Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

GarryB summed it up pretty well
Counter stealth simply goes into the direction of multi sensor integration.

@thegopnik
By the way , the R-77 series can infact shoot down air to air missile. It can act like an air borne APS .
This comes in handy considering a Su-35 having 12 of those and shooting down missiles that for some reason had not been jammed

thegopnik wrote:The 3 things I want is.

1. photonic radar 360 degree coverage. Raytheon and DARPA have still yet to talk about a working photonic radar other than exploring the field of PICs. This will give this forum shitposting rights to claim they are ahead in radar technology and to get vengeance at the Russia does not have operational AESA on aircraft yet claim when they got something better.

2.Minauture missile APS.  Issues with miniature missiles is because of small diameter size homing features have more limited ranges especially engaging fast maneuverable air to air missiles. Therefore the 360 degree photonic radar will also compliment this feature since the frequency range is higher than X-band which offers far more better precision in tracking(sensor fusion with infrared/UV for enhanced accuracy). This will give this forum shitposting rights that they got the 1st missile APS on their aircrafts before the MSDM.

3. hypersonic internal air to ground missiles. shitposting rights on claiming that the Su-57 has a better stealth option than the F-35 having an external option.

Actually, technically the Su-57 is operational and has AESA radar. That's what N036 is.

They just have 1 right now.

Man, the shilling for AESA radar proves US marketing is effective even on this site.

thegopnik wrote:The 3 things I want is.

1. photonic radar 360 degree coverage. Raytheon and DARPA have still yet to talk about a working photonic radar other than exploring the field of PICs. This will give this forum shitposting rights to claim they are ahead in radar technology and to get vengeance at the Russia does not have operational AESA on aircraft yet claim when they got something better.

2.Minauture missile APS.  Issues with miniature missiles is because of small diameter size homing features have more limited ranges especially engaging fast maneuverable air to air missiles. Therefore the 360 degree photonic radar will also compliment this feature since the frequency range is higher than X-band which offers far more better precision in tracking(sensor fusion with infrared/UV for enhanced accuracy). This will give this forum shitposting rights that they got the 1st missile APS on their aircrafts before the MSDM.

3. hypersonic internal air to ground missiles. shitposting rights on claiming that the Su-57 has a better stealth option than the F-35 having an external option.

Odds are you will get all those shitposting rights, you just need to be patient

Ideally 4 should be built this year but we don't know if covid will delay that. There is still no photo of any construction.

1. photonic radar 360 degree coverage.

It is supposed to be surface mounted so 360 degree coverage should be the normal and standard arrangement for most aircraft.

2.Minauture missile APS.

The 9M100 missiles also called Morfei, is supposed to be an IIR guided lock on after launch missile designed to be carried by ground vehicles and ships (as a CIWS), and in aircraft.... helicopters, fighters, UAVs, and even bombers, and that includes stealth aircraft with internal weapon bays.

It is supposed to have a two way datalink but be able to fire at targets based on IR signature of the target.

3. hypersonic internal air to ground missiles.

That is supposed to be on the way too...

Actually, technically the Su-57 is operational and has AESA radar. That's what N036 is.

They just have 1 right now.

There have been several MiG-35s delivered which also have AESA radar, but if you want big numbers... the Su-35s all have wing mounted L band AESAs too.

thegopnik wrote:The 3 things I want is.

1. photonic radar 360 degree coverage. Raytheon and DARPA have still yet to talk about a working photonic radar other than exploring the field of PICs. This will give this forum shitposting rights to claim they are ahead in radar technology and to get vengeance at the Russia does not have operational AESA on aircraft yet claim when they got something better.

2.Minauture missile APS.  Issues with miniature missiles is because of small diameter size homing features have more limited ranges especially engaging fast maneuverable air to air missiles. Therefore the 360 degree photonic radar will also compliment this feature since the frequency range is higher than X-band which offers far more better precision in tracking(sensor fusion with infrared/UV for enhanced accuracy). This will give this forum shitposting rights that they got the 1st missile APS on their aircrafts before the MSDM.

3. hypersonic internal air to ground missiles. shitposting rights on claiming that the Su-57 has a better stealth option than the F-35 having an external option.

