If you are referring to the IAFs famously erm… hazhazard maintenance approach… then I see what you mean.
Indian Air Force having issues with maintenance is quite a notorious problem.
1 Like
R-37s are outranged by AIM-174s, but im not sure if the f22 carries them. It does carry the AIM-260 which does also outrange the R-37. And it gets the f22 launch platform so it will have the first shot unlike the su-57 as its rcs is 1m3 and the f22s is .001 m3 (1000x difference) (yes this is leaked classified documents pls dont ban me). In game stealth is hard to implement like we’ve seen with the F-117. Yes the 57 has more payload due to having 2 more internal and 8 external hardpoints, but quality over quantity
Also academic (dis)honesty is quite interesting.
It feels like an alien ecosystem whenever my research has me consult chinese papers. Their standards seem quite different from german/hungarian/japanese/spanish institutions and publishers.
1 Like
Not to be that guy but the 260 is unproven, it is a completly new missile design and the US first true purpose built BVRAAM since the AIM-54 (RIM 174 is an SM-6) The fact it is due for entry into service this year and there are no images of it, no test shots and no actual data. Leads me to believe they are not as close to entering service as the USAF and USN would like hence the need to rush the RIM-174 into service for the USN as they do not have a competitor to the PL-15.
R-37M however is in service it is being deployed and we have actual combat data on this system. It currently has the longest recorded A2A missile kill.
You can add even more nonsense. As well as RCS calculations based on photographs
there are no images bc it is still classified and carried out on secure AFB. there have been many test shots already, dozens iirc. there is no actual data becuase it is classified
1 Like
Those are not leaked documents, just propaganda numbers from LM for the F22, and unreliable simulations done on Ansys HFSS (a software primarily made for antennas and small electronics) using crude 3d models and a bunch of either wrong (metal skin, metal canopy) or unknown parameters for the SU57/J20/F35/Rafale RCS considerations. Oh yeah, and a very suspicious patent containg an average RCS (why would secret RCS information be on a patent? Yeah, makes no sense).
1 Like
By whom and how is this confirmed?
I wonder how they’ll handle the DIRCM on the Felon, probably just like the Ka-52s I’d assume?
And so could an X-29 :P
S500 isn’t for AA duty. It’s primarily a missile defense system like THAAD.
1 Like
The S-500 is produced in two versions for air defense and missile defense…
Also, individual systems of the S-500 complex are integrated into the S-400 as ready-made solutions to improve the characteristics of the S-400…
that story can be easily disputed
1 Like
the claim comes from an Indian tabloid
1 Like
Talking about double whammy
Su-57 has a very very similar rcs to the f35 and a bit worse than the f22
The copers out there saying su57 has a rcs of super hornet (1m2) and f22 of rcs of whatever 0.0001m2 have no idea what they are saying
First of all minimum rcs of CLEAN f18 is 1 m2
The average rcs of t50 (prototype variant of su57, without ram, radar blocker and exposed metal parts) os between 0.1 to 1 m2
Minimum rcs of f22 is 0.0001 m2 but it is only achieved at a small area, smaller than the rcs itself a bit borsight to the left
In reality achieving that it near impossible
Average rcs of f22 is -10 dBsm or 0.1 m2 based on various simulation accounting it’s RAM coatings too
TLDR su57 stealth is very similar to f22 but sill f22 has a upper hand
It’s not as different as claimed difference of a super hornet and f22s optimal minimum rcs
1 Like
For fun, here’s a simulation for the F22 using perhaps the most common of the RCS simulation software, one which has been seen in topic before.
As someone who has had a tad of experience with 3D modelling, I can affirm the F22 model chosen for the simulation is of way higher fidelity (overall shape, but even then it has innacuracies, such as the stuff inside the splitter plates) to the real thing than the models I saw on those other analysis.
Anyhow, as usual we see a bunch of simplifications to try isolating shape alone, aircraft is entirely metallic to check for geometry alone, no RAM/RAS interference. Welp, do we see the claimed -9000 gorillion DB all around the aircraft? As one would expect, that did not happen.
So, the settings on the simulation were:
- 8GHz
- Aircraft is made entirely of gold
- Frontal arc of ± 60 deg horizontal, ± 30 deg vertical, in 10 deg steps.
- Excitation: Incident planar wave
- Boundaries: Perf E
TLDR: minimum frontal was -17.53 db (0.017 sqm), max +10.33 db (10.78 sqm).
4 Likes
I didnt see this so late reaply. And no the claim and Radar track are online you can see both.
Further more there is an efficacy report on the VVS and how dangerous the R-37M is to UA aviation produced by the British MoD research and evaluation division.