The unannounced capabilities of the S-70 Okhotnik-B attack UAV will allow to seize the initiative from the F / A-XX project

Source: TerHussein, wikipedia.org

Have the Russians overtaken the Americans?

The spectrum of information received by the Sukhoi Design Bureau specialists during the recently completed unique stage of field tests of the promising multipurpose attack and reconnaissance UAV S-70 "Okhotnik" air and interception of priority air targets in those areas of theaters of war of the XXI century, where the abundance of modern air defense systems of a potential enemy (air defense systems "Patriot PAC-3MSE", SAMP-T, "Land Сeptor", etc.) calls into question the safety of the flight the operational-tactical aviation Russian Aerospace Forces.

The operational-tactical tandem "Su-57 ꟷ S-70" Okhotnik-B "makes another leap

We are talking about the successfully implemented "digital" (without actual launches and defeats) interception of heat-contrast and radio-contrast targets of a simulated enemy by means of short-range and medium-range training missiles UZR-73/74 and RVV-SD-UL (simulators R-73RMD-2 / RVV-MD and RVV-SD) deployed and virtually launched from the in-fuselage compartment of the S-70 “Okhotnik” UAV at the Ashuluk interspecific training ground in the Astrakhan region.

Despite the fact that the aforementioned flight training models of missiles did not "leave" the Okhotnik-B's in-fuselage hardpoints throughout the entire test period, the open architecture of the avionics in general and the weapons control system in particular (in conjunction with several asynchronous exchange lines data via secure radio communication channels and software and hardware diagnostic add-ons) provided Sukhoi Design Bureau specialists (as well as representatives of the Russian Aerospace Forces) with a host of critical parameters for synchronization and data exchange between Okhotnik-B weapons control systems and the Su-5 57th generation multifunctional fighter ... Su-57 acts as a leading component in this operational-tactical tandem. Obviously, the latter also took part in field tests.

Techno jump of Russia: journalists missed the sensation

RIA journalists Newsreferring to competent sources in PJSC "Company" Sukhoi "limited themselves to extremely superficial coverage of this event. Meanwhile, we are talking about a significant technological leap, embodied "in hardware" by the specialists of the Sukhoi Design Bureau.

In particular, the coordinates of the airborne AFAR-radar N036 "Belka" or the quantum optical-electronic sighting and navigation system OLS-50M of the Su-57 fighter aircraft detected in combat conditions can be transferred to the weapons control system (SUV) of the slave "Okhotnik-B" by means of a specialized "accompanying file" sent in encrypted (using the Reed-Solomon code) data packets by the on-board communication system S-111-N.

At the same time, having a much wider range (about 2900 km versus 2000 km for the Su-57), the S-70 Okhotnik-B strike and reconnaissance drone is capable of reaching the launch lines of the Product 180 long-range air combat missiles (or RVV-BD; correspond to the geometric parameters of the S-70 weapons compartments) along much more optimal and safe trajectories, bypassing the enemy's air defense systems in the terrain bend mode.

At the moment Okhotnik-B reaches the launch lines (continuously updated in the tracking file), the target coordinates will be instantly loaded into the drives of inertial navigation systems and active radar seeker of the Washer family of the Product 180 and / or RVV-BD missiles by means of a multiplex data exchange channel of the MIL-STD-1760 type (synchronizes the Okhotnik weapons control system with the avionics of interceptor missiles).

At the same time, the launch can be carried out in a covert mode (without using the Okhotnik airborne radar) and without the need to maintain line of sight between the C-70 and intercepted objects. In the latter case, we are talking about launching either from outside the radio horizon, or because of the "screen" of the terrain. This is true for remote targets operating in low altitude mode.

And the Americans are just scratching their heads

At the moment, hundreds of specialists from leading American military-industrial corporations are struggling to realize this potential within the ambitious NGAD (Next Generation Air Dominance) program. This project provides for the development and launch into large-scale production of the carrier-based stealth fighter F / A-XX in both manned and unmanned versions.

Comments

[Aerodrome]

And the Americans are just scratching their heads

thank you comrade Damantsev! neighing with you as usual! you should perform together with the "popovoskabeyevs"

[Aerodrome]

with such an ass, only to seize ... the initiative. at least finish the engine with "exhaust", then write bravura articles. a maneuverable interceptor, this thing cannot be, by definition, loitering, waiting for a possible victim - it may very well be, waiting and covering some character is also an option. but not a fig not an interceptor.

[Jacket in stock]

Quote: Aerodrome

loitering, waiting for a possible victim - it may very well wait and cover some character is also an option. but not a fig not an interceptor.

Contradict yourself.
If "wait and cover" is not an interception, then what is it? And what is interception in your understanding?

[Pechkin]

Aerodrome means work on the ground and not on air targets, and interceptor is the term for fighters to work on air targets.

[Alex777]

And the interceptor is the term just for fighters to work on air targets.

As if the author was talking about air-to-air missiles all the time.

The S-70 "Okhotnik-B" is capable of reaching the launch lines of long-range air combat missiles "Product 180" (or RVV-BD; correspond to the geometric parameters of the S-70 weapons compartments) along much more optimal and safe trajectories, bypassing the enemy's air defense systems in terrain bend mode.

I did not understand why the terrain enveloping mode was mentioned here, but judging by the task: to get close, get the coordinates and knock them from afar - we are talking about the destruction of large low-maneuverable targets. Like B-52, AWACS, tankers, transport workers.

[bayard]

It is quite interesting for the fight against the Hokai, for the breakthrough to the launch distance at the AUG.
Especially considering the stealth of this UAV.

[Alex777]

It is quite interesting for the fight against the Hawks, for the breakthrough to the launch distance at the AUG.

Yes, I first of all thought about it.

[Boris Chernikov]

and they will finish it, just while they finish it, tests of what can already be tested will be carried out on this

[El Chuvachino]

The ass will be different to reduce IR visibility.

[bayard]

Quote: Aerodrome

waiting for a possible sacrifice, it may very well be, to wait and cover some character is also an option. but not a fig not an interceptor.