New izdeliye 30 engines for Su-57 and AAMS such as Izdeliye 300M, 270, 810 and New VLRAAM with multiple warheads for PAK-DP.
In fact, everything about 2nd gen Su-57 and PAK-DP is going to be very interesting for us...
I feel like a kid in his favourite toy store

LMFS wrote:

WOW!   What a great pic that basically says "here we come!"  Clicking the enlargement is a great feature it smacks you in the face! lol.  

I personally think that a lot of the negativity from the west or whomever towards the Su-57 is a couple of reasons.  

1)  The F-22 came out a decade or so earlier and then LM practically cornered the world market with the F-35.  I've been to several airshows and seen the F-22 and I looked around at the crowd to see their reaction and it was like they were seeing the most amazing thing in the world.  The fact that the US was "sort of" the first to introduce a 5th gen fighter and accompany it with very intelligent marketing and promotional literature (including those airshows I mentioned) was a huge plus for that aircraft that helped the anti-Su-57'ers out there a lot, unfortunately.

2)  This reason I personally think is the worst one but is more influential than people actually mentioning it, and that is when India pulled out of the FGFA program.  First of all, why India wanted a 2-seat version of this flying Ferrari was besides me.  But their engine problem claims were not as damaging as their "not such great stealthy characteristics" claims.  The latter was most likely the most damaging in influencing opinions around the world.  India had invested A LOT of loot in the development of the FGFA and to pull out and simply lose that money for those reasons they mentioned was more damaging to the Su-57 unfortunately.  Just my opinion.  

As far as I'm concerned, I can't friggin wait until this thing goes into service and proves all the doubters so wrong as it just over-powers both F-22 and that gas can F-35.  The only thing that bums be out is the speed of production for us impatient export customers.  Come on Russkiaskies, let's go and get her done!

limb wrote:How do you debunk the claim that the Su-57's wing mounted L band radars are only there for IFF? I constantly keep hearing claims that for an LDAR radar to be able to detect targets at meaningful ranges, it must have a very large antenna, and theese arguments cite the nebo as having a much larger antenna than similar xband ground based radars as proof of this. However the IFF claim doesnt make sense since IFF technology hasnt changed much and it would be a waste to put 2 entire Lband radars on just for IFF. I hear yet other claims that the wing mounted Lband radars to be for IFF, ground search as well as datalink disruption, but not detection of stealth targets.

So is it true that its possible for an Lband radar on the Su-57 to be supplied with enough power and have the size to detect detect stealth fighters at 300-400km? I'm guessing the physics of it are classified, but western electric engineers are basically claiming is physicially impossible.

Sorry for bringing this topic back up, but when I first found out that the Su-35S had AESA (that's what I like to call them more so than L-band whatever) radars mounted on the wing root flap, I jumped up in the air and smacked my head on the low ceiling but the excitement overcame the pain!

This was announced back in 2009 and the MAX show.  I don't know how many of you members here take "Air Power Australia" as a reliable source or not, but much of what they mentioned pretty much debunks the claim you mention.

So off the Australian air Power source is some incredibly convincing material that these are in fact AESA (L-band) as well as IFF sensors.

LINK - http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-06.html

Obviously this is on the Su-35 and I would probably be pretty correct to say that what is fitted on the Su-57 is even more advanced and developed.



Here's a small passage from that source if you don't feel like reading the whole thing since it's rather long but super informative and convincing:

The L-band AESA designed for embedding in the inboard leading edge of a fighter wing was perhaps the most interesting single disclosure from the MAKS 2009 event in August, 2009. Tikhomirov NIIP's marketing material for this product describes it as intended for the “Su-27 (30) and Su-35 family of aircraft” thus presenting it as a component for new build aircraft and retrofit to existing fleet aircraft. Depicted the second Su-35S prototype B/N 902 (KnAAPO image),


Abstract

Tikhomirov NIIP in Moscow are developing an L-band AESA radar  system intended for embedding in the leading edges of fighter wings. A demonstrator of the L-band AESA subsystem was publicly displayed at MAKS2009.

This paper analyses the operational potential of this  design, and performs a range of performance estimates based on  manufacturer disclosures and known design features.

