Please do the YF23 vs F22

For what it’s worth, Cap, some of us do have time to watch a 40 minute video and do very much enjoy the talking portion at the beginning. Love the content! Keep up the great work gentlemen.

This is a very important question: Do we use the simulated F35 or stated F35? My preference is that since we're using the simulated SU57, we should also use the simulated F35. That being said, this is the perfect opportunity for a KZfaq Community Poll!

For me, moving to the stealthier models for both makes sense- the public figures for the F-35 are likely to be over the real figures as if an enemy develops a radar solution for the published figures and it's lower, that system is already not effective (or as effective as desired byt the developer), The stealthier Su-57 makes for a more challenging set of engagements and although Russia's actual ability to make and maintain its Su-57 fleet is highly dubious, this is a best-case for the wargames sake. BTW, are you guys going to RIAT? Would be awesome to meet you

I'd like to see the upgraded SU-57 versus a newer F-16 variant. I'd also be curious to hear what these people calculate the J-20 RCS to be.

I would go with the .002 meters squared. I would think with high level aircraft that they would not release the actual numbers.

Hi Cap. Going to beat on my drum again about the radars. Cap these, tests while fun, are NEVER going to be accurate if you keep using the same radar for both aircraft. I know it's a pain in the ass and from your point of view not worth bothering to design and use different radars but I'm sorry it makes a big difference. That's one of the U.S. major advantages BY DESIGN ! I know you've read my and others comments about this before and addressed this with your reasons for not making separate radars but I'm still going to keep pounding away on my drum because it makes such a big difference. OK rant over and thanks for making such fun videos all of us to enjoy and for me to gripe about :)

I'd like to see the F-35 perform at the lower 0.002 stealth spec to see if it makes any noticeable difference.

Seems pretty thorough to me! Looks like these guys put a lot of effort and skill into these tests, and being that they’re so close with the F35 I would assume the SU57 would be just as close to real figures. I say go with their numbers.

It makes sense to me that the russians would be using RAM coating on their stealth fighter and we can safely assume that this is how most combat Su57s will be treated. The IRST of the Su-57 will be closed in almost all situations except for closer ranges (15-10 nm) where it may already be seen by modern AESA radars so I think you should go for the version with the closed IRST.

If you are going use the calculated number it makes sense to use it for both aircraft. Do use 0.002 m2 for the F35.

A big thing that is not taken into account is the IRST of the F35. I dont know anythying about the one from the su57 but the F-35 IRST probably can do cool things too, but obviosly it is classified. The AN/AAQ-37 Electro Optical System of the F-35 can among other things detect and track aircraft. The USAF has also been testing IRST Pods on F15s and have shot down a QF-16 with an IRST guided aim 120 without using radar, and I would be surprised if the F-35 cannot do that. All this Information leads me to think that the F-35 might be able to detect other stealth aircraft by their heat signature before it can see them on their radar. Of course the public information on this is extremely limited, but I think it is atleast worth to talk about when doing comparisons/battles like in this video.

The most important thing to me would be consistency. If you use the 0.05 of the F-35 as a baseline, you would have to mutiply the results for the SU-57 by 2.5. If you use the simulated figure for the Su-57, then you should also use it for the F-35. Since stealth isn't perfect in real life, I would go for the higher figures.

My concern or shall I say question is.. how effective is their coating? Are we assuming all RAM coating is the same? Or is one better then the other?

Just for the record i love the breakdown at the beginning going into weapon specs and fleshing out the scenario its great to have the tech talk before the boom boom!

Heard a couple comments during the video that the Su-57 IRST/EOTS could not be made stealthy and that it would confer an advantage against the F-35. F-35 does have an DAS that functions as an EOTS, among other things, and it does not compromise stealth design, or if it does amplify RCS it is very minimal. Understand F-35 may not have EOTS modeled in game, but it does have one in real life and apparently doesn’t compromise its low RCS. Part of the distributor aperture system located under the nose of Fat Amy.

Simba's back!!😁✌ 20:56 😂 scratched your RAM off Cap! 24:35 lol voice of an Angel😆👍 26:31 I remember when it was The MIG-21 Cockpit Not for nothing but i think a cool last round would have been SU-57 VS SU-57 with RAM... 42:32 lol Simba's allowed to phase in and out of reality😆👍

I would want to see the correlation between your 3rd party analysis group's RCS predictions for well known fighter jets compared to the published RCS figures for those aircraft. Only change the F-35's RCS from the official number when you have more confidence in your 3rd party analysis group's figures for a range of other aircraft.

Happy to continue using the best public data - reduces the risk of favourites ;) Keep up the good work

2:38 it is always better than the public numbers. Also you have variability/uncertainty in the stealth coating

Another great vid boys. Welcome back Simba.

I'm not sure what the IRL status of the Su-57 RAM coating is, but it definitely makes for more interesting DCSW fights. I vote keeping the Su-57 upgrade.

My assumption, I guess predictably, since I am from the US, is that US released numbers are _not_ as good as they really are and Russian released numbers are _boosted._ I'm not sure how to interpret the alternate computations. Sorry. That really is a moot opinion in answering your question.

