Would be glad to. could you please share an authentic source? These seem to be hard to come by.@Elysium Look at the specs of the 177. The whole discussion for years has been how izd. 30 could join the SFC of AL-31F and the specific thrust of F119 in the same engine.
Wasn't the flat nozzle flying demonstrator AL-31 based rather than next gen?I would not be so certain that Izdeliye 177 is purely an export product.
Piotr Butowski mentioned years ago in his book (ISBN 1913870448) the Udlinitel’ project, whose goal was to develop an interim powerplant in case of delays to Izdeliye 30.
And that is exactly what happened, with one of the main causes of the delay reportedly being the uncompromising VKS requirement for a flat nozzle, which necessitated the development of new solutions.
Flat nozzle - AL-51F (with new nozzle). Su-57M only. Not sure if AL-51F with axiosymmetric nozzle with be fielded.Wasn't the flat nozzle flying demonstrator AL-31 based rather than next gen?
It most certainly not an export product (first).I would not be so certain that Izdeliye 177 is purely an export product.
Among the things of note, as flight testing of Izd. 177 is just starting, even assuming a smooth testing program it's hard to expect series production much before 2030. Meanwhile Izd. 30 would have flown for over a decade, surely production should be ongoing by then.I would not be so certain that Izdeliye 177 is purely an export product.
Piotr Butowski mentioned years ago in his book (ISBN 1913870448) the Udlinitel’ project, whose goal was to develop an interim powerplant in case of delays to Izdeliye 30.
And that is exactly what happened, with one of the main causes of the delay reportedly being the uncompromising VKS requirement for a flat nozzle, which necessitated the development of new solutions.
If Su57 is supercruising without this new engine, it may be a true 5th gen if it is also : affordable (not a single 5th gen is), agile at least as a F16, with sensor fusion, stealthy (what is the limit ?).Export customers demand 5th gen technologies now, but Russia is not going to offer izd. 30. That is the rationale, I would say.
Hard to tell;If Su57 is supercruising without this new engine, it may be a true 5th gen if it is also : affordable (not a single 5th gen is), agile at least as a F16, with sensor fusion, stealthy (what is the limit ?).
So nothing in direct link with the new engine (if it is spercruising with the actual one).
Maiden flight with Izd.177
![]()
ПАО «ОАК»
⚡️Самолет Су-57 впервые поднялся в небо с перспективным двигателем пятого поколения «изделие 177» Специалисты Объединенной авиастроительной корпорации и Объединенной двигателестроительной корпорации (входят в Госкорпорацию Ростех) приступили к летным испытаниям двигателя «изделие 177» в...t.me
dead link to copy of original video from UAC Telegram channel posted before I guess
Actually, this is not silly at all. Why not use a 11/16tf engine with improved nozzle over an older one with lower thrust and worse LO performance, specially when using it in the VKS can encourage foreign customers to buy the plane? Nothing wrong with it, I would say. But the domestic engine that defines the state of the art in Russia remains classified, I have no doubts about it.I would not be so certain that Izdeliye 177 is purely an export product.
Piotr Butowski mentioned years ago in his book (ISBN 1913870448) the Udlinitel’ project, whose goal was to develop an interim powerplant in case of delays to Izdeliye 30.
And that is exactly what happened, with one of the main causes of the delay reportedly being the uncompromising VKS requirement for a flat nozzle, which necessitated the development of new solutions.
Izd. 177's specs have been publicly shown in Dubai:Would be glad to. could you please share an authentic source? These seem to be hard to come by.
Can be used domestically. But already with the export in mind. Otherwise, specs would not be published at an airshow abroad.It most certainly not an export product (first).
VKS itself is stretched over multiple AL-31/41 variants, with hundreds of underpowered aircraft at hand.
