Su-57 Stealth Fighter: News #9

The nozzles are canted 2D ones, like the existing ones, only flat

Here is the documentary on YouTube with English subtitles:

Flight simulation of the Su-57 with three-axis flat nozzle:

Flight simulation of the Su-57 with three-axis flat nozzle:

It would not be impossible to have a two part system that either rotates or flexes vertically and horizontally... but the only images I have seen of the TVC nozzle show the flat nozzles canted like the Su-35s nozzles are canted so they can simulate 2.5 degrees of TVC, rather than having full 3D angles.

If it uses 2D flat nozzles with a rotating mechanism allowing them to be rotated around, meaning 3D capacity then that would make sense, but I find it suspicious if they can be rotated that they are shown at the same angles the Su-35 engines are angled to to allow 2.5D use.

The animation was done by people that have no clue, it is just that...

The Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aircraft Production Association (KnAAPO) named after Y.A. Gagarin has handed over a batch of new Su-57 (the 3rd this year) fighters to the MoD RF.

On behalf of bmpd , we would like to point out that the Russian Aerospace Forces have thus received the third batch of Su-57 fighters in 2024, manufactured by the Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aviation Plant named after Yu. A. Gagarin (KnAAZ) of the UAC. The transfer of the first batch of serial Su-57s in 2024 was announced on September 12, and the transfer of the second batch - on November 11. These three batches are a continuation of the contract concluded in June 2019 between the Russian Ministry of Defense and PJSC Sukhoi Company for the supply of a total of 76 serial Su-57 fighters to the Armed Forces (including the first two aircraft separately contracted in 2018), with the contract execution period ending in 2027. As usual, in UAC reports, starting in 2022, the number of aircraft delivered is not disclosed, and the tail numbers of the fighters are retouched in the official photo and video materials distributed.

Judging by the video, the Su-57 fighters of all three batches of delivery in 2024 have red tail numbers. According to unofficial reports, the first batch delivered in September included three aircraft.

According to known information, by the beginning of 2024, 22 serial Su-57 fighters were built under this contract, of which, after the loss of the lead one on December 24, 2019, at the final stage of the factory tests, the Russian Aerospace Forces received 21 aircraft. In particular, KnAAZ handed over four Su-57 aircraft to the Russian Aerospace Forces in 2020-2021, and six more in 2022 (two in May and four in December ), and 11 Su-57 aircraft in 2023 (in two batches in September and December).

So if all 3 batches include 3 aircrafts then we have 9 aircrafts delivered this year



https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4884856.html

That would make it 30 units already, would that be a reasonable estimation?

That "digital camo" paintjob is cringe

For decades people have argued on the internet about camo schemes complaining that this or that Russian/Soviet aircraft has horrible paint schemes and that the pale gray scheme of the USAF is best... and then I saw a video showing an F15 flying close to the camera and then an Su-27 with its awful light blue dark blue camouflage scheme fly in and scare the F-15 away from the aircraft the Su-27 was clearly escorting. As they both flew off into the distance the Su-27 very quickly disappeared and could no longer be seen, while the F-15 with its amazing low viz gray scheme could be seen out to the damn horizon...

Don't just a scheme sitting on tarmac or at an airshow... look at it in the air... preferably with a superior alternative near it for reference and then decide.

No fifth-generation fighter can compare to the Russian "Su-57" when it comes to testing in combat conditions , writes the magazine "Military Watch".

 " Thanks to the participation of the Su-57 in operations in Ukraine since the beginning of 2022, it remains absolutely unrivaled among fighters of its generation in terms of the degree of experience in high-intensity combat. The aircraft solves a wide range of tasks - it engages targets in the air, eliminates enemy air defenses, and successfully carries out highly precise strikes in conditions of strong enemy resistance ," the text states

Su-57 being used in Ukraine is hardly any new news at this point.

Someone at a different forum said new MAWS at 2:00 anyone see it or can circle it so we can compare it to the old MAWS?

https://tass.ru/interviews/22794879

- What, in your opinion, should a Russian sixth-generation fighter be like?

"It must meet the increased modern requirements. And of course, there is work to be done in terms of reducing visibility, and in all ranges. This is achieved through the use of certain materials and layout forms of the structure. I also think that it should have a power plant with significantly improved characteristics: very low specific consumption and high thrust. No matter how powerful the engines are, there is always not enough thrust, it is never superfluous. Creating a next-generation aircraft is always a very expensive technical issue, but we have made progress in this direction.

New (somewhat larger aperture)


Old (101KS-U)


- What, in your opinion, should a Russian sixth-generation fighter be like?

It should kick everybody else's ass

There really is no rush to a 6th generation aircraft as it would be far off better making breakthroughs now before applying them in structuring a new aircraft.

1.Creating new material that is stronger and lighter than titanium with time passing can determine if its production wise feasible to produce for 6th generation aircraft.
2.Announcing a new creation for radars to track radar shadows of stealth aircraft in far ranges for 2020 where they estimated a 7 year time frame to put its use into practice.
3.More bench tests of adaptive cycle or detonation engines to either modify or create newer better designs to determine the best aerodynamic performance design they want to create.
4.Breakthroughs continuously being made for infrared heat detection for improving material making capabilities like increasing purity of Germanium for further ranges and target accuracy.
5.photonic radar tests that offer high performance and increasing the miniaturization of your electronics capability for high end PICs for better detection and tracking performance.
6.PICs wafer topology is between 90 nm and 350 nm but even so their expected photonic computer prototype is to be made around the same timeframe Intel and Japan matching their performance in the Zettaflop range. Russia is still currently trying to improve their lithographic machines which will take time for smaller topology but better performances than before.
7.A photonic computer, especially in an aircraft with its insane processing speeds significantly enhances neural networking and artificial intelligence performance than current electronics on computers.
8.The trend of switching to ramjet engines on missiles to meet the same size proportions with increased range and payload capabilities enhances combat performance better than current air to air or air to ground missiles. They have also shown miniaturization air defense missile capabilities which can decide internal weapons bay capacity loadouts on aircrafts.
9.Newer engine power generation performance and missile miniaturization can decide what will be the best self-defense decision that can be made for an aircraft to deal with incoming air to air missiles based on 360-degree infrared, UV, and millimeter radar wave frequency ranges all sensor fused for the best tracking precision possible.

I think it's only worth being interested in 6th generation aircrafts that decide to be created and fly around 2030 or after that.

It looks like engine was not replaced to AL-51. At least, exterior looks same as AL-41F1, without serrated edges.
I thought that this is a new video, but it is actually two years old. Never mind.

Both these Su-57's are prototypes and they are clearly testing something. The MAWS in question is likely the test subject but at times Sukhoi tends to give away some clues painted on these aircraft.
Bogdan's Su-57 have a painting on the rear stabilizer depicting a Su-57 firing a missile. It may well be that they are doing some tests on a new missile as well?

thegopnik wrote:More bench tests of adaptive cycle or detonation engines to either modify or create newer better designs to determine the best aerodynamic performance design they want to create.

You won't be seeing pulse detonation engines in fighters or bombers any time soon. They can't generating enough power to power airplane avionics from yester years never minded future. Along with host of other issues with them.

At best you might see pulse detonation engines in missiles. But that is likely a decade if not more from happening.

The animation was done by people that have no clue, it is just that...

That is all together possible, but equally if I developed a new engine and managed to achieve full 3D vectoring if part of the solution allowed the two D vectoring portion to rotate... what position of rotation would I set it to for display purposes... to make the enemy specialists underestimate my achievement.

They can't generating enough power to power airplane avionics from yester years never minded future.

Sounds a bit like a myth considering the two tiny engines in the Yak-130 generate enough power to run an AESA radar and wing tip ESM pods and an EO targeting pod... might just be a one time thing... like once a tank man reached into the mechanism to fix a jam or realign a round in the autoloader and injured his arm, and then all of a sudden all Soviet tank autoloading systems were removing thousands of arms a week.

The systems attached to a jet engine to generate electricity while the engine is running may not have been designed for the amount of power an AESA radar needs to draw to run at full power. Once the problem has been identified it is not rocket science to put in a new generator that has the capacity to run everything... If you add a 600 watt stereo to your car you don't have to replace the engine... that would be stupid... but certain changes to the electrics might be needed.

At best you might see pulse detonation engines in missiles. But that is likely a decade if not more from happening.

Would need to be liquid fuelled engines, and a decent scramjet engine wont need pulse detonating thrust because it works at very high flight speeds generating a good amount of thrust unlike conventional jet engines which lose thrust as their flight speed increases.

