Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 29852
    Points : 30380
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  GarryB 04/07/21, 04:54 pm

    For the record, I am definitely in the camp of people that think thrust vectoring has no intention to dodge or fool missile tracks.

    TVC engines are about being able to turn your missiles and main radar at a target allowing you to fire your missile on a straight path to the target without any energy sapping 90 degree or 180 degree turns that would reduce the performance of your missile... but also then turn away and target and fire upon the next target without worrying about stall or energy management... it also allows you to point your gun where you need to without fear of spin or stall... and no EW kit will stop 30mm cannon shells... especially command laser detonated ones...

    The Su-57 also has a lot smaller vertical tails than the Su-27. I think part of the reason is the TVC.

    The all moving vertical tails offers better control with a smaller area, and can be differentially used as an airbrake...

    With TVC you do not need the control surfaces to be as large and this reduces RCS.

    Actually most of the 6th gen aircraft design proposals I remember seeing did away with vertical and horizontal tails all together to reduce RCS and that is only possible with TVC engines... with an aircraft designed to be manoeuvrable AFAIK.

    Gomig-21 and SaneBomber like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 29852
    Points : 30380
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  GarryB 04/07/21, 05:03 pm

    Also what is the story about the time between overhaul of Russian engines compared to western engines?

    Traditionally Soviet and Russian engines are more practical than western designs, and also more realistic in their numbers.... I mean the F-35 is supposed to have an airframe life of 8000 hours, but the early ones are having problems at 2,000.

    Russian engines tended to be optimised for low normal maintenance, but shorter periods between overhauls... often because cheaper less durable metals are used, but the effect is that during wartime you put oil and fuel in them and they go, and the overhaul time means you can get through most wars before they all need overhauls.

    During War time that is excellent and it very good for servicability and use, but during peace time it makes them rather more expensive... especially if you have to send the engines a long way for that overhaul.

    Cheaper and easier to use, but more expensive during peace time.

    Obviously their newer engines will be better made, more precision, better materials, and improved state of the art design so performance will improve and operational and overhaul lives will improve too... so the difference between west and Russian will mainly come from marketing departments after a sale.

    I noted that the C-17s the Australians bought... renowned for their short rough airstrip performance.... which would be useful in Australia and places like Afghanistan.... they were told if they used them on short unpaved airstrips it would invalidate their airframe life guarantees...

    Go figure... would be like the guarantee on a new Jeep being reduced to 6 months if you get mud on the tires....

    TMA1 likes this post

    avatar
    limb

    Posts : 260
    Points : 268
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  limb 11/07/21, 04:38 pm

    Cheetah wrote:I watched both of Millennium 7's videos on the subject yesterday.

    Obvious errors aside, it is somewhat refreshing to see someone who doesn't immediately criticise the Su-57. Ignoring the specifics, he was more or less on-point with the broad strokes; though, there is one thing I took issue with. His take on thrust vectoring.

    I don't know about anyone else here, but I've always held the idea that the Soviets', and by extension Russia's, obsession with extremely nimble fighters (with a recent focus on thrust vectoring) was due to a prediction that modern air combat, in spite of all its technological proclivities, would inevitably degrade into a complete mess where WVR combat would be prevalent.

    I think with the advent of modern EW systems, and the still lackluster performance of medium-range A-A missiles, it seems perfectly logical to focus on close-quarter air combat capability. I'd also argue that in the larger defensive military doctrine employed by Russia, this tendency towards WVR combat could be forced by any number of complementary assets, such as SAMs, ground-based EW systems, Interceptors, etc.

    For the record, I am definitely in the camp of people that think thrust vectoring has no intention to dodge or fool missile tracks. We're talking about aircraft entering combat at speeds nearing or exceeding Mach 2 and merging at around Mach 1. At those speeds, the accelerometer is going to max-out long before your AoA meter. Pushing that boundary isn't going to be good for the airframe and more-so the squish container of red water strapped into the seat. Not to mention, all of that is ignoring that the best way to defeat a missile is with vector changes at high speed and high G force with the intention of defeating the missile's energy, not its tracking ability.