And if as a naval reconnaissance and strike complex?
Including VV BD missiles, the same R-37?
Against the same "Khokaev"?
In passive mode to the radiation source?
From a distance of 200 - 250 kilometers from the target?
Taking into account its (C-70) combat radius, the presence of "Hunters" in the attacking order, with the possibility of launching explosive missiles for self-defense / clearing space from AWACS aircraft and carrier-based fighters ... would be very useful.
And interception for a subsonic and low-maneuverable device is, of course, nonsense. Another thing is the possibility of launching explosive missiles ... this option will not be superfluous for new long-range bombers.

[Jacket in stock]

I recognize Damantsev ...
From three lines.
And if on the topic, then on the basis of the "extremely superficial" message from "Sukhoi", the author here fantasized.

[Old tanker]

This is called "analytics"!

[zyablik.olga]

Quote: Old Tanker

This is called "analytics"!

This is called fantasy!

[The leader of the Redskins]

It's hard not to recognize him:
an abundance of alphanumeric characters and frequent bends towards air defense. Apparently, with these "codes" he is trying to instill in those who are not well informed about the topic his peremptory nature.
Personally, lately, bumping into this heap of names and symbols, I stop reading the article to the end.

[Captain45]

Quote: Jacket in stock

I recognize Damantsev ...
From three lines.

I’ll recognize my sweetheart by gait,
He writes, writes on VO.
This writer is called Damantsev,
I read his opuses ...

[Pessimist22]

Clearly, overtook America.

[Thrifty]

Well, the idea that the Su57 will drive the C70 is so-so idea, not to say frankly - a bad idea! Su57 will be a good target on subsonic, because of the need to constantly maintain communication, even in a narrow range and protected, but it is a source of radiation that can easily be targeted by missiles. And, in addition, if it is necessary to engage in close air combat, the Su57 is simply not able to protect its slow wingman, then it would not let itself be shot down! The C70 must "learn" to be a purely autonomous platform, or the lead aircraft must also be subsonic, and with powerful armor and strong defensive weapons, in order to fight for itself and the C70 if necessary. And the Su57 should remain a purely fighter, not a subsonic drone avian.

[Imobile]

AWACS at a great distance in the rear. And the dry one can passively receive information about targets. And the material is presented as if you read in the yellow press, you no longer know whether to believe it or not. Most likely not, otherwise they would have experienced it in Syria.

[Pilat2009]

Quote: Thrifty

Well, the idea that the Su57 will drive the C70 is so-so idea, not to say frankly - a bad idea! Su57 will be a good target on subsonic, because of the need to constantly maintain communication, even in a narrow range and protected, but it is a source of radiation that can easily be targeted by missiles. And, in addition, if it is necessary to engage in close air combat, the Su57 is simply not able to protect its slow wingman, then it would not let itself be shot down! The C70 must "learn" to be a purely autonomous platform, or the lead aircraft must also be subsonic, and with powerful armor and strong defensive weapons, in order to fight for itself and the C70 if necessary. And the Su57 should remain a purely fighter, not a subsonic drone avian.

Excuse me, but on what principle do modern UAVs work, is it not constantly exchanging information? Drying can keep the UAV in silence, and at the right time download the data and ditch it. Whether you want it or not, unmanned aircraft is the future

[Sergey Sfiedu]

Exactly what kind of drone. Another UAV can transmit information to the "hunter", and this will be better than substituting an expensive and manned Su-57, for which it is necessary to leave those tasks where one cannot do without a man. However, the "Okhotnik" is still sawing and sawing, it is not so easy to create a heavy unobtrusive strike UAV.

[Dodikson]

A hunter is not a UAV that is constantly controlled by a human control panel from the center.
this is a UAV with AI, the leader gives him tasks and he performs them. can perform in radio silence mode, only receive information.

[Boris Chernikov]

why did you decide that he should constantly keep in touch? the device will receive control commands and will carry them out .. and why did the S-70 suddenly become "subsonic" ??? According to current data, its capabilities will be at the same level as the F-16 ..

[Owl]

Why come up with some kind of "victory"? "Probable allies" are very zealous owners, it is not for nothing that they keep a large number of obsolete fighters in storage bases, these machines are supposed to be used, among other things, to break through a powerful layered air defense system, by equipping most of the vehicles with a simple control system for opening an air defense system (targets- suicide bombers, like the AN-2 of the Azerbaijanis-Turks in the conflict in Karabakh), and a smaller part, with a more expensive control system, to turn into unmanned strike vehicles for launching heavy weapons from a long range at air defense targets. The aierikos do not even think about any "air combat". They have a lot of experience in the real combat use of UAVs and the "partners" know a lot about the capabilities of unmanned aerial vehicles.

[Boratsagdiev]

Quote: Thrifty

And, in addition, if necessary, to engage in close air combat, the Su57 is simply not able to protect its slow wingman

Hmm? ...
And how do you imagine "close air combat", "supersonic"?
"Melee" and especially "maneuverable combat" are usually performed "before the sound".
At supersonic if at intersecting corners or oncoming (in dogon).
Have you heard about overloads and turning radius?
And why should he protect him? ...

[Sergey Sfiedu]

It is not very clear why "Hunter" is needed as a slave.

[Boris Chernikov]

to send it where it will be difficult for a fighter to survive

[Boa kaa]

Quote: BoratSagdiev

Have you heard about overloads and turning radius?

Have you heard. By the way, you can also read how the Su-57 without stopping the movement turned 360 degrees. Before that, there were shots of how he calmly enters a flat spin and just as easily gets out of it. Wits called this maneuver "pancake". (And what to take from them? - Infantry!)
AHA.

[Boratsagdiev]

What speed was it? ... supersonic? ...
You can read a lot, "the paper will endure."
Demonstration flights (for the public and for the show) are usually subsonic and are made.
How many G units air-to-air missile carries (calculated) during active maneuvering?
The airplane's glider, in theory and in practice, can also maneuver at high G-forces, but there is one catch - the pilot.

