why are s ducts so hard to make?

s-ducts are a meme just like stealth

>>32567698
it's about compromises.
s-ducts may reduce rcs but also reduce engine performance and the flight envelope.

yf-23 did have visible fan blades from certain angles but still had acceptable RCS

>>32567698
They're not, assuming you're not a slavic savage with fetal alcohol syndrome.

>>32567759
That would explain why the Russians have opted to not go with any kind of LO for the PAK-FA

I'm sure the engineers at Suhkoi know what they are doing and have their reasons.

>>32567833
SNAP

File: 1482366393312.jpg (23KB, 402x187px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 402x187px

>>32567698
Russia doesn't have the money to engineer a new aircraft design, that's why they got stuck with SU-27++++++ Variants since collapse of soviet union same with other weapons.
So SU-50 Is just a covered up SU-27++++++++

>>32567787
You are talking about the YF-23 Whitewidow, which didn't have a proper S-ducts, this was fixed with the second design Blackwidow which had S-ducts.

File: russian_general_speaks.png (554KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

554KB, 800x450px

>be russian general
> warns about s300 and s400 air defense systems
> proceeds as pic related

And not a single nato s-duct jet was seen in the skies from that day on.

>>32568230

>Talk shit about the S-300 system
>Deploy one in Syria
>Make immediate news about how no planes will fly through it
>RAF flies a bunch of planes originally designed in the 70's through it one day afterwards
>W-WELL WE JUST ALLOWED IT W-WE DIDN'T MEAN THEY COULDN'T FLY

Slavshit BTFO as usual.

>>32567698
You need a very powerful engine to cover power losses.

>>32568337

>RAF
>Flying over Syria

Kek. Assad must be dead by now then lol;

>>32568503
They flew tornado's over syria

>>32568521

Can't find a source. Far away from russian and syrian forces I gess?

>>32568600
All I know is that the Tornado was the plane he was referring to and someone claimed it didn't fly over Syria when it did. The RAF still sorties aircraft over Syria.

>S-300
>entered service in 1978

if you think thats enough to stop NATO jets you're a gulllible fucking retard

>>32568600

Didn't look very hard then.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british-combat-aircraft-continue-operate-mosul/

>>32568620
Thats not a good way to put it as its been upgraded many times, but still its pretty sad that all they have to counter the newest generations of aircraft is a system that is another Soviet hand me down.

>>32568623
>Mosul
retard

>>32568337
>mosul
that mean at least they was fly over IS control land in raqqa and iraq border

S-400 is in Latakia though

>>32568620

Seems like nato did not wanted to find out. Good luck with your s-duct F-35s in the future.

>>32568623

Yep, the news don't even tell where they were bombing. Far away from russian and syrian forces, it seems.

File: web.jpg (476KB, 1400x933px) Image search: [Google]

476KB, 1400x933px

>>32567698
>why are s ducts so hard to make?-
why are forward swept wing with S duct so hard to make?

>>32568337
embarrassing

File: 1448540247107.jpg (805KB, 1920x2560px) Image search: [Google]

805KB, 1920x2560px

>>32568620
>70s missile can't stop 2000s fighter
are you a retard?

>>32568230
The US has access to an S-300 system.

If they were really that terrified or aware of how useless VLO/LO airframes were, they wouldn't be aggressively pursuing them.

>>32568726
>Far away from russian and syrian forces, it seems.

You base that on nothing.

>>32568745
Is that an F/A 18 with the wings on backwards? What am I looking at here?

File: Serbians_dancing_on_F-117.jpg (260KB, 500x750px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 500x750px

>>32568781

Indeed.

>>32568781
pic unrelated?

File: 137d29f1d5e33479b4a7b2f1357cebe8.png (420KB, 600x506px) Image search: [Google]

420KB, 600x506px

>>32568795
sr-10
Russia new single engine jet trainer

>>32568600
>>32568725

IAF flew F-16s over the S-400 meme without warning, bombed the shit out of some Syrian and Hezbollah big heads over Latikia and returned safely, no one knew until their death was announced...

>>32568787
>The US has access to an S-300 system.