    TL;DR
    I think Russia plans to force the aerial battleground into a WVR focused arena. Hence the focus on thrust vectoring and super-manoeuvrability.

    The whole stereotype about russians  only focusing on WVR is a russophobic meme based on the assumption that russians are too stupid/backward  to design long range missiles and radars. If russians believed WVR is most important, they wouldn't  focus so much in using the MiG-31 to be used against NATO aircraft on the frontline, or invest in increased G limit of the R-37M.

    By saying russians only focus on WVR and maneuverability the west tries to paint russian pilots and aircraft designers as hopeless traditionalist romantics, akin to an eastern martial arts fighter, while the western airforces are pragmatic adopters of new technology(i.e. cowboy indiana jones type gunslingers).

    Its also incorrect to assume the russian AF believes that  jamming is some miracle that will make ECM useless, hence why theyre focusing on BVR missiles.

    Tl, DR, its annoying when people from both the west an east think of Russian air doctrine as this one dimensional all or nothing doctrine.


    Regarding TVC, it as absolutely relevant for BVR, since it reduces control surface movement which reduces drag and RCS, and provides superior control at very high altitudes. One barely mentioned advantage of russian fighters is their superior cieling, which would allow them to increase the NEZ of their BVR missiles and also reduce the NEZ of their enemies missiles.

    Also the guy in the video is retarded for assuming TVC is to compensate for Russian inferiority in control surface design.  The western cope about "muh  super computers" being able to somehow make their aircraft's control surfaces to be perfect is such BS.

    On reddit, self proclaimed computer engineers were claiming with a straight face that the F-35 is as maneuverable and retains more energy than the Su-35 because it was designed by a supercomputer, while the Su-27s aerodynamics were designed on paper sheets.

    kvs, miketheterrible and LMFS like this post

    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 3783
    Points : 3785
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  LMFS 11/07/21, 04:54 pm

    Yeah it is self serving and retarded to think the Russians just do different things because they are too stupid to copy the West. The guy at Millenium should not participate in such polemics as TVC. Obviously it is the way of the future, when everyone is working on aircraft without mobile control surfaces, tails or wing mechanization for reasons of stealth and performance. But you cannot do that unless you reach a lot of practical experience with TVC to the point of knowing full well how it works and how reliable it is.

    kvs and Russian_Patriot_ like this post

    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 10282
    Points : 10429
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  kvs 11/07/21, 06:50 pm

    Dick stroking chauvinist retards indeed. I use supercomputers running Navier-Stokes equations based code for a living and these morons
    know fcuk all about what they are yammering about.

    Wind tunnel models for testing of aircraft shapes and control surface will never lose their utility. They are anchored in reality
    and not resolution limited with crummy parameterizations for turbulence below the grid scale. All computing is garbage in/garbage out.
    This is not a smear, it reflects the fact that it is impossible to shove reality into a supercomputer via some code. Code is a human
    construct and not a substitute for realty.

    Of course, modeling of the atmospheric circulation is not a waste of time since the dynamical scales are mostly resolved. So this is
    not about the lack of utility of supercomputers. It is about fanboi retards thinking that "double click exe" is research. No it is not
    you fcuks. You have to develop the code as part of the research. And you need laboratory data to do that.

    Also, we see here the trope about Russia being far behind in computing resources. As if UAC engineers are using IBM XT ripoffs. This
    is yet more pure fanboi retardation. In terms of utility, Russia has enough HPC resources to design aircraft and other products on a
    deep level. That means being able to simulate the stress-deformation and vibration harmonics of all the pieces of an aircraft or
    an automobile. This "dynamics" CAD is well established in modern times and Russia is not stuck in the 1980s. But CAD dose not remove
    the need for TsAGI and field testing.

    miketheterrible, LMFS and limb like this post

    Atmosphere
    Atmosphere

    Posts : 115
    Points : 117
    Join date : 2021-01-31

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  Atmosphere 12/07/21, 03:39 am

    "On reddit, self proclaimed computer engineers were claiming with a straight face that the F-35 is as maneuverable and retains more energy than the Su-35 because it was designed by a supercomputer, while the Su-27s aerodynamics were designed on paper sheets."

