Daryl Hunt
Your Worst Nightmare
- Banned
- #1
No, The Su-57 Isn't 'Junk:' Six Features We like On Russia's New Fighter
Russia’s 5th generation fighter aircraft, formerly known as the T-50 and now officially named the Su-57, has been in the news a lot lately. India’s decision to finally walk away from the joint program could be a catastrophic blow to the jet’s future, which followed an abortive deployment to war-torn Syria late last February. Russia’s inability to afford decent sized production lots of the new jets and the aircraft’s ongoing engine saga also have taken their toll on the program. And above all else, the aircraft’s degree of low-observability (stealthiness) has long been in question, as it lacked many of the key features that define modern stealth fighters. But none of this conclusively means the Su-57 doesn’t have some redeemable qualities and features that are worth pointing out.
To some degree, the T-50/Su-57 is a misunderstood aircraft. The jet's lack of high-end low-observable design features doesn't mean it is irrelevant or even ineffective. Sukhoi designers have taken a 'balanced' approach to low-observability, whereby the aircraft's reduced radar signature from certain aspects becomes just another feature to be weighed against other design priorities. This very well may have been a necessity due to lack of stealthy materials science, manufacturing, and design expertise, but none-the-less the outcome is the same.
I have discussed how standoff weaponry has come into play in this equation as well, but other features have also been designed into the airframe with an apparent self-awareness of the fact that the aircraft will not be able to compete with U.S or even Chinese counterparts in terms of stealth alone. And considering how Russia's armed forces are organized and the battle doctrine behind that organization, being able to pierce deep into the most sophisticated integrated air defense networks during some sort of expeditionary operation isn't a top priority anyway.
I get asked a lot about the Su-57s level of 'stealth' in comparison to other fighter aircraft. From years of looking into this, and talking with countless people in the defense-aerospace field about their thoughts on the design, I would handicap the Su-57 as something between an International Roadmap Super Hornet or Silent Eagle and China's J-20, with it being closer to the former than the latter. But once again, stealth is just one ingredient of a complex cocktail that makes up an advanced fighter's overall capabilities set and ability to survive in various combat situations.
With all this in mind, here are five features we like on the Su-57, some of which are tailored to help overcome its lack of extreme signature reduction, at least to a certain degree.
Side Facing Cheek-Mounted Radars
The Su-57 has a feature that was long-promised for the F-22 but as of yet, has never been delivered—side-facing radars mounted below the cockpit on aircraft's 'cheeks.' These active electronically scanned array (AESA) X-band radars supplement the aircraft primarily nose-mounted X-band N036 Byelka (Squirrel) AESA radar. Supposedly these secondary radars have roughly a third of the transmit-receive modules as the jet's main radar.
At first glance, the utility of these radars is clear—they provide a far greater sensor field of view and thus enhance situational awareness for the Su-57's pilot. But beyond this the most basic of advantages, they allow the Su-57 pilot to execute a key tactic better than nearly any other fighter around. This tactic is usually referred to as "beaming."
Beaming is when a fighter turns 90 degrees away (perpendicular) to an enemy’s pulse doppler radar array. Because these types of radars use doppler shift to gauge a target’s relative velocity, and as such, they filter low relative velocity objects, like ground clutter, the beaming fighter, which is not moving towards or away from the enemy radar much, can enter the enemy radar’s 'doppler notch.'
This blind spot is where the radar’s velocity gate, which acts like a filter, sees a target at low enough relative motion from its perspective that it discounts it. So even though the enemy fighter may be moving at 500 mph, the right angle to the radar makes it only detect small amounts of closure. As a result, it throws this information out as it would a mountaintop. This is an especially useful tactic when the radar is positioned at a higher altitude than the beaming aircraft, and trying to lock up its target in a look-down-shoot-down scenario where ground clutter is prevalent.
The issue is that with a typically fixed AESA radar or mechanically scanned array, pulling off a beaming maneuver means the fighter doing so will lose its radar picture of the enemy it is trying to evade. Without third-party sensors feeding this data to the beaming fighter via data-link, its pilot will become blind to the tactical situation when it matters most. But what's worse is that any radar-guided missiles that have been fired from the now beaming fighter will not be able to receive mid-course updates, and thus those missiles' probability of kill will plummet, especially if fired off initially at long-range.
So fighters without cheek arrays, or novel swashplate like designs like those found on SAAB's JAS-39E/F Gripen and eventually on the Typhoon, and absence of engagement quality tracks provided by third-party sensors via data-link, the launching fighter will either have to take a more acute and less effective beaming angle in order to continue to update their missiles with their radar, or they will have to forget about updating them altogether.
