It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the Su-57 project effectively toast?

page: 5
3
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2018 @ 11:57 PM
link   
I may or may not have seen a Sniper pod hanging from a F-35B and heard rumours that partners are looking at "stealthy" options for external pods because of certain short comings in the EOTS and limitations in the ability to upgrade it within it's current footprint. Also heard a story of F-22's slinging a pod both for targeting and the up-/downlink ability for other assets in the neighborhood. Take that one with a grain of salt, but seems to make sense on the face of it.




posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 03:05 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

I'm going out on a limb here: up until the end of the 1980s, some of the best and brightest scientists and engineers in the USSR and the West could be found in the military industrial complex. Cue the end of the Cold War, the Internet boom, the financial services sector running wild with salaries and other areas like health as well as law suddenly soaking up the best brains in the world. With Soviet Union losing its best and brightest to the West, who these days can be found creating the next revolution in dating apps. Whilst the defense sectors in all countries still have many exceptional people, I suspect that many more are needed, given how many projects there are in play around the world. But why would a top flight engineer work for a Russian government support defense contractor when someone like Porsche would easily offer them 3 times the money and perks galore?

The Russians have suffered far more than the West, but the truth is they need not just more money, but more quality people to fix the Su-57 - and neither is in abundance now. They are making a sensible choice in going with the Su-30, and then subverting the rest of the West: a few well placed tweets and Facebook ads can do a lot more damage than a squadron of Su-57s, for the price of about the fuel bill of 20 mins flying time...



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 03:49 AM
link   
They have plenty of capable people. What they don't have is experience in this context. The US had three (and more) operational stealth aircraft in service before it started work on the F-35 and it still took literally decades for the US to get it up and running. Sensor-fusion is proving to be a # for everyone, not just the Russians. Beyond the functional networking and CPU-power, it all adds up to extra heat that needs cooling; preferably in a way that doesn't negatively affect your signature. Russia has only one short-lived aerospace composites company which is still gaining experience on large scale structures. Something simple like enlarging intakes for more airflow or enlarging a control surface becomes a chore because not only do you have to model the airflow and structures/material aspects, but also account for what it does to your signature. Modern jet engine production is its own black -magic, and noone is sharing those secrets. That means a lot of trial and error until they hit their own magic.

They're putting everything together in an ambitious program. They don't have decades of experience on a lot of this stuff, but they are figuring out. They're also working on a pretty small budget. Took us many years and $55B+ in R&D to figure out the F-35, and that is still a work in progress. Russia has spent a few billion.

It's not going to be some invincible super-weapon, but if they persevere, they should end up with an affordable and capable combat aircraft for the foreseeable future.



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

Robert, please, don't take this personally, but I am a bit skeptical. I've always heard about how the F-35 is relatively easy to upgrade (one of the issues they had was developing the architecture for that). I haven't heard a whiff about the pods being hung though.

And now we have a contrarian report about the SU-57 contract: TASS has stated its still not signed.

tass.com...



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha
The Israelis were looking at a pods for their homegrown tech at some point. Thats special case though.
EOTS will recieve a comprehensive upgrade with Block 4 which will be superior to any available pod solution.



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

That's possible. The Israelis have already added in some avionics. They were given an API to work with rather than the source code for the F-35 avionics. However, if personal experience is any guide, they are very actively trying to get the source code...by other means.



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha
I dont think they have to. They were happy with the deal they got in the end and have a extremely close working relationship with Lockheed Martin. You can bet Lockheed has a tech team in Israel helping them out with everything they want try with their new toys. Benefits all involved afterall.
In any case, Israel wasnt that crazy about the stealth features of the F-35 anyway. Dont be surprised if we see F-35I with CFTs and additional external hardware a couple of years from now.
Or not. They too know how to keep secrets.



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: mightmight
a reply to: anzha
The Israelis were looking at a pods for their homegrown tech at some point. Thats special case though.
EOTS will recieve a comprehensive upgrade with Block 4 which will be superior to any available pod solution.



