it will retain offensive potential even after having defeated the enemy's loadout.
1. if the Su-57 does get a photonic radar, than 10 F-35s jamming a single Su-57 wont do shit as explained in the radar system thread we had a month or two ago, While a single Su-57 can do distributive jamming that will effect the opposing aircrafts
2. If it was a 10 missile loadout than I see it possible for 76 Su-57s to take out 760 F-35s with a stealth profile and conducting EW with its entire body.
You can assume every country is working on such radars, it is not like any powerful state is going to come with some untouchable technology, or not for a long time at least. But that does not mean I don't agree on very lopsided exchange ratios in favour of the Su-57 if it counts on the needed early warning and the expected kinematic and potential payload advantages materialize. If the Su can attack while the F-35 cannot, then there is simply no chance they will shot them down, no matter how many they are. It is a simplified example but that is the way VKS or any air force would try to play for sure.
GarryB wrote:Obviously when they do the Cobra they have massive AOA and rapidly slow down because the wings and body lift suddenly becomes a massive air brake, but surely the reverse of that pushing their nose down the wings would become an airbrake rather than a lifting surface too while the vectored engine thrust prevents loss of height so the aircraft maintains height but rapidly slows down with a negative AoA...
No, TVC out of CoG only points the nose up or down. So in the case you describe, the plane would fall like a rock, but turning very aesthetically around itself
The fins and strakes are tiny and would create little actual lift in teh sense that an aircrafts wing generates lift to support the aircraft.
The Strakes stabilise and the fins initiate turns.
The cylindrical body of the missile does not generate lift... otherwise an anti tank missile would not need to be powered all the way to the target.... its body lift and control fins should allow it to fly all the way... except it doesn't.
If the fins are small and the body does not generate lift, the missile would not fly. I am explaining that no aircraft flies with zero AoA, all have a slight noise up attitude so the aero surfaces can work, creating lift by transferring downwards moment to the airflow. So both the fins/strakes and body create lift, some shapes are obviously more effective than others in that regard. The high flight speed and low weight of the missile allows it to fly despite having small lifting surfaces
The Arms that throw the missiles down don't require any width... they are inside the launch pylon and are above the missile and push it down and out of the bay on launch.
Of course they need the robustness and stability to eject the missile, maybe under load, high speeds, vibrations, etc. Those loads are no small thing and only sufficient arm width can handle them.
Only if there are always four targets... otherwise you are essentially wasting three shots.
Planes don't fly alone and salvos are regularly used, so no big deal. In therms of self defence, some different, short ranged missile of which many can be carried would be ideal, maybe a higher calibre gun with guided rounds would be even better? They would be both useful for short range atttack and for defence from incoming missiles...