NS Military Worldbuilding Thread No. 12

[The Akasha Colony]

Su-35 is trash. Su-30 is trash. Su-57 doesn't exist. Obviously.

e: Although, granted, compared to any modern aircraft (F-22 and F-35), both Rafale and Gripen are also trash, but compared to equivalent Russian aircraft *Su-27S and MiG-29K) both Rafale and Gripen are superior in most aspects.

Alright, I'll bite: what sucks about the Felon?

Its stealth shaping isn't great and the Russians almost certainly lack the industrial capability to meet the same production tolerances the US has for F-22 and F-35, which is very important for translating a low-RCS stealth design from a model to reality. Especially when attempting to produce aircraft at scale. This is probably contributing to their quiet cutbacks in the program.

The Russians have also been struggling unsuccessfully for literal decades to develop a modern replacement to AL-31, and they don't have it yet. F119/F135 provide significant advantages for F-22/F-35 over their rivals, especially with their advantage in dry thrust. Despite already having entered development nearly 30 years ago, F119 still has significantly higher dry thrust than the newest AL-31 variants in Su-57. The Chinese have also been having difficulty in this area because they haven't been able to steal/copy this technology from the Russians.

Which means that Su-57 really falls into a strange twilight zone category wherein it doesn't quite match the standards of the other fifth generation fighters in terms of stealth and engine performance. So the Russians have compensated in the usual way by cramming in a ton of radars and making bold claims about maneuverability since both of those options are easier to implement than producing a "real" fifth generation fighter.

[New Vihenia]

I don't get the "Su-57 isn't stealth" argument that some people like to make.

It is rather obvious it's not if you look at it. Simulations back this assertion up even if they are imperfect.

Are you seriously using this paper which doesnt even mention nor specify that the thing is Su-57 O-o ?

This thing is basically just make an aircraft and then just taking generic shape "similar" to Su-57... How much fidelity you think the author consider if the fighter in the paper is Su-57 O-o. Come on. Carlo Kopp did so much better in this area.

Its stealth shaping isn't great and the Russians almost certainly lack the industrial capability to meet the same production tolerances the US has for F-22 and F-35, which is very important for translating a low-RCS stealth design from a model to reality. Especially when attempting to produce aircraft at scale. This is probably contributing to their quiet cutbacks in the program.

Really O-o ? Like from what i see so far, when they do want things done precisely, they can and they did. Like you see down here between the prototypes and the one on production floor.

[Austrasien]

Are you seriously using this paper which doesnt even mention nor specify that the thing is Su-57 O-o ?

This thing is basically just make an aircraft and then just taking generic shape "similar" to Su-57... How much fidelity you think the author consider if the fighter in the paper is Su-57 O-o. Come on. Carlo Kopp did so much better in this area.

There isn't any important disagreement between this paper and APAs model.

[New Vihenia]

There isn't any important disagreement between this paper and APAs model.

The APA One have more fidelity. Like this plot for the same 6 GHz. Their model also build for Su-57.

http://www.ausairpower.net/Rus-VLO/Sukh ... heta-E.png

This might become pedantic.. but. If that Chinese paper is to be taken as fact, are we supposed to use Mean RCS value when computing radar range ? Which would mean things that Mikhail Pogosyan said back then about F-22 have average RCS of 0.3 sqm is true.

[Austrasien]

The APA One have more fidelity. Like this plot for the same 6 GHz. Their model also build for Su-57.

...but it doesn't change the actual conclusion.

[New Visayan Islands]

Alright, I'll bite: what sucks about the Felon?

Its stealth shaping isn't great and the Russians almost certainly lack the industrial capability to meet the same production tolerances the US has for F-22 and F-35, which is very important for translating a low-RCS stealth design from a model to reality. Especially when attempting to produce aircraft at scale. This is probably contributing to their quiet cutbacks in the program.

The Russians have also been struggling unsuccessfully for literal decades to develop a modern replacement to AL-31, and they don't have it yet. F119/F135 provide significant advantages for F-22/F-35 over their rivals, especially with their advantage in dry thrust. Despite already having entered development nearly 30 years ago, F119 still has significantly higher dry thrust than the newest AL-31 variants in Su-57. The Chinese have also been having difficulty in this area because they haven't been able to steal/copy this technology from the Russians.

Which means that Su-57 really falls into a strange twilight zone category wherein it doesn't quite match the standards of the other fifth generation fighters in terms of stealth and engine performance. So the Russians have compensated in the usual way by cramming in a ton of radars and making bold claims about maneuverability since both of those options are easier to implement than producing a "real" fifth generation fighter.

So the Felon is more or less a what, 4.75-gen if I'm getting this correctly?

[Ideal Britain]

Has any real-life nation ever relied on mercenaries for it's airforce?

[New Vihenia]

...but it doesn't change the actual conclusion.

The conclusion of what ? Like the APA one and Chinese paper doesnt even constitute the same aircraft, and APA doesnt even mention the "mean" RCS value of their model. Or are people making their own conclusion. You're not the first, however there was another in facebook and whatsapp group that i joined.

I found it hard that people do actually present that as "evidence" of Su-57 RCS and making conclusion While not paying attention to the big gaping hole like the fidelity of the model and the important question on which RCS (mean or one from single angle) to use if one desires to make use the values in that paper for some numerical work.

Anyway guess i can believe this too.



The full paper is here :
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_9I0iQ ... sp=sharing

If i were to use that value for some work... that would means Irbis can pick F-22 from 170 km and locking it from 96 km. But nobody will believe it even if it's a real published paper.

Has any real-life nation ever relied on mercenaries for it's airforce?

Eritrea, perhaps. It's Ukrainian mercenaries flying some of their MiG's

[Dayganistan]

Has any real-life nation ever relied on mercenaries for it's airforce?

Countries in Africa have hired Russian and Ukrainian mercenaries to fly their Soviet aircraft. Israel in 1948 had a lot of foreign pilots in their air force but they were volunteers, not really mercenaries.

[Manokan Republic]

Why is the Intelligence Corps one of the smallest corps in the Britain Army?

They don't need that many people in it, it's better to have smaller units when making decisions to have a faster more direct method of action and because of compartmentalization, you don't want too many people knowing about your plans or else it could leak. These are positions that require both loyalty and skill, being dedicated to the country and the fight specifically, as well as actually being good enough for the role. You don't just need intelligence, but also good social IQ's to work with others and read people, as a spy might need as well, and lots of dedication to succeed, and so given the small number of men you would want in the position combined with it's difficulty, you try to recruit the best people. You also just don't want that many numbers, the military doesn't expand infinetly of course, it recruits a rather specific number of people for specific anticipated threats, unless it's something like WWII where as big as possible is the goal. You only have oh-so-many generals for example because there's only so many people needed in a leadership position so you can take decisive action, and in intelligence it's the same way, decisiveness is important.

[Atlantian Dominions]

Has any real-life nation ever relied on mercenaries for it's airforce?

Carl Gustaf von Rosen basically made a living flying as a mercenary pilot in Finland and then various African conflicts. His "Biafra Babies" were the largest and (for all intents and purposes) the only effective element of the Biafran Air Force

[Manokan Republic]

tldr Anything that isn't stealth is absolutely worse than anything that is.

I don't get the "Su-57 isn't stealth" argument that some people like to make.

It's not like other stealth aircraft in that while it's harder to track than a normal aircraft, let's say 2-3 times harder, it's radar cross section is not the size of a golf ball like comparative F-22's and F-35's, which are extremely difficult to track, and with radar tape virtually impossible. The F-22 had for example a 221 to 0 kill ratio in mock combat scenarios, even with other countries, even when going up against Russia, who used various aircraft in the mock engagements. Although there are reports that in simulated combat a French or Russian plane supposedly took out an American one, this has been disputed fairly heavily, even by the people flying the aircraft. And even if there's one instance in training where an F-22 was defeated, that would just give it a 221 to 1 ratio vs. 221 to 0. The F-22 is practically unbeatable, and the fact it's nearly invisible to radar, making it almost impossible to track with missile systems, is a lot different than scattering some of the radar making it harder to track like the various Russian "stealth" aircraft. It's a lot like comparing a child's remote control car to a Ferrari. Yes one can move around a bit, like a car is supposed to, but it's not going to come close in a race.

[Gallia-]

Has any real-life nation ever relied on mercenaries for it's airforce?

Ethiopia and Eritrea both made use of Soviet/Russian mercenaries in the '90's.

[Triplebaconation]

One Su-57 = 10 F-22

[Gallia-]

I suppose that's true for its units per month production. ):

[The Akasha Colony]

Really O-o ? Like from what i see so far, when they do want things done precisely, they can and they did. Like you see down here between the prototypes and the one on production floor.

(Image)

How precise is the actual molding, or the manufacturing of the structural members below the skin? That's hard to get across in a photo, it's the sort of thing that you'd need to observe in a test rig across multiple aircraft.

And can the Russians mass-produce them? Not in prototype or LRIP quantities, but in the numbers needed to field a substantial fleet of them?

So the Felon is more or less a what, 4.75-gen if I'm getting this correctly?

Sort of? The Russians clearly understand the concepts behind fifth-generation fighters, they're just not quite capable of building one. Some of that can be retrofitted to Su-57, like newer engines. And if they figure out how to improve their production techniques, they can probably improve later-production units (but not the early ones). Maybe 4.8 or 4.9, since it's closer to fifth gen than the horde of 4.5 gens flying around today. But it doesn't quite bring together all of the elements that make fifth-generation fighters such a leap over previous designs that warrants some kind of generational change.

[Triplebaconation]

I suppose that's true for its units per month production. ):

I suggest you read "The Arts of War" by one Mr Sun Zoo.

There's not much question the F-22 is "better" at air combat than Su-57.

That's a dumb question though. What's the Boeing 767's mock combat record?

What happens to NATO air operations when every heavy asset has to be covered by a forward screen of F-22s?

Real value of Su-57 is increasing perceived risk by risk-adverse NATO, deterring them that much more from intervention in areas of Russian interest.

Directly comparing characteristics of fighters might be relevant to some extent if you're looking at Messerschmidts and Spitfires I guess but it's pretty worthless now where there are only a few planes to go around.

[New Vihenia]

[

How precise is the actual molding, or the manufacturing of the structural members below the skin? That's hard to get across in a photo, it's the sort of thing that you'd need to observe in a test rig across multiple aircraft.

Well can one see the same thing for others like F-35 or F-22 ? Like i can find hi-res photo of F-35 and F-22 being manufactured and i wont be able to tell whether it's 0.001mm or less amount of tolerance there.

And can the Russians mass-produce them? Not in prototype or LRIP quantities, but in the numbers needed to field a substantial fleet of them?

It's already a firm order of 76 and expect more to come when they finally secure buyers abroad or feel they need more. Like, one can expect perhaps over 100 as there are still Su-27SM to replace and maybe if allegations about Su-35 is a "stop gap" for SU-57 there would be more.

the LRIP quantity here is kind of a weird measure as does Russia ever even know terms of LRIP in the first place ? Like they will build any numbers they need.

[Eukaryotic Cells]

One Su-57 = 10 F-22

Su-57 pilots are equipped with the StG44 and dual Lugers

[The Akasha Colony]

Well can one see the same thing for others like F-35 or F-22 ? Like i can find hi-res photo of F-35 and F-22 being manufactured and i wont be able to tell whether it's 0.001mm or less amount of tolerance there.

