PAK-FA / Sukhoi Su-57 - Updates and Discussions

[Hyperactive ADD]

We already have that.

Oh, absolutely! India managed to bag the AL-31F production line—the ultimate tech holy grail that the Chinese Air Force has been desperately craving and could only ever dream of acquiring

 

[Hyperactive ADD]

I was talking about weight and thrust class. 18T, 24T, 36T. F-16 is 15T.
18T sits between 15 and 24. So empty weight, loaded weight, MTOW etc will reflect the thrust.

Su-57's avionics are half a generation to a full generation behind AMCA. With 177, it's performance is 40% inferior to AMCA's. With Izd 30, it will be about 15% inferior to AMCA.

AMCA was designed to surpass the Su-57 in every way imaginable, which is why the IAF decided they are no longer interested in it. It only has a slightly shorter range and a slightly smaller WB. Both tactically irrelevant in comparison. But avionics, stealth, maintenance, operations cost etc are all excessively in favor of AMCA. It was designed 20 years after Su-57 after all.

U.S. engine maximum thrust figures are obtained at sea level, Mach 0.4;
Russian engine maximum thrust figures are obtained at sea level, zero speed.

F404-GE-400: U.S. standard 8.9 tons, converted to Russian standard 7.2 tons
F414-GE-400: U.S. standard 0.8 tons, converted to Russian standard 6.3 tons
F110-GE-129: U.S. standard 13.2 tons, converted to Russian standard 10 tons
F100-PW-220: U.S. standard 10.8 tons, converted to Russian standard 8.8 tons
F135-PW-100/400: U.S. standard 19.5 tons, converted to Russian standard 16.5 tons

By comparison:
RD-33：8.3 tons
RD-33MK：9 tons
AL-31F: 12 tons
AL-41F-1: 14.5 tons
===============
First, get the statistical standards straight — otherwise it's just rambling.
Thrust is merely an instantaneous quantity, whereas maneuverability is a linear time integral.
200 horsepower in a farm tractor and 200 horsepower in a MotoGP racing bike are not the same thing. You can't just grab a number and make a direct, side-by-side comparison.




And I have no idea where you got the idea that the AMCA is 15% better than an Su-57 equipped with Izd 30.
By that logic, it would mean the U.S. imports engines from India,
rather than exporting engines to India.

We are doing that with the indigenous Kaveri (75-90 kN) and a French engine for AMCA (120-140 kN).

As for the French, they'd better make it a priority to catch up with Turkey or South Korea. There's still a huge technological gap between them and Japan, and I doubt they have the capacity to bother with India either.

 

[Hyperactive ADD]

F404-GE-400: U.S. standard 8.9 tons, converted to Russian standard 7.2 tons
F414-GE-400: U.S. standard 0.8 tons, converted to Russian standard 6.3 tons

Clipboard error: corrected below：

U.S. engine maximum thrust figures are obtained at sea level, Mach 0.4;
Russian engine maximum thrust figures are obtained at sea level, zero speed.

F404-GE-400: U.S. standard 8.9 tons, converted to Russian standard 6.3 tons
F414-GE-400: U.S. standard 10 tons, converted to Russian standard 7.2 tons
F110-GE-129: U.S. standard 13.2 tons, converted to Russian standard 10 tons
F100-PW-220: U.S. standard 10.8 tons, converted to Russian standard 8.8 tons
F135-PW-100/400: U.S. standard 19.5 tons, converted to Russian standard 16.5 tons

By comparison:
RD-33：8.3 tons
RD-33MK：9 tons
AL-31F: 12 tons
AL-41F-1: 14.5 tons

 

[Hyperactive ADD]

Oh, absolutely! India managed to bag the AL-31F production line—the ultimate tech holy grail that the Chinese Air Force has been desperately craving and could only ever dream of acquiring

Our esteemed interlocutor is truly a master of zealously rhetorical posturing.
It was mere Dayss ago that they adamantly argued Japan's Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries (IHI) fundamentally lacked the autonomous industrial capacity to produce the F110 and F100 engine series, reducing their operations to mere licensed assembly.