The design has clear potential to provide a genuine “shared multifunction aperture” with applications including:
Search, track and missile midcourse guidance against low signature aircraft.
Identification Friend Foe / Secondary Surveillance Radar.
Passive angle tracking and geolocation of JTIDS/MIDS/Link-16 emitters at long ranges.
Passive angle tracking and geolocation of L-band AEW&C/AWACS and surface based search radars at long ranges.
Passive angle tracking and geolocation of hostile (i.e. Western) IFF and SSR transponders at long ranges.
High power active jamming of JTIDS/MIDS/Link-16 emitters.
High power active jamming of satellite navigation receivers over large areas.
High power active jamming of L-band AEW&C/AWACS and surface based search radars at long ranges.
High power active jamming of guided munition command datalinks over large areas.
Performance modelling for a range of feasible configurations indicates the radar will deliver tactically credible search range performance.

The Tikhomirov NIIP L-band AESA is an important strategic development, and a technology which, once fully matured and deployed in useful numbers, will render narrowband stealth designs like the  F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and some UAVs, highly vulnerable to Flanker variants equipped with such radars.



If any Russian-speaking fellas could kindly translate the very short remarks inside the pics, that would be great! There's only two out of the posted batch that have any Russian description.











Oh and this translation please.  They're both pretty short, right?  Not asking much!   Thanks ion advance.




If all of this was in the Su-35 back during MAX 2009, one can only imagine the strides they've taken since for the development of the AESA winged radar L-Band!

BTW, this might be another reason why they make that silly claim is the F-35's IFF are in the same place.  Not good to assume as we know what the word "ass u me" really means lol.

You know it is funny but I have been talking about the L band wing mounted radar antenna but I never actually thought much about where they actually went.

I had always assumed they went above the engine intakes in the leading edge root extention in the body of the aircraft either side of the cockpit, but the actually fit into the leading edge flaps.

In the lower photo above of the Su-57 you can see light gray... almost white fairings in the Levicons, the leading edge of the inner area of the slats and the front and rear facing parts of the wingtips... hold on I will get my crayons out...



With all those antenna isn't it odd that the antenna for radar arrays for the sides of the nose are not visible... effectively this aircraft has three forward looking wing arrays two of which can be moved up and down because they are mounted on moving surfaces, with the wing tip antennas being fixed.

The Su-35 doesn't have them on the LERX... see I thought that would be where they were located because like the nose radar they would need to be fixed, but having them on Levicons and flaps it means at the cost of some flight performance the aircraft could wiggle them around a little to get a better view of some targets perhaps... similar to the way animals move their heads to get better ideas of range and distance...

Wingtips are not L band radars, not every RF aperture is.

Wingtips are not L band radars, not every RF aperture is.

To be fair to me I didn't say what they were, I just identified where they could be located because of their design and highlighted similar fairings in various locations...

But I would say that the ones on the Levicons and the ones on the inner wings would be ideally located to scan forward for stealthy targets... especially because they can be moved up and down to effectively give vertical scan capacity..... but the wing tip antenna could be different... though I would think being fixed and also looking forward and looking backwards they would be more useful for detecting enemy use of datalink communication with each other or sending and receiving commands from missiles in flight... in which case they would benefit from being L band too.

They seem to be the right size and location to be the same...

I may be wrong but I heard the mig-35 is still not yet equipped with the zhuk aesa radar. I've heard rumors that the mig-29 fighters being sold to India might be equipped with them.

I'm hoping the zhuk aesa radars are near complete in their testing phase. Heard sometime this year.

I would think the operational AESA radar is why they delayed the service entry of the MiG-35 in Russian service... they have already delivered MiG-29Ms to Egypt so what else could have delayed the Russian AF getting their MiGs?

Note had a more complete prune of OT posts... any further discussion Off topic you now know where to continue...

GarryB wrote:To be fair to me I didn't say what they were, I just identified where they could be located because of their design and highlighted similar fairings in various locations...

Ok it sounded that way. We had already addressed the RF apertures on the plane, the tails and wing tips and possibly tail sting (some say it is a radar) are part of the EW system and not of the radar suite, at least by now it seems.

But I would say that the ones on the Levicons and the ones on the inner wings would be ideally located to scan forward for stealthy targets... especially because they can be moved up and down to effectively give vertical scan capacity..... .