15:36 For some reason the last minute eject straight into a hillside had me laughing hysterically 😂

Glad to see Simba back

"Got a lock! Launch authority! Firing everything!" "Your missiles missed..." 🤣🤣

I suggest being as consistent as possible and sticking to one approach for all aircraft if possible.

If the calculated RCS of the F35 is a little low then I would expect the calculated RCS of the Su to be a little low too. Maybe bump it up to 0.015?

The return of Simba, TallyHo!!!

Would love to know the RCS of the J-20 from these studies! Doesn't make much sense to me if the SU-57 can have an RCS of 0.012m2 but the J-20 which should be superior is 0.5m2 according to past videos.

Two USAF generals have said the F-35 is stealthier than the F-22 so I think yeah run it as .002. I assume part of that stealthiness is not just RSC but I don’t think DCS can model that?

3:12 I think the predicted one is more realistic and consistend, so take that. But for the future you will need that kind of analysis for every aircraft

Thank you Simba for your service!!!

Wooo love the vids!

since the plane in DCS is a sphere none of this really matters unless you take not the frontal RCS but instead an average RCS from different angles of the plane models

Now we just need to get thr F-35's insane maneuverability added into the mod.

I would say with the F-35 the US official number is taking a standard deviation high amount for the RCS. I would say change it to halfway between the two numbers given.

F 35 use the new numbers, and same for the Felon. Lets go with the best science we have since Wikipedia is just an educated guess as well.

You should‘t interpolate the figure between IRST open/closed… basically it‘s never gonna fly around like that so choose either one i‘d suggest

I like seeing the “scientific methods” y’all use to entertain us!

Hey Cap! Given how public figures can be so challenging with claims of all sides either over or under reporting the potential of their aircraft, it makes it hard for any consistent modelling between aircraft of different sources. If it would be possible to run these independent models for as many aircraft as possible and use these results it would at least give a fairly consistent model for the RCS of each aircraft. There is always the possibility of further materials tech and differences between radar absorbent coatings meaning that there will be greater variation between aircraft from different sources, but as there is no way to know the capabilities of each producer estimating that they are all equal seems the best outcome we can hope for. Love the vids, keep up the great work! Hope baby reaper is well and not giving you too much trouble!

Welcome back Simba!!!!!

Cap where did you get the 0.005 m2 rcs for the f-35? Here is an excerpt from a research paper at the naval post graduate institute on stealth aircraft. I highly recommend giving this chapter a read, it’s not very long, and it details other attributes that make a plane stealthy aside from the shape/coating. Shape is just one piece of the pie. I’ll link the chapter below. “According to November 2005 reports, the US Air Force states that the F-22 has the lowest RCS of any manned aircraft in the USAF inventory, with a frontal RCS of 0.0001~0.0002 sqm, marble sized in frontal aspect. According to these reports, the F-35 is said to have an RCS equal to a metal golf ball, about 0.0015 sqm, which is about 5 to 10 times greater than the minimal frontal RCS of F/A-22. The F-35 has a lower RCS than the F-117 and is comparable to the B- 2, which was half that of the older F-117. Other reports claim that the F-35 is said to have an smaller RCS headon than the F-22, but from all other angles the F-35 RCS is greater. By comparison, the RCS of the Mig-29 is about 5m2. Much has been improved between the design of the F-22 and the F-35. The F-35 doors for landing gear and equipment, as well as control surface, all have straight lines. The F-35 does not require "saw tooth" openings to divert RF energy. One reason the openings on the F-35 are straight lines is reported to be embedded electrical wires near the edges which interfere with RF signals. The F-35 RAM is thicker, more durable, less expensive and, being manufactured to tighter tolerances compared to that of the F-22. The tighter tolerances means less radar signal can penetrate openings and reflect back to its source. The newer RAM is more effective against lower frequency radars, and maintenance should cost about a tenth that of the F-22 or B-2. Some forms of RAM have electrical plates or layers within the layers of carbon composites.”

Do you guys model the electro optical system for f35?? I don’t expect y’all to be looking through the aircraft with the DAS system but could you integrate its irst? The f35s stealthy infrared search ability could be pretty unbalanced

I think to be fair, both should use the simulated or neither should.

Given that this 0.005 variant is already so good that eyeballing it does a better job than radar, I think keeping it at the higher number makes sense, if you go all the way down to 0.002, you might as well not equip the enemy with radar anyway.