Yet, in a staggering displays of intellectual agility, the narrative now shifts seamlessly: India's licensed assembly of the AL-31FP—which completely excludes the foundational metallurgy of single-crystal turbine blade fabrication—is suddenly championed as definitive, empirical evidence of India's 'indigenous localization' of the AL-31F.
Following that twisted causality, we should realistically expect India to export thrust-vectoring AL-31F powerplants to the French to retrofit their aerodynamically constrained Rafale, rather than tolerating this absurd supply-chain inversion where Paris attempts to salvage the underpowered M88 architecture through some superficial modernization scheme.

This line of reasoning induces a severe cognitive dissociation; it is a structural self-contradiction where the left hemisphere of their analytical brain is in a violent dogfight with the right

 

[Lolwa]

I think whether something is good or not comes down to price first.
If the Su-75's price is within 60% of the Su-57's, then it's a pretty good deal.

I believe the Indian Air Force is too small, and a single-engine aircraft like this would provide a massive boost to its combat capability.

At the very least, I think it's far superior to that flashy F-35...

And from a commercial standpoint, if you buy both types simultaneously, it becomes easier to gain leverage when negotiating engine production licenses.

Of course, in the long term, I believe all fifth-generation fighters are already obsolete, and India should go straight into developing a sixth-generation fighter.

As a transitional aircraft, the Su-75 is very suitable. Moreover, its shape is clearly optimized for ground attack (for example, the forward-tilted intakes are obviously meant to shield against radar waves from below), and it has a relatively flat underside. Compared to the Su-57, it would be far less dependent on long-range guided munitions. Perhaps when dropping cheap bombs, the cost would be lower, and it could be used more boldly and with greater confidence...

So in summary, since my fundamental position is that India should pursue sixth-generation fighter development, not fifth-generation,

I think the Su-75 is actually very good,
and an irreplaceable choice.

After all, the Su-57 is twin-engine and just too expensive.

Su-75 is the fifth generation f-16. It is perfect for India in fact considering how badly the Tejas program has been managed and the lack of planning of a fifth gen Tejas mk3 makes it all the more important for us to have the su-75. If we can mki it the su-75 with astra MK2 and 3 will be a huge problem for every airforce.
Plus it has similar engine as the final su-57M1 will have so no supply chain issues. The same engine is compatible with the mki's. On top of the su-75 the okthonik uses the same engine. So you have an entire air force on the back of one engine. An approach that should have been followed by the Kaveri.

 

[batman]

I was talking about weight and thrust class. 18T, 24T, 36T. F-16 is 15T.
18T sits between 15 and 24. So empty weight, loaded weight, MTOW etc will reflect the thrust.

Sure

Su-57's avionics are half a generation to a full generation behind AMCA. With 177, it's performance is 40% inferior to AMCA's. With Izd 30, it will be about 15% inferior to AMCA.

Wrong, the AMCA avionics is nothing but in paper, infact the avionics in Su57 is 5 generations ahead until AMCA becomes operational. The Su57's kinematic performance is also much superior.

AMCA was designed to surpass the Su-57 in every way imaginable, which is why the IAF decided they are no longer interested in it. It only has a slightly shorter range and a slightly smaller WB. Both tactically irrelevant in comparison. But avionics, stealth, maintenance, operations cost etc are all excessively in favor of AMCA. It was designed 20 years after Su-57 after all.

Surpass in every way? The Su57 is the best fighter on the planet right now, you gotta be less delusional about said claims. Su57 had superior aerodynamics, control surfaces, twr, suoermaneuverability, supercruise, longer combat radius, bigger internal weapons bay, AI and ability to command drones and can even act as mother ship, better multi band senor suite, a decade more mature and proven tech by the time AMCA get deployed, blanketed claims like hold no meaning. Don't get me wrong, the AMCA is gonna be a great jet but claims like AMCA is gonna surpass the Su57 in every way is peak delusion from lack of understanding both's capability and maturity.

 

[batman]

It's a slow-flying, gunless stealth version of the MiG-31 that can't even carry long-range air-to-air missiles.

Oh, right, he also lacks the "Kinzhal" missile.

Isn't it optimized for supercruise?

Apart from that, its large internal weapons bay, long range missile, massive radars, long combat range etc should make it a formidable jet for any air force to face. So I would need a better explanation for this. Regarding the gun point, isn't being able to fit 2 additional missile worth the cost of removing a gun which hasn't been used much since half a century ago?

 

[Lolwa]

how is the F22 a better jet?

Superior stealth, better radar, thrust vectoring. It can actually supercruise unlike the j-20.