But we know the USAF has nearly forty years of experience operating stealth aircraft and have seen the performance of some of these aircraft in combat. And we know that USAF programs are also subject to rather thorough audits and inspections by other government agencies (and outside monitoring by various watchdog groups) designed to catch program issues or deficiencies. And we also know that programs that fall short of objectives like A-12 get canned. The US and much of the Western-aligned defense industry has a better reputation for trustworthiness than their Russian counterparts.

This trust does not exist when it comes to taking the Russian government at its word. Especially when the Russians already have a reputation for churning out exaggerated claims for the sake of spooking foreign rivals. If Su-57 gets exported and foreign operators report that it performs as the Russian government claims (or even better, actually gets used in combat), then we have something to work with.

It's already a firm order of 76 and expect more to come when they finally secure buyers abroad or feel they need more. Like, one can expect perhaps over 100 as there are still Su-27SM to replace and maybe if allegations about Su-35 is a "stop gap" for SU-57 there would be more.

the LRIP quantity here is kind of a weird measure as does Russia ever even know terms of LRIP in the first place ? Like they will build any numbers they need.

76 aircraft by 2028, or an average of barely 10 per year. Fewer than 10 per year if they mean by the end of 2028.

Even the anemic F-22 production rate was over 15 aircraft per year on average. F-35 production is already well over 100 per year.

Whether the Russians use the literal term "LRIP" is somewhat irrelevant; unless they have the capability to roll right into full-rate production (the entire supply chain sorted, factories ready, workers trained, etc.), they'll inevitably start at a lower rate of production and ramp up from there. Which is what they seem to be in at present, unless 10 aircraft per year is their intended full production rate.

[Gallia-]

The 30-50 F-22s the USAF could put on the frontlines in any one spot aren't really adequate to deal with the threat of more advanced Su-27s, much less something like PAK FA, or if the Chinese start cranking out something similar to FC-31. Maybe if they could drop 2-3 F-22 wings on major airbases they would feel safe, but it will probably be something the USAF surges to one spot with a couple squadrons of 192d or 1st FWs to show its commitment and resolve and it never achieves a single air to air kill in its entire brief life. Because the enemy backs down or the USA does.

If it actually comes down to a shooting competition between something that can put up a good OCA fight, like the PLARF, then the USAF would probably just get told to retreat rather than risk a precious fighter pilot's life unfavorable opinion poll for the President in a battle.

So really you just need a couple IRBMs to beat America because it's too afraid to use its massive nuclear arsenal to do anything. o:

[New Vihenia]

But we know the USAF has nearly forty years of experience operating stealth aircraft and have seen the performance of some of these aircraft in combat. And we know that USAF programs are also subject to rather thorough audits and inspections by other government agencies (and outside monitoring by various watchdog groups) designed to catch program issues or deficiencies. And we also know that programs that fall short of objectives like A-12 get canned. The US and much of the Western-aligned defense industry has a better reputation for trustworthiness than their Russian counterparts.

and what ? does this really answer question on manufacturing tolerance ?

This trust does not exist when it comes to taking the Russian government at its word. Especially when the Russians already have a reputation for churning out exaggerated claims for the sake of spooking foreign rivals. If Su-57 gets exported and foreign operators report that it performs as the Russian government claims (or even better, actually gets used in combat), then we have something to work with.

And the claims made by Russian govt on Su-57 being ?

I mean, so far it's those watchdogs or military websites and forums that made the claims, even the claims on L-band wing leading edge radar weren't made my Russian Govt. and those claims of the Su-57 being unrefined etc is also made by military blogs and websites.

76 aircraft by 2028, or an average of barely 10 per year. Fewer than 10 per year if they mean by the end of 2028.

Even the anemic F-22 production rate was over 15 aircraft per year on average. F-35 production is already well over 100 per year.

