Thread 63999729

Can someone please enlighten me on SU-57 actual AGM capabilities?
Ruzzians pride themselfs on SU-57 being the first true multirole stealth fightet because of the large AGM options as opossed to F-22.

In theory it can equip in internal bays:
>4×Kh-38M (inertial, ARH, GPS, SALH, IR)
>4×Kh-59MK2 (ARGS-59 active radar seeker.)
>KAB-250 guided bomb
>KAB-500 guided bomb
All of these munitions need some initial input from a targeting pod or an integrated sensor complex like the JOTS(F-35) to lock the target.
The SU-57 has neither. As far as I can see the only current option is a guy on the ground point a laser or inputing in GPS coordinates. In my eyes, this contradicts the SU-57 supposed role as being a deep strike multirole stealth jet.

Sure it has other AGM options like 4×Kh-58UShK ARMs, but I think those can lock on active radar targets acquired through the SU-57 radar array.

>first true multirole stealth fightet
:)

>>63999729 (OP)
Let me just say, there's a reason no one wants this trash (except algeria lmao)

>>63999729 (OP)
They receive general indications about their target but the pilot has to do everything else, from actually identifying the target with the radar/IR/EO, to lock-in the target and firing the missile. Truly retarded.
AFAIK their GPS are pre-loaded coordinates. In theory the Su-57 has a data link but Russia never showed a BMS/C2/some high-level automatized network good enough for targeting. They unveiled demos but as per usual making it real and introduce the system is a completely different thing.

x-69, which is russia's stealthy cruise missile, seems decent enough. it can fit inside the felon's internal bay.

range is ~400 km.

>>63999729 (OP)
It's still a flying prototype, we have no clear info on which baseline systems are even working, let alone anything additional like weapons integration. Back in syria they were flying their "in service" Su-57s with dumb bombs on external racks that were aimed using exclusively Mk1 eyeball because neither the weapons bay or the radar were operational. It's very possible that today the only things that work in the plane are the parts directly transplanted from the Su-35.
>In my eyes, this contradicts the SU-57 supposed role as being a deep strike multirole stealth jet.
Duh, it's neither a deep strike, multirole or stealth. Good job figuring it out.

>>63999729 (OP)
Well if it wasn't for the exposed engine fans behing the "cope mesh"
And a radar cross section of a bus I guess you could call it stealth

>>63999760
>from actually identifying the target with the radar/IR/EO,
But what kind of a EO does the SU-57 actually have? Ironically enough it most probably can't even use the thermal seekers on Kh-38Ms and KABs to lock on because they are obstructed by the fuselage plus the loss of stealth when opening the bay.
>AFAIK their GPS are pre-loaded coordinates.
Holy shit, that's Ukrainian MiG-29's jerry rigged Western JDAMs.

>>63999766
>it can fit inside the felon's internal bay.
True, but I didn't mention the Kh-69 because it has sattelite guidance and the plane carrying it only acts as a platform for launching it..

>>63999767
>"in service" Su-57s with dumb bombs on external racks that were aimed using exclusively Mk1 eyeball because neither the weapons bay or the radar were operational
Grim.

>>63999786
> Ironically enough it most probably can't even use the thermal seekers on Kh-38Ms and KABs
Slaving your missiles to the platform sensors and avionics has been normal since the 1960s, the only difference were (too dumb) some IR/contrast seekers if the missile can't have an internal INS reference and memory (the pre-1970s sidewinders had no internal memory for example, it was purely electromechanical). Russia/soviets used to integrate everything to the airframe so it's less noticeable. And the problem aren't the individual components but the whole system and its weak link with the rest of their military. They know that but networking is incredibly expensive and for their partner exports and parades it's a waste of money.

>Holy shit, that's Ukrainian MiG-29's jerry rigged Western JDAMs.
For some weapons Ukraine was using "smart" pods, aka a complete a pod with basic NATO avionics controlled with a tablet or something like that, more like a patch.

>>63999795
i think it's the one munition that is actually useful for the su-57. felon will be able to get closer than other birds if carrying 2 internally, so the range of the munition is extended on the battlefield.

there's reports of this combination being used in ukraine.

>>63999817
101KS-V
>forward looking IRST, used since MiG-23, can lase the distance to target, nothing more.
101KS-O
>DIRCM
101KS-U/01, 101KS-U/02
>MAWS
101KS-P
>Posadka/Landing) device comprises a small imaging infrared sensor to aid low-level flying and landing; it is fitted in the forward section of the canoe-shaped underwing missile bay

There isn't a single sensor used for targetting in you picture.

>>63999729 (OP)
>what is S-70 Okhotnik

>>63999871
a pile of aluminum wreckage in some Ukrainian field?

>>63999880
No, it's an Russian stealth heavy unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV) used as an advanced sensor array platform for the SU-57.

>>63999861
My bad, the 101KS-N (and the -V for IR, I don't think it's an IR imager though).
Their Su-34 does have the EO integrated incorporated in the airframe

>>63999900
>Number built: 2
>had to shoot one down after losing control of it
highly advanced

>>63999903
>101KS-N
There were some tests done with this pod, but one wonder about its influence on the stealth factor.

>>63999900
>stealth
from its wreckage we know there's exactly zero stealth in that thing, just sheet aluminum and basic paint.

>>63999943
>but one wonder about its influence on the stealth factor.
no need to wonder comrade, aircraft was stealth-certified at the factory therefore no matter what condition it is it'll guaranteed to be glorious russian stealth, just like russian submarines!

please don't mind the IRST bubble that always reduces aircraft rcs unless it's pointing backwards into the airframe so the non rounded rear side doesn't expose the aircraft.

>>63999955
That was a prototype used for testing.
>thing they would use a real model in contested airspace.

>>63999974
>thing they
Thinking*

>>63999974
There are no production models of the S-70

>>63999971
Even Suhkoi claimed a RCS of ~0.5m2 for the definitive design, they could create a better 57M2 but that would need major redesigns.
Trials of Flankers against fighters with smaller radar but RCS in the order of 1 sqm showed that the Flanker had a serious problem with its RCS and its radar couldn't make up for the difference in detection range, for russians the Su-57 is "stealth", even if it's just "Super Horner/Gripen/EF stealth"

>>63999971
Kek, never really thought abiut the IRST head.
So is SU-57 actually stealth or is it just stealth-ish?

>>63999974
I'm sure they will do better for the mass production run :^)

>>63999974
>not using real model at war
kek

>>64000018
>Even Suhkoi claimed a RCS of ~0.5m2 for the definitive design
So it's actually more visible than B-2?

>>64000038
They dont even have s ducts man, its traaaaash

>>64000051
Forgot picrel.

>>63999729 (OP)
first multirole stealth fighter is the F35
russians are vapid and will claim firsts they have no right to in order to stroke their ego's.

>>64000038
Even if russian manufacturing did everything right instead of pic rel and you didn't use IRST, guidance pod or any other shit that reduces its RCS then it's only going to be as stealthy as an old block Super Hornet, which is better than euro 4.5th gens but not even remotely close to the actual stealth aircraft by any stretch of imagination.

>>64000051
>B-2
Yes but the B-2 is an all-around stealth, meanwhile the usual fighter is only 'stealth' for its frontal arc. The frontal RCS of the B-1B is barely larger than the Su-57 despite initially being a non-LO design (the original design considered a lower RCS but not as a LO design).

>>64000070
> reduces its RCS
Say inverse RCS, because they're increasing the RCS (it reflects back more microwaves).

>>64000051
we don't actually know what B-2 rcs is so published estimates are wild guesses and go all over the place from 0.1 to 0.0001 m2

>>64000083
right, my mistake

>>64000018
>>64000058
I've just browsed a few threads and the general consensus seem to be:
>"Sukhoi’s own patent claims Su-57 having a design RCS between 0.1 and 1 m2."
https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/ioyhp4/are_the_rcs_values_published_by_sukhoi_for_the/

>>64000070
Shieet, this can't be real.

>>63999729 (OP)
>Can someone please enlighten me on SU-57 actual AGM capabilities?
No. Russians only have a few of them and don't use them, sell them, or test them openly.
After their war in Ukraine, I'm considering them a significantly more retarded Texas with an affinity toward communist ideals.

>>64000058
Almost certainly, although it's not that simple, there's a lot of factors. It certainly doesn't have anywhere near the all-aspect broadband stealth of the B-2. Su-57 doesn't even use a true radar absorbent skin, it was deemed too costly to maintain and they replaced it with fiberglass construction and a radar absorbent coat of paint.
In general, there's a lot of infrastructure and maintenance work going into keeping a stealth aircraft actually stealthy, and Russians haven't invested at all in such capabilities