Hey I mean that’s completely valid point of view I mean America did produce radars for a long time and they did pump more money into radar development than Russians did in past 20 years
Coming from someone with a garbage Ivan jet as their gamertag, that’s extremely ironic.
@GNDM_Panzer @MiG_23M Let’s keep it cool guys we’re here to discuss comparison between su-57 and F22 I understand everybody has different viewpoints but let’s not attack each other for it
2 Likes
There is plenty of information around suggesting the Su-57 RCS is not impressive, and analysis by people who are experts in the field suggests 0.1 - 0.5 m^2, or about 1/2 that of an F-18
Eg Su-57 matches F-18 radar cross section, F-22 beats it by 5000 times
The visible screws and canopy bubbles have been noted - but also the engine compressor blades are visible through the inlet ducts for example - so it is reasonably safe to conclude that it is not in the same class as the F-22 in this regard.
1 Like
Lmfao I haven’t even name-called him yet. He’s not even worth that little energy. He can seethe about my dismissal of his intial disagreement all he wants.
CAESAR (CAPTOR AESA Radar) was the technology demonstrator programme. It was a conventional AESA radar:
CAPTOR-E refers to the ECRS family of radars (ECRS Mk 0, 1, 2) of which Mk 0 is in service and Mk 1 is due into service next year. The RAF decided to skip the earlier versions and is currently in the process of integrating an testing the Mk 2.
All the ECRS radars have a repositioned giving them azimuth limits of 100°, compared with 60° for conventional AESA radars.
2 Likes
Lmao yet
Ok, dude. Let me know when they point an actual production western radar at the Su-57 and get actual RCS data.
1 Like
You understand the same way they determine the RCS of a f-22 and F-35 is the what they used to determine the rcs of su 57
Thats not quite accurate. Part of the issue with stealth and radars is the radar itself can create a large reflector. This necessitates shaping of the AESA that could potentially degrade performance compared to a perfectly flat panel.
With that in mind i would argue the most powerful AESA on a fighter is likely the APG-82v1 found on F-15Es. It has to my knowledge the largest apeture and power combined with none of the drawbacks associated with stealth designs.
1 Like
Are the actual numbers available for the public to see, or do we just get the propaganda numbers?
So why are Typhoons currently in the process of being upgraded with them?
Which have routinely performed nearly as good as AESA. Whilst it does have some limitations associated with a mechanical radar. The reason for the delay in upgrading to AESA is because it was unneeded
Everything I know is that meteor is equal or maybe even superior to the R-37M which may or may not be pretty poor performing against high agility fighters and was originally designed for knocking out AWACS/tankers beyond the range of their escorts.
1 Like
RCS is measured in m². That’s what I mean by numbers. Simulations, while useful, rely on too many assumptions, especially regarding classified material applications.
ESPECIALLY ignores the ultra classified RAM’s on the US stealth machines
Needed to pull sick maneuvres at airshows
Yeah but not entire machine is covered in the RAM
Exactly! We just don’t know. It’s ok to not know. We can make educated guesses as mental exercises and try to figure out how they’d work in game, but anything beyond that is pointless.
2 Likes
You nor I know the extent to which any stealth jets are covered by RAM. I argue that atleast 90% of either F35 or F22 are covered by RAM. Everything except the canopy, and the exhausts.
The canopies however have ITO to help with stealth. I dont know if Russia or China employ ITO. I assume they do
1 Like
I can’t remember where I read but there was a document that said that the RAM was mostly used on the wing edges and intake and Im just saing basically at the points that you know the radar can bounce off