Advanced AESA radars that are highly sensitive and run complex software have lessened the impact of beaming as a tactic to a limited degree. But it is still considered relevant, especially against opponents without high-end networking and surveillance support capabilities.
Considering the Su-57s lack of advanced stealth, you can see why having dedicated cheek arrays can be very useful as it can lower its detectability using extreme beaming tactics, especially at long ranges, while still actively guiding its missiles to its target.
Once again, advanced networking capabilities, especially those used by the U.S. and its allies, can lessen the effectiveness of beaming and notching in a densely surveilled battlespace that includes the presence of airborne early warning aircraft, surface and ground-based radars, and other fighter aircraft all feeding their information into a common picture that is distributed via data-link. But Russia doesn't benefit from this level of dynamic connectivity, nor do many of its potential adversaries. So including cheek mounted arrays on the Su-57 so that it can maintain situational awareness and targeting capabilities while beaming without external help makes a lot of sense.
The Su-57 is also said to incorporate L-band radar arrays blended inside its large maneuvering leading edge extensions. These radars are more for target discrimination and identification than anything else. The aircraft also has another X-band radar array in its 'stinger' tail for enhanced situational awareness, and possibly for future targeting with extremely agile 'lock-on after launch' missiles as well.
Infrared Search and Track
Directional Infrared Countermeasures System
Austere Airfields Welcome
3D Thrust Vectoring:
Unique Weapons Bay Configuration
This is a very long article. I posted just enough to get it started. I suggest everyone with interest go to the URL and read the whole thing. The SU-57 is the Best Gen 4.5 Fighter on the Planet. As the Author stated, is it a F-22? No. But it can take on and defeat almost anything else and maybe fight the F-35 at a distance long enough to close where it has the decided advantage. It's tough, easy to maintain, can operate off of unimproved runways and is on par with the full Tilt Silent Eagle F-15SE at almost half the cost. The downside is that the Engine needs to be replaced at a higher rate than the Western Engines and is not as dependable. If they can get this into more Air Shows, the rest of the world just might notice it and start buying it instead of the F-35 which would run the cost of the F-35 up instead of down. If you can get around it's short comings, it's a good alternative to the F-35.
Russia’s 5th generation fighter aircraft, formerly known as the T-50 and now officially named the Su-57, has been in the news a lot lately. India’s decision to finally walk away from the joint program could be a catastrophic blow to the jet’s future, which followed an abortive deployment to war-torn Syria late last February. Russia’s inability to afford decent sized production lots of the new jets and the aircraft’s ongoing engine saga also have taken their toll on the program. And above all else, the aircraft’s degree of low-observability (stealthiness) has long been in question, as it lacked many of the key features that define modern stealth fighters. But none of this conclusively means the Su-57 doesn’t have some redeemable qualities and features that are worth pointing out.
To some degree, the T-50/Su-57 is a misunderstood aircraft. The jet's lack of high-end low-observable design features doesn't mean it is irrelevant or even ineffective. Sukhoi designers have taken a 'balanced' approach to low-observability, whereby the aircraft's reduced radar signature from certain aspects becomes just another feature to be weighed against other design priorities. This very well may have been a necessity due to lack of stealthy materials science, manufacturing, and design expertise, but none-the-less the outcome is the same.
I have discussed how standoff weaponry has come into play in this equation as well, but other features have also been designed into the airframe with an apparent self-awareness of the fact that the aircraft will not be able to compete with U.S or even Chinese counterparts in terms of stealth alone. And considering how Russia's armed forces are organized and the battle doctrine behind that organization, being able to pierce deep into the most sophisticated integrated air defense networks during some sort of expeditionary operation isn't a top priority anyway.
I get asked a lot about the Su-57s level of 'stealth' in comparison to other fighter aircraft. From years of looking into this, and talking with countless people in the defense-aerospace field about their thoughts on the design, I would handicap the Su-57 as something between an International Roadmap Super Hornet or Silent Eagle and China's J-20, with it being closer to the former than the latter. But once again, stealth is just one ingredient of a complex cocktail that makes up an advanced fighter's overall capabilities set and ability to survive in various combat situations.
With all this in mind, here are five features we like on the Su-57, some of which are tailored to help overcome its lack of extreme signature reduction, at least to a certain degree.