    I swear reddit people, of all categories rather than just jets and tanks, are reaching a point where it is questionnable if they are even sentient or not.

    By the way, the very logic that narrows down airfame comparison to computer simulation vs papersheet design also implies that the su-57 would be both nimbler and stealthier than the raptor and lightning because the computers and software are newer.
    Im not saying this is my point, but rather that this same logic leads to that conclusion.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7642
    Points : 7626
    Join date : 2015-11-07

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  Isos 12/07/21, 04:14 am

    Since it can go only straight it retains the energy much better lol1 .

    PapaDragon, Hole and Backman like this post

    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 671
    Points : 673
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  lyle6 12/07/21, 05:03 am

    The main reason why Sukhoi didn't stealthmaxxx the Su-57 is because there is literally no point. Not when netted, multispectral sensor complexes can detect and allow for engagement of stealthed targets at nominal ranges - so taking on a modern IADS is off the table. Instead the Su-57's stealth is tuned against the limited by contrast sensor suites of tactical aircraft, and even then it would still lean heavily on its superior kinematics to win such engagements.

    kvs, miketheterrible and LMFS like this post

    Gomig-21
    Gomig-21

    Posts : 330
    Points : 332
    Join date : 2016-07-18
    Location : Boston USA

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  Gomig-21 12/07/21, 05:12 am

    Atmosphere wrote:"On reddit, self proclaimed computer engineers were claiming with a straight face that the F-35 is as maneuverable and retains more energy than the Su-35 because it was designed by a supercomputer, while the Su-27s aerodynamics were designed on paper sheets."

    I could've sworn I either read it somewhere or it was on one of those Ultimate Russian Weapons videos that the Su-57 was in fact the first, newly designed aircraft to be completely computer & digitally designed?  Or am I mistaken?
    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 3783
    Points : 3785
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  LMFS 12/07/21, 05:32 am

    lyle6 wrote:The main reason why Sukhoi didn't stealthmaxxx the Su-57 is because there is literally no point. Not when netted, multispectral sensor complexes can detect and allow for engagement of stealthed targets at nominal ranges - so taking on a modern IADS is off the table. Instead the Su-57's stealth is tuned against the limited by contrast sensor suites of tactical aircraft, and even then it would still lean heavily on its superior kinematics to win such engagements.

    And that would be imply admitting the US did better with their stealth, which is far from a given. Given their claims about "insects" and "marbles" are not only unproven but rather demonstrably false, when weak scattering sources are placed all over the fuselage whose RCS is already comparable to the values claimed for the whole plane, it would not be strange that they simply tried to bullshit their way out of the problem as they normally do. It could perfectly be that Su-57 has the same or better RCS values than the F-22 and F-35 in tactically relevant conditions, that is something we cannot really know.

    GarryB, dino00, kvs and Backman like this post

    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 671
    Points : 673
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  lyle6 12/07/21, 06:13 am

    LMFS wrote:
    And that would be imply admitting the US did better with their stealth, which is far from a given. Given their claims about "insects" and "marbles" are not only unproven but rather demonstrably false, when weak scattering sources are placed all over the fuselage whose RCS is already comparable to the values claimed for the whole plane, it would not be strange that they simply tried to bullshit their way out of the problem as they normally do. It could perfectly be that Su-57 has the same or better RCS values than the F-22 and F-35 in tactically relevant conditions, that is something we cannot really know.

    Many people unironically ascribe the 40 dB reduction to the F-22/35 as if its in isotropy. Seriously. If whoever you're speaking to is that dumb as to think the complex geometry of a stealth fighter can be reduced to that of a sphere that's your definite cue to leave, preferably after hurling insults rightfully deserved.

