Russian Su-57 Aircraft Thread (PAK-FA and IAF FGFA)

[Air Force Brat]

Going back a little, but a logical fallacy often invoked by Russian fans is them bringing up elements tested on experimental aircraft, like the flat nozzles on the Su27 and S-ducts on the S47, and insisting that Russia is a master at those technologies and chose not to use them as opposed to not being able to master them to incorporate into the PAKFA design.

Just because they tested them is not actually proof that the tests were successful. Point in fact, neither design feature have been applied to any operational aircraft.

It could have been that they have reviewed the test data and decided that the benefits did not justify the costs and compromises. But it's just as plausible that they were just not able to get the feature to work as well as others have and/or fit with their other designs goals, so could not incorporate them into future designs.

For the flat nozzles, it could well be that the cost just wasn't worth the benefits, since even the Americans went back to using round nozzles on the F35.

For the S-duct, considering how pretty much everyone else is using them, and the state the Russian aviation industry was in when work on the PAKFA started in earnist, I find the balance of probabilities favouring the likelihood they simply lacked the experience and resources necessary to confidently apply that to a new design.

There's our bright lad on the track! great summary!

 

[b787]

I seriously doubt that.

First off NEBO radars operate in a very different way compared to conventional radar in which it requires background interference of the area they scan recorded for cross reference to find new anomalies. That wouldn't work in a moving vehicle. Second it needs a secondary reflective wave such as a mountain to scan for those anomalies. Third NEBO radars operates in a relatively low frequency band in the VHF range with a wave frequency in the meter range meaning the transmitter antenna needs to be that large and uses a YAGI antenna as receivers. I have seen some ELINT crafts with YAGI antennas but a would be a nightmare for fighter planes equipped with them.
Basically NEBO radar is for ground scanning not for moving vehicles.

The Russian Aerospace Defense Force will add dozens of radars this year, a force spokesman said Wednesday.
MOSCOW, January 8 (RIA Novosti) – The Russian Aerospace Defense Force will add dozens of radars this year, a force spokesman said Wednesday.

The list includes six Nebo-M active electronically scanned arrays (AESA) and a mix of 23 Podlyot low-altitude and Sopka medium- and high-altitude radars, the spokesman told journalists.



Read more:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

it reads AESA radar for PAKFA. X frequency band experimental example

 

[b787]

nice video about PAKFA

 

[Jura The idiot]

... It's also selective in area where the method would work where there are places that radar wave will bounce off like within a valley or a mountain nearby.

I normally don't post conjecture but now I will:
the negativity about "stealth aircraft", which one often finds in Russian Internet, calls for a question
Why Does Russia Bother With PAKFA?
and I think that's because they need 5th Gen aircraft to tweak their radars against 5th Gen aircraft, I mean to look what actually shows once a Swarm comes, a Squadron comes, how many aircraft passed undetected at these conditions etc. etc. Once they evaluate it, they'll see like "The Nyebo works!" or "oops, we need more PAKFAs!"

 

[Air Force Brat]

I normally don't post conjecture but now I will:
the negativity about "stealth aircraft", which one often finds in Russian Internet, calls for a question
Why Does Russia Bother With PAKFA?
and I think that's because they need 5th Gen aircraft to tweak their radars against 5th Gen aircraft, I mean to look what actually shows once a Swarm comes, a Squadron comes, how many aircraft passed undetected at these conditions etc. etc. Once they evaluate it, they'll see like "The Nyebo works!" or "oops, we need more PAKFAs!"

The Russians are negative about stealth because they have not been able to bring PAK-FA up to the F-22ski standard, flat out TRUTH!

and for those of you who want to make excuses, and support the poor Russians and their in-ability to produce a functional 5 gen and say AFB is just an F-22 FanBoy you're partially right, I love it cause it is an "over-achiever". I have been a witness to the USSR as their stuff some of which is very good, ie AK-47 thanks to Mr. Kalishnikov, and SU-27 and progeny are awesome, PAK-FA beautiful airplane flies well has some structural issues which PAK-FA fan boys have never heard of????? but it "aint stealthy", sorry, it just isn't, so the Rooosians HAVE to say well that stealth don't work no-how Komrade, after all they want to sell a bunch of these to the Indians??? So they are try-in to "fake-it" with some super hi-zoot "now ya see it, now ya don't" slight of hand, magic stealth-killer radars???? but they keep tryin to make a real 5 gen, it just shows up on their radar, so their radar must be the best that's ever been???

 

[Jura The idiot]

AFB I think you saw my picture(s) in that T-shirt I often wear when visiting bunkers, so I protest the spelling below LOL!

... AK-47 thanks to Mr. Kalishnikov, ...

 

[Brumby]

I normally don't post conjecture but now I will:
the negativity about "stealth aircraft", which one often finds in Russian Internet, calls for a question
Why Does Russia Bother With PAKFA?
and I think that's because they need 5th Gen aircraft to tweak their radars against 5th Gen aircraft, I mean to look what actually shows once a Swarm comes, a Squadron comes, how many aircraft passed undetected at these conditions etc. etc. Once they evaluate it, they'll see like "The Nyebo works!" or "oops, we need more PAKFAs!"

It sure is an expensive way to test out your radars. I understand the manufacturing tolerance to get the necessary stealth feature is so tight that it is 1/3 of a thickness of a hair strand. Unless the Russians are serious enough to produce to required specifications, their radar might be detecting the so called stealthy planes for the wrong reason. Lol.

