• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Sukhoi Su-57 / T-50 / PAK FA - flight testing and development Part II

LMFS

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Mar 19, 2019
Messages
39
Reaction score
43
The video above,starting to turn from 3:36 till 3:55.
360°/19s
19º/s is nothing stellar at low altitude, but we don't know fuel load, start and finish altitude and more importantly start and finish speed. We also dont know how hard was the pilot going on the stick and throttle... in general I very much doubt the pilots are going to demonstrate the ultimate turning characteristics of the plane at an airshow, Russians don't even specify the empty weights of their fighters...
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,467
Reaction score
283
According to forums.airforce.ru, it seems, that the Kh-59MK2 ALCM (MAKS 2015) for the Su-57 might have the new designation "Kh-69", so it won't get confused with the former Ch-59MK2 Owod-MK2 (MAKS 2009). :confused:
View: https://twitter.com/Sneekser/status/1302219552739262464
Is it me or does the X-69 look rather like a lengthened Storm Shadow/SCALP stealthy cruise missile without the air intake? it certainly looks like it from certain angles.

 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
11,717
Reaction score
1,841
Wish list or actually in-progress procurement attempt?
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
11,717
Reaction score
1,841
If Algeria were to go for a future purchase of the Su-57 they should wait until the Su-57M is ready for export.
They may think that there is a narrow window of opportunity to get a good deal, including a long term in-depth support package, off the Russians.
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
23
Hmm sorry if repost.. but. This one is rare.

an RCS testing in Voronezh.
I've seen another one from Voronezh as well but I can't find it at the moment (may have been a FLANKER even). You can tell it's Voronezh due to the lack of trees (this is looking southeast) and the circular mounting pad. Russia's other major RCS range at Tver is significantly different. Pretty sure I had a satellite image of an Su-57 at Voronezh at one point.
 

Trident

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
965
Reaction score
173
The Flanker image from that range can be found in an article summarizing Sukhoi's RCS reduction efforts that was posted online years ago. I have the Su-57 photo too, but don't remember where I got it.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,805
Reaction score
247
I just found this video, seems to be a translated version of a video already posted in youtube but in Russian, I haven't seen the whole thing, but they make some bold claims, I don't think necessary ones.
I haven't watched the whole thing yet, but the first "bad translation" I picked up is when they're in the back of the AN-12 he says "we're at 30,000 ft." No you're not. If you were, you would be freezing and passed out. It's safe to say that was supposed to be 3,000 ft. Also, of course they will make bold claims, all weapons manufacturers do that, it's called marketing. I'm just watching it for the cool video of the T-50/Su-57 in flight. ;)

Edit 1: LOL, OK, they compare the Su-57 to the F-35. Apparently they have amnesia regarding the F-22. Probably because the F-22 was designed so long ago and they're just getting those capabilities. I guess the F-22 is also mentally stealthy. Oh, OK, they finally got to the F-22.

Edit 2: The T-50 can fly low! lol. It then flies over at around 100 to 150 ft above the ground and the announcer states it flew 15 ft above the ground.

Edit 3: Apparently the Russian designer doesn't understand the U.S. High Low Mix of fighters. There is a lot of boasting without evidence. "Note that the airplane is the Su-57, because if you add 35 to 22 it's 57 and this airplane is better than both." Yeah, some of the comments are that silly.
 
Last edited:

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
1,469
Reaction score
472
" Yeah, some of the comments are that silly".

Almost a requirement these days, possibly one of those areas where politics is so contentious and therefor not wanted here.
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,281
Reaction score
2,988
To be fair, the chief designers of Su-57, its engine etc can hardly go on National TV and say, "Yeah, its a bit crappy compared to the F-22/F-35 but hey its the best we could do". Don't think that'd be a good look in Putin's Russia....
 

Dr.Snufflebug

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Sep 14, 2020
Messages
4
Reaction score
5
I haven't watched the whole thing yet, but the first "bad translation" I picked up is when they're in the back of the AN-12 he says "we're at 30,000 ft." No you're not. If you were, you would be freezing and passed out. It's safe to say that was supposed to be 3,000 ft. Also, of course they will make bold claims, all weapons manufacturers do that, it's called marketing. I'm just watching it for the cool video of the T-50/Su-57 in flight. ;)
In the original Russian-language video from TV Zvezda that aired in 2018, he says at around 06:20 "our height above sea level is 1000 meters" (высота над уровнем моря тысяч метров), ie just over 3000 feet. The translator inexplicably decides to invent a number an order of magnitude higher...

Edit 2: The T-50 can fly low! lol. It then flies over at around 100 to 150 ft above the ground and the announcer states it flew 15 ft above the ground.
The original Russian narrator/host says at 17:42 "about 5 meters" (около пяти метров), so about 50 feet, certainly not 15. Another nonsensical "translation" that completely changes the number stated. In addition they're actually higher than 50 feet in the accompanying footage, but they could conceivably have dipped that low.

As for the rest, it's just headache inducing. The translation is below all reasonable standards, and it amazes me that this is at least semi-official. The original host/narrator is somewhat annoying as it is, and with this bad and oftentimes entirely misleading translation into English it just gets even worse.

edit: Sorry, my bad, I somehow messed up in my own calculations (meters to feet and vice versa isn't something I instinctively know, being entirely engulfed in metrics) and I mistakenly converted *15* meters to feet, not 5 as the guy originally said. So it turns out that part of the translation was at least accurate, I admit, as 5 meters is about 16½ feet.