[parusnik]

Well, accessible, intelligible words. The only thing left to do is to compose sensible sentences from these words.

[416D]

I am wildly sorry for the incompetent question - but did the author of the article accidentally reveal a couple of military secrets?

[Toucan]

Even a standing clock shows the correct time twice a day. But Damantsev's fantasies are certainly something. Such propagandon disappears. He does not need to publish his fiction on VO, but write texts for channel 1.

[lucul]

I am wildly sorry for the incompetent question - but did the author of the article accidentally reveal a couple of military secrets?

No, he just said that the network center in Russia has finally taken place. The digital secure bus / data interface has been successfully tested. And this is really a breakthrough for us, akin to ROFAR.

[Tavrik]

Where is the network center here? Dull data transfer channel between aircraft, which the Americans did during the Vietnam War. Another thing is that for lack of something better, everything becomes a "breakthrough". So soon we will call the field cable line on the TA-57 network centric. Nenuache - Increasing Situational Awareness!

[etc]

And no one thought that the S-70 is a platform for working out decisions on the PAK-DA? https://360tv.ru/news/obschestvo/interesnaja-mashina-voennyj-ekspert-otsenil-vozmozhnosti-novogo-bombardirovschika-pak-da/

[kill the fascist]

I think it's too early to shout "bravo", however, as "everything is lost, chief." We must wait until the end of the project. Critics will surely find "flaws" even if the project is very successful, people have such a vocation.

[Zaurbek]

In any case, the work of such devices should be with an external control center ... or from a fighter with a powerful AFAR or from an AWACS. He will not be able to catch up with anyone and make sharp jerks towards the goal too. His destiny is the launch of medium explosive missiles. It is quite possible to create a system of 5-6 pieces of Hunter with missiles in-in and AWACS. But whether it will be a universal UAV or a specialized air defense - I don't know. And you also need to make a Hunter - you need a refueller to refuel your comrades.

[Ural resident]

A heavy drone, especially in conjunction with the SU-57, it's certainly cool. However, this is not enough.
How and where will it be used, for example, "allies-wards" how will they defend themselves? Indeed, given the numerical superiority of the enemy in the local theater of operations, a couple of these control systems will simply have to be hidden, since any aircraft will be "fought" directly from takeoff. The events in Karabakh showed that it is enough to tie up the aviation and solve everything by other methods. We need massive cheap and multifunctional drones, which are not a pity to lose and have something to replace right there.

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: Resident of the Urals

We need massive cheap and multifunctional drones, which are not a pity to lose and have something to replace right there.

Quite right. In the same USA, heavy UAVs are in no particular hurry to make, although they have been created, tested, ready for mass production.
Now they are concentrating on mass, relatively cheap and multifunctional UAVs. UTAP-22, XQ-58, they don't even need a runway, they launch from a catapult, a Boeing Loyal wingman has an aircraft takeoff. They can produce thousands of such UAVs, if not tens of thousands. We need to maintain parity. S-70s are expensive, complex, demanding on infrastructure, with incomprehensible tasks. There will not be many of them, if at all they will reach the series.

[flicker]

A heavy drone, especially in conjunction with the SU-57, it's certainly cool. However, this is not enough.

This is promising.
The technology of such a bundle is promising.
It is promising that such a bundle increases the combat capabilities of the SU-57, since the Hunter can carry a combat load of up to 8 tons.
In addition, in the future, the technology of such control will allow the SU-57 to control several UAVs at once (which means that the combat capabilities of the SU-57 will be increased).
---

We need massive cheap and multifunctional drones

Needed, only they solve different tasks, by virtue of their combat capabilities to cause damage.
Cheap drones are good in local conflicts: destroy a howitzer, tank, etc. But the bunker is unlikely. By the way, against loitering ammunition (read cheap drones), it would be possible to use a grid like tanks against ATGMs.

Another thing is that heavy UAVs can cause much more damage (by the same KAB), including bunkers.
For example, if one SU-57 can control several UAVs at once, it will be able to solve not so much local combat missions (knock out a tank, howitzer), but destroy an underground bunker, a command center, a stationary communications center, etc. Do much more damage.

[Tavrik]

For example, if one SU-57 can control several UAVs at once,

How many people should the SU-57 crew be? Considering that one UAV should be controlled by two people - a pilot and a load operator?
This is a hopeless occupation. Everyone must do their job. Scouts - by reconnaissance, strike weapons - by destroying the enemy. Coordination of actions, making a decision to strike - with the help of a single information space, which receives data from all reconnaissance means, and access to which all means of destruction have - both aircraft, tanks, self-propelled guns, etc. Then the combat capabilities of the SU-57 will increase. Otherwise, well, the Hunter found the enemy in some sector, well, he told "his" SU-57. Or SU-57 to the Hunter. And no one knows what is happening in the neighboring sector. there is a SU-57 with its Hunter. And they don't exchange info. And the fact that reconnaissance discovered a massive take-off of enemy drone UAVs somewhere else, none of them will ever know. "Everyone has their own war."
A single information space is implemented in WoT, when the enemy, detected and classified by one "firefly", becomes known to the whole team .

[Salty]

Quote: Tavrik

A single information space is implemented in WoT

Funny)

[Tavrik]

Yes, most funny! But, here it is - take the concept and use it, "finish" it to use it on a real technique. Fortunately, they learned how to make a three-dimensional top view in the automotive industry.

[flicker]

How many people should the SU-57 crew be? Considering that one UAV should be controlled by two people - a pilot and a load operator?
This is a hopeless occupation. Everyone must do their job. Scouts - by reconnaissance, striking means - by destroying the enemy.

Yeah, maybe one operator should control each missile?

AFAR tracks dozens of targets (let's say 40), takes under the sight already fewer targets (let's say 20), and the pilot selects from them to attack exactly as many targets as he has missiles on the SU-57.
If there are 8 missiles, then there will be 8 targets to attack (one pilot).
If the Hunter is armed with 8 more missiles, then ONE SU-57 pilot can attack 16 targets.
---
Those. The hunter can and should be considered, among other things, as an additional attacking capability (at least twice) of the SU-57.
---
In other words, the SU-57 fights its battle without bothering too much with the Hunter, detects targets (including through the Hunter's radar), attacks these targets not only with its own missiles, but also with the Hunter's missiles.