    Also, whether the RCS of the Su-57 is worse or not than its opponents is frankly, immaterial. The Russians simply made it irrelevant with a fully 360 degree sensory field of view + superior kinematics enabling it to reorient itself at a dime against threats from any direction. You aren't sneaking a missile past an unawares Su-57, ever. In this sense improving stealth is like a runner taking laxatives to reduce weight and theoretically improve his speed over his opponent. Retarded as ****.

    kvs and LMFS like this post

    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 10282
    Points : 10429
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  kvs 12/07/21, 08:38 am

    Gomig-21 wrote:
    Atmosphere wrote:"On reddit, self proclaimed computer engineers were claiming with a straight face that the F-35 is as maneuverable and retains more energy than the Su-35 because it was designed by a supercomputer, while the Su-27s aerodynamics were designed on paper sheets."

    I could've sworn I either read it somewhere or it was on one of those Ultimate Russian Weapons videos that the Su-57 was in fact the first, newly designed aircraft to be completely computer & digitally designed?  Or am I mistaken?

    Since this is the state of the art for the last 20 years it only makes sense. The stealth aspect requires EM scatter modeling so integrating it
    with the rest of the CAD suite is logical. Doing it via paper and modeling in an iteration would take too long and be pointless given the available
    computing resources. Scalar parallel clusters have been powerful enough since around 2000 to do such CAD. Sure, they have become
    much cheaper per FLOP, but Sukhoi could afford to blow a vast sum of money on such systems. They did not cost billions anyway.

    I am also sure that Sukhoi paid to have its own custom CAD software developed. It did not have to wait for trickle down from the west.

    Gomig-21, PhSt and limb like this post

    PhSt
    PhSt

    Posts : 531
    Points : 537
    Join date : 2019-04-02

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  PhSt 12/07/21, 10:09 am

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 288547

    LMFS, Backman and Rasisuki Nebia like this post

    thegopnik
    thegopnik

    Posts : 502
    Points : 508
    Join date : 2017-09-20

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  thegopnik 12/07/21, 10:12 am

    Definitely will get chewed out here, but this is now a new shit posting viral image of the Su-57.  Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Su-57-12

    I mean what do other 5th gens use? Do they do this as well and cover it with paint?
    avatar
    ALAMO

    Posts : 323
    Points : 325
    Join date : 2014-11-26

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  ALAMO 12/07/21, 12:10 pm

    Maybe they are already tired of masturbating to the pics of supa dupa F-22.

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 1564560328_274

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Message-editor%2F1564523223695-jjjjasd

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 File

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 1564560319_275

    https://s167.daydaynews.cc/?url=http%3A%2F%2Finews.gtimg.com%2Fnewsapp_bt%2F0%2F11542182752%2F1000

    dino00, miketheterrible, thegopnik, LMFS, Hole, Rasisuki Nebia and Mir like this post

    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 6021
    Points : 5999
    Join date : 2016-11-07

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  miketheterrible 12/07/21, 01:31 pm

    thegopnik wrote:Definitely will get chewed out here, but this is now a new shit posting viral image of the Su-57.  Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Su-57-12

    I mean what do other 5th gens use? Do they do this as well and cover it with paint?

    I believe they cover it with a film then paint. The pain acts like an adhesive to whatever film they use over it. I'm not sure how often though one has to reapply film and paint. I'm assuming quite often thus the Russians and Americans do not repaint and apply the film as often as we may think. Waste of money.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7642
    Points : 7626
    Join date : 2015-11-07

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  Isos 12/07/21, 02:38 pm

    lyle6 wrote:The main reason why Sukhoi didn't stealthmaxxx the Su-57 is because there is literally no point. Not when netted, multispectral sensor complexes can detect and allow for engagement of stealthed targets at nominal ranges - so taking on a modern IADS is off the table. Instead the Su-57's stealth is tuned against the limited by contrast sensor suites of tactical aircraft, and even then it would still lean heavily on its superior kinematics to win such engagements.


    Totally right.

