Sukhoi T-75 LTS (CheckMate)

Colonial-Marine said:
Upgraded over the already revised design that has been around since last year? Do you know of any notable changes?

Yes, I suppose building another mock-up wouldn't actually help anything.
Click to expand...

New wing, new radome for starters, maybe more tapering along the spine as well.
 
I was wondering why Sukhoi went quiet in regards to the SU-75, I am liking the look of the new design of the Checkmate and like others on this thread cannot wait to see it fly.
 
India said no to the Su-57 when Russia tried to co-develop it, so India might or might not purchase the Su-75 but I suppose we will have to wait and see what happens.
 
FighterJock said:
India said no to the Su-57 when Russia tried to co-develop it, so India might or might not purchase the Su-75 but I suppose we will have to wait and see what happens.
Click to expand...
And they went on and bought the inherently inferior Rafale in stead just because it was urgent. I'm not against rip off the Rafale purchase by the way, it was just wrong to cancel Su-57 participation and then think they can replace it with modernized 4th gen fighters. They should've replaced the MKI with Su-57, now they have too many projects on their hands that even if they are realized they will be too little too late. I've even read that they didn't even pay for the development of FGFA. They were imo a bit arrogant to demand too many changes and also think they can get away with not contributing to the programme.

If they had continued with the programme, they could've gained the technological upper hand against PAF much earlier. They could've accepted the base capabilities of the aircraft and had a local assembly or maybe even a production line. Even if it is clearly not a true 5th gen (4+ with some LO by my standards), its capabilities are not that bad either.
 
Alifzero said:

ИЗ №2800101

new.fips.ru new.fips.ru

Patent of Checkmate's landing gear (and other stuff?).
Google translate is not working for me. So landing gear is the only part that i kinda understand that the patent talking about
Click to expand...

One interesting thing about this patent (if I understood it correctly ) is that they don’t seem to be too happy with the maintenance and manufacturability of Su-57 - or at least they weren’t too happy. Below:

The technical solutions adopted in the analogues do not allow to ensure a sufficient level of operational manufacturability and are characterized by increased labor intensity and maintenance time. There is no convenient approach to the niches of the main supports (supports) of the chassis (PSO), where the maintenance units are located. The process of installation and dismantling of the engine is time-consuming and is provided with the use of additional devices for the upper surfaces. The production hatches have a large number of fasteners characterized by the most time-consuming process of opening/closing hatches, which leads to an increase in the duration of dismantling and installation of service hatch covers. The dense layout of the blocks and assemblies on board the aircraft leads to the need to dismantle neighboring blocks and units during maintenance and troubleshooting. To dismantle the power plant, partial dismantling of power elements (section of the frame) is required.

The technical task aimed at achieving the invention is to eliminate the shortcomings of aircraft known from the level of technology and to create a light tactical aircraft characterized by ease of use and with the least time-consuming and lengthy aircraft maintenance operations.

The technical result of the claimed invention is to improve the convenience and safety of technical operation and maintenance of a light tactical aircraft, including in troubleshooting, as well as reducing the time for these activities.
Click to expand...
 
snne said:
And they went on and bought the inherently inferior Rafale in stead just because it was urgent. I'm not against rip off the Rafale purchase by the way, it was just wrong to cancel Su-57 participation and then think they can replace it with modernized 4th gen fighters. They should've replaced the MKI with Su-57, now they have too many projects on their hands that even if they are realized they will be too little too late.
Click to expand...

India said when they cancelled it in 2018 the performance of the SU-57 didnt live up to India's technical requirements and that's why they cancelled it. According to the India Business Standard at the time low-observable characteristics were its biggest technical shortcoming.
 
WatcherZero said:
India said when they cancelled it in 2018 the performance of the SU-57 didnt live up to India's technical requirements and that's why they cancelled it. According to the India Business Standard at the time low-observable characteristics were its biggest technical shortcoming.
Click to expand...
Do Rafale, Tejas Mk.2, TEDBF and possibly first couple dozen AMCAs have lower RCS than even the current Su-57? I'm not even talking about how the Felon would be ready and would've already gone through the Su-57M mod.

Yes, it has inferior LO characteristics compared to true 5th gen designs but the aircraft itself isn't that bad. It has long range, deep internal weapon bays, long range sensors amd faster cruise speed (or high supercruise with AL-51F1). It also has some degree of RCS reduction which is a big bonus compared to 4+ (or as I call it, modernized 4th gen) arcraft.

They wanted out for some reason and "not meeting requirements" was admittedly just the perfect excuse for them.
 
Last edited:
They want their own strong aviation industry. They have to start somewhere. Another is that we are putting a lot of pressure across the globe to decrease Russian weapon export sales. Even us buying out stocks of soviet weapons to send to Ukraine has an impact in this.
 
TMA1 said:
They want their own strong aviation industry. They have to start somewhere. Another is that we are putting a lot of pressure across the globe to decrease Russian weapon export sales. Even us buying out stocks of soviet weapons to send to Ukraine has an impact in this.
Click to expand...
Hence:
snne said:
They should've replaced the MKI with Su-57, now they have too many projects on their hands that even if they are realized they will be too little too late. I've even read that they didn't even pay for the development of FGFA. They were imo a bit arrogant to demand too many changes and also think they can get away with not contributing to the programme.
Click to expand...
 
If you guys want to debate what constitutes a 5th generation fighter or want to try to figure out why the FGFA deal actually collapsed - there are other threads for that.

Acatomic said:
One interesting thing about this patent (if I understood it correctly ) is that they don’t seem to be too happy with the maintenance and manufacturability of Su-57 - or at least they weren’t too happy. Below:
Click to expand...

I suspect that this paragraph refers to a number of different types of modern aircraft. A big push with the LTS is to have rapid turn-around times, limited airfield infrastructure, and ease of maintenance (without extensive specialised training)... so they might be trying to outdo several 4th generation designs as well.

If I understood it correctly, one of the advertised features was having diagnostics and predictive maintenance actually carried onboard the airframe (i.e. the maintenance scheduling can be managed by an onboard computer)!

So the idea that it also includes a quick drop-out engine bay, and arrangement of systems to allow opening a few large panels for most tasks (rather than a more complex strip down), is quite consistent with this overall goal.
 
Avimimus said:
I suspect that this paragraph refers to a number of different types of modern aircraft. A big push with the LTS is to have rapid turn-around times, limited airfield infrastructure, and ease of maintenance (without extensive specialised training)... so they might be trying to outdo several 4th generation designs as well.

If I understood it correctly, one of the advertised features was having diagnostics and predictive maintenance actually carried onboard the airframe (i.e. the maintenance scheduling can be managed by an onboard computer)!

So the idea that it also includes a quick drop-out engine bay, and arrangement of systems to allow opening a few large panels for most tasks (rather than a more complex strip down), is quite consistent with this overall goal.
Click to expand...
This was also a big part of the F-35 contract. No part could be hidden behind something else, they all had to be the first thing once you opened a panel.
 
As seen on some previous pics intake shape changed as well

In the 2021 version of the project, it is divided into two channels and its lower corner part slightly protrudes in the direction of flight. On the model, which UAC brought to Riyadh, there is no such division, the air channel is one without a bulkhead at the flow inlet, and the bottom of the air intake is straight.
 

Attachments

  • su-75-model-751-board-number-820x410.jpg
    su-75-model-751-board-number-820x410.jpg
    50.2 KB · Views: 155
  • su-75-21-24.jpg
    su-75-21-24.jpg
    58.7 KB · Views: 159
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom