Yeah, the resolution of the simulation isn’t the best but to say that it is “extremely poor” is huge exaggeration especially when compared to other simulation that is available in public sector, unless you can rent an anechoic chamber it doesn’t really get better since they all based on mesh. Besides, even the physical model that Central Scientific Research Institute of the Aerospace Forces of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation ( NII VVKO) used for RCS prediction of F-35, F-18 …etc aren’t really that accurate to the real thing to be honest.
Blockquote
This thread has better images and explanation in regards to the workings of the Su-57 intake.
I have read that thread several times before, I still I don’t see how exactly you come up with the conclusion that the inlet shape is so wrong that the simulation is invalid. Especially when we consider that the slanted blocker will cause multi bounce reflection, then with RAM inside the inlet, the multi bounce will reduce reflection strength by -50dB due to multi bounce. So even if they manage to get the inlet shape 99% wrong, the reflection from there only contributed a small part in the total RCS
We first need to see how the gameplay with new Fox 3 goes. Adding such modern stuff isn’t good for a game and would be just useless for everyone who wants to enjoy top tier. Its just my opinion but war was always a race about who has the better weapons so its pretty hard to balance it. Cuz they always waant to be better then the other once. Most important is that there is not really a plane which is as strong as such a plane. Maybe as a boss fight but this won’t be added I’m sure.
being poor or good is relative, it hard to argue that something is of bad quality when there isn’t anything better. In this case, the even the physical model used by NII VVKO are quite far from the shape of the real plane
Yes the IRST “bulge” that has a very specific internal design made to mitigate the reflection of radio waves.
Really? The cockpit “strut”? You’re joking, right?
You say it as if it isn’t the exact same here…
Why would I not compare the two aircraft?
The F-22’s stealth performance is overall pretty bad. The F-35 holds its own in average RCS, though the F-22 can only be seen as ahead of it when you cherry-pick peak figures.
The Su-57 has an rcs of ~26dbsm, which is very comparable to the F-35’s frontal average of 25.6dbsm. What the F-35 excels in is peak readings and side / rearwards stealth.
That isn’t an Su-57, that’s a T-50. That airframe specifically was created almost a full decade before the first production Su-57 ever had air under its wings.
By all means, find an image that isn’t 13 years old. I dare you.
Those aren’t compressor blades on production models, it would be the inlet blocker specifically designed for the Su-57’s intake.
Even if the engine WERE exposed (which it isn’t as shown), you wouldn’t see compressor blades at all. It’s hard to take you seriously when you’re ignorant of the most basic fundamentals of a turbofan.
“Extremely classified” does not detract from the fact that there are near exact graphical models of these aircraft, with quite in-depth knowledge of the metallurgy and applique objects.
Yes, because you are definitely an expert in stealth technology, and those referenced models were definitely privy to the exact TOP SECRET data you don’t have access to and not made from pure speculation…
2 aerospace degrees, a decade in the military, pilot… I feel like I’m qualified enough to open PORSS and test a model.
By all means, can you explain to me how it would be any different? Sukhoi has released images and even diagrams of their geometrical radar blockers, and have extensive documentation on the composition of their RAM. There are images so close to the OLS-50M system that you can ese the inner workings of it.
I don’t think you understand that something saying “top secret” does not mean it’s entirely unknown. All it means is that the exact specifications to produce, use, or exploit it are compartmentalized and only shown to those with the proper clearance. That does not mean that the systems themselves and their physical attributes are simply blanked out like a poor Google Maps sensorship. The T-50s and Su-57 are displayed publicly on a very frequent basis, with 3 T-50s grounded with the express purpose of being display-pieces.
His argument is that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about and since it isn’t made plain and simple for him to see then it must simply be unknown to everyone else as well.
I’ve heard a rumor that ‘the famous photos of the F-22 with wing-mounted missiles show CATM-120s, and there’s no evidence that the F-22 can actually fire AIM-120s from its wings. Currently, wing-mounted missiles are only used for ferry purposes, and the feature to fire AAMs from the wings was canceled when mass production was halted.’ In fact, it’s difficult to find any records online of live-fire tests. While it’s certain that the missiles can be mounted, does anyone have documentation that can disprove this rumor?
