New combat aircraft will be presented at MAKS-2021

That's some sort of DIRCM. It's optical locator seems to be on the nose.

medo wrote:I don't see this down looking EO complex on this plane, unless it is very small. Could be an option, to be installed later.

It may actually explain why the tarp does not fit the intake around the nose landing gear. That is the natural place in such a layout to put the EOTS, with the best FoV and using the space a the flat bottom and not interfering with the weapon bays or the engine compartment. The landing gear demands a space of at least 50 cm deep and the bottom will be 1-1.2 m wide, so minus the width of the well it leaves 30-40 cm at the sides for equipment. This is a very clear statement about the plane not being just a fighter but also a strike plane

Isos wrote:That's some sort of DIRCM. It's optical locator seems to be on the nose.

It may be combined, like in the PAK-FA. The IRST at the nose is for air combat, for strike you need down-looking EOTS

kvs wrote:

Big_Gazza wrote:

limb wrote:However, if sukhoi is like the people on this forum, they will deem all chinese engineering decisions as retarded and worthless because ofcourse, chinese are supposedly backward commie copying subhumans not capable of innovation...just like the west claims.

You're casting a wide net there...  Best not stick everyone in the same bucket eh?

Chinese fanbois and official media smearing of Russian tech is on a whole higher plane of BS.    Any criticism of Chinese tech, e.g. engines, that I have
seen on this forum has been grounded in reality.    So where this butthurt is coming from is hard to tell.

Yeap, hence the article that was posted in Su-35 thread.  China trashes the very tech they need all the time because when they do come up an inferior knockoff, they attack Russia's equipment.  

As they trashed Su-57 they will trash this.  China can try to make fun of Russia with lies and BS but we can't make fun of China for actual events and known issues.  Gotta love some morons here. Anyway, that's end of this convo.

I love speculations but it's best to wait till July 20.

Rostec told about the first "target" of the new fighter, 17.07.2021.

The first "target" of the new Russian aircraft, which Rostec will present at the MAKS-2021 air show, was a foreign warship, similar to the British destroyer Defender ("Type 45").

On the corporation's Facebook page, an image of a part of the fuselage of a new aircraft flying over the sea has been published . Under the fuselage of the fighter there is a new type of optical radar station, in the mirror panels of which a foreign warship is reflected, with its outlines reminiscent of the British Navy destroyers "Type 45". "See you (" See you ")" - says the caption in the picture.

"The new image contains a detail that, obviously, is an optical-electronic sighting system built into the aircraft, such equipment is used to guide aircraft weapons in order to strike at ground and sea targets," RIA Novosti reports citing a source in the military-industrial complex.

In May 2021, the media reported on the development of a single-engine fighter in Russia. The VZGLYAD newspaper was trying to figure out why at one time the Air Force of our country abandoned such machines, and where the idea arose to revive their production.

On June 23, the Black Sea Fleet, together with the Russian FSB Border Service, stopped the violation of the Russian state border by a British destroyer, while warning shots and bombing had to be fired. The Russian Defense Ministry accused the command of the British destroyer of dangerous actions and gross violation of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and demanded an investigation into the actions of the ship's crew.

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, commenting on the incident with the British destroyer Defender off the coast of Crimea, said that if colleagues do not understand what Russia's borders are, then “we can bomb”. Meanwhile, the British ambassador was summoned to the Foreign Office for a tough demarche.

Meanwhile, earlier the British authorities made a statement that the destroyer of the Royal Navy allegedly did not enter Russian territorial waters and was not fired upon . The Russian Foreign Ministry accused the British Ministry of Defense of deliberate lies.

Text: Vera Basilaya

https://m.vz.ru/news/2021/7/17/1109463.html

depends on the size of the housing unit for the radar, maybe it will use a lower T/R counted N036 modules? Since they are roughly 10-15W GaAS modules that ISTOK was parading around a few years ago to replace the 5-10W modules, maybe if its about 800 T/R module count, then it would be roughly 8KW of power? All depending of course on the power supply to it (depends on the Engines).

You can´t see it because the landing gear is down.

miketheterrible wrote:

kvs wrote:

Big_Gazza wrote:

limb wrote:However, if sukhoi is like the people on this forum, they will deem all chinese engineering decisions as retarded and worthless because ofcourse, chinese are supposedly backward commie copying subhumans not capable of innovation...just like the west claims.