[Hexenmeister]

AFAR tracks dozens of targets (let's say 40), takes under the sight already fewer targets (let's say 20), and the pilot selects from them to attack exactly as many targets as he has missiles on the SU-57.

Why target 20 targets if only 8 missiles ??? It is easier to "correctly estimate" the original 40, and "target" 8, according to the number of missiles available.

including through the Hunter's radar

Judging by the size of the nose cone in the photo, there is no serious radar on it!

[flicker]

Why target 20 targets if only 8 missiles ??? It is easier to "correctly estimate" the original 40, and "target" 8, according to the number of missiles available.

Apparently, the radar detects targets at an inaccessible distance for missiles, some of the targets that are within reach are taken under the sight (and there may be more than missiles), but the pilot chooses from them according to the number of missiles available.
Well, the capabilities of the Hunter's radar can be improved.
Today, the UAV only detects ground targets (for now).

[Hexenmeister]

You need to select targets for an attack even before they enter the launch zone, and the selected targets, as you say, also need to be "targeted" before they enter the launch zone, and when these targets are in the launch zone they need to be attacked, and not dealt with their importance and danger!

[Sanichsan]

are you familiar with the characteristics of the radar? I would like to get acquainted with your interpretation of such characteristics of the radar as tracked targets and fired targets.

[Hexenmeister]

Yes, everything is very simple, the primary marks found in all survey cycles are tied into the so-called target tracks, the tied tracks are arranged in priority, there can be several priority criteria, some of the tracks can be targets specified in external target designation, some of the tracks can be targets that can attack you even before your attack is exactly your objectives on the task, you can choose several and different criteria. Of this series of routes, the very first (that is, the most important-dangerous) in terms of the number of missiles available stand on the algorithms for combat use, and when each of these targets enters the zone of possible launches, a control check of our / foe and information to the pilot about the possibility of launching, and then how he decides, puts everything on "automatic", the missile will be launched at the appropriate target when it enters the launch zone.

[Sanichsan]

Not certainly in that way. The radar station sees all available targets but can track multiple targets and give target designation to multiple targets. these are not all detected targets. for Belka, 62 and 16/8 (air / ground) are declared (once in open sources it means the export version).

[Hexenmeister]

Who should be given target designation? And what does "lead" mean? And what does detected targets mean? If several "marks" from different viewing cycles are tied into one trajectory, then this is one goal! And something discovered on one single cycle of review is not yet a target, in a tactical sense!

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Hexenmeister

Who should be given target designation?

today there are already a lot of people, but initially their own guided weapons. now they can also direct calibers from the Caspian.

Quote: Hexenmeister

And what does "lead" mean?

roughly speaking targets are captured by radar and tracked.

Quote: Hexenmeister

And what does detected targets mean?

everything that allows you to see the technical capabilities of the radar. birds, civil aviation ground objects, etc. .. these are hundreds of objects, of which 62 squirrels can, conventionally, take aim and simultaneously attack (give target designation) 16 air targets or 8 ground targets.

[Hexenmeister]

You have complete confusion in your head, plus the use of invented terminology. So let's start, what can the radar detect? Signal reflected from some object! And what parameters of this object can the radar determine? Angular coordinates, latency, indirectly range, and Doppler shift, essentially radial speed! And will this set of information be able to solve at least one tactical problem? No, it won't, because for tactical tasks you also need to know the target's velocity vector! And so, even though something was discovered, but from the tactical point of view, there is still no goal! And all this will become the goal when several such detection marks are tied into one trajectory, it will be possible to determine the target's velocity vector, and solve any tactical tasks using it! This will be the detected target, not the technical spec bullshit.
Further, modern radars do not have any capture and tracking, at least on fighters, but there are "games" with these routes, and, if necessary, increase the accuracy of the tracked trajectory to the level required for target designation to weapons.

[Sanichsan]

are you alright?

Quote: Hexenmeister

So let's start, what can the radar detect? Signal reflected from some object! And what parameters of this object can the radar determine? Angular coordinates, latency, indirectly range, and Doppler shift, essentially radial speed! And will this set of information be able to solve at least one tactical problem? No, it won't, because for tactical tasks you also need to know the target's velocity vector! And so, even though something was discovered, but from the tactical point of view, there is still no goal! And all this will become the goal when several such detection marks are tied into one trajectory, it will be possible to determine the target's velocity vector, and solve any tactical tasks using it!

well at least they didn't copy-paste the wave theory from the wiki

Quote: Hexenmeister

This will be the detected target, not the technical spec bullshit.

how is she! the first time I see that they deny the presence of technical characteristics of the radar that is, you deny that the radar has such parameters as detection range or RCS of detected objects?

Quote: Hexenmeister

Further, modern radars do not have any capture and tracking, at least on fighters, but there are "games" with these routes, and, if necessary, increase the accuracy of the tracked trajectory to the level required for target designation to weapons.

yeah you exactly? then formulate why in the performance characteristics of all radars, including aviation, these parameters are indicated, and not some "" games "with these tracks"?

[Hexenmeister]

are you alright?

I'm fine, but I would advise you to understand the terminology, otherwise there are "detected targets" and "tracked targets" and "targets in lock" and "targets in sight" and "targets for target designation"!

the first time I see that they deny the presence of technical characteristics of the radar

Actually, I asked: "What is considered a detected target?", And you started talking about what the technical characteristics of the radar can detect, but it turned out that what is "detected" is not yet a target.

then formulate why in the performance characteristics of all radars

It seems to me that you have never seen a real technical task ...

[Ros 56]

Let's wait and see how it really will be.

[Wertgan]

"previously unattainable" is an adverbial turnover. Separated with commas. The author in this article shows primitive illiteracy

[Tsoy]

The author in this article shows primitive illiteracy

If the problem was only in grammar ... I don't understand for the life of whom he writes. Fans of leaving the caps for the most part of their half of the text will not understand for the pile of abbreviations and helluva lot of clever verbal constructions. For others, it is too obvious that these are fantasies flowing into fantasy.