Side Facing Cheek-Mounted Radars
The Su-57 has a feature that was long-promised for the F-22 but as of yet, has never been delivered—side-facing radars mounted below the cockpit on aircraft's 'cheeks.' These active electronically scanned array (AESA) X-band radars supplement the aircraft primarily nose-mounted X-band N036 Byelka (Squirrel) AESA radar. Supposedly these secondary radars have roughly a third of the transmit-receive modules as the jet's main radar.
At first glance, the utility of these radars is clear—they provide a far greater sensor field of view and thus enhance situational awareness for the Su-57's pilot. But beyond this the most basic of advantages, they allow the Su-57 pilot to execute a key tactic better than nearly any other fighter around. This tactic is usually referred to as "beaming."
Beaming is when a fighter turns 90 degrees away (perpendicular) to an enemy’s pulse doppler radar array. Because these types of radars use doppler shift to gauge a target’s relative velocity, and as such, they filter low relative velocity objects, like ground clutter, the beaming fighter, which is not moving towards or away from the enemy radar much, can enter the enemy radar’s 'doppler notch.'
This blind spot is where the radar’s velocity gate, which acts like a filter, sees a target at low enough relative motion from its perspective that it discounts it. So even though the enemy fighter may be moving at 500 mph, the right angle to the radar makes it only detect small amounts of closure. As a result, it throws this information out as it would a mountaintop. This is an especially useful tactic when the radar is positioned at a higher altitude than the beaming aircraft, and trying to lock up its target in a look-down-shoot-down scenario where ground clutter is prevalent.
The issue is that with a typically fixed AESA radar or mechanically scanned array, pulling off a beaming maneuver means the fighter doing so will lose its radar picture of the enemy it is trying to evade. Without third-party sensors feeding this data to the beaming fighter via data-link, its pilot will become blind to the tactical situation when it matters most. But what's worse is that any radar-guided missiles that have been fired from the now beaming fighter will not be able to receive mid-course updates, and thus those missiles' probability of kill will plummet, especially if fired off initially at long-range.
So fighters without cheek arrays, or novel swashplate like designs like those found on SAAB's JAS-39E/F Gripen and eventually on the Typhoon, and absence of engagement quality tracks provided by third-party sensors via data-link, the launching fighter will either have to take a more acute and less effective beaming angle in order to continue to update their missiles with their radar, or they will have to forget about updating them altogether.
Advanced AESA radars that are highly sensitive and run complex software have lessened the impact of beaming as a tactic to a limited degree. But it is still considered relevant, especially against opponents without high-end networking and surveillance support capabilities.
Considering the Su-57s lack of advanced stealth, you can see why having dedicated cheek arrays can be very useful as it can lower its detectability using extreme beaming tactics, especially at long ranges, while still actively guiding its missiles to its target.
Once again, advanced networking capabilities, especially those used by the U.S. and its allies, can lessen the effectiveness of beaming and notching in a densely surveilled battlespace that includes the presence of airborne early warning aircraft, surface and ground-based radars, and other fighter aircraft all feeding their information into a common picture that is distributed via data-link. But Russia doesn't benefit from this level of dynamic connectivity, nor do many of its potential adversaries. So including cheek mounted arrays on the Su-57 so that it can maintain situational awareness and targeting capabilities while beaming without external help makes a lot of sense.
The Su-57 is also said to incorporate L-band radar arrays blended inside its large maneuvering leading edge extensions. These radars are more for target discrimination and identification than anything else. The aircraft also has another X-band radar array in its 'stinger' tail for enhanced situational awareness, and possibly for future targeting with extremely agile 'lock-on after launch' missiles as well.
Infrared Search and Track
Directional Infrared Countermeasures System
Austere Airfields Welcome
3D Thrust Vectoring:
Unique Weapons Bay Configuration
This is a very long article. I posted just enough to get it started. I suggest everyone with interest go to the URL and read the whole thing. The SU-57 is the Best Gen 4.5 Fighter on the Planet. As the Author stated, is it a F-22? No. But it can take on and defeat almost anything else and maybe fight the F-35 at a distance long enough to close where it has the decided advantage. It's tough, easy to maintain, can operate off of unimproved runways and is on par with the full Tilt Silent Eagle F-15SE at almost half the cost. The downside is that the Engine needs to be replaced at a higher rate than the Western Engines and is not as dependable. If they can get this into more Air Shows, the rest of the world just might notice it and start buying it instead of the F-35 which would run the cost of the F-35 up instead of down. If you can get around it's short comings, it's a good alternative to the F-35.