Whether the Russians use the literal term "LRIP" is somewhat irrelevant; unless they have the capability to roll right into full-rate production (the entire supply chain sorted, factories ready, workers trained, etc.), they'll inevitably start at a lower rate of production and ramp up from there. Which is what they seem to be in at present, unless 10 aircraft per year is their intended full production rate.

well are Russia in the same situation as the US in the first place ?

Like do they really need to match F-35 production rate in the first place ? It's been known since 1970's that Russian did things differently or can do things differently than the west so that "demanding for mirror image" is not an appropriate comparison.

[Crookfur]

Has any real-life nation ever relied on mercenaries for it's airforce?

As well as the various African countries mentioned the gulf states (Saudi Arabia, oman etc) were pretty much all foreign crewed (iirc at one point the entire Omani airforce was made up of RAF pilots on "holiday") in thier early days in the 60s and 70s.

[Gallia-]

Saudis employed ex-RAF mercenaries in 1990 for their Tornadoes, if not the whole air force, too.

[The Akasha Colony]

and what ? does this really answer question on manufacturing tolerance ?

It means that I'm willing to implicitly trust the USAF's manufacturing tolerances as being adequate, whereas I am not willing to trust the Russian government's implicit claims of adequate tolerances.

The United States has nearly 40 years of experience building and operating stealth aircraft. These aircraft have been used in combat, have been observed quite regularly by the media and civilians, and over 40 years, a fair amount of information makes it into the public. All of which points to the conclusion that these aircraft do what they have been advertised to do and meet whatever tolerances are needed to meet their RCS targets or whatever. That means when the US rolls out new stealth aircraft in the form of B-2, F-22, F-35, RQ-180, or whatever, there is little reason to doubt that these aircraft meet their expected tolerances, as manufacturing stealth aircraft is within the known capabilities of the US industrial base.

Russia doesn't have a very large body of work in this case. So far as I am aware, no stealth aircraft has entered mass production in Russia before Su-57. That doesn't make it impossible for them to have fully developed their production processes, but the state of Russian precision industry is not on par with the West's as a whole so I'd like to see some verification before I accept their claims.

And the claims made by Russian govt on Su-57 being ?

I mean, so far it's those watchdogs or military websites and forums that made the claims, even the claims on L-band wing leading edge radar weren't made my Russian Govt. and those claims of the Su-57 being unrefined etc is also made by military blogs and websites.

That's the point. After years of dissection (and decades in the case of F-22), we haven't learned anything particularly new about F-35 or F-22 that wasn't already disclosed by the US military/Lockheed, or anything that couldn't have relatively easily been figured out from what was disclosed. Which more or less confirms that the US military and Lockheed were telling the truth (or an abridged version of it in keeping with classification rules, etc.). That's not surprising given that there are financial and political incentives to avoid being caught in an obvious lie and disclosure laws that require a good amount of information to be made public.

None of these are true in Russia. The Russian government has plenty of reasons to lie and lie by omission. It's one of their primary foreign policy tools. It's possible foreign analysts may be wrong and the Russian government may be right. But given the facts at hand, that the Russian government is an untrustworthy source, that Russian industry has not mass-produced any stealth aircraft previously, that Russian precision industry is behind the West's, etc., it does not seem to be a particularly far-fetched conclusion that Russia's ability to reliably produce stealth aircraft is questionable until proven otherwise.

well are Russia in the same situation as the US in the first place ?

Like do they really need to match F-35 production rate in the first place ? It's been known since 1970's that Russian did things differently or can do things differently than the west so that "demanding for mirror image" is not an appropriate comparison.

Where did I say Russia needed to match F-35 production rates? Or to "mirror" US procurement policy?

My point is that the 76-aircraft order doesn't really prove that the Russians are capable of building stealth aircraft at scale, because 10 aircraft per year isn't a particularly high rate of production. Even Lockheed, with a fairly extensive background in stealth aircraft production, has had trouble meeting production targets for F-35.