When a simple question unsettles someone, they usually answer with another.
2 Likes
I find it funny that people argue about a plane that is fresh from the factory with everything classified like they got secrete knowledge all we can assume is the engineers know what they are doing and the plane is built well enough.
Same thing was happening about Chinese jet fighters and then that thing happened and no one makes joke anymore. Assume it will work and let the snail guess how the plane works that is all we can do unless some good real information gets out which there will be little. Best info we get is export information because well to sell something people need to know something works.
3 Likes
You realize that radar cross section of this plane is estimated to about 0.5 square meters in ideal conditions and russia never had a high production quality in anything, not to mention that old polish radars see this plane when its in air above Kaliningrad while F-35 is invisible to them.
B-2 has way smaller cross section and its old and big.
Sure in WT it should be in ideal state just like every other vehicle should be but even then its not as stealthy.
This “fresh from the factory” aircraft has already been used for 4 years in a conflict that cannot be discussed here.
2 Likes
This just proves that you don’t know anything the Su-57 or how RCS works. 0.5m^2 for what aspect? What angles? What wavelength? What polarization?
Where did you get these estimates from? Quora, Reddit ir Sukhoi themselves?
If you really want to look at its RCS you would need to know its RAM properties, which we don’t know. Here is a RCS simulation that treats a F-35 and Su-57 with the same RAM in a 120*45 degree frontal sector.
6 Likes
But this extremely rough simulation has little in common with reality.
It’s the most accurate you will find online. The 3D model is very detailed. It doesn’t prove any specific figures it it proves that the Su-57 obviously doesn’t have a RCS of ”0.5m^2”.
2 Likes
Can you show this 3D model?
Made by the same person who modeled the one at basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com
We can’t get the actual 3D file, we only have pictures of it because he obviously won’t give out such a model for free.
2 Likes
But his models are simplified, they don’t include panel seams, access panels, and other small details.
1 Like
That’s practically impossible to model without using some kind of supercomputer. These details will change the final result but they don’t matter as much as other means of reducing RCS for these 2 since neither of these have any big panel gaps, exposed bolts is similar. You’re trying to find a excuse to consider these simulations as useless.
The point of them is not to get any exact RCS figures for these planes. That would be impossible, especially considering that we know absolutely nothing about their RAM properties. It simply shows that the Su-57’s stealth characteristics are far from what people claim it to be.
4 Likes
It seems that you’re the one doing exactly that, and quite successfully.
But yes, it’s impossible to accurately assess an aircraft’s RCS from a rough 3D model alone. You’re simply clinging to it as a lifeline because, in that simulation, the Su-57 doesn’t look quite so bad. However, we do have an indirect metric that allows us to judge just how far this aircraft is from the standards of a true 5gen fighter. I’m talking about its IRL operational performance.
1 Like
Did you not read what I said?
You can’t really tell much about it’s RCS from Ukraine.
If a 5g fighter is not being used as a 5g fighter, then…
1 Like
That’s targeting pod for a 5gen fighter? What?
Again, you’re not even refuting anything I said, you’re just using the same form of argument as before to try to prove something about its stealth. As I’ve sad several times not, my whole point is to show that the Su-57’s RCS is far from what people claim it is.
You are very unclear with what you are trying to prove.
But you’re the one admitting that the aircraft’s actual RCS is unknown, while at the same time appealing to a rough 3D model. That’s about as meaningful as trying to estimate the F-117’s RCS from a wooden mock-up of the Have Blue demonstrator.
You know who does know the Su-57’s actual RCS and real combat capabilities? The Russian military. And the fact that they only allowed it to approach the front line once, in what appears to have been an exceptional situation to prevent a secret drone from falling into enemy hands, says a great deal about the aircraft. That’s really all there is to it.
1 Like
I really think that I’m talking a to a brick wall, no wonder people stop ”arguing” with you here. You have obviously not read what I have said. I have not said once that this is a way of measuring its exact RCS, and no it’s a lot more accurate than using a wooden mockup. I have explained maybe 4 times now that it’s a way to prove that the Su-57’s RCS of far from what people claim it to be. Its usage in Ukraine does not give you a better estimate as I already explain (which you of course completely ignored and proceeded to argue like a 5 year old by using the same useless argument).
1 Like
Sure, but that’s basically an “I want to believe” argument. You have no way of validating the simulation, so you have no way of knowing whether its results are even remotely accurate.
1 Like