Turkey Could Evaluate Russian Su-57 Aircraft If US Blocks F-35 Sale

[zzzz]

Its nowhere near. As I said the ball on pak fa nose alone equals to the entire F-35 RCS.

Retard, F-35 canopy RCS alone is 10 times the size of SU-57 IRST ball.

 

[500]

Retard

Don't worry I know who are u.

F-35 canopy RCS alone is 10 times the size of SU-57 IRST ball.

No its not.

 

[50cent]

Retard, F-35 canopy RCS alone is 10 times the size of SU-57 IRST ball.

lol why useless arguing when we don't know their electronic warfare specs as they are top secret of both Russia and isreal just organize a simple dogfight over Lebnon sky between prototype su57 and Israeli operational f35 as which one is superior

 

[500]

Sergey Nesterov, the leading science officer of Russian air force central research institute tells that these metal balls equal to RCS of different US stealth planes.

 

[ptldM3]

Its nowhere near. As I said the ball on pak fa nose alone equals to the entire F-35 RCS.

You’re full of it, will debunk this later on.
The entire F-35 would include its engine rear nozzle—engine compressors which are problematic and all the depression angles and the entire complexity of the aircraft. The only real test we have without using the eyeball test or actual test facilities is the Physical optics simulations done by engineers.

And it doesn’t look good for your claim, but please continue lying as if you know anything.

Continuing believing a 6’ half sphere creates more RCS then this

Then u dont need stealth at all.

Basically you’re saying (without realizing it) is that the SU-57 has such long standoff weapons that it will be undetected.

And yes you do need such long range weapons. It’s an added level of survivability. Aircrafts designers are always trying to make aircraft harder to detect by having the greatest standoff weapons possible.

The F-35 just falls well short of then SU-57 in many regards.

LOL kiddo. U dont' even understand the concept of RCS and radar. Learn a bit and dont ask silly questions next time.

Go back to making your mornic schizophrenic conspiracies, it’s the only thing you can do. You’re a fraud, that knows nothing.

A sphere generates much of its return signals from creeping waves, waves in which travels the circumstance of the sphere and makes its way back. The SU-57 IRST is not a sphere, it’s blended into the canopy and fuselage so creeping waves do not apply.


44 inch sphere=1m2 RCS, this includes creeping waves in which does not apply to the IRST do to it not being a perfect sphere. This is not even counting absorption or diffraction of the IRST.

A illustration of creeping waves.

The F-35 depression angles is a reason it has worse RCS then the SU-57 in physical optics simulations. Notice all the spherical surfaces as well.

 

[Tshering22]

US and EU are the major business partner of Turkey. They can't walkaway with free will. I see many Turkish products in my local store.

We also have a lot of German products in India available. Does it mean that we agree to Germany's binding weapons export conditions or that they export anything to us? No. Defence trade and non-defence trade have a lot of difference. WTO doesn't oversee the rules pertaining to defence trade as no company or country is willing to divulge its secrets or deals.

Turkey has already gone ahead with S-400s which is a major blow to NATO. It is more likely that they will prefer to choose Su-57 with a non-binding alliance rather than have US poke its nose everywhere in Turkey's internal and defence affairs.

It is something admirable about Turks who fiercely maintain their political autonomy.

TAF would be sitting ducks if say, tomorrow they end up revamping their fighter fleets with F-35s and then US passes a restrictive resolution. It would be a colossal waste of Turkish taxpayers' money with a Damocles' sword hanging on Turkey's head.

Regardless of any political party in Turkey, they won't accept such a position.

Geopolitics is changing around the world. We were going bonhomie with US until Obama was there and then suddenly Trump the Unpredictable has put a big stop on our cooperation programmes due to his see-sawing approach towards international relations.

There is no reason why Turkey would not seek autonomy given that it is increasingly becoming influential player in the Middle Eastern and Eurasian politics.

 

[500]

You’re full of it, will debunk this later on.
The entire F-35 would include its engine rear nozzle—engine compressors which are problematic and all the depression angles and the entire complexity of the aircraft. The only real test we have without using the eyeball test or actual test facilities is the Physical optics simulations done by engineers.

And it doesn’t look good for your claim, but please continue lying as if you know anything.


View attachment 477618


Continuing believing a 6’ half sphere creates more RCS then this


View attachment 477621








Basically you’re saying (without realizing it) is that the SU-57 has such long standoff weapons that it will be undetected.

And yes you do need such long range weapons. It’s an added level of survivability. Aircrafts designers are always trying to make aircraft harder to detect by having the greatest standoff weapons possible.

The F-35 just falls well short of then SU-57 in many regards.










Go back to making your mornic schizophrenic conspiracies, it’s the only thing you can do. You’re a fraud, that knows nothing.

A sphere generates much of its return signals from creeping waves, waves in which travels the circumstance of the sphere and makes its way back. The SU-57 IRST is not a sphere, it’s blended into the canopy and fuselage so creeping waves do not apply.


