with the powerful AESA radar’s on contemporary aircraft like the f22 and f35, a large IRST dome such as the one on the SU57 actually does cause a massive issue with RCS, as both the dome itself does reflect radar in a larger amount, and the fact that the IRST will likely be active in any combat scenarios as we have seen in the past in the war that shall not be named and Syria.
this compounds the fact that the published RCS is .1m-1m, comparable to an f18 in frontal RCS, this was published outright by sukhoi mind you.
Stop writing nonsense.AESA radars are not able to identify individual elements on the airframe. Sukhoi’s patent is not 100% reliable RCS. Moreover, the average RCS is indicated there, and not the minimum as some idiots attribute to the F-18, although its Average RCS is 5m^2
take a mirrored ball into a dark room and shine a flash light at it, then take an angled mirrored and shine a light at it, that is how radar is reflected with balls at its most basic principle, with or without RAM a sphere will always reflected radar waves back at the emitting aircraft as it scatters light, and thus the microwaves used in radar, it makes a HUGE difference and is the reason why you rarely if ever see rounded shapes on the front of stealth aircraft, if you could get away with a ball mounted IRST in aircraft dont you think the US, the original creator of stealth aircraft, would use that instead of the much more expensive system found on the bottom nose of the F35?
Considering RAM, does the golf ball reflect a lot?
And your example is not correct.If you take a mirror ball, the light will be in all directions, and not at the radiation source
1: Yes if the radar source was matched to be the same scale as said gold ball, as RAM reduces and dims the reflected microwave radiation, not eliminate it completely
2: thats the point, a ball reflects light in all directions, it is unable to deflect microwaves, aka light, in a controlled fashion required for stealth, thus reflecting it back at the radiation source as well as anything within roughly 180 degrees of the radiation source
stealth requires the ability to precisely control where microwaves go when reflecting, its why any stealth aircrafts radar dish is angled upwards, your not trying to absorbed the energy in a radar beam, but reflect it anywhere other then where it came from, giving the emitting aircraft less to no returns, a sphere cannot do that because spheres have infinite sides, thus infinite ways for the radar beam to reflect
IRST is much more limited in range then radar, as for ECM, it is not impossible for an AESA radar to burn through an aircrafts ECM, not to mention many missiles have the ability to simply home in on a jamming aircraft, thus why the f35 has a deployable ECM device that is towed behind the aircraft if it is ever acquired by an enemy aircraft
What you’ve stated about stealth suggests you’re reading wikipedia incorrectly. The truth is much more complex than anyone has stated. Russia’s Su-57 is no doubt a 5th generation fighter proper and fits in an entirely different (better) category of stealth than anything else that isn’t gen5. There is low observable (LO) (F/A-18E block 3+, Rafales, KF-21, etc)… and then there is ‘very’ low observable (VLO) which solely belongs to F-22, F-35, J-20, Su-57 currently. I am aware of others but we are discussing proper fighters.
The ranges an Su-57 will be found frontally on radar will be low enough so as to alert both aircraft to each others positions by other sensors prior to any possible radar acquisitions. This is sufficient stealth.
First of all, no im not reading off of wikipedia, as most of the details im citing are common sense based off how light reflects off of objects in the microwave spectrum, and the fact that you have made several claims that are factual garbage such as : “The ball never reflects light back to the radiation source, it will always distort the light.That is, the reverse radiation will be strong”., which is physically impossible mind you.
second of all it has been proven through several studies that the shape and material of the su57 is outright unstealthily in its current iteration (see weapons bay not sealing, engine fans being visible, and subpar materials like wooden screws
Much of what you have ‘stated’ to counter my points are old talking points by propagandists before the war trying to give off a ‘russia strong’ image, the su57 is at best low observability, and at worst a non functional vanity project that has never been tested on the front lines of any combat scenario
This is all nonsense. The F-22 has worse exposed fasteners of similar type all over the cockpit area. This isn’t a huge concern like you think. All of what you have stated is either ground models, non production, or otherwise not a flight worthy serial aircraft afaik.
Everything in your last post is exactly that. Post specifics and I’ll debunk them.
1, both of you have identical user icons so my b,
2, the su57’s most famous images of the exposed screws where when it was airborn, aka flight worthy serial aircraft, as noted in this image, the most famous one
good image on the su57’s engine ducts,
you can see the compressors blades, not ideal for stealth
no other stealth aircraft, not even the j20, did that during their prototyping phase, the su57 STILL lacks any form of covering for its engines, it entered production in 2022 as per russian sources