You're casting a wide net there...  Best not stick everyone in the same bucket eh?

Chinese fanbois and official media smearing of Russian tech is on a whole higher plane of BS.    Any criticism of Chinese tech, e.g. engines, that I have
seen on this forum has been grounded in reality.    So where this butthurt is coming from is hard to tell.

Yeap, hence the article that was posted in Su-35 thread.  China trashes the very tech they need all the time because when they do come up an inferior knockoff, they attack Russia's equipment.  

As they trashed Su-57 they will trash this.  China can try to make fun of Russia with lies and BS but we can't make fun of China for actual events and known issues.  Gotta love some morons here.  Anyway, that's end of this convo.

I love speculations but it's best to wait till July 20.

Their hardware is a copy of US/russian stuff.

Their best students study in the US and western universities.

They should keep their opinion for themselves and try to do something on their own for once.

They lack credibility to "analyse" anything. Just keep eating dogs and weired animals you are good at that.

So just to be sure the journo is a little retarded for stating optical radar, when it looks like the F-35 EOTs? Use of words matter.

thegopnik wrote:So just to be sure the journo is a little retarded for stating optical radar, when it looks like the F-35 EOTs? Use of words matter.

They are stupid generally. But when it comes to military/geopolitics stuff they are beyond stupidity.

They probably looked at wikipedia quickly to have an idea of such stuff and wrote whatever they could to be the first to publish.

Mir wrote:The Rostec logo worries me a little bit - might be just a mock-up - but I'll keep on believing!

I am thoroughly enjoying Rostec's marketing of this aircraft, but that picture is definitely some rushed photoshop work. Check the edge aliasing and poor alignment and illogical reflection angles of the images over the sensor. I bet you'll find the exact still frame of that ship in one of the videos taken from an Su-30 that intercepted the ship.

Possibly this one:

GarryB wrote:Sukhoi might just be fishing for export customers, while MiG has the actual contract to supply the eventual replacement for the MiG-35....

They are fishing with dynamite in that case while MiG might as well wipe their asses with that contract

Reminds me of MiG SKAT UAV, anyone remember that situation and how it turned out?

MiG can't even supply MiG-35 even after 30 years, expecting them to supply it's replacement is realm of fantasy

LMFS wrote:
It seems very big, in part because it rests very high on the landing gear. When we get good pictures I will try to analyse the exit angle of the nozzle, I believe it will be higher than most planes. As explained I theorize this may be related to loading the weapons in the bays from below, but we will see. As to the length, the calculations until now show between 16 and 17 m, that is the size of the Saab FS2020. That study had 10 t empty weight, bays for A2G attack and required an engine close in thrust to that of the izd. 30. So even when it may seem close to a heavy fighter, we have to remind that:

> We talk about 5G, that means a "light" fighter is rather what we would call medium in 4G. This is not self serving analysis after having seen the plane, I have been saying this for a while, because I saw it myself when trying to put everything inside of the 3D model. A "stealth F-16" is at least 1.5 - 2 m longer than the original one, that is almost unavoidable.
> F-22 and Su-57 have two engines of the size of the izd. 30 and are close to 20 t empty. That is, twice as much propulsion and almost twice as much empty weight.

Accordingly, the fuel load will increase notably compared to fighters like F-16 and MiG-29 in their original versions, probably it will almost double. It already was studied in the FS2020, I saw that in my model too and I believe it will be the case with the LTS as well.

All of that makes a lot of sense.  I think most (including myself) expected something smaller, more along the size of the F-35 probably just subconsciously.

LMFS wrote:I couldn't care less about those stupid NATO denominations, please let us not start one of those insufferable discussions about them?

Oh we don't have to have an insufferable discussion about them, I just thought of it since the last one they came up with was just terribly insulting, and so it makes one wonder about this one.

However, it just dawned on me that it seems Rostec has already taken the initiative away from NATO IMO by possibly calling it the "Checkmate"?  That name seems to be attached to it on other forums where it's been talked about like crazy and simply referred to as Checkmate.  This might've been on purpose or unintentional, but giving it an original name will negate others from having to do so.  Most of all past Russian aircraft are only designations such as Su-XX or MiG-XX but never given a name, until maybe now?  Can we conclude it's called the Checkmate by Rostec & Sukhoi, or does Checkmate refer to something else?