44 inch sphere=1m2 RCS, this includes creeping waves in which does not apply to the IRST do to it not being a perfect sphere. This is not even counting absorption or diffraction of the IRST.


View attachment 477619

A illustration of creeping waves.


View attachment 477620


The F-35 depression angles is a reason it has worse RCS then the SU-57 in physical optics simulations. Notice all the spherical surfaces as well.


View attachment 477617

I dont know where from u get these looney toon cartoons. Especially when PAKFA has exposed engine blades, means huge frontal RCS.

1) F-35 has RCS of a small metallic ball. This is confirmed by both US and Russian sources (see above).
2) PAK FA IRST alone has similar RCS.
3) I dont know why u jumped to protect superboy who asked obviously idiotic question. Hint: no plane is invisible for radars, what matters is detection range.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

I dont know where from u get these looney toon cartoons. Especially when PAKFA has exposed engine blades, means huge frontal RCS.

1) F-35 has RCS of a small metallic ball. This is confirmed by both US and Russian sources (see above).
2) PAK FA IRST alone has similar RCS.
3) I dont know why u jumped to protect superboy who asked obviously idiotic question. Hint: no plane is invisible for radars, what matters is detection range.

Yeah, and Thor can bitch slap Thanos. Your fairy tales are just that, fairy tales.

 

[zzzz]

1) F-35 has RCS of a small metallic ball. This is confirmed by both US and Russian sources (see above).
2) PAK FA IRST alone has similar RCS.

Retarded lying troll, the video you posted says that PAK-FA has RCS of small metallic ball.

 

[500]

Retarded lying troll

We know who are u, no need to introduce uyrself every time.

the video you posted says that PAK-FA has RCS of small metallic ball.

Here a blatant example of ur lie. You think only u understands Russian?

14:05 these balls are comparable to planes built with stealth technology
14:11 in another words, one of these balls will be seen on radar like B-2 and another could be F-22, but its a secret which ball is which.

 

[zzzz]

We know who are u, no need to introduce uyrself every time.


Here a blatant example of ur lie. You think only u understands Russian?

14:05 these balls are comparable to planes built with stealth technology
14:11 in another words, one of these balls will be seen on radar like B-2 and another could be F-22, but its a secret which ball is which.

Yes, retard. The video says that all stealth planes including PAK FA have RCS of small metallic ball. So how it turned out that this claim from video is a proof that only F-35 has RCS of small metallic ball?

 

[LeGenD]

That is what I said. As for the F-35 it uses glide bombs (only 2 I believe) with a tiny fraction of the range of the KH-59M2 and the F-35 still has limitations in range, it still has to have aerial refueling to achieve a similar range to the SU-57 (which will give away its possition and add to cost and mission complexity). Lack of supercruise also means it would either burn through already precious fuel and have even less range or just take longer to achieve missions which ultimately means it would need more sorties, which equates to more risk, more cost. F-35 fanboys just can admit to its flaws and limitations.

SU-57 is a twin-engine combat aircraft, therefore it can cover more distance and super-cruise. SU-57 is ideal for Russian needs because Russian territory is huge and Russians have a history of invading other countries. Downside of twin-engine design is its extensive maintenance requirements; a large number of countries cannot afford a large fleet of twin-engine combat aircraft. Russia cannot mass-produce SU-57 either due to shortage of funds.

F-35 is a single-engine combat aircraft; it has better individual range than F-16 and F-18 and it can carry long-range air-to-surface cruise missiles to project power from considerable distance (see below). In short: F-35 is ideal for Turkish needs, and they are looking forward to induct 100+ units.

USAF and USN have ample aerial refueling platforms at their disposal so they can employ F-35 squadrons to cover vast distances if necessary. USAF also have fleets of F-22 and B-2 to project power from vast distances. B-2, in particular, has greatest range and its stealth capabilities are reportedly unparalleled.

You mistake my pragmatism for fanboyism! There isn't a product out there which is self-sufficient for every role; every product have its share of advantages and limitations. Strength lay in network-centric warfare concept wherein a number of products work together to mask their individual limitations and fulfill a common goal.

Defense requirements vary from country to country. For instance, Pakistan prefers single-engine combat aircraft because it is easier to maintain, small territory to cover and defensive posture in large part. SU-57 is appropriate for Indian needs but they dropped it.

Yes good luck with that. It’s a novel idea that worked in controlled tests against US cruise missiles over the ocean but on land there is complex terrain where cruise missiles can mask their possitions. Heavy electronic jamming would also be a problem. I don’t think the F-35 would do as well going up against unknown Russian cruise missiles, with heavy jamming and a launch platform that is difficult to detect.