Not really necessary, the radiation pattern of those arrays will already be similar to a vertical plane that can be scanned horizontally and not a beam that can be scanned in 2D

Large panel composites at work here.
It looks sculpted out of a piece of soap , very smooth.

I am rarher certain that it is fully capable of passive sensor engagements.Russian electro optics were always great in the lenses , cooling , and software department. Now that they got the thermal imager industry issue fixed , their new sighting systems will be very long ranged

Su-57 is being developed to control a group of drones

The fifth-generation Su-57 fighter is undergoing refinement to enable the control of a group of small unmanned aerial vehicles that will be located in the internal compartment of the aircraft. This is reported by RIA Novosti with reference to a source in the aircraft industry.

"The development of on-board equipment and special software has begun, which will allow the Su-57 to control a group of small strike and reconnaissance UAVs," the agency quotes the source as saying.

According to him, a stand is also being created for ground testing of the UAV interaction system with the carrier fighter and among themselves in real time using semi-natural modeling.

"One Su-57 fighter will be able to carry more than a dozen reconnaissance and strike drones, as well as electronic warfare, in the intra-body compartment. Within the framework of the concept of group application, the devices will interact via secure communication channels both with the onboard complex of the carrier aircraft and with each other," he explained.

It is assumed that the fifth-generation fighter will drop a group of drones, for example, before entering the area of an enemy air defense system. Drones will interfere with the system's radars and jam its information channels with false targets, as well as directly attack anti-aircraft systems as high-precision aviation weapons.

Currently, a multi-purpose unmanned complex "Molniya" is being created for the Aerospace Forces, whose jet vehicles will be launched in a swarm from a carrier aircraft, for example, to destroy enemy air defenses or conduct electronic warfare. The basis of the complex will be small unmanned aerial vehicles made in the form factor of a cruise missile. One unit of the system will have a length of 1.5 m and a wing span of up to 1.2 m. The speed of the device is stated at the level of 600-700 km / h, the mass of the warhead or payload will be about 5-7 kg.

https://aviation21.ru/su-57-dorabatyvaetsya-dlya-upravleniya-gruppoj-bespilotnikov/

The question is... will the fighter be operating on its own or will some aircraft carry drones and then remain and monitor and perhaps issue orders to drones while other Su-57s with internal weapons follow the drones offering support and perhaps hypersonic weapon attack against things further afield that could effect the drones.

For instance a group of Su-57s attack a HATO HQ and drones are sent in but an unexpected THAAD battery or PAC-2 battery reveals its presence and starts tracking some drones... an armed Su-57 might launch some hypersonic ARMs to take out the SAM sites, or at least their radar as they could make defending against the drones easier by supporting the defence.

LMFS wrote: "The development of on-board equipment and special software has begun, which will allow the Su-57 to control a group of small strike and reconnaissance UAVs," the agency quotes the source as saying.

What kind of "strike"? Air to air or air to ground? Given their small size UAVs won't be able to carry a lot of missiles.

Maybe they will divide the number of UAVs so that a few of them can carry out air to air strikes and the rest can carry out air to ground strike.

GarryB wrote:The question is... will the fighter be operating on its own or will some aircraft carry drones and then remain and monitor and perhaps issue orders to drones while other Su-57s with internal weapons follow the drones offering support and perhaps hypersonic weapon attack against things further afield that could effect the drones.

Su-57 is fully networked, they can do any variant they need.

Sujoy wrote:What kind of "strike"? Air to air or air to ground? Given their small size UAVs won't be able to carry a lot of missiles.

Strike is always air to ground as far as I know, which is the already known tactical use of UCAV / suicide drones / loitering ammunition. With the Su-57 carrying them close to the point of employment you gain a lot of depth and speed vs time critical targets, as well as the capability to react to possible countermeasures the enemy may employ.

Stealth deployed drones to attack targets and perform SEAD attacks.... surprised the west didn't think of that first...

Su-57 is fully networked, they can do any variant they need.

What I mean is, will they use a drone only attack, or will the drones support an Su-57 attack, or will they attack with Su-34s and Iskanders and drones and AS-11s from Su-57s as well as other platforms...

I guess it would depend on the target and how well it is defended and how close to the front line it is.