    Radar detection was important in the 80s.

    Now they have diffefent tools all connected for detection so stealth isn't that an advantage.

    Just when you know that RWR can guide missiles without turning your radar on and tracking the target with it, means no one will really use its radar in the air and just coubt on visual, IR or external data from ground based L band radars with datalink to find enemy aircraft. Tgose datalink are also enough for guiding missiles.

    Onboard radars are a not the main detection tool anymore. So making your aircraft stealth against them should be a secondary objectif when building your aircraft.
    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 3783
    Points : 3785
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  LMFS 12/07/21, 03:11 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:I believe they cover it with a film then paint.  The pain acts like an adhesive to whatever film they use over it.  I'm not sure how often though one has to reapply film and paint.  I'm assuming quite often thus the Russians and Americans do not repaint and apply the film as often as we may think.  Waste of money.

    The actual problem is protruding rivets or screw heads, all planes have such recessed ones as seen in the Su-57. The F-22 is covered with them and nobody said it is "fake" stealth. It is just Western retarded trolls doing the only thing they know.

    miketheterrible and Mir like this post

    avatar
    limb

    Posts : 260
    Points : 268
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  limb 12/07/21, 03:11 pm

    lyle6 wrote:
    LMFS wrote:
    And that would be imply admitting the US did better with their stealth, which is far from a given. Given their claims about "insects" and "marbles" are not only unproven but rather demonstrably false, when weak scattering sources are placed all over the fuselage whose RCS is already comparable to the values claimed for the whole plane, it would not be strange that they simply tried to bullshit their way out of the problem as they normally do. It could perfectly be that Su-57 has the same or better RCS values than the F-22 and F-35 in tactically relevant conditions, that is something we cannot really know.

    Many people unironically ascribe the 40 dB reduction to the F-22/35 as if its in isotropy. Seriously. If whoever you're speaking to is that dumb as to think the complex geometry of a stealth fighter can be reduced to that of a sphere that's your definite cue to leave, preferably after hurling insults rightfully deserved.

    Also, whether the RCS of the Su-57 is worse or not than its opponents is frankly, immaterial. The Russians simply made it irrelevant with a fully 360 degree sensory field of view + superior kinematics enabling it to reorient itself at a dime against threats from any direction. You aren't sneaking a missile past an unawares Su-57, ever. In this sense improving stealth is like a runner taking laxatives to reduce weight and theoretically improve his speed over his opponent. Retarded as ****.

    Stealth is still extremely important for spoofing Xband ARH seekers of missiles and it will remain important for this reason. ARH seekers are inherently weak and short ranged and cannot function at a large frequency bandgap, therefore are very easy to spoof. If you have an aircraft that has near perfect stealth, assuming it is not emmiting radar waves, an ARH seeker simply cannot lock on to it. If its true that the F-35 is as small as a marble from the front, then it would be impossible for any ARH AAM or SAM to lock onto it from the front and it will harmlessly fly past it, unless a larger Xband radar is tracking it.

    Speaking of xband, unless photonic radars appear, Xband will remain the only way to weapons grade tracking for AAMs and SAMs. Xband radars are also the most susceptible to stealth. With every dB or signature reduction, it takes an exponentially larger amount of power to track the object at an equivalent distance. There are claims that even though the Irbis can track a 3m2 target at 400km, it can only track a 0.01-0.001m2 target at less than 50km.

    Therefore if photonic radars turn out to be technologically impossible, stealth is here to stay because Xband is the only way to get a weapins grade lock outside of IR or home on jam passive locks which are less reliable.
    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 3783
    Points : 3785
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  LMFS 12/07/21, 03:33 pm

    Signature management in the full spectrum is indeed here to stay, it is senseless doing otherwise now that it is known how to do it. With low RCS EW is much more effective, detection ranges are reduced and in general it has always been a very bad idea to be a conspicuous target in any battlefield. ARH seekers are capable of detecting very small RCS (i.e published value of 0.003 sqm at >= 2 km for the 9B-1103M2) enough for finding the target if they are guided close enough to it. Stealth was never a panacea against peer rivals, the biggest difference I see is that only now its limitations are increasingly known to the general public.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 29852
    Points : 30380
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  GarryB 12/07/21, 05:51 pm

    If its true that the F-35 is as small as a marble from the front, then it would be impossible for any ARH AAM or SAM to lock onto it from the front and it will harmlessly fly past it, unless a larger Xband radar is tracking it.