GarryB wrote:Sounds a bit like a myth considering the two tiny engines in the Yak-130 generate enough power to run an AESA radar and wing tip ESM pods and an EO targeting pod.

Nope, look at how PDE work. PDE might work as a good power generators but those are hybrid system a good read on some of them here.

https://www.rroij.com/open-access/feasibility-study-of-power-generation-by-pulse-detonation-engine-.pdf

The future for fighters and bombers is scramjet or ramjet combined turbojet or fan engine. The end of Soviet Union delayed that. Also, scramjet or ramjet combined rocket engine's.


That's no to say PDE won't have their use. But i think we'll see the more in missile's and probably in rockets in some form or other. UAV's also. And light aviation.

GarryB wrote:

Robert.V wrote:At best you might see pulse detonation engines in missiles. But that is likely a decade if not more from happening.

Would need to be liquid fuelled engines, and a decent scramjet engine wont need pulse detonating thrust because it works at very high flight speeds generating a good amount of thrust unlike conventional jet engines which lose thrust as their flight speed increases.

Can you rephrase that. Because frankly i don't quite understand you here.

There really is no rush to a 6th generation aircraft as it would be far off better making breakthroughs now before applying them in structuring a new aircraft. wrote:

How do we know what breakthroughs have already been made? The SU-57 is probably 20-25 year old tech at this point. This plane was probably being worked on in the late 90's or early 2000's when Russia was reconstituting from the USSR collapse. How do we know there is no rush. Its possible we have already seen the first Chinese 6G fighter take its first flight, and the USA first flight was in 2020. Personally I think manned fighters for air dominance are essentially obsolete so I would prefer Russia work on a all new concept where the fighter is a larger AWACS equipped mothership that can launch and control largish fighter drones and perhaps even retreive them eventually. The drones can also be operated from the ground. they would be smallish 10-20T and capable of pulling the same G's as missiles .

Su-57 with 2 S-71 drones.
Stolen from Paralay who stole from Telegram...

the S71 is very much ground attack focused as far as I can tell, but I suppose its entirely possible to create a fighter version with much more thrust and manuverability. I think the smallest it can be is a ramjet powered R-37, maybe a bit larger. And instead of a warhead, it will have perhaps 3 small AAMs or a 30mm cannon. For example the amraam can pull 25G's with 25G capability it can get real close, fire 1 or 2 30mm rounds and pull off with very high Gs to avoid the debris.

Nope, look at how PDE work. PDE might work as a good power generators but those are hybrid system a good read on some of them here.

None of the Russian planes known use PDE engines.... my understanding of PDE engines is to boost thrust, but if it is a turbojet or a turbofan even the increase in thrust wont allow it to run normally at mach 2.5 plus speeds. The MiG-25 trashes its engines when it goes too fast for too long, and the SR-71 does not derive thrust from its turbojet engines at speeds above mach 2... those big pointy nose cones slide forward and block the airflow going through the hot core of a the turbofans... the only airflow is through the bypass flow around the turbojet core through the turbofan bypass airflow region so essentially it acts as a ramjet... the centripital force would rip the blades to bits running at that speed.

The new Russian MiG PAK DP is supposed to fly at mach 4 plus speeds which means a ramjet or scramjet motor is needed... the extra power from a PDE is not relevant, it is the operating speed and for that you need an engine with no blades or disks.... so ramjet or scramjet.

Essentially air breathing rocket.

The future for fighters and bombers is scramjet or ramjet combined turbojet or fan engine.

True... but are you confusing a PDE with a ramjet or scramjet?

The V-1 buzz bomb used a pulse detonating engine in WWII... but the modern equivalent is based on the fact that a rocket motor when first lit often generates a lot more thrust or power than when it stabilises and runs normally... so as the name suggests the fuel is surged and shut off and surged and shut off leading to engine pulses that generates more thrust than that generated with the rocket motor running normally.

It is not something you could do with a solid rocket missile like an AAM... it would need to be a liquid or gel ramjet or scramjet... but in the case of the latter it is probably already powerful enough.

The end of Soviet Union delayed that. Also, scramjet or ramjet combined rocket engine's.