Intake. Looks like those on su-57.

Isos wrote:Intake. Looks like those on su-57.

I'm not so sure?

The tied down bit seems to correspond to be the one on the bottom part of the nose.

That would put the intake below the nose and going up on the side of the fuselage.

Gomig-21 wrote:All of that makes a lot of sense.  I think most (including myself) expected something smaller, more along the size of the F-35 probably just subconsciously.

The F-35 is actually quite big, between 13. something and more than 15 t empty(!). Depending on the version.

It is quite short, but massively thick and with the cross sectional area of a heavy fighter. I really hope LTS is lighter, and I am pretty sure the frontal area is fairly smaller.

Oh we don't have to have an insufferable discussion about them, I just thought of it since the last one they came up with was just terribly insulting, and so it makes one wonder about this one.

Yes, I did not mean to criticise you. As Garry said, they just want to make propaganda with their BS names, so I am 0% interested in that BS

However, it just dawned on me that it seems Rostec has already taken the initiative away from NATO IMO by possibly calling it the "Checkmate"?  That name seems to be attached to it on other forums where it's been talked about like crazy and simply referred to as Checkmate.  This might've been on purpose or unintentional, but giving it an original name will negate others from having to do so.  Most of all past Russian aircraft are only designations such as Su-XX or MiG-XX but never given a name, until maybe now?  Can we conclude it's called the Checkmate by Rostec & Sukhoi, or does Checkmate refer to something else?

Maybe, why not. You give an English name so nobody needs to wait for the NATO boys to come up with any stupid ideas, well thought...

Isos wrote:Intake. Looks like those on su-57.

You mean, hollow? What else do they have in common? Honest question

PapaDragon wrote:

GarryB wrote:Sukhoi might just be fishing for export customers, while MiG has the actual contract to supply the eventual replacement for the MiG-35....

They are fishing with dynamite in that case while MiG might as well wipe their asses with that contract

Reminds me of MiG SKAT UAV, anyone remember that situation and how it turned out?

MiG can't even supply MiG-35 even after 30 years, expecting them to supply it's replacement is realm of fantasy

You don't think MIG-35 was just to program to conceal this? With all the tech developed for MIG-35 also being designed for this new plane. How else have we heard sooo little about this?

It will be interesting to see how they have used TVC to support elimination of the horizontal stab. The criticism of the TVC is the weight it add, but if you can eliminate the entire horizonal stab, that goes a loooooong way to making it weight and cost neutral, as well as a HUGE performance advantage. Russia has a massive lead in TVC development in integration. This may be the first pure TVC airframe where it is an essential component of the design.

Rasisuki Nebia wrote:Rostec announced the show of a fundamentally new military aircraft at MAKS-2021



Edit: Can't get much from the reflection of the aircraft on water maybe some of you will but to me it looks something like a MIG 35, some said it's the LMFS or a "An airplane based on the new physical principles" that's been talked about, idk if it's VTOL like some Russian friends told me but the intrigue is definitely there, also interesting to see the potential buyers Rostec has listed in the video

That 30 sec trailer is better made than most contemporary Russian movies

medo wrote:

Mir wrote:

dino00 wrote:


The marketing is very agressive

Pointing a middle finger at the Brits!

The Rostec logo worries me a little bit - might be just a mock-up - but I'll keep on believing!

I would say computer graphic.



I don't see this down looking EO complex on this plane, unless it is very small. Could be an option, to be installed later.

I see a few bumps on the underside that could be an Eo complex. Even if its a computer graphic, they wouldn't show this if it didnt have it.

kvs wrote:

Big_Gazza wrote:

limb wrote:However, if sukhoi is like the people on this forum, they will deem all chinese engineering decisions as retarded and worthless because ofcourse, chinese are supposedly backward commie copying subhumans not capable of innovation...just like the west claims.

You're casting a wide net there...  Best not stick everyone in the same bucket eh?

Chinese fanbois and official media smearing of Russian tech is on a whole higher plane of BS.    Any criticism of Chinese tech, e.g. engines, that I have
seen on this forum has been grounded in reality.    So where this butthurt is coming from is hard to tell.

Whether its some of the Chinese posters here, official media or Twitter personalities , they look down on Russia almost as bad as the Americans do. And they back slap each other. So what do they expect ?