This supercruising crap is really a plague. No plane crosses the sound barrier and spends lots of fuel to "cruise", this is dashing on mil power. But still, Su-57 is supposedly capable of doing that, only the 1st stage engine is not optimized for it. As for F-16 agility... Su-57 has no AoA limits and retains yaw authority at zero airspeed. Is that enough?If Su57 is supercruising without this new engine, it may be a true 5th gen if it is also : affordable (not a single 5th gen is), agile at least as a F16, with sensor fusion, stealthy (what is the limit ?).
So nothing in direct link with the new engine (if it is spercruising with the actual one).
![]()
Russia’s Su-57 Flies with New Izdeliye 177 ‘Gen. 5’ Engine
The development of the Izdeliye 177 appears to be driven by the need to upgrade the earlier Su-57 production models and offer a new powerplant totheaviationist.com
As per reports from 2023, the ten Su-57s delivered to the Russian Aerospace Forces (RuAF) until the end of that year from the Komsomolsk-on-Amur plant, and all future production batches, were flying with the Stage 2 Izdeliye/Product 30 (or the AL-51F-1). All these engines are developed by the UEC’s NPO Saturn.
It was a request of ATF.No plane crosses the sound barrier and spends lots of fuel to "cruise",
They still fly on mil power (100%), and in case of f-22 it's time-limited (temperature rather than just fuel).It was a request of ATF.
YF22, YF23 and now F22 were or are clearly able to.
No 2D TVC on this one for some reason:
View attachment 796087
''The development of the Izdeliye 177 appears to be driven by the need to upgrade the earlier Su-57 production models and offer a new powerplant to international customers.''
Product 177 is a single engine for the entire Su-27 family. And also for the export version of the Su-75. The Su-57 has its own engine.
The new nozzle appears to be an attempt to improve the aft end LO characteristics of the Su-57. If the both nozzles are pivoting up and down independently on their rolled vector axis in response to the flight controls, it is likely that they will be reflecting RF signals in multiple unpredictable directions, making any stealth shaping useless in improving the airframe signature in flight.Yes,interesting detail and interesting citation :
https://theaviationist.com/2025/12/22/su-57-new-izdeliye-177-engine/
Hm, why would they install engines w/o TVC capability into Su-57's produced so far and Su-57E instead of AL-41F-1?
Yes,interesting detail and interesting citation :
https://theaviationist.com/2025/12/22/su-57-new-izdeliye-177-engine/
Hm, why would they install engines w/o TVC capability into Su-57's produced so far and Su-57E instead of AL-41F-1?
It is not an attempt, the nozzle definitely improves the aft end LO characteristics of the Su-57, and in standard flight envelope Su-57 doesn't need to use TVC.The new nozzle appears to be an attempt to improve the aft end LO characteristics of the Su-57. If the both nozzles are pivoting up and down independently on their rolled vector axis in response to the flight controls, it is likely that they will be reflecting RF signals in multiple unpredictable directions, making any stealth shaping useless in improving the airframe signature in flight.
The new nozzle appears to be an attempt to improve the aft end LO characteristics of the Su-57. If the both nozzles are pivoting up and down independently on their rolled vector axis in response to the flight controls, it is likely that they will be reflecting RF signals in multiple unpredictable directions, making any stealth shaping useless in improving the airframe signature in flight.
Not specifically about the Su-57 but thrust vector is quite useful in helping with trim drag in transonic flight and reduce control surface deflections which help stealth, pretty useful for BVR.It is not an attempt, the nozzle definitely improves the aft end LO characteristics of the Su-57, and in standard flight envelope Su-57 doesn't need to use TVC.
TVC is primarily used at high AoA and Post Stall region (mostly during the WVR fight) which means that nozzle stealth shaping is not useless.
Thanks for the info/data .Hm, what if this new engine ( Izd 177 ) is in fact replace for the first stage engine Izd 117/ AL-41F-1 and will give serial produced/operational Su-57's so far ,real supercruise capability ? Yury Slyusar told once that second stage engine Izdeliye 30 will not be integrated into serial produced Su-57's so far. Reason is simple, Izd 30 is completely new engine and requires some modifications and new details inside of the engine nacelles.
