Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues
flamming_python and tanino like this post
x_54_u43 wrote:LMFS wrote:Gomig-21 wrote:If those are in fact 3 fuel tanks on its back and spine, that is quite the internal load of fuel this thing can carry! It would be something if that center, spine "box" was actually a container for additional missiles that would automatically feed down into the forward weapons bay once its missiles are used up. That would give this aircraft quite the weapons load as you could pack in what, 20 R-77s in that space? Even split it where the lower half holds additional missiles while the upper half holds fuel. That would be quite the setup to make this thing even more lethal than it already seems to be.
If the Su-57 is to match the massive 11.5 t of fuel of the Su-35 for a range >3500 km, which I take as the "no brainer" approach to the plane's baseline requirements, then they need something close to 14.5 cubic meter fuel volume, and that is a LOT. Some knowledgeable guys doubt this is even possible, since the linear dimensions of the Su-57 are smaller than those of the Flankers. The plane already has way bigger weapons bays than any other competitor and, as discussed, the current issue would be how to make the best use of it. Two layers of magazine would make the handling of the missiles very complex, the mechanicals would be quite challenging. I think the plane as designed is a masterpiece and the only piece missing is to know more abut the real capabilities including operational concept, engines, systems and armament.
I think the quote goes is that the Su-57 has more litres of fuel than Su-27s, which I believe makes sense since the Su-35 did receive additional fuel tanks. But taking into account newer design, materials, and engines, it will get the same or higher range than the Su-35. Plus possibility of have the huge drop tanks as well.
Overall it's an incredible plane, enormous range and payload, all-around(or near all-around) radar, full vision systems, all around IRST, laser countermeasures, kinematic capability....but people focus on rivets.
Gomig-21 likes this post
Isos wrote:Morphei is radio guided last time I checked, similar to Tor guidance.
magnumcromagnon wrote:Isos wrote:Morphei is radio guided last time I checked, similar to Tor guidance.
Yeah, and the Su-27M in the photos used a rear-facing radar, what's your point?
Dorfmeister, tanino and thegopnik like this post
LMFS wrote:@Dorfmeister:
your pieces are great, keep up the good work
that are 1 meter or below in size to engage incoming air to air missiles because the tracking precision of using 100ghz will be high enough which is needed for a small diameter sized homing radar for a missile.
Tank like APS i dont know. T-14 is like 26.5-40ghz. Missiles engaging an aircraft are faster and more manueverable.
Projectiles have a very short range, and dont have homing heads to follow incoming air to air missiles and they follow just one direction., so the area of destruction will be very close, but that wont be a problem depending if 100ghz is able to detect the incoming missile at a good enough range
magnumcromagnon wrote:x_54_u43 wrote:LMFS wrote:Gomig-21 wrote:If those are in fact 3 fuel tanks on its back and spine, that is quite the internal load of fuel this thing can carry! It would be something if that center, spine "box" was actually a container for additional missiles that would automatically feed down into the forward weapons bay once its missiles are used up. That would give this aircraft quite the weapons load as you could pack in what, 20 R-77s in that space? Even split it where the lower half holds additional missiles while the upper half holds fuel. That would be quite the setup to make this thing even more lethal than it already seems to be.
If the Su-57 is to match the massive 11.5 t of fuel of the Su-35 for a range >3500 km, which I take as the "no brainer" approach to the plane's baseline requirements, then they need something close to 14.5 cubic meter fuel volume, and that is a LOT. Some knowledgeable guys doubt this is even possible, since the linear dimensions of the Su-57 are smaller than those of the Flankers. The plane already has way bigger weapons bays than any other competitor and, as discussed, the current issue would be how to make the best use of it. Two layers of magazine would make the handling of the missiles very complex, the mechanicals would be quite challenging. I think the plane as designed is a masterpiece and the only piece missing is to know more abut the real capabilities including operational concept, engines, systems and armament.
I think the quote goes is that the Su-57 has more litres of fuel than Su-27s, which I believe makes sense since the Su-35 did receive additional fuel tanks. But taking into account newer design, materials, and engines, it will get the same or higher range than the Su-35. Plus possibility of have the huge drop tanks as well.
Overall it's an incredible plane, enormous range and payload, all-around(or near all-around) radar, full vision systems, all around IRST, laser countermeasures, kinematic capability....but people focus on rivets.
I wonder if the smart-skin suite will allow rear-facing/launching AAM's like it was tested on the Su-27M?
Because the AAM's are internally carried it will not affect drag like it would on a Su-27 family aircraft. Obviously your not going to have LRAAM's like R-37M's rear facing, or MRAAM's for that matter but for SRAAM's? Seems reasonable to have VSRAAM's like Morfei missiles rear facing.
dino00, Big_Gazza, kvs, zardof, thegopnik, LMFS, lyle6 and like this post
Hole, TMA1 and Finty like this post
Isos wrote:From behind the radar waves will go inside the engine so you will never have a stealthy RCS.
But the advantage is that for a target going away from the radar the detection is greatly reduced so having even a 1m2 rcs is like a 0.01m2 rcs from the front.
kvs wrote:But, but, but the nacelles are round and not 2D like on the F-22. So Russia = epic fail....
tanino, LMFS and TMA1 like this post
Isos wrote:From behind the radar waves will go inside the engine so you will never have a stealthy RCS.
But the advantage is that for a target going away from the radar the detection is greatly reduced so having even a 1m2 rcs is like a 0.01m2 rcs from the front.
magnumcromagnon, lyle6, Backman, Rasisuki Nebia and SaneBomber like this post
I wonder if the smart-skin suite will allow rear-facing/launching AAM's like it was tested on the Su-27M?
tanino likes this post
GarryB, magnumcromagnon, thegopnik, Hole, lancelot and Finty like this post
GarryB, thegopnik, lancelot, Backman and Finty like this post
Dorfmeister wrote:TMA1 wrote:mnztr wrote:He is talking about if the engine is adapted for use in the PAK DP
sorry wrong article
https://redsamovar.com/2020/12/26/actu-livraison-du-premier-sukhoi-su-57-de-Serie/
in the article the author cites an invoice of some kind. here is the link.
https://zakupki.gov.ru/223/purchase/public/purchase/info/lot-info.html?lotId=13455655&purchaseId=10143489&purchaseMethodType=IS
I translated it and this is a portion of what the author quoted.
1700-2020-02468 Implementation of research and development work on the topic: "Research to determine the causes of destruction of the welded section of 1-2 stages of HPC kit No. С17-004 of product 30-05 assembly 7".
anyone with jet engine knowledge out there? the hot compressor core is the beating heart of the whole thing. what do you guys make of all this?
I know I'm writting the articles in French but the invoice is quite clear about the works and researchs needed and it quite confirms what P.Butowski wrote recently about some difficulties encountered with the Izd.30
DerWolf and Finty like this post
GarryB, George1, dino00, magnumcromagnon, Big_Gazza, DerWolf, zardof and like this post
|
|
|
Home
Register
Log in
LMFS