warbook1987

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Sep 22, 2021
Messages
1
Reaction score
2
Hi guys, this is what I think it could look like.. RVV-SD and RVV-MD in side bays, and a pair of Kh-59MK2 in the main weapons bay:


0f95c6f3f527e3c61b12e2551e844b3b.jpg


26574467992c3ac0519e309dcaae67fe.jpg


71e678f6d01db11c5a432f2d3032921b.jpg


bb28ba9c310e30bf983eb5ef228fc051.jpg


be1bbb6c697abf4bcfb2441dcc8a0e48.jpg


0482d138e18550a44873eda2d2af346a.jpg


483e19dfbc6e94bbb923351c15012e1b.jpg


41bbb4b1f51bf97dd0ae510f9a56b949.jpg
hello buddy :), I have a question, could you share your su 75 model ?? it's very nice and I would like to add it to the game ARMA 3 (only for my use), please write back
 

Saber

Long way up the mirror
Joined
Dec 6, 2017
Messages
49
Reaction score
60

The massive disparity in aperture size frankly makes a dual UV/SWIR band KS-U unlikely. I’m inclined to agree with @Trident that those two smaller apertures are instead LWR. Given that UOMZ is supplying the entire 101KS EO system, a SWIR array may be used by another component, such as the KS-O. I made a typo earlier; if the KS-U has an IIR function, then the KS-P landing camera would be unnecessary.

I literally just said that the two smaller apertures were LWR... the dual UV/SWIR band is indeed the larger aperture, with the imaging array operating in both spectrums, as SWIR, NIR. and UV are right next to each other in terms of spectrum.

It would make a lot more sense than for the system to be just UV, plus, these were specs and feature sheets that I believe were revealed like what, a decade ago with the first flight? Things can certainly change in that timeframe, it was recorded that the emitters for the defense station had indeed changed design several times.

Anyways, these are the types of products that I was talking about, imaging in 400 to around 1400nm, there are of course, nuances to this.




NII Electron is part of Ruselectronics, which is part of Rostec, UOMZ, which is the supplier for the electro-optical systems for the Su-57(though this could have changed in the background), is part of Schwabe Holding, which is also part of Rostec.

And on paralay, it was found through gov contract documentation for Electron to perform works related to PAK-FA, you can kinda start putting 2 and 2 together and it's rather unlikely looking that KS-U is just a UV imaging sensor for missile warning.
 

icyplanetnhc (Steve)

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
218
Reaction score
216
Website
aiaa.seas.ucla.edu
None of the photodetectors by themselves cover both the UV and SWIR bands; one is covering from 0.4-1.0 micron, and another covering from 0.95-1.65 micron. I've also not heard of a missile warning system in the NIR band. Perhaps you can design a lensing or mirror arrangement that allows a single aperture to use both chips, but now we're assuming that certain items must be found on a platform because the vendor is a contractor for that program. NG's and LM's electro-optical portfolio has both UV and IR products, but that doesn't mean individual systems like the AAR-47 would have combination of bands under their portfolios. A dual-band KS-U may be possible, but the arguments involve synthesizing contracts to try to determine the bands of specific sensors, frankly quite speculative.
 
Last edited:

Trident

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
1,274
Reaction score
767
Positioning with respect to the wing seems poor for that purpose (should be in the same plane or above).
 

icyplanetnhc (Steve)

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
218
Reaction score
216
Website
aiaa.seas.ucla.edu

Interview with the Director for International Cooperation and Regional Policy of Rostec State Corporation, Viktor Kladov.

One of the primary goals of the LTS is low operating costs, with the goal of matching the Gripen NG; it is claimed to be several times lower than the F-35, which Kladov states will be a primary reason for attracting foreign buyers. I guess we’ll see how it plays out.
 

timmymagic

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
117
Reaction score
227
One of the primary goals of the LTS is low operating costs, with the goal of matching the Gripen NG; it is claimed to be several times lower than the F-35, which Kladov states will be a primary reason for attracting foreign buyers. I guess we’ll see how it plays out.

With Lockheed on contract for per flight hour at $30k by 2023 and aiming for $25k by 2025 they must be out of their minds. Janes estimated that Gripen C was c3/5's of F-16 back in 2012. Gripen E won't be cheaper, it will in fact be more expensive. F-16's are c$20k per flight hour at present. If a Gripen E is less than $15k per flight hour I'd eat my hat...too many ludicrous claims from Saab are taken at face value I'm afraid...
 

Bhurki

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Messages
306
Reaction score
292
One of the primary goals of the LTS is low operating costs, with the goal of matching the Gripen NG; it is claimed to be several times lower than the F-35, which Kladov states will be a primary reason for attracting foreign buyers. I guess we’ll see how it plays out.

With Lockheed on contract for per flight hour at $30k by 2023 and aiming for $25k by 2025 they must be out of their minds. Janes estimated that Gripen C was c3/5's of F-16 back in 2012. Gripen E won't be cheaper, it will in fact be more expensive. F-16's are c$20k per flight hour at present. If a Gripen E is less than $15k per flight hour I'd eat my hat...too many ludicrous claims from Saab are taken at face value I'm afraid...
Quoting costs from US method of CPFH modelling doesn't do justice to aircraft in operation with other airforces.
US includes 'all' costs when calculating its fleetwise CPFH like basing, personnel etc rather than just O&M related to the aircraft itself.
This severely inflates CPFH for US since basing is almost always at more austere, far away places as compared to other countries. Stack on top the higher personnel costs, and the fact that some fleets require completely different kinds of maintenance architecture. Also, not to forget is the fleetsize that utilizes these special maintenance items might be small, further inflating the cost it imposes on every tail.
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
963
Reaction score
851
Well.. there is unfortunately no single standard method being agreed upon in calculating "operating cost" so everyone will have their own method and consequently their own numbers. arguing one number against another is kinda fruitless and unproductive.
 