Not specifically about the Su-57 but thrust vector is quite useful in helping with trim drag in transonic flight and reduce control surface deflections which help stealth, pretty useful for BVR.
I think the engines can be equipped in any combination. The customer will decide what they needSo there is 177 w/o TVC and 177S with TVC ?
I don't know about that info regarding Yury Slyusar
It's significant enough that Lockheed was citing it as 1 of the 2 main reasons they retaining TVC for their A/F-X program.Sure, and such type of deflections are minimal, and will probably have minor effect, if any, on "RCS degradation". Su-57 is also using the LEVCONS for the supersonic trim drag with positive deflection in front of CG significantly improving Lift to drag ratio in supersonic region so the TVC deflection would be minimal, or even absent.
I know the requirement of the ATF program and the original definition of supercruise as flying on mil power above 1.5M (later degraded by common use into anything higher than 1M). I mean that the term is misleading, since the intent of this feature is clearly not to 'cruise', but typically to extend the duration of a high energy status for an air superiority fighter during a combat mission. Fuel consumption and engine stress is normally not worth it in a peacetime mission.It was a request of ATF.
YF22, YF23 and now F22 were or are clearly able to.
Agree, minimal TVC deflections would not have any substantial effects on the LO performance during egresion, the typical situation where rear-aspect RCS may be relevant. It is questionable to what extent deflection of aerodynamic surfaces is not a bigger factor than TVC in that regard.It is not an attempt, the nozzle definitely improves the aft end LO characteristics of the Su-57, and in standard flight envelope Su-57 doesn't need to use TVC.
TVC is primarily used at high AoA and Post Stall region (mostly during the WVR fight) which means that nozzle stealth shaping is not useless.
I wonder if he is being strict with that 'original' sense of the term as 'higher than 1.5M'. The thrust difference between Izd.117 and F119 alone is enough to be skeptic in that regard, but who knows.For example, we have obtained outstanding characteristics in the area of supersonic cruise and super-maneuverability», - the First Deputy Director General of Project and Research Scientific Center of Sukhoi Design Bureau, Mikhail Strelets, said."
Fine, so logically deflection of aerodynamic surfaces is more damaging to RCS than TVC. With two 'unconventional' options to trim, one on the rear hemisphere (TVC) and one on the frontal one (LEVCONS), the Su-57 has the options, at least on paper, to chose the one which is best for the situation, depending on what aspect is being exposed to enemy detection. Whether that is implemented on the flight controls or not is another issueIt's significant enough that Lockheed was citing it as 1 of the 2 main reasons they retaining TVC for their A/F-X program.
LEVCONS deflection would be frontal hemisphere. Using TVC while minimizing LEVCONS would have positive effect on RCS and thus preferred.
I wonder if he is being strict with that 'original' sense of the term as 'higher than 1.5M'. The thrust difference between Izd.117 and F119 alone is enough to be skeptic in that regard, but who knows.
A prosaic question: isn't the absence of TVC on Izd. 177 related to the upcoming T-75 flight?
Good idea and plan. With TVC there is no need to install 177/177S into Su-34/M(NVO). 177 for the Su-30SM2,Su-35S and for sure Su-57's produced and delivered so far.Installing can be done during overhaul process.According to this Chemezov says 177 will indeed be installed on VKS(?) Su-30, 35, 57, not clear if new, retrofit or both. 2 x 14,500 kgf izd. 177S for Su-30SM (and maybe Su-34?) and 2x 16,000 kgf izd.177 for Su-35 and (early?) Su-57 sounds very logical to me.
It's significant enough that Lockheed was citing it as 1 of the 2 main reasons they retaining TVC for their A/F-X program.
LEVCONS deflection would be frontal hemisphere. Using TVC while minimizing LEVCONS would have positive effect on RCS and thus preferred.