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: Choi

fantasies flowing into fantasy.

Well, if only so ... a lot of science fiction stuff comes true. This article is just fantasy.

[Tsoy]

Well, if only so ... a lot of science fiction stuff comes true. This article is just fantasy

About fantasy is not a fact. I see orcs and elves on TV every day. And also trolls on the net. And one goblin flooded me from above the other day.

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: Choi

About fantasy is not a fact.

And how to explain that the S-70 subsonic reconnaissance and strike UAV can effectively withstand the next-generation F / A-XX supersonic air superiority fighter along with a swarm of led UAVs? Only magic. Apparently holy water gives invisibility, invulnerability and all missiles that hit. Although some rituals of the Rodoverians may contribute to this.

[Tsoy]

How can one explain that the S-70 subsonic reconnaissance and strike UAV can effectively counter the next-generation F / A-XX supersonic air superiority fighter along with a swarm of led UAVs?

Gzhel coating will replace stealth cladding and give invisibility in all spectra. Consecrated V-V missiles will receive a buff plus 20 range and luck. So we will win.

[Flurry]

Quote: Aerodrome

with such an ass, only to seize ... the initiative. at least finish the engine with "exhaust", then write bravura articles. a maneuverable interceptor, this thing cannot be, by definition, loitering, waiting for a possible victim - it may very well be, waiting and covering some character is also an option. but not a fig not an interceptor.

What is it? If you look at the F-35, it is no better. Why don't you shout about the need to finish off its round nozzle? And there are already legends about his "maneuverability";))) But no one doubts his potential as an "interceptor"? ;))

[Flurry]

Uzhos just ... and how is it considered subtle ??
"Hunter" is our version of the F-35 concept, only unmanned.

[Aleks2048]

I read the article and comments ... Sadness. The future belongs to the UAV. And SU57 is a great fighter overall. And a bunch of them as a whole may not look bad, especially when you consider that we do not foresee any breakthroughs with AWACS aircraft, more precisely, AWACS needs not a platform, but a filling ... although quantitatively, there are few platforms. The use of SU57 as a place for analyzing the air situation with the subsequent issuance of target designation to the UAV is about poverty and wasting money on PR campaigns. Well, at least not a lot of money sawing. If only because in fact there is no SU57 or Hunter in large quantities.

[Maks1995]

They also did not have time to test the only option, and already the peremogs in the articles are being felled

[Dmitry Vladimirovich]

Questions:
Su-57 as a supersonic flying command center, as a radar carrier and a repeater - not too expensive?

1. A ground mobile command center or a remote stationary protected command center is several orders of magnitude cheaper. The issue of communication range and stability makes the air control point unnecessary.
Global Hawk is controlled from another continent - the intelligence channel is very "thick", is the task solved?

2. Frankly speaking, the contradiction is embarrassing - the use of the Su-57 air platform, built according to the technical specification for attack aircraft, and used completely not according to the platform profile - as a control center / command center.

3. Confused by the work of the Su-57 as a "tactical AWACS". In active mode, the radar detects its presence in the area, which potentially carries the threat of its destruction.

4. Confused by the difference in the speed of the "command post" and the "slave" strike UAV, is the command post faster than an interceptor UAV? - At least strange. The uniformity of aircraft characteristics in a tactical group - the basics of building a tactical group - here this rule is violated.

In the USSR, we were taught to separate tasks, the concept of the Su-57 and the slave UAV-interceptor violate several principles that I outlined above.

It is roughly clear what conditions were laid down in the simulation program: the Su-57 determines the air situation, reveals its presence, provokes an attack, the UAV, which is not detected, counterattacks.
But it will work a couple of times.

It seems more logical to shift the functions of opening the air situation to a similar UAV with a radar (aka a command relay), the second will perform strike functions.
A pair of UAVs with identical flight characteristics is a more logical solution.

[Selevc]

4. Confused by the difference in the speed of the "command post" and the "slave" strike UAV, is the command post faster than an interceptor UAV?

I think that the combat use of a bunch of aircraft and at least a couple of UAVs is generally problematic ... They fly very differently: takeoff and landing at different times, the difference in maneuverability, climb and descent, as well as in other flight parameters ...

This bundle is actually a show! And in a real battle in the sky there will be either bedlam or the elements of the bundle will simply lose each other and their effectiveness is very doubtful ... At least not a single country in the world has shown such effective systems in battle ...

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich

Global Hawk is operated from another continent

That's right, but you forgot (don't know !?) to add that it is controlled through space! AHA.

Confused by the work of the Su-57 as a "tactical AWACS"

And the fact that the F-35 is endowed with such functionality does not bother you? And why, in a network-centric war, the Su-57 cannot receive data from VII in a passive mode? Strange ...

Confused by the difference in the speed of the "command post" and the "slave" strike UAV, is the command post faster than a UAV interceptor?

Dmitry Vladimirovich, what does it say about combat economic speed? Supersonic is for leaving, breakout and other crap. And at high subsonic frequencies - the maximum range. Or am I wrong about something?
Then, the interceptor "WHAT" ??? - KR? UAV, B-52, B-2 and other flying mischief? So they are all almost SUBSOUND. So why can't the C70 intercept them on a head-on course? Therefore - not a fact!
But to cover our C70s from the attacks of the IA, performing the supplied BZ, the Su-57 may well. At the same time, he will help in organizing the battle. AI is certainly good, but a pilot with living brains is still better.
IMHO.

[Dmitry Vladimirovich]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

That's right, but you forgot (don't know !?) to add that it is controlled through space! AHA

Reception / transmission of data via a satellite channel to an air platform is a matter of encryption, not a possibility in principle. In the GH reconnaissance complex, the issue of online broadcasting was successfully resolved through a military satellite communications group, and the channel there is very thick. An aerial interceptor does not need a satellite control channel - it is expensive, not stable in soy conditions, locally - via a repeater - is more competent for a tactical interceptor.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

what does it say about combat economic speed? Supersonic is for leaving, breakout and other crap. And at high subsonic frequencies - the maximum range. Or am I wrong about something

In price - those solutions for aircraft supersonic and aircraft subsonic - differ significantly.
A subsonic command relay and a subsonic interceptor are a more logical solution and reasonably economical.
I do not consider this a contradiction - it is not clear what the engine will be on the UAV-Okhotnik platform, the wing profile may also be supersonic - it is not visually clear from the photo yet. The machine can be designed according to the specification for the SZ aircraft.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Then, the interceptor "WHAT" ??? - KR? UAVs, B-52, B-2 and other flying mischief? So they are all almost SUBSOUND. So why can't the C70 intercept them on a head-on course?

Naive reasoning - to bring the interceptor on a collision course in the right place at the right time - from the category of coincidences. Well, there were deflecting interceptors in the history of USSR aviation - before the appearance of the MiG-25, which in the NW quickly went to the area of ​​intercepting subsonic and supersonic targets.
The interceptor must be TOTAL and built according to the design of the performance characteristics of a supersonic aircraft.
Otherwise, it's just a striking platform.

[Tavrik]

On points 1 and 2: well, Duc is our style - "and let's hang him some more tasks!" Convulsive throwing, which sailors have already gone through with aircraft carrier cruisers.

[Pavel57]

For a swarm of Hunters, a two-seater plane looks better. The role of the operator may be more important than the pilot.

[ccsr]

Author:
Evgeny Damantsev

in the foreseeable future will reveal to the Aerospace Forces of Russia previously unattainable horizons in the field of tasks to achieve air superiority and the interception of priority air targets in those areas of the theaters of war of the XXI century, where the abundance of modern air defense systems of a potential enemy (the Patriot PAC-3MSE air defense system, SAMP-T, Land Сeptor, etc.) calls into question the safety of the flight personnel operational-tactical aviation of the Russian Aerospace Forces.

You read such slogans, and you immediately want to ask the author a question - where did he see such an "unattainable horizon", if the main task of the Aerospace Forces is to inflict a nuclear strike with strategic aviation on our main enemy, and for this no UAVs are needed. Naturally, our armed forces need UAVs, but not at all in the way the author depicts it, and even more so they will not bring us any advantage in the strategic confrontation. This means less fanfare and blows to the tambourine - you need to soberly look at such things, and not fall into euphoria. But the author of the article apparently has problems with this ...

[Selevc]

Quote: ccsr

where he saw such an "unattainable horizon", if the main task of the Aerospace Forces is to deliver a nuclear strike with strategic aviation against our main enemy,

Maybe it was ... But now we see collective attempts by the West to destroy the Russian Federation without using nuclear weapons - they are already sure that the Russian Federation will never dare to use it !!! That is, if you pursue a sufficiently clever policy of the same "soft power" or "economic pressure" then the Russian Federation will never use its nuclear weapons !!! After all, there are examples in the very recent past - Hitler did not dare to seriously use chemical weapons in the Second World War, despite the death of millions of Germans !!!

And if we remove the nuclear component of the confrontation, then in the development of UAVs and other progressive military technologies, the West is still ahead of the rest !!!

[evgen1221]

I agree with you, in one discussion I was trying to find out from the members of the forum at least the minimum possible scenario of actions to defend one object without inflicting blows. Zero solutions, a bunch of minus players and a bunch of style answers will never be like this, because we pomp bang-pancake, continuous waving checkers from the battle sofa under a beer.

[bk316]

encrypted (using the Reed-Solomon code)

ALE GARAGE! What the hell is this? Reed-Solomon codes do not encrypt anything; they are used to detect and correct errors in the transmission channel.
If the rest of the information in the article is of this quality, it’s worthless.

[Flurry]

This is Damantsev. Do not take it seriously, an article to seed the discussion.

[Barabanshik]

Quote: Rafale

This is Damantsev. Do not take it seriously, an article to seed the discussion.

Either the public was so excited with fright ..))) Is it not?
They are paid to find out who and what and how ..? "Hunters" for technologies are sitting here and there are many such Well done Damantsev, you know how to identify and anger some here fans of the West and who hate Russia terribly

[Tavrik]

Yes, I also "hit in the eyes". So soon we will know about the application of the latest Huffman code. And LDPC is finally a breakthrough!

[Flurry]

Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich

It is roughly clear what conditions were laid down in the simulation program: the Su-57 determines the air situation, reveals its presence, provokes an attack, the UAV, which is not detected, counterattacks.
But it will work a couple of times.

This is how the F-35 interception tactic works. AWACS reveals its presence, the rest are in radio silence and control center from him. Either one of the F-35s opens targets, the rest in radio silence from him and attack. It's strange that the Yankees are counting a little more than twice;))

[Pavel57]

Quote: Rafale

Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich

It is roughly clear what conditions were laid down in the simulation program: the Su-57 determines the air situation, reveals its presence, provokes an attack, the UAV, which is not detected, counterattacks.
But it will work a couple of times.

AWACS reveals its presence, the rest are in radio silence and control center from him.;))

For the role of mini AWACS, the MiG-31 would be suitable.

[Hexenmeister]

For the role of mini AWACS, the MiG-31 would be suitable

I don't think it will work. The radar of the same Su-35S outperforms the Zaslon from the MiG-31 both in the detection range and in the angles of the possible pumping of the radar antenna, and the ability to work on ground targets.

[Knell wardenheart]

For this product, I have only two questions - whether it is good or bad - I will leave it out of brackets.
1) How much will it cost and how many pieces are planned?
2) Will our industry be able to saw hundreds of similar products "like sausages" based on its own electronic component and material and technical base?

It is these 2 factors that determine the "value" and the real military significance of the product in the structure of our security now.

[viktor_ui]

escort file + escort = puck, puck ... the more chatter around the project and even in terms of the lack of analogue in the world, the worse the patient is. What to rattle about that there is a current in the form of a RAW prototype. Satisfy the Air Force, then we'll applaud.

[Ryaruav]

first, it is necessary to bring the su-57 and the hunter to full functionality separately, and only then to experiment

[JD1979]

Eugene, did you yourself write this ... article? It is somehow uncharacteristic for you: short, incoherent and so delusional that even for you it is too much.

[Bolo]

Damantsev, how many more will you keep us, readers for a sprat?

[Barabanshik]

Unsound capabilities of the S-70 Okhotnik-B strike UAV

God forbid that ours did not voice performance characteristics and other surprises .. You need to be silent, otherwise everyone will be tricked out and vulgarized later .. Remember Hitler also yelled, Russia on clay feet, etc.
Where is he now and whose weapon was the best?
Is the spiral of history starting again? Well, let's someone new, who is sure!
PS Write Damantsev write more .. Look how they react with screams .. When they are asked such riddles! They are afraid of our weapons, eerily and especially the Russian spirit ..! Now they will kick and complain en masse
Break through!

[AC130 Gunship]

What's interesting: 1. In reality, there were no missile launches, but all the imaginary targets were allegedly hit. 2. "Dumb Americans", who have been producing and operating heavy drones since the late 90s, are far behind. Good daughter Annushka - praise mother and grandmother

[Aleks2000]

We didn't manage to do it, but "the Russians overtook the Americans"

It wasn't her they refused to insure - too expensive?

In general, peremoga ...

[Undecim]

Another tub of verbal abracadabra from Damantsev. The chicken is in the nest, the testicles are not known where, and Damantsev is already in Okhotny Ryad selling chickens.
Moreover, the author has already completely lost respect for the readers, composing his texts from arbitrarily typed technical terms and not even caring about giving the set of these terms any meaning.

[evgen1221]

I alone noticed that so unobtrusively between the cases in the article, the code encryption system was leaked to the masses? Hope or what is it? With the increased possibilities of computing power and a kind fit on the basis of which system the data exchange was encrypted, it will be easier for the enemy to intercept and decrypt it - they have already learned what encryption method we have used. Another breakthrough.

[Maxim_ok]

The author is not ashamed to give out such enthusiastic fantasies? We overtook, gave out a techno jump! Some kind of modeling and such delights. So far, everything is "on paper". In fact, the only prototype UAV made its first flight on August 3, 2019, flying around the airfield at an altitude of 600 meters (controlled by the operator) and less than a month later (September 27) flew next to the Su-57 (there is only one serial in the Air Force) that's all for you breakthrough so far. Something was being modeled at the test site. All this is still at the very beginning and it is not a matter of giving colorful fantasies as a fait accompli. Moreover, the topic of UAVs in the Russian Federation has actually failed at the moment (even the Turks have bypassed it) and progress in this area, if there is, it will not be soon.

[Saxahorse]

I already got this endless fountain of trash around the "Hunter", which barely got off the ground !!

Some stupid "effective manager" suddenly decided that the pilot of a modern fighter plane had absolutely nothing to do in battle! Sluggish he is a gray dog! Therefore, let’s load him with two or three more fighters so he’s not bored, and it’s not in vain that he was wiping the official overalls in his pilot’s seat.

There are not even censorship words to appreciate the depth of this "idea". If we talk about the Tu-22, or at least about the Su-30 with a dedicated weapons operator - well, something might work with a creak ... But the Su-57 with a Hunter as a partner is a thick and odorous trash!

[AML]

Quote: Saxahorse

Some stupid "effective manager" suddenly decided that the pilot of a modern fighter plane had absolutely nothing to do in battle!

In battle? So you still have to fly to the battle.

[Mikhail3]

open architecture avionics

Let's start with an anecdote. This is what ?! Is it really a mandatory sign of the younger generation to be absolutely illiterate with regard to at least some kind of computer knowledge? You were given a computer back in kindergarten, but you still don't understand anything. Alas, the ability to watch cool vids and shit in the comments is not any qualification.
An open software architecture, the author, is when you give everyone the opportunity to view its sources, and based on these sources, third-party developers can write their own programs that integrate with this. I hope, damn it, that everything in our design bureaus is not yet rotten enough to make the architecture of the main avionics software complex open! And even more so not to allow at least someone to write docking software!
These clumps of rubbish never work well, although the world's best programmers work on open platforms. WORLD, not a dozen in one KB, and six in another! Who will also get the opportunity to push the blame onto each other! If the software is not written entirely, with one hand, and at the same time its authors are not fully responsible for the result, then ... Moreover, for the successful implementation of the project, responsibility must be properly distributed. Successful implementation - top developers become dollar millionaires. Failed business - car accident. However, again I was dreaming ...
Well and further. There is nothing revolutionary, to put it mildly, in transmitting data to a UAV. You see, the author, radio communication was not opened yesterday. And the transmission of encrypted packets is not a revolution either. Believe it or not, those who came up with this method of data exchange carried out all this long ago. Estimate - a very, very long time! And all this has not been introduced into a wide circulation, not because no one can do that. But because so far it has not been possible to achieve decent data protection and work in war conditions, that is, with active opposition from the enemy.
So, while our specialists have not achieved anything interesting. That is, in general. Absolutely. "Achievement" at the level of drone control with Ali, nothing more. The fact that they managed to reconcile several systems into a single whole is not a development, it is overcoming departmental squabbles and bureaucratic rest mass. There is nothing to be proud of. Alas.

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Mikhail3

Moreover, for the successful implementation of the project, responsibility must be properly distributed. Successful implementation - leading developers become dollar millionaires... Failed business - car accident. However, again I was dreaming ...

in reality, on the contrary or why are you drowning? sell homeland for green papers

Quote: Mikhail3

And all this has not been introduced into a wide circulation, not because no one can do that. But because so far it has not been possible to achieve decent data protection and work in war conditions, that is, with active opposition from the enemy.

not bad. I agree! that's why I started to think that the whole forum has a brain bayraktar

Quote: Mikhail3

So, while our specialists have not achieved anything interesting. That is, in general. Absolutely. "Achievement" at the level of drone control with Ali, nothing more.

have you read the article? does nothing bother you? Su-57 has 1 pilot. with him in a bundle drone ... come on! who drives the drone? if this is "nothing interesting has been achieved" what do you think is interesting?

Quote: Mikhail3

The fact that they managed to coordinate several systems into a single whole is not a development, it is overcoming departmental squabbles and a bureaucratic mass of rest. There is nothing to be proud of. Alas.

exactly? Since there is nothing new, then probably in all countries fighters are already working, accompanied by drones, right? list the countries with such complexes in service.
you obviously got excited

[Mikhail3]

No, it doesn't bother me that the drone operator is not standing on the ground, but sitting on the plane. I hope they made him something better than the remote control they buy on Ali, at least some of the functions are taken over by the computer. Only this, to put it mildly, is not the cutting edge of technology, is it?)
Our fighters DO NOT WORK with a drone. They had tests there. That's all. The fundamental possibility has been proved. May I not cry with joy that it has been proven that it is fundamentally possible to control the drone remotely? For some reason it seems to me that this is someone somewhere a couple of times already done ...

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Mikhail3

Only this, to put it mildly, is not the cutting edge of technology, is it?)

no! this is just the very cutting edge. can be said sharper than military science
both in our country and in the USA they are actively working on a project of a slave UAV. they and we have successes. the idea is that the fighter is accompanied by drones independently performing the tasks set by the pilot, for example, reconnaissance or attack. the pilot does not control them.

Quote: Mikhail3

May I not cry with joy that it has been proven that it is fundamentally possible to control the drone remotely?

of course! especially considering that the UAVs were not controlled but this, personally pleases me.

[Mikhail3]

I know about active work, and I guess about successes) That the pilot does not control is also an achievement. But there is nothing in the news about this, but only about the fact that the control of the UAV is implemented in encrypted packets. And that's all. This does not attract achievements.
The fact that the UAV was not "controlled" ... Science has a lot of guitars. Nobody bothers to write a chain of commands and transfer them for execution to the drone. And in it, if it is a drone as part of an aircraft escort and attack group, there must be something like AI in order for it to become really useful.
You will excuse me, but I do not believe in such a level of programming and hardware that will make it possible to make a slave group, and implemented here. However, I do not believe in the solution of this problem in the West, at least at the level of a real battle, so I cannot be blamed for the absence of patriotism)
I believe that we are witnessing the beginning of the collapse of our dead-end civilization, and the processes of destruction have affected, first of all, breakthrough technologies. There will be a lot of noise ... and no real product. IMHO

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Mikhail3

I know about active work, and I guess about successes) That the pilot does not control is also an achievement. But there is nothing in the news about this, but only about the fact that the control of the UAV is implemented in encrypted packets. And that's all. This does not attract achievements.

well that's already an excuse but it is accepted.

Quote: Mikhail3

The fact that the UAV was not "controlled" ... Science has a lot of guitars. Nobody bothers to write a chain of commands and transfer them for execution to the drone. And in it, if it is a drone as part of an aircraft escort and attack group, there must be something like AI in order for it to become really useful.

quite right!

Quote: Mikhail3

You will excuse me, but I do not believe in such a level of programming and hardware that will make it possible to make a slave group, and implemented here. However, I do not believe in the solution of this problem in the West, at least at the level of a real battle, so I cannot be blamed for the absence of patriotism)

Duc level of "combat use" is not yet, so far only work is underway, both here and there.

Quote: Mikhail3

I believe that we are witnessing the beginning of the collapse of our dead-end civilization, and the processes of destruction have affected, first of all, breakthrough technologies. There will be a lot of noise ... and no real product. IMHO

but from now on in more detail. in what do you see destruction?

[Mikhail3]

I am not making excuses) Once upon a time, when there was still a lot of things that are now not in sight, I was taught some psychological techniques suitable for working with my own consciousness. Neighing, I remember, over the term "subconscious" and taught. Since then, no excuses, no weak capture, no much else is about me) Maybe I shouldn't have gotten into all this, clearing up my mind does not give happiness ...
Here I have to write a series of articles, and I have the first one, there is no inspiration, the struggle for existence takes a lot of energy. Well, quite simply - our civilization already cannot do much of what it could before. It's funny that all this is hidden behind the "progress" in drawing pictures on PC screens, and the complication of calculations on the same PCs and supercomputers. Control systems for it, this very civilization, are also rapidly degenerating, and also, this is covered by attempts to introduce automatic regulation by increasing the collection of data and impact on all aspects of human activity. The same digitalization, yeah.
A long and completely useless speech ...

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Mikhail3

Well, quite simply - our civilization already cannot do much of what it could before.

for example? to make tools of stone and herbs are treated? this is how development works, effective develops, not effective is forgotten and it disappears

Quote: Mikhail3

Control systems for it, this very civilization, are also rapidly degenerating, and also, this is covered by attempts to introduce automatic regulation by increasing the collection of data and impact on all aspects of human activity.

how do you imagine the correct management of the multi-million masses of people? well, not "autocracy, Orthodoxy and nationality"

[Mikhail3]

Well, for example, the United States can no longer establish work with weapons-grade uranium and plutonium) This is offhand, without thinking. And there is still a lot of that, look - you will be surprised.
How do I represent the management of multimillion people? I wrote an article from the very beginning, there were such comments as yours, the sea was)) I'm saying - you have to write a whole cycle. You will be even more sad now, but I cannot but ask a question. Tell me, do you know the numerical strength of the control systems for the gigantic territories of that very damned autocracy? Do you know how many people effectively and extremely successfully ruled the gigantic regions, ensured their development, made it so that Russia before the First World War developed ten times faster than any country on this tired ball? Do you know that Sytin, the owner of a network of taverns, was finishing the study of opening the same network in the USA and Europe?
AS? How did it come about? What was the secret, why this pathetic autocracy was so hated and so feared by the Western rulers? Just do not answer with ordinary platitudes, please. Answer yourself to the questions I have asked. And answer so that your answer completely closes the question logically. I assure you, this is very, very difficult))