Cruise missiles are difficult to detect in any setting, not just on land; oceanic environment present its own set of challenges in this regard. However, USAF and USN have fielded a range of sensor technologies and/or capabilities to detect and track movement of cruise missiles over a large surface area and deploy suitable countermeasures for them; these include LRMP, AEW&C, JSTARS, AEGIS, F-22A and Global Hawk. In-fact, Space-based assets such as DSP, SBIRS and STSS complement all branches of American war-machine in these matters; they provide advanced warning of cruise and/or ballistic missile launches from across the world to all branches of American war-machine. STSS, in particular, can track movement of any type of missile in real-time from its launch to terminal phase of its flight and relay such information to all branches of American war-machine. The entire capability is very thorough and unparalleled in scope and cutting-edge.

Objective of testing is to evaluate 'operational capacity' and 'performance' of a product in a laboratory setting (early phase) or in real-time conditions (advanced phase). Below is an example of testing in real-time conditions:

Testing in real-time conditions ensure that the end-product will be good enough to deliver in real-time combat situations. For example, AEGIS proved its mettle in Yemeni waters: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/uss-...ise-missiles-in-yemeni-waters-in-2016.543523/

Electronic warfare is a feature in RED FLAG exercises, and American war-machine can deliver under such circumstances. In-fact, American forces are doing fine in Syria in spite of Russian electronic warfare in the picture. Do not mistake US for Ukraine in these matters.

But it’s peculiar how you flip arguments, first you were boasting that cruise missiles are too difficult to shoot down now you are boasting the opposite. There is no way to fully stop a barrage of cruise missiles, especially if you don’t know where they are cominng from and the F-35 platform lacks in range both it’s weapons systems and overall its reach. It’s much easier to launch 200 cruise missile then to shoot them down.

I do not flip arguments; you think US is Syria or Ukraine? US can field vastly superior defenses than either in the battlefield.

Watch this:

I don't think any country has the operational capacity to unleash 200 cruise missiles in one go besides the US.

First you admit that no one knows the RCS of the F-22/F-35 then you make the claim that the SU-57s RCS is worse, funny Considering you know nothing about the aircraft. You have nothing good to say about anything Russian made but will argue until you’re blue in the face how great western weapons are.

True RCS of a number of aircraft are classified which include F-35. This isn't to say that professionals are not in the position to pinpoint shortcomings in the design of an aircraft.

Actual engineers have conducted physics optics simulations and in many respects the SU-57 has better RCS figures then the F-35.




The F-35 JSF exhibits similar, but in some respects more severe beam aspect specular RCS behaviour than the T-50.


http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2010-01.html



If the production T-50 retains the axisymmetric nozzles and extant ventral fuselage design, the aircraft would still deliver robust Very Low Observable performance in the nose aspect angular sector, providing that effective RCS treatments are applied to suppress surface travelling waves, inlet and edge reflections.



These simulated were conducted with old nozzles. New ‘stealth’ nozzles have since been introduced.

View attachment 477549



Result of test:



View attachment 477544 View attachment 477546 View attachment 477547

This analysis is outdated.

F-35 have considerably evolved during the course of its development and the end-product has really good stealthy attributes such as parallel surfaces, integrated airframe, axisymmetric nozzle, structural fibremat, internally mounted ordinance and extensive countermeasures. Onboard engine and mission systems are also optimized for LO.

“Stealth” is about survivability. That part went over you’re head apparently. As stated the SU-57 has similar or better RCS for figures compared to the F-35 in specular simulations but let’s assume the SU-57 has much worse RCS. Would it matter when it can launch cruise missiles from 300kms away and stay undetected?

Depends on who is on the receiving end. If it is the US, then Russia cannot achieve much. US can force Russia to fight on its terms due to its relatively superior electronic warfare capabilities, defenses, surveillance and power projection.

Most aircraft radars struggle to detect aircraft size targets past 150-200kms. Meaning the SU-57 would be virtually invisible to the enemy where and the F-35 would be more vulnerable to being shot down simply because it would have to get much closer and rely more on aerial refueling which is a give away to your position.

Both F-22 and F-35 can detect other aircraft from well over 300 KM away.

"The processor speed of 400 billion operations per second of its core processor, combined with stealth and integrated sensors, allows the F-35 to gather and process an unprecedented amount of data and share this real-time data securely with all commanders in the battlefield. To carry out intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions, the F-35 has an electronic warfare suit and Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) consisting of eight sensors, which provide 360-degree coverage to identify electronic emissions and enemy radars." - Declassified information

In-fact there are rumors that F-35 squadrons might make dedicated AWACS obsolete in years to come. Learn more from here: http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/ANAAQ37F35/Pages/default.aspx

Either way all aircraft can be detected on radar. It’s better to have longer standoff weapons.....period.

See above.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Russian territory is huge and Russians have a history of invading other countries.

BS.

 

[LeGenD]

BS.

Hello? Russia invaded Chechnya in 1999, Georgia in 2008, and Ukraine in 2014.

USSR invaded Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan during the course of Cold War.

 

[Basel]

This is just Turkey's way of telling the US that they have options. I'm surprised they haven't approach the Chinese on the FC-31.

Why would they do it when BAE is working on TFX with them? They still can manage to get capable 5th gen fighter jet without US.