Having had access to some 20+ year old Slovakian version doesn't cut it...btw, when they did a wargame excersize with the slovakian S300s they found out that even that 20+ year old version is highly resistant to their best ECMs.

Back in 2008 when Russia kicked some Georgian ass the Georgians shot down some russian aircraft with their 15+ year old Buk SAMs they bought from Ukraine. Russian planes deployed their state of the art ECMs to counter Georgian SAMs, yet they still lost some planes to missiles they designed themselves.

If they couldn't jam their own missiles effectively, WHAT chance do you think american ECM has? A tip, none.

>>32568882
says a lot about how shitty the vvs is tbhfam

>>32568795

Sukhoi su-47 with s-ducts but don't tell anyone.

>>32568868
>IAF flew F-16s over the S-400 meme without warning, bombed the shit out of some Syrian and Hezbollah big heads over Latikia and returned safely
Hezbollah main base are in Homs and Damascus, not Latakia, northern Latakia is full of turk, idt the Turk would let IDF jet fly near them
are you drunk?

>>32568904
They put s-ducts on their test bed prototype aircraft and not on their "low observable" fighter? Whats that about?

>>32568928

S-ducts doesn't matter.

>>32568928
Thy're the same "s-ducts" that you see in the F-4, ex: they're not

>>32568941
Just like having a one piece canopy, rivets visible through RAM doesn't matter?

File: 50000.jpg (161KB, 1000x637px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1000x637px

>>32568928
because Sukhoi suck
their key engineer were all bought by China

now they can't built anything that is not a SU-27 airframe

>>32568781
>F-117
>2000s
>fighter
Pick one.

>>32568928
the belief that s-ducts are a prerequisite for stealth is just /k/ autism.
posters focus on one feature that is most visible, and blow it's importance out of proportion. same goes for canards.
those who work in the industry won't ever debunk their claims, because it's not worth losing security clearance.

>>32568967
more features unimportant for stealth.

yf-23 did not have single-piece canopy
f-22 has hex bolts visible.

>>32569132
They aren't a prerequisite for stealth but they help a lot, the fan blades are responsible for a great deal of the radar return. In fact US fighter radars can actually identify aircraft by the fan blade return.

With that said the PAK FA has few radar reducing features aside from RAM, which oddly enough still does not cover all the rivets. Its not that its not stealth because it lacks s-ducts, but rather its stated "low observability" comes into question when its construction seems to lack even the most common features of every other contemporary stealth aircraft.

>>32569132
>most visible

Indeed, the engines are what cause the largest RCS return after all

>>32569153
>muh hexbolts

the difference is that on the f-22 they're flush with the skin, that's not so with the pak-fa

>>32569153
>yf-23

Yes, but every other accepted design since then has.

>>32568180
They were called the Grey Ghost and Black Widow respectively IIRC.

>>32569203
>muh rivets
i'm pretty sure a rivet is smaller than wavelength of any fighter radar
>>32569231
yf-23 was stated to have lower RCS than yf-22. both have exceeded the requiement.

>>32569305
Its not the individual bolt that raises the return but rather the total amount of bolts that collectively create a percentage of the surface area of the aircraft that raises it return.

>>32567698
Because, during supersonic flight, the geometry of the ducts can induce shockwaves which the engine can have trouble dealing with.

>>32568726
In order to get to the target they have to fly over the Syrian coast, which is more than within the S-400 or even S-300v engagement range.

>>32569381
that's not how electromagnetic radiation works.

>>32568882
considering American ECM is much more advanced than mid 2000s Russian Air Force, I'd say it stands a very good chance.

>>32569474
Are you trying to say rivets don't contribute to an aircraft's RCS?

>>32569490
go ahead, make a parabolic antenna from a dielectric sheet with rivets in it and post results

>>32569547
Sp every single modern stealth fighter has no raised rivets with the exception of the PAK FA for absolutely no reason?

>>32569483
do you have any reasoning for that claim?

>>32567698
You need much more advanced engines that can deal with the wonky airflow.
Russian engines are crude and they can't build sophisticated ones so they rely on intake ramps with the result of an rcs on the level with a super bug. Jet engine modulation gonna be a bitch for poor Ivan Vatnikski while Joe Burger will laugh as he lines up shots at more than twice the detection range of the PAK-FAilure.