Several countries had plans for combined turbojet and ramjet propulsion... one option for a US supersonic airliner was the Turbojet engine from a Phantom fighter... J-79 or something and a ramjet. The point is that you only use the turbojet for takeoff and landing so it really does not need to be brand new or super powerful... it just needs to be very reliable, so you use it to take off and then once you get to height and speed you shut it down and start up the ramjet which climbs and accelerates you to flight speed and altitude to cruise to the destination. It is what you want to be fuel efficient... as you approach the destination you start up the reliable turbojet and use it to land on a conventional runway.

The turbojets can be cheap light compact and reliable... they don't need to be fuel efficient... because you wont be running them very long.

That's no to say PDE won't have their use. But i think we'll see the more in missile's and probably in rockets in some form or other. UAV's also. And light aviation.

PDEs don't spin blades or disks... they generate thrust so I am not sure how you could get an AAM to pulse its thrust if it is a solid fuelled rocket.

The Soviets and Russians already have pulsejet drones and UAVs and the V-1 was probably the best known missile using that type of propulsion.

I would suggest light aviation would like the cheap and simple nature but wont like the noise.

Can you rephrase that. Because frankly i don't quite understand you here.

Perhaps I am mistaken but my understanding is that a PDE is a liquid fuelled rocket or ramjet type engine that surges the fuel in pulses to get peak power in terms of thrust rather than a steady flow of fuel and oxidiser so a PDE with solid rocket fuel does not make sense.

Soviet scientists noticed when their rockets first start up the thrust levels are much higher than when the rocket is running normally... the initial explosion of fuel and oxidiser exceeds the normal thrust power of the rocket motor running at normal levels.

Therefore to increase thrust levels they pulse the fuel to create detonations to boost thrust levels.

It might work with a ramjet or scramjet or pulsejets, but with most normal engines it is not relevant.

Using the extra thrust of a pulse jet or PDE to fly faster doesn't make sense.

The MiG-25 didn't fly faster than other aircraft because it had higher thrust engines. It had 11 ton thrust engines at a time when the Su-27 had 13 ton thrust engines.

Even the MiG-31 has 15 ton thrust engines which are not as powerful as the Al-51 engines going in to the Su-57M or even the R79 engine of the Yak-141 which has models up to 22 tons thrust... though it only has one.

There is talk of the R579 being used in the PAK DP and it being able to operate at mach 4 but I am no so sure.

Putting the 25 ton thrust engines from the Tu-160 into the MiG-31 wont make it go faster.... its problem is not engine thrust but engine thrust at high speed and this is where scramjet technology is so important. The airflow into jet engines has to be slowed down to subsonic before the fuel can be burned. With a scramjet you don't need to slow the airflow down to subsonic speeds... fuel can be burned at supersonic speeds... hence the title supersonic combustion ram jet.

How do we know what breakthroughs have already been made? The SU-57 is probably 20-25 year old tech at this point. This plane was probably being worked on in the late 90's or early 2000's when Russia was reconstituting from the USSR collapse. How do we know there is no rush.

There are lots of technologies that were put on hold because it simply was not possible before.

The new high temperature metals Russia has created and also all sorts of new design equipment and materials and even computer models which allow them to check things quickly and easily without needing to build a scale model which is not cheap...

Personally I think manned fighters for air dominance are essentially obsolete so I would prefer Russia work on a all new concept where the fighter is a larger AWACS equipped mothership that can launch and control largish fighter drones and perhaps even retreive them eventually.

I think a lot of countries are going to make that mistake... I suspect China is probably about the only country with AI that is advanced enough to start thinking about such things, but equally AI is going to be needed on the modern battlefield because technology has reached a level where you can have millions of ground and air and sea targets all moving around at once that need to be detected and properly IDed and checked out and then challenged and perhaps destroyed.

A drone unit launching 10 drones in the path of an enemy ground force with 200 vehicles and 500 soldiers... you might upset them a little but you can't stop such a big force with such a tiny pin prick.

A drone unit with 5,000 suicide drones that automatically find their own target and are stacked in launch tubes ready to fire that has say 100 recon drones operating at 50km altitude scanning the ground for targets with optics and IIR and Lidar and MMW radar sensors and allocates suicide drones to attack enemy targets as they are found and IDed as hostile. You could devastate the enemy force with half a dozen men... but of course the enemy will have their own drones and drone defences and their own artillery and air power etc etc.