And conversely, that it is indeed an (original) exaggeration, at least vis-a-vis the footage we're seeing. And as noted, it's just skillful piloting to keep a plane in level flight real close to a long, flat runway. It doesn't have all that much to do with the plane itself, and it is irrelevant in most "real life" situations (except perhaps sea skimming, but that's the job of ASMs, not the planes themselves, not since the Falklands).

Ahem:
 
Last edited:

Avimimus

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
76
There is a lot of boasting without evidence. "Note that the airplane is the Su-57, because if you add 35 to 22 it's 57 and this airplane is better than both."
Okay, you have to admit that is a little bit hilarious!

P.S. The translators being bad with numbers reminds me of someone doing the voice over for a reasonably accurate video on ships ...except for the fact that the narrator read 'kts' as kilo-knots...
 

Ejajjs

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Messages
22
Reaction score
69

LMFS

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Mar 19, 2019
Messages
39
Reaction score
43
Edit 3: Apparently the Russian designer doesn't understand the U.S. High Low Mix of fighters. There is a lot of boasting without evidence. "Note that the airplane is the Su-57, because if you add 35 to 22 it's 57 and this airplane is better than both." Yeah, some of the comments are that silly.
Well, Strelets just said that it the name was not meant to refer the US fighters, but as a matter of coincidence 57 = 22 + 35, and that relates to the comments he made before about it being capable both as air superiority and strike fighter due to its layout / internal weapons volume advantage. A perfectly valid claim IMHO

As to Egorov, he is a journo doing what journos do, the only thing that I find regrettable is that he has the chance of talking to Strelets or Marchukov and cannot manage to make questions that are a bit more interesting. Nevertheless, listening the top technical guys talking about the plane and its systems is very interesting as there are always some bits of information and insight that can be taken.
 

TR1

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Aug 12, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
28
To be fair, the chief designers of Su-57, its engine etc can hardly go on National TV and say, "Yeah, its a bit crappy compared to the F-22/F-35 but hey its the best we could do". Don't think that'd be a good look in Putin's Russia....
That wouldn't be a good look in anyone's America either.

In fact most military themed TV segments in the US make Zvezda look downright tame.
 

helmutkohl

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
206
Reaction score
200
Such a nice plane. But please, please, please ... stop with that pixelated paint job. It ruins everything.
seems like the Mi-26? next to it also has the same scheme.
will this be the standard on production Su-57s?
 

AGS-1787

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
8
Reaction score
5
So my humble opinion is that as an airplane the su-57 as an "airframe" is more advanced that the f-22. Is it more effective as a combat machine than the raptor? it is debatable. It looks like it has more wing area than the f-22, which gives it several advantages over the other stealth jets, especially the f-35. Now the question is how draggy it becomes when turning? will it have an excellent sustained turn rate? How draggy it becomes when approaching post-stall maneuvers? I always wondered why they don't display the jet taking off from a complete stop and instead choose to do a rolling takeoff, the video mentioned before gives a hint why; Sukhoi don't want to reveal the take off distances yet.

The su-57 has several aerodynamic features missing from the f-22 and f-35; Levcons, full moving tails, the leading edge slats seem to also move independently to aid roll, and tvc that aids yaw. One thing I haven't seen the su-57 do is a high-speed high g turn, which makes me think that Sukhoi still has not lifted the g-restrictions for the jet. The f-22 does not seem to have a problem doing high-speed maneuvers. This brings to the question the structural soundness of the layout Sukhoi picked for the su-57.

Stealth is a hotly debated subject, to me, it looks like they took a practical approach rather than going for perfection, they seem to be building something easy to repair instead of having to bring an expert to do coating repairs. One thing that looks apparent from seeing the prototype is that they have big composite panels and the latest production airplane seems to be very smooth and with fewer panels than for example the j-20.

They did mention in the video that the su-57 has several receiving antennas through the body to aid detection of other aircraft, so far we know it has 3 radars on the nose, that is something the raptor was supposed to get. So I think if Sukhoi doesn't cheapen the avionics and the do a good job they have the chance of making a su-27 2.0 where the su-57 becomes a more advanced version and helps create a family of airplanes like the su-30, su-34 etc.
 

tanino_it

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Dec 2, 2019
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
QUOTE:
Stealth is a hotly debated subject, to me, it looks like they took a practical approach rather than going for perfection, they seem to be building something easy to repair instead of having to bring an expert to do coating repairs. One thing that looks apparent from seeing the prototype is that they have big composite panels and the latest production airplane seems to be very smooth and with fewer panels than for example the j-20".

Completely agree.

It is also clear that the maintenance / hour of a 5 generation aircraft is complex, expensive and suffers from low and high temperatures. I am sure chre this was one of the basic requirements for the Su-57, as per Russian tradition.

I would very much like to discuss now how much the -DB (-10, -15?) of the pre-series (looking at the surfaces, the few rivets of 50002 compared to the first evaluations made with the prototypes.

The answer I believe is in the range of the new A2A missile.
 

TR1

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Aug 12, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
28
Last edited:
Top