Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 91 to 102 of 102

Thread: Su-57 (PAK FA) News, Discussion and Pics

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,288
    From that F-16.net link. The truth has a funny way of coming out. The whole western defense media has convinced itself that the Pak Fa isn't stealth (Tyler Rogoway even made a whole post about how unstealth the Pak Fa is. Which is why I don't go there anymore)But now more and more, we keep running into posts like this.

    I think it's going a bit too far to say that the SU-57 only matches a super hornet for RCS. Everything that's been said publicly about stealth design is that the shape of the aircraft is the most important consideration, and that materials are less important.

    The SU-57 beats the pants off of a shornet, rafale, typhoon or gripen or any other aircraft that was designed with only aerodynamics in mind and then stealth features added opportunistically afterward. It has planform alignment. Those other aircraft don't. The horizontal stabs are in the same plane as the wing. Not the case on other 4.5 gens. It had sawtooth panels over the weapons bays, IFR probe, landing gear, etc. Those other aircraft don't. Hell, those other aircraft don't even have internal weapons bays.


  2. #92
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,859
    It's obviously better than SH and Tyler is an idiot.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1
    Nice:

    Fantastic, thanks!

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    177
    Tyler used to write great pieces, even if a little biased at times but nothing one couldn't look past.

    Lately, his articles read like propaganda pieces written by some douche on the Pentagon's payroll

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    698
    gonna wait for anyone doing things in the level of Carlo Kopp's stuff.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    288
    I <3 that blue-grey the Russians use on their planes.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by KGB
    From that F-16.net link. The truth has a funny way of coming out. The whole western defense media has convinced itself that the Pak Fa isn't stealth (Tyler Rogoway even made a whole post about how unstealth the Pak Fa is. Which is why I don't go there anymore)But now more and more, we keep running into posts like this.

    I think it's going a bit too far to say that the SU-57 only matches a super hornet for RCS. Everything that's been said publicly about stealth design is that the shape of the aircraft is the most important consideration, and that materials are less important.

    The SU-57 beats the pants off of a shornet, rafale, typhoon or gripen or any other aircraft that was designed with only aerodynamics in mind and then stealth features added opportunistically afterward. It has planform alignment. Those other aircraft don't. The horizontal stabs are in the same plane as the wing. Not the case on other 4.5 gens. It had sawtooth panels over the weapons bays, IFR probe, landing gear, etc. Those other aircraft don't. Hell, those other aircraft don't even have internal weapons bays.
    Link?

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,701
    Keep your F-16.net nonsense to PMs. Not everyone here cares.



    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    6,324
    A nice anti glare around the canopy glass there^
    Did they rework the mesh right behind the glass canopy?
    Thanks

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    San Francisco, USA
    Posts
    867
    As a general rule detection range is halved when rcs is reduced by a factor of ten. Airframe rcs has to be reduced multiple factors of ten to reduce detection range to useful levels. Thus it doesn’t matter if SU-57 “beats the pants” off 4th gen fighters. Even if it has 10% the rcs of shornet that still place it in the same class in terms of detectable range. Now I have no idea how these aircraft actually compare, but simply claiming its more stealth than x and y is not meaningful.

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    16
    That's right; but I think that with some basic (engineering) understanding of how RCS scattering (matrix) works and what can be achieved with materials (RAM) we can guess ...

    Thus, contribution of different structures and RCSR based on shaping to the reduction obtained (dominant scatter, combined RCS result ...); materials used; RAM treatments ...

    In relation with a legacy design (4G) where RCSR shaping was not considered at all or only in a limited way (no internal weapons bay, general surfaces alignment ...) 20-30 dB in most important aspects is realistic... that besides the other means. Therefore a new clean design shall be in a different class in terms of observability

  12. #102
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,288
    Even if it has 10% the rcs of shornet that still place it in the same class in terms of detectable range
    This is total nonsense. There's no way that the su 57 has more than 5% more rcs than the F-22. The only reason the su 57 exists is to match and therefore neutralize the stealth advantage coming from the west. Its basic military doctrine. Its why Stalin worked and worked until they developed a nuclear bomb. He didn't just give up half way and call it good. Sukhoi didn't just give up and self sabotage the development of the rsc of the su 57 either.

    The su 35 has supercruise and 5th gen avionics. Russia didn't need another jet.

    If Russia had any doubt about its ability to design a stealth aircraft, it could have just copied the F-22 too. They could have easily copied the same basic design. They did it before. Then what ? The Amercans would just say that its all in the coating. Well therer's the Serbia F-117. Russia has a sample. The Americans just have this burning desire to deny the stealth of the su 57. Its quite pathetic.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 22 users browsing this thread. (2 members and 20 guests)

  1. KGB,
  2. Lt Anderson

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

 

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES