Looks like complete nonsense, sorry.
And how, after making 70 sorties in Sim EC on a plane with a typical Soviet HUD, did you miss this?
i dont know what and why you find nonsense
seems like the UK claim of 177km is correct, that number in the bottom left looks like its max possible range, idk how i missed this.
lets change this topic anyways, the whole story is quite a mess, theres sites saying its from su57(i am sure its not this case) whereas some say its su35. at one point a site says its from s300v and in the other it says it was from a r37m
the point is it wasnt from a su57 and cant even fit in su57 internally so is bassically not related to this topic
thanks for pointing that out
i saw the footage, the right side seems to be a radar screen sorting object based on their velocity (like PDV mode in game) as you can see ground clutter below a certain line
the red blip seems to be a enemy, and the green blip seems to be a friendly missile(as it seems to have more speed than the red blip). when the green blip is gone, the red blip seems to rapidly lose speed (could be a indicator that its shot down)
this is just my analysis and i am not saying that its a real footage
This is the maximum range at the current altitude and speed.It also depends on the target’s speed.Judging by the frame, the height is no more than 5000m
yeah i meant this, didnt completely state it
I’ll see what I can do on getting the same type of results. I’ll reserve this post to edit later.
Edit:
Ok, received some results today. 12GHz. Aircraft is entirely PEC.
Here’s the countour plot you wanted to check. Absolute minimum RCS happen near wing sweep angle (somehow), for the right wing @ -22.78 db. Engine inlets are also low points (expected from very distorted S-ducts). Overall picture is ±90 degrees off from the nose on the horizontal, ± 10 vertical. Since the radome tip is PEC and it’s a tip, it shows a spike from tip diffraction. Resolution on the analysis @ 10 degree per step on the horizontal and 5 degree step on the vertical (so a total 19x5 analysed points).
It’s a slightly different simulation, but the results are pretty much the same.
1 Like
the issue with sims like this is that they ignore small details such as panel gaps, and other surface defects, they are only showing the effect of design shape in an ideal world
Because the fighter jet’s nose cone is radar-transparent, and behind it, in the case of the Su-57, there is a radar antenna positioned without tilt, if I’m not mistaken. If your model takes this into account, then OK.
This could very well be real combat footage or footage from some exercises. It’s just that they show something being shot down at a distance far less than 100 km, and the comrade above presented it as proof of the mythical record-breaking shootdown at a distance of 217 km.
Su57 radar is indeed tilted, the non functioning prototypes in zhuhai airshow with only the radar frame, and the radomes going way back give it sense that it isnt
you can see the line in the radome in the above 2 pictures, thats how the radar is tilted
regerding the simulation, RAM is applied on the air cooling inlet, air intakes, radar blockers and the IRST, rest of the surface is purely reflective. However this simulation does not consider the bandpass frequency of the radome for both the F35 and the Su-57, however if it was modelled i believe su57 would come closer to f35 in terms of rcs due to its planar and smooth finish instead of the slotted irregular antennas found in f22/35
the thing is if we are considering frequencies of X band (8ghz) or below, these irregularity will barely have any effect, this is because a EM wave does not like to reflect from objects smaller than its wavelength. However something like a missile radar which uses Ku band frequencies, will effect the stealth of the plane in that case
To put it simply, make a 1080p video completely white, then in the middle put exactly 1 pixel of a grey colour. then upload it to youtube and watch it at 144p, this is what the X band radar would see against these panel gaps and surface defects
It is useless for him to explain something, He sees propaganda and lies everywhere.
i dont think so, atleast he was right in correcting me that the 217km kill was 177km kill
There is a lot of debate going on.Was it even a defeat
i have a hard time believing that a moving aircraft target remained stationary for the whole duration of the launch at 217km for minutes
the way range is calculated for kills for fighters here and sams seems to be differentiating yet the 217km is constant
regardless of what it was, seems like it wasn’t a su-57.
it wasnt constant, in the matter of 4 seconds, it reduced from 217 to 212km
and it definitely wasnt a su57
so the range where the aicraft died wasn’t at 217 and was significantly less as they flied towards the missile rather than the kill actually being from launch point to end
missile range is normally given at point of launch not point of impact, because that is what matters when considering if you should launch a missile
1 Like
nonono, 177km was the distance between the jet when the missile was launched
217km value was the max possible range of r37m at that altitude (which is low in this case as seen by cloudy weather in the footage)
so thats around 140-150km distance covered by the missile itself (educated guess)
so if i shoot a sam missile against a target that was 250km away but my missile travelled only 200km and i killed the target at 200km is that a 250km kill?
like i said i believe the difference between sam and air kills is in how people measure them however i am asking how do you measure these?
thank you for confirming that. then it is not the kill that is being talked about here