Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #8

Not to mention the control surfaces that form the upper part of the intake that act like canards can also deflect far enough to completely cover the engine intakes anyway... you can see that when they are sitting on the ground.

The F-18... the fighter aircraft rejected by Tom Cruise and Hollywood...

Analysis by people who never flew it nor seen it.

Please remove.

Tolstoy wrote:

Isos wrote:The checkmate is just perfect. It reminds me the mig-21, does the job at low cost.

They need to speed up its development and production to get hundreds of them.

For that export orders need to pick up. Else, economies of scale won't kick in.

Economies of scale picks up regardless who orders it. If Russia decided to replace all jets with a mix of Su-57 and checkmate, while sharing common parts, guarantee it will be cheaper in long run.

When the Russians withdrew huge numbers of single engined fighters they didn't replace them all with larger fighters, so they are probably a bit light on the sort of aircraft frontal aviation would be using... essentially the MiG-29 should have replaced a lot of planes and been made in very large numbers but instead its numbers have diminished radically.

This means they could make a large number of single engined or twin engined lighter fighters that would be useful and not require any existing types to be removed to make room for them.

They would essentially be short range swing fighterbombers.... the equivalent of a mix of the MiG-21 and the MiG-27 or the MiG-21 and the Su-17.

The MiG-23 is essentially a longer ranged interceptor fighter and is being replaced by the Su-27/30/35.

It seems to be the case that stealthy aircraft will be more expensive to maintain than 4th gen aircraft because of their coatings and materials, but keeping a mix of 4th and 5th gen aircraft should allow them to keep operational costs to a reasonable level.

The suggested costs for the Su-75 seem to be better than for most western 4th gen fighters.... something the Gripen claims too, which suggests it is acheivable when the makers and customers think that is desirable.

RTN wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Analysis by people who never flew it nor seen it.

Exactly what happens in this forum. Woke non resident Russian forum members who never got to touch an aircraft even with a barge pole and Indian frauds like you with a dozen accounts.

Pretty gross statement without any evidence.

I assume you make youtube videos then eh?

Werewolf wrote:

RTN wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Analysis by people who never flew it nor seen it.

Exactly what happens in this forum. Woke non resident Russian forum members who never got to touch an aircraft even with a barge pole and Indian frauds like you with a dozen accounts.

If you want to have first hand experienced people with all kinds of military hardware, blueprints military experts and veterans of every single heroic war that was ever fought go to Youtube Comment section.
I have met there 31 year old Vietnam veterans, constantly Apache Pilots which are not even of legal age to drink and even some engineers who have build the M1 Abrams tank.

While there are a few who have served and some even with expertise and specialization like taddei, Vlad, Kysusha and probably some others.
A forum is a place for people to talk to about their interests, ideas and opinions. Most people do state their opinions as such while Youtube Video Analysis are often nothing else but propaganda that very often portray their opinions as some expert level knowledge and facts and above anyone to judge.

You are voluntary here and nobody forces you to believe anything you don't want to.

PS: Besides all that, this is the only place where I have seen people being allowed to talk freely without being censored or banned for their opinion. You are still here while on other forums I have been banned for simply stating facts like Ukraine is proxy war by NATO.

This requires some sentiment of acceptance from RTN.  The guy has been here a long time but never came to the realization that he is generally hated and ignored for a good reason.  Only reason I responded to him was because you guys do and I see his comment.  He thinks I am Indian which he is so far from the truth that its rather hilarious.  But he will never accept that.  He also assumes I never touched or seen a plane.  Seen and touched various of them.  Never flew them or handled them.  But then again, I am not the one creating youtube videos about them.  Something he may not acknowledge or understand but since I am not the one making the claims that is said in the video, then it isn't up to me to prove anything yet he assumes (assume is an acronym for making an ass of you and me).  He also assumes I got multiple accounts.  Anyway, I will wager a bet with him that whoever made that video never saw, flew or even know what is actually wired to the Su-57.  No experience or anything.  Yet said youtuber provides a video about it.  You see, there is one thing to talk about it.  Another is making a video about it.  Talking about it is simply debating, breaking down and figuring out.  Youtube video's tend to be much more....absolute.  They figure what they make a video about is correct but they regurgitate information handed to them.  Not unlike the rest of us.  We assume what the Su-57 has.  So does the youtuber.  But at least we can talk about it but as you pointed out, the comment section of youtube is the "professionals" just like the youtuber who uploaded the video. There is no debate because we aren't debating with the youtube creator unless its RTN and he feels that he got his anus stretched Goatse style because I disregarded his trash. If it is RTN's video, then he is a joke. But if he is just shilling it for sake of it, then that makes him even more of a joke than the creator of the youtube video. Actually, jokes on us cause its free advertising for his video's and people talk about it with the absence of the youtuber.

Nothing to debate really.  Just regurgitation and garbage recycled.  Maybe RTN likes drinking recycled toilet water.  Same thing.

Youtube on the other hand, is good for political commentary, cat or video game video's, some entertainment and that's about it. When looking for technical facts for secret projects, its trash. Maybe make more sense if an Su-57 was smuggled out of the country and it was technical details being talked about by experts who have dissected it.

He thinks I am Indian which he is so far from the truth that its rather hilarious. But he will never accept that.

Yeah, I occasionally get accused of being a Russian expat because obviously you can't defend Russia if you have British heritage and live in the west... can't criticise the west either BTW because the west is just bloody perfect and cannot be criticised for anything.

It is ridiculous how Russia is supposed to not understand stealth (low RCS) when it literally wrote the manual on it
that the US rushed to implement.

The Soviets invented it and the US made it super expensive and made lots of billionaires from its commercialisation...

People are clearly clueless when they think that a bit of an angle in a surface means
zero return to the detector. That is purely classical geometric optics which has no relevance for actual EM and quantum
mechanics. Every surface, no matter its angle, will scatter some of the incoming photons back to the source.

Well it is as simple as normal light... when you change the angle of a surface the reflected light does not act like light with a mirror where a flat view of a mirror reflecting light back to the light source, but angle the mirror 45 degrees and the mirror disappears and the light is all redirected away from the light source if it is the only light source present.

Replace the mirror with a sheet of paper and the angle the paper is held to does not effect the light shining directly on it... you can see the paper from any angle because the light is reflected in all angles.

Stealth is not that hard to understand but it is an expensive technology.

Shapes need to be simple. Coating need to absorb radar waves (wood already is a good radar absorbant). And put everything inside the plane.

If you think of stealth as camouflage, then non stealthy 4th gen fighters were redcoats with bright shiny buttons and distinct profiles, Low observable, which many claim for Rafale and other types is a modern camouflage uniform, while stealth is a ghillie suit... a walking bush.

You don't want redcoats walking around the place, but equally you don't need snipers everywhere either... most of the time a decent camouflage suit is all you need... especially if you have external weapons or fuel.

Shameless presstitutes have misled lots of folks to think they can eyeball RCS or determine the merit of some design by some trivial and mostly cosmetic elements like colour, presence of serrated edges and the like.

The real irony is that before that Soviet guy invented the specific mathematics for calculating RCS of a given surface the US so called stealth platforms were eyeball hit and miss type build a scale model and test it on a range with radars set up on wires that you can spin the model on to check actual RCS figures for and it was all guesswork and hit and miss stuff.

With the mathematics model created by that Soviet guy they could use computers to do the calculations and test thousands of shapes and designs very quickly and only make models of the most promising designs saving a lot of time and money.