Bhurki

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Messages
306
Reaction score
292
Well.. there is unfortunately no single standard method being agreed upon in calculating "operating cost" so everyone will have their own method and consequently their own numbers. arguing one number against another is kinda fruitless and unproductive.
Exactly, so comparing CPFH of a fleet in USAF to any other countries fleet cost is highly dubious.
 

jeffb

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
381
Reaction score
426
Well.. there is unfortunately no single standard method being agreed upon in calculating "operating cost" so everyone will have their own method and consequently their own numbers. arguing one number against another is kinda fruitless and unproductive.
Exactly, so comparing CPFH of a fleet in USAF to any other countries fleet cost is highly dubious.
Especially since everyone's looking for a buyer. It's like the mpg figures used to advertise cars.
 

tequilashooter

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 2, 2021
Messages
592
Reaction score
710
New radar to besides engines please.


UAC plans to show the new Checkmate fighter at foreign air shows

The Checkmate light single-engine fighter of the fifth generation is planned to be demonstrated to potential customers at exhibitions abroad, said the head of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) Yuri Slyusar.
"Judging by the visits of delegations to the pavilion (at MAX), the interest is very great. And, of course, we will now carry this plane to exhibitions if they return to the usual offline mode," Slyusar said in an interview with Vedomosti newspaper.
He confirmed plans to carry out the first flight of the new fighter in 2023.
"This aircraft as a platform implies both a two-seat, optionally manned, and unmanned versions. We hope that this approach and modification options will interest our key customer," said the head of the UAC, answering the question whether the Russian Defense Ministry will order Checkmate.
According to him, over time, the new Sukhoi aircraft may be equipped with a "second stage" engine for the Su-57. This "product 30" engine will allow the fighter to develop supersonic speed without afterburner.
 

paralay

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
245
Reaction score
381
Website
www.paralay.ru
"In the minimum configuration, the radar with AESA allows you to attack up to 6 targets and escort 30 air and 2 land / sea targets" (from the article) The Zhuk-AE radar has such characteristics
Presumably, H036 accompanies 60 targets and simultaneously fires at 12 - 16 targets
 

Attachments

  • Part8_13-L.jpg
    Part8_13-L.jpg
    166 KB · Views: 32
Last edited:

Scar

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Apr 25, 2019
Messages
156
Reaction score
329
No way NIIP will allow NIIR to this tasty and huge pie. I can bet it will be N036 derivative, especially if to speak about the cheapest and the most numerous version of Checkmate.
 

tequilashooter

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 2, 2021
Messages
592
Reaction score
710
What new radar do you mean and what for? To make it more expensive while it's supposed to be as cheap as possible? Derivative of N036 will be more than enough.
LTCC modules seem cheap and efficiently better, The Su-57 besides new engines is getting new avionics. I didnt think the Su-57 would get a internal hypersonic missile or that the LTS would possibly use 2nd stage engines but here we are. I rather prefer new radars and rather if that happens or not one can only dream.:(
 

FighterJock

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
2,000
Reaction score
850
What new radar do you mean and what for? To make it more expensive while it's supposed to be as cheap as possible? Derivative of N036 will be more than enough.
LTCC modules seem cheap and efficiently better, The Su-57 besides new engines is getting new avionics. I didnt think the Su-57 would get a internal hypersonic missile or that the LTS would possibly use 2nd stage engines but here we are. I rather prefer new radars and rather if that happens or not one can only dream.:(

Anyone know what the problem is with the current Su-57 avionics? And why it is getting new avionics, are the current systems not good enough. :confused:
 

Scar

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Apr 25, 2019
Messages
156
Reaction score
329
What new radar do you mean and what for? To make it more expensive while it's supposed to be as cheap as possible? Derivative of N036 will be more than enough.
LTCC modules seem cheap and efficiently better, The Su-57 besides new engines is getting new avionics. I didnt think the Su-57 would get a internal hypersonic missile or that the LTS would possibly use 2nd stage engines but here we are. I rather prefer new radars and rather if that happens or not one can only dream.:(
LTCC modules seem nonexistent, ATM. The main goal of LTS is to be affordable in development, production and service. So no risky solutions, waste of time and extra-costs.
 

tequilashooter

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 2, 2021
Messages
592
Reaction score
710
What new radar do you mean and what for? To make it more expensive while it's supposed to be as cheap as possible? Derivative of N036 will be more than enough.
LTCC modules seem cheap and efficiently better, The Su-57 besides new engines is getting new avionics. I didnt think the Su-57 would get a internal hypersonic missile or that the LTS would possibly use 2nd stage engines but here we are. I rather prefer new radars and rather if that happens or not one can only dream.:(

Anyone know what the problem is with the current Su-57 avionics? And why it is getting new avionics, are the current systems not good enough. :confused:
KRET and RTI stated they are 10 years behind the west in MMIC technology and that radar goes all the way back to 2009. Upgrade is needed for the mid 2020s which I am hoping more information is disclosed on the LTS as it is for the Su-70. Never a boring day with sukhoi.
 
Top