Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Su-57 News and Discussion -version_we_lost_count!-

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 6 (1 members and 5 guests)
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • TR1
    TR1
    http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
    • Oct 2010
    • 9740

    Originally posted by halloweene View Post

    Look UNDER F-35, see how many huge bumps there are, then compare to IRST. No comment.
    That doesn't count for the LM cult.

    They 'calculated and took care of it' lmao.

    sigpic

    Comment

    • haavarla
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Dec 2008
      • 6507

      Originally posted by stealthflanker View Post

      Well as long as the bumps still there and it's located on front. There will still be allegations and stuff.

      But it never really touch the real question.. How big it is actually. What's the magnitude. Or even how often it will be "looked" by radar. Or even, what limitations does it impose to the operation. and how Russian could handle it.
      To stay serious here. There is also the High and low look down angle.
      Something tells me the Su-57 will enjoy a slightly higher mission altitude vs F-35. So how exposed are the top IRIST Bump on the Su-57 from Land based radars, and likewise lower flying planes.
      And on the flip coin the underside of F-35 will very much be radiated by ground based radars.

      But who cares about small trivial details like these, when some bumps are not bumps, they are only special effects(soft angles).

      If it aint a straight flat surface, then its far more like a round bump surface.
      Thanks

      Comment

      • LMFS
        Rank 3 Registered User
        • Feb 2018
        • 228

        What if the glass and mirror used in the IRST are transparent to radar frequencies and just get that small amount of incidental energy dissipated at the RAM on the back side? Thoughts?

        Comment

        • moon_light
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • May 2012
          • 932

          Originally posted by haavarla View Post

          To stay serious here. There is also the High and low look down angle.
          Something tells me the Su-57 will enjoy a slightly higher mission altitude vs F-35. So how exposed are the top IRIST Bump on the Su-57 from Land based radars, and likewise lower flying planes.
          And on the flip coin the underside of F-35 will very much be radiated by ground based radars.

          But who cares about small trivial details like these, when some bumps are not bumps, they are only special effects(soft angles).

          If it aint a straight flat surface, then its far more like a round bump surface.
          I don't want to nitpick but the underside of Su-57 isn't flat, it got 2 circular nacceles with a tunnel in between with bigger size than F-35 bumps
          Last edited by moon_light; 11th February 2019, 03:50.

          Comment

          • St. John
            Rank 4 Registered User
            • Jan 2018
            • 473

            Originally posted by halloweene View Post

            Look UNDER F-35, see how many huge bumps there are, then compare to IRST. No comment.
            Any shapes under the F-35 are stealthy shapes and covered in RAM, no so for an IRST and additionally, it's smack-bang on the front of the aircraft.

            Comment

            • halloweene
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Jan 2012
              • 4004

              Well. My "souce" about the "bumps" is the former head of project of RBE2 radar (now retired). I guess he knows what he talks about.Look X35, F-22. Flat surface. (Btw, he says Rafale is NOT VLO just LO) in comparison he also says F-35 is VLO except looked up due to those.

              They 'calculated and took care of it' lmao.
              . Yep, on a Dassault software...

              Comment

              • haavarla
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Dec 2008
                • 6507

                Originally posted by St. John View Post
                Any shapes under the F-35 are stealthy shapes and covered in RAM, no so for an IRST and additionally, it's smack-bang on the front of the aircraft.

                So when a large cockpit glass has all the bumps and bends in the world, then its Stealth with "soft Angle". But a small glass housing the IRIST ball is such a disaster?

                Click image for larger version

Name:	ysqj1.jpg
Views:	1095
Size:	55.6 KB
ID:	3850608

                Thanks

                Comment

                • FBW
                  FBW
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Dec 2011
                  • 3034

                  But a small glass housing the IRIST ball is such a disaster?
                  Certainly not the most advantageous shape in regards to EM reflection, especially on the frontal arc.


                  Comment

                  • St. John
                    Rank 4 Registered User
                    • Jan 2018
                    • 473

                    The cockpit glass is slanted back massively. If the IRST were slanted back like that I doubt anyone would comment but it's basically a baseball on the front of an aircraft claiming to have the RCS of a tennis ball.

                    Comment

                    • moon_light
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • May 2012
                      • 932

                      Originally posted by halloweene View Post
                      Well. My "souce" about the "bumps" is the former head of project of RBE2 radar (now retired). I guess he knows what he talks about.Look X35, F-22. Flat surface. (Btw, he says Rafale is NOT VLO just LO) in comparison he also says F-35 is VLO except looked up due to those.

                      . Yep, on a Dassault software...
                      Can you link the video of the interview?


                      Comment

                      • halloweene
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Jan 2012
                        • 4004

                        There is no interview, it is private talks.

                        Comment

                        • moon_light
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • May 2012
                          • 932

                          Originally posted by halloweene View Post
                          There is no interview, it is private talks.
                          Did you meet him in real life or on a forum? How can we know he is the real deal? you know people pretend to be in the know all the time.

                          Comment

                          • halloweene
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Jan 2012
                            • 4004

                            Maybe because i know them? Have you ever seen me give wrong infos about Rafale? Of course i could (anyone can make mistakes), but generally speaking my assertinos about Rafale capabilities are right no? Being invited to Le Bourget or Farnborough have some advantages.

                            Comment

                            • moon_light
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • May 2012
                              • 932

                              Originally posted by halloweene View Post
                              Maybe because i know them? Have you ever seen me give wrong infos about Rafale? Of course i could (anyone can make mistakes), but generally speaking my assertinos about Rafale capabilities are right no? Being invited to Le Bourget or Farnborough have some advantages.
                              I don't follow Rafale developement process, so to be honest, i don't know how accurate your depiction of Rafale is, but i don't think that translate to the same level of expertise on F-35 or Su-57.
                              From the perspective of a third party, i can't help but feeling suspicious of his claims because Dassaults can't know the characteristics of F-35's RAM or RAS, and it doesn't make sense for F-35 to be only as stealthy as Rafale when looked up from below. In my opinion, that is as ridiculous as USA fanboy who say Su-57 equally stealthy as F-18SH. Logically, a stealth aircraft with strike as its main mission must be very stealthy when viewed from below. That is already consider the best case scenario that he isn't a stolen valor
                              Last edited by moon_light; 12th February 2019, 15:20.

                              Comment

                              • halloweene
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Jan 2012
                                • 4004

                                Originally posted by moon_light View Post
                                I don't follow Rafale developement process, so to be honest, i don't know how accurate your depiction of Rafale is, but i don't think that translate to the same level of expertise on F-35 or Su-57.
                                From the perspective of a third party, i can't help but feeling suspicious of his claims because Dassaults can't know the characteristics of F-35's RAM or RAS, and it doesn't make sense for F-35 to be only as stealthy as Rafale when looked up from below. In my opinion, that is as ridiculous as USA fanboy who say Su-57 equally stealthy as F-18SH. Logically, a stealth aircraft with strike as its main mission must be very stealthy when viewed from below. That is already consider the best case scenario that he isn't a stolen valor
                                i didnot say rafale rcs was similar to f-35. And yes, my informations about F-35 and Su57are much less complete. His claims were just that these bumps are very unfavorable to stealthiness and "compare it to X-35".
                                Last edited by halloweene; 13th February 2019, 14:43.

                                Comment

                                • RALL
                                  Rank 4 Registered User
                                  • Aug 2017
                                  • 129

                                  Originally posted by haavarla View Post

                                  To stay serious here. There is also the High and low look down angle.
                                  Something tells me the Su-57 will enjoy a slightly higher mission altitude vs F-35. So how exposed are the top IRIST Bump on the Su-57 from Land based radars, and likewise lower flying planes.
                                  And on the flip coin the underside of F-35 will very much be radiated by ground based radars.

                                  But who cares about small trivial details like these, when some bumps are not bumps, they are only special effects(soft angles).

                                  If it aint a straight flat surface, then its far more like a round bump surface.
                                  I am agree, on this case IRST will be not a problem. The problem will be nacelles of the engines.

                                  I dont understan really if this fighter will operate on so hight altitude, why did not use other engine design for its botton surface, some similar to F-22 or J-20.

                                  Comment

                                  • moon_light
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • May 2012
                                    • 932

                                    Originally posted by halloweene View Post

                                    i didnot say rafale rcs was similar to f-35. And yes, my informations about F-35 and Su57are much less complete. His claims were just that these bumps are very unfavorable to stealthiness and "compare it to X-35".
                                    You said Rafale is LO and F-35 is VLO except from under, so i understand that as both Rafale and F-35 are LO from under, or in the same class.

                                    Comment

                                    • St. John
                                      Rank 4 Registered User
                                      • Jan 2018
                                      • 473

                                      Originally posted by haavarla View Post

                                      To stay serious here. There is also the High and low look down angle.
                                      Something tells me the Su-57 will enjoy a slightly higher mission altitude vs F-35. So how exposed are the top IRIST Bump on the Su-57 from Land based radars, and likewise lower flying planes.
                                      From the low-look angle the nacelles are its downfall. With that rear-end it could only hope for frontal stealth but the IRST scuppered that too.

                                      Comment

                                      • LMFS
                                        Rank 3 Registered User
                                        • Feb 2018
                                        • 228

                                        Originally posted by St. John View Post
                                        From the low-look angle the nacelles are its downfall. With that rear-end it could only hope for frontal stealth but the IRST scuppered that too.
                                        Are we never going to stop this absurd? You suddenly all know more about radar scattering than the inventors of PTD, it is ludicrous.

                                        Comment

                                        • St. John
                                          Rank 4 Registered User
                                          • Jan 2018
                                          • 473

                                          Originally posted by LMFS View Post

                                          Are we never going to stop this absurd? You suddenly all know more about radar scattering than the inventors of PTD, it is ludicrous.
                                          The problem is that if we ignore features like this then one could just as easily make an argument for a clean Typhoon or Rafale being VLO. It's details like this that determine it.

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X