 

[b787]

The Russians are negative about stealth because they have not been able to bring PAK-FA up to the F-22ski standard, flat out TRUTH!

and for those of you who want to make excuses, and support the poor Russians and their in-ability to produce a functional 5 gen and say AFB is just an F-22 FanBoy you're partially right, I love it cause it is an "over-achiever". I have been a witness to the USSR as their stuff some of which is very good, ie AK-47 thanks to Mr. Kalishnikov, and SU-27 and progeny are awesome, PAK-FA beautiful airplane flies well has some structural issues which PAK-FA fan boys have never heard of????? but it "aint stealthy", sorry, it just isn't, so the Rooosians HAVE to say well that stealth don't work no-how Komrade, after all they want to sell a bunch of these to the Indians??? So they are try-in to "fake-it" with some super hi-zoot "now ya see it, now ya don't" slight of hand, magic stealth-killer radars???? but they keep tryin to make a real 5 gen, it just shows up on their radar, so their radar must be the best that's ever been???

let me tell this as a Historian, all weapons system sooner or later are surpassed, your hypothesis could be true, however in 1999 a 1960s long wave radar in conjunction with a SA-3 downed a F-117 and only 6 years later F-117 was retired.

The Russians claim these same long wave radars used in conjunction with 2 or 3 different radars working in different frequency bands will render stealth useless.

Stealth means very low observability, or RCS reduction it means the aircraft still is detectable but at shorter ranges, anti-stealth means bring back the RCS to levels the air defense system will react on time or in few words increase the RCS area so the aircraft have time to fire on time.

In history you can see when a weapon is surpassed by its reduction in effectiveness, if F-22 still is effective it might challenge the S-400 over Syria as the U-2 and SR-71 did in the past in the 1960s, but in my opinion it will not happen, the US used the F-22 over Syria and Russia deployed the S-400 for a reason.

Both nations have challenged each other, but PAKFA is supposedly using stealth but with emphasis on speed and agility and Antey is developing the anti-stealth S-500s

 

[Brumby]

let me tell this as a Historian, all weapons system sooner or later are surpassed, your hypothesis could be true, however in 1999 a 1960s long wave radar in conjunction with a SA-3 downed a F-117 and only 6 years later F-117 was retired.

Sorry you are wrong. I respect your convictions in your beliefs but you are propagating a view that is simply not backed up by either facts or coherent reasoning. The F-117 downing incident over Serbia has been discussed at length. You had used this example to advance your views that UVF/VHF bands are rendering stealth as useless. The facts are the Serbians managed to reasonably establish a flight path of the F-117 because it used the same ingress and egress night after night. That was sloppy mission planning and they paid a price ultimately for it. The Serbians used a VHF radar to search (targeted search box) for the F-117 at the suspected time and location to confirm its presence. Once a detection was made, they just have to launch a SAM from their SA 3 battery using the SA 3's fire control radar (short wavelength radar, not VHF!) to guide a missile to the F117. This was a one off event never to be repeated. In other words, the target was on a sliver platter handed to the Serbs. It is logically unsound to base a position on an exception and statistically meaningless as a data point. Persistent arguments in such a manner is contrary to good and sound judgement.

The Russians claim these same long wave radars used in conjunction with 2 or 3 different radars working in different frequency bands will render stealth useless.

The Russians make all kinds of claims all the time. The fact is that radar science is well established and is not some voodoo science. What the Russians are claiming doesn't correlate to known radar science. If you wish to use Russian marketing materials, you have to be prepared to justify the claims against known radar science and not just repeat what is in the brochure. I took the trouble to discount this tri-band approach in one of the earlier postings but instead of offering a rebuttal, you included two you tube videos as a reply. You need to take the trouble to understand the subject matter of radar science and not just spruik Russian claims.

Stealth means very low observability, or RCS reduction it means the aircraft still is detectable but at shorter ranges, anti-stealth means bring back the RCS to levels the air defense system will react on time or in few words increase the RCS area so the aircraft have time to fire on time.

So what is new? There will be measures and counter measures.

In history you can see when a weapon is surpassed by its reduction in effectiveness, if F-22 still is effective it might challenge the S-400 over Syria as the U-2 and SR-71 did in the past in the 1960s, but in my opinion it will not happen, the US used the F-22 over Syria and Russia deployed the S-400 for a reason.

This is an example of incoherent reasoning. Russia and the US is not at war if you have not noticed.

 

[b787]

Sorry you are wrong. I respect your convictions in your beliefs but you are propagating a view that is simply not backed up by either facts or coherent reasoning. The F-117 downing incident over Serbia has been discussed at length. You had used this example to advance your views that UVF/VHF bands are rendering stealth as useless.

So what is new? There will be measures and counter measures.


This is an example of incoherent reasoning. Russia and the US is not at war if you have not noticed.

Buddy i also respect your views, i guide my self by equation and physics, the Russians do not claim anything irrational, you can question the effectiveness of their tech, but i can only tell you this if stealth works S-400 will be rendered ineffective, if it does not, S-400 will show what the equation shows more wattage and the right frequencies will see stealth aircraft.

You can be sure it works, but this are weapons and when they clash you know they work or not.

If F-22 is so good, is not a matter of advertising, but a matter of application on real combat situation and at this moment Syria is the most likely scenario where F-22 can be tested versus Irbis and S-400.

the rest is useless i am not going to convince you, the only thing i can say to you is PAKFA uses another philosophy, it uses stealth to reduce its RCS, it uses 3 AESA radars and an IRST system, high agility and supercruise