>>32569575
flush rivets slightly reduce drag.
but pak-fa has plenty of flush rivets, take a look at some hi-res photos.

>>32568882
>Russian equipment is so shit they can't counter almost 2 decade old IADs, so American equipment must be bad

makes you think

>>32568918
IAF not IDF.

>>32569630
Fucked up, raised rivets haven't been a thing for decades. Meant that the presence of visible rivets makes the stated stealth capabilities of the aircraft as this is currently the only recent stealth aircraft to have them.

>>32569674
new aircraft use new manufacturing techniques.
by coincidence, most new aircraft are also low observable.
but there's no point in arguing. go read a book. or ask /sci/.

>>32569590
sure

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/ea-18g-growler/

at the time of the war in 2008 Russian aircraft couldn't actually fly at night or in bad weather because they lacked the technology. The latest Allied dedicated EW aircraft is the EA-18 which is miles again of anything the Russian have. They on the other hand use Su-24s which have been earmarked for elint/EW missions and have EW suites attached to them, unlike designing a new aircraft around EW/ECM from the get go. Mind you, the Russian Air Force still uses legacy semi-active missiles in their fleets.

PS even when the only EW aircraft we had was the EA-6B, it was still miles ahead of them

>>32569714
>dedicated EW aircraft
>ECM pods powered by propellers
how advanced lol

>>32569759
Well yeah, those pods are just one part of the plane. The rest of it has gone under an extensive overhaul including taking out weapon systems and replacing them with internal sensors, pods and jammers. That's what a EW aircraft is.

Or did you intentially forget that so you could make your little joke. Fact of the matter is, in terms of EW/Jamming and SEAD the US is miles ahead. Just like nearly everything else. Hell, even the Russian Air Force showed itself incapable of dropping precision guided munitions because they lacked the training, equipment and the aircrews to undertake those kinds of missions.

>>32569818
I should add to this
>>32569818
The US military is currently undergoing trials for new jammer pods right now, meaning that in addition to having a new EW aircraft, they'll also get new jamming equipment.

>>32569710
>new aircraft use new manufacturing techniques.

They've literally reused every single part of the Su-27/35 as they could. The radar and engines are just modified versions of what they've
already been using for years. The only thing new that it brings to the table is RAM. Meanwhile the F-35 and F-22 both had their own new radars and engines. Even though J-20 and J-31 both use older engines they still represent a radical step forward in China. The PAK FA shows just how badly the standards for Russian aviation have fallen.

Also planes aren't low observable by coincidence, agencies across the world have spent trillions developing the technologies for these aircraft. While newer aircraft like the Rafale, Gripen, and Eurofighter have smaller RCS than there predecessors, they aren't low observable.

File: 1483814322354.jpg (87KB, 750x583px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 750x583px

>>32567698
Because they want to use the room between the engines/ducts for more weapons, otherwise they could do this

File: C0rTlxpVIAEc9fH.jpg (188KB, 919x1149px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 919x1149px

>>32568882
>mfw when American F35s acquire the PAK-FA with Grave Stone radars and shoot them with S400s

Considering American Suter III ECM software dominated Russian IADS during Isreal's cross-border excursions, I'm guessing the modern Suter 6 will crush them in the present. Suter had full network penetration and firing capabilities back in the mid-00s. God only knows what it does now.

>>32568702

Well done for not reading the article moron.

File: Weapons bay.jpg (166KB, 1022x694px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1022x694px

>>32569878

You can have S ducts and still do that anon.

File: 1446583331347.jpg (167KB, 866x838px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 866x838px

>>32568882
>russians attack one of their shitty irrelevant neighbours that use outdated slavshit
>still take more casualties than they should with such a lopsided balance of power
>this is supposed to reflect well on russians
weeewww

File: 1480185417629.jpg (164KB, 1052x459px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1052x459px

hmmmmm
rly makes u think

File: 1479689798633.jpg (191KB, 1065x635px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 1065x635px

Vatnik butthurt, best butthurt.

>>32570015
You should read it again, dumbo.