Would interesting to see the British f-35 with the meteor to see if that changes the outcome

The problem is, RAM coating is presumably optimised against X band radars and thus not very effective against AWACS. Given the 0.002 vs 0.005 m2 discrepancy could reasonably be attributed to the RAM coating, it actually depends on what is the adversary radar (or can DCS model different RCS for different radar bands?). For AWACS or LR radars, I would go with 0.005. For fighter jets and rockets itself, I would go with 0.002. Possibly, you could go with 0.002 and boost the AWACS radar? Piece of further evidence: Based on the 1999 incident in which F117 was shot down, it is beleived that F117 has RCS of 0.0012 m2, while publicly available data says 0.003 m2. The same proportion holds for this 0.002 m2 vs 0.005 m2 case. And the F117 case could again be attributed to the RAM coating. However, update of radars should be done in line with such stealth improvement. For example, Gripen radar has mk4 version available since 2017, that should see a 1 m2 at 225 km (as opposed to the original 90 km range), or 0.002 m2 at 47-48 km (25-26 nm). Assuming the same upgrade was done to SAAB AEW&C, with the original version allegedly capable of detecting 1m2 at 225 km, it should now be boosted beyond the instrument range. The F35 should be seen at about 60 km with the old setting, 150 km with the upgrade, and the new Global Eye at 216 km, asuming 650/450 improvment corresponding to the instrumented range. That is 117 nm! - for a brand new AWACS operating at low enough frequency to overcome the RAM.

Simba is back. Someone new is needed to restore balance to the Force again.

Cap, would you be able to do something like handful of F-15/18 missle trucks with a couple F-35s running ahead as hive mind via Link 16 (using AWACS if needed to simulate Link 16) vs handful of non stealth Su/Mig running with a couple Felons in tow?? I'd like to see how the F-35 linked to missile trucks would look like in a large air superiority battle.

good to see Simba back!

The people's champ! That's some surgical flying

What about sideways RCS? For tasks like notching missiles or or when cranking this can matter a lot, and the 57 seems far less optimsked for this, which I think aight to be reflected in the way you modelnitnto some extent too. Additionally. Does their software model creeping waves and other less radar radiation propogation? The F-35s RAM coating for example isn't uniform but carries electricall conductivity in certain areas to make creeping waves release radiation in directions that aren't back at the emitter. Even if the SU-57 has a "relatively primitive" RAM coating now, it's likely to still be missing subtle nuances like this.

I think I'd trust Heat Blast and the team's work more than "official" figures. God Save the People's Champion Simba!

Welcome back Simba

I'd say split the difference on the F35 so .0035 and the .012 for the Felon

2 things that would be interesting to model: the electrooptical system of the f35 (that diamond shaped think beneath the nose) and the reduced thermal signiture of the f35 that would hinder the enemies EO systems

Y’all really need to try to model the hmd system the lightning has as it along with the distributed aperture system are it’s aces in the hole

I would like to see you guys try to recreate a recent Chinese simulated attack on a US Carrier group, which they ran 20 times and claim succeeded in destroying the carrier and most of the ships in the carrier group. They used a 3 wave attack strategy or something. You can read about it online if you look.

At was enjoyable, good fun. 👍👾

Stealth coating won’t help Su-57 that much because the partially exposed engine faces are the most egregious contributor to radar reflections.

I would absolutely change the RCS of the F-35 to 0.002. While you're modifying it, can you please fix the flight model so it's more kinematically correct? Also, the radar has recently been said to be close to about as powerful as the old E2D awacs. Can you model a better radar? Oh, and i would use the Su-57 with the RAM coating.

The seventh rule of Fight Club is: fights will go on as long as they have to.

I would stick to the official numbers So 0.005m2 for the F-35 About the Su-57 There is an official paper from Sukoi itself that stated the RCS of the Felon from 1dbm to -10dbm so about 0.1m2 to 1m2 That's why I would stick to the old rcs model of 0.12m2

Does the Su-57 model have 2 x L band radars, side radars, rear radar, & a DIRCM?

Shape, aka design, is what matters most regarding stealth. RAM is just there to pick up creeping waves and the like. It's also really important in things such as engine inlets, even if it's s-shaped or y-shaped. But other than that, it won't change RCS value drastically

do the models take into account that there may be a difference in materials/ quality of the RAM coating?

I want the F-35A to be represented more closely than their analysis has done. The F-35 doesn't have RAM coating, the radar absorbent materials are baked into its skin. I've stated this before, but the USAF has officially came out and said the RCS of the F-35 is LOWER than the F-22. They also noted that a factory of safety is applied to damages to the surface of the F-35 will maintain its stealth profile, so it's much stealthier than this unknown RCS. The F-35A's RCS needs to be at least lower than the public F-22 number. I have provided the quotes below: Two USAF Generals on the F-35 Stealth --- Gen. Gilmary Michael Hostage III, then head of Air Combat Command, said at AFA’s September conference that the F-35 “has drawn a lot of criticism” for some of the sacrifices USAF has had to make to pay for it. However, “it is my professional judgment that recapitalizing our aging legacy fleet with a fifth generation capability is a national imperative,” he declared. Hostage caused a stir in late spring when, in press interviews, he said the ----F-35 would be stealthier than the F-22-----, its larger USAF stablemate. Conventional wisdom had pegged the F-22, with its angled, vectored-thrust engines, as a stealthier machine than the F-35. Hostage also said the F-35 would be unbeatable when employed in numbers, which is why the full buy of aircraft is “so critical.” “I would say that General Hostage … is accurate in his statement about the simple stealthiness of the F-35 [with regard