Israelis are looking at pods for the same reasons anyone else is. It will always, always be cheaper, easier, and (most importantly in the case of the Israelis who are likely to use/need it) faster to upgrade sensor and EW capabilities with a pod than with internal hardware replacements or additions that have to make their way through the Puzzle Palace and another program office.

The Advanced EOTS is supposed to be a block 4 improvement. I've heard 4.1 and 4.2. It has flown, but is anywhere from two to six years out. It has to use the same interface, mounting, and cooling currently installed. And it is supposed to fit in the same space without adding weight. A ROVER addition is supposed to be an independent block 4 improvement. I don't know what that schedule is. I do know that USMC aviation has a sideways toothpick up its @ss about not having ROVER from the get go. All that can be put in a pod tomorrow (or .. several months ago in Yuma).

More importantly, any upgrade/addition to capabilities will need to fit in the same footprint, be completely integrated with software, etc, etc. It's time and money. The pod is always quicker, cheaper, and easier. It will always have interest.

I don't have any direct involvement in the EOTS program, but I've seen what I've seen and heard what I've heard. The F-22 story I have not actually seen, but have heard and makes some sense given its current deployment and need for "interoperability" with other assets in theater. Particularly on the ground.

And anzha, I'm not at all offended if you're skeptical. I'm just a guy with an internet connection among many.
As they say, trust none of what you hear and only half of what you see



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

The russians have stated the Su-57 has met all its development goals, has the potential to be upgraded for the next 50 years and can be turned into a UCAV:

www.ruaviation.com...

The Russians are also stating they are still talking with the Indians and that the Indians have not formally ended the FGFA:

www.ruaviation.com...

I'm dubious on that last. Most government entities are willing to meet and talk, but if the Indians have cancelled it, they will simply not cut cheques. They will happily talk though.



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

If India hasn't ended their role, they're at the least letting it wither on the vine for the moment.


The Russians say a lot of things. It's all posturing and marketing. Who's going to buy into the program if you say, "We're way behind schedule and way over budget!" Who wants to admit "We bit off more than we can chew. We're not there yet."

You have to separate the wheat and the chaff and dig through the bull#.

When they said a while back they'd be in full-scale production in 2018, that was obvious bull#. Even if there were no issues with anything else, there was no way they were taking a brand new engine and putting it into service after a handful of flight hours. I'm sure I'm not the only one that said that. When they say in effect that "It's too good. We don't need it yet", it's obvious bull#, too. It's not ready for primetime.

But the flip side is you can't take the fact they missed dates on their unrealistic marketing timeline and spin it that the program is dead or dying. If you applied the same rationale to western defense programs, none of them are worth a damn either.

The smart thing would have been to run the F-35 through this same style delay instead of running for concurrency and large blocks of semi-capable aircraft. It just runs the costs up per aircraft, because now they'll all have to go back to contractors and get the block upgrades to be fully combat capable instead of pushing them through the line in larger numbers when it is actually ready. The only reason they pushed for immediate LRIP is so it would withstand the political heat. "We already built 185 of them. We can't scrap them now".



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert


If India hasn't ended their role, they're at the least letting it wither on the vine for the moment.


Russian aircraft raisins, got it.


Does the Su-57 below look a little dinged up? or my I wrong?




posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Two Su-57s, not 12.

www.ruaviation.com...



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 07:30 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Tass says 12. So I'd probably go with Tass until I heard something different from a first-hand source.



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

Tass also said the contract wasn't signed. And RT had said it was. Neither is really an independent media outfit...



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Neither is independent, but both are Russian-speaking outlets who talked to the primary source in Russia(-n). I'd say their interpretation of the statements made are or tend to be more reliable. If you want to argue they are state-based and more likely to report the "official line", that's fine. Slyusar heads OAK. I'd assume he's on top of reality. No reason to misrepresent something due in the next few weeks. When the timeline starts stretching farther out, the marketing talk probably slips in.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join