    There are plenty of IR and command guided Russian SAMs and about half of Russian SAMS are IR guided too.

    I would think the tiny radars in missiles does them a favour in terms of target detection as the very small seekers don't have the discrimination to see the shape of the target, therefore more of the signal would reflect towards the incoming missile than would if it was a larger antenna with better discrimination.

    The fact that America has stopped ordering F-35s and started putting back into production new build F-15s which are actually more expensive than the F-35s they are making now suggests it is not what they claimed it was and is not able to do what they claimed it could.

    Don't read about Israeli attacks over Syria from their F-35s able to operate freely over the SAMs it was supposed to be designed to deal with... like S-300 and S-400 as well as BUK and Pantsir and TOR.
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 10282
    Points : 10429
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  kvs 12/07/21, 06:53 pm

    thegopnik wrote:Definitely will get chewed out here, but this is now a new shit posting viral image of the Su-57.  Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Su-57-12

    I mean what do other 5th gens use? Do they do this as well and cover it with paint?

    This is an obvious photoshop hack. Nobody uses Phillips screws on air frames. Rivets are used for a reason. Screws would unwind
    enough to lead to structural failure very quickly simply due to thermal expansion/contraction cycling. The temperature in the troposphere
    falls off rapidly with height.

    Also, why would Sukhoi release a promo photo from this vantage in-flight to show such crap? The photoshop is also apparent from the
    fact that the "wing" is not that of the Su-57.



    miketheterrible and Mir like this post

    Broski
    Broski

    Posts : 30
    Points : 32
    Join date : 2021-07-12

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  Broski 12/07/21, 08:28 pm

    kvs wrote:
    thegopnik wrote:Definitely will get chewed out here, but this is now a new shit posting viral image of the Su-57.  Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Su-57-12

    I mean what do other 5th gens use? Do they do this as well and cover it with paint?

    This is an obvious photoshop hack.   Nobody uses Phillips screws on air frames.   Rivets are used for a reason.  Screws would unwind
    enough to lead to structural failure very quickly simply due to thermal expansion/contraction cycling.   The temperature in the troposphere
    falls off rapidly with height.

    Also, why would Sukhoi release a promo photo from this vantage in-flight to show such crap?   The photoshop is also apparent from the
    fact that the "wing" is not that of the Su-57.  



    It's not photoshop, it's a screenshot from this video

    What they failed to mention is that this is one of the T-50 Prototypes, specifically the '510' model

    dino00, kvs, miketheterrible, thegopnik, owais.usmani and Finty like this post

    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 3783
    Points : 3785
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  LMFS 12/07/21, 09:07 pm

    In Russia such screws are widespread in aviation, maybe with threadlock? Probably out of the requirement not to need more exotic tooling like Torx keys or similar.
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 10282
    Points : 10429
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  kvs 12/07/21, 10:46 pm

    LMFS wrote:In Russia such screws are widespread in aviation, maybe with threadlock? Probably out of the requirement not to need more exotic tooling like Torx keys or similar.

    That would have to be some special epoxy to survive cracking from the thermal cycling and even the stress deformation. The only way that these "screws" can be
    secured is if there is a feature on the other side which mechanically locks them into place. A sort of non-reversible nut. So these are not screws as they appear.

    https://store.skybolt.com/aircraft-panel-fasteners-c140.aspx

    Something like in the above link. So the shock value is for the ignorant, which includes myself.

    LMFS likes this post


    Sponsored content

    Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7 - Page 30 Empty Re: Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #7

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is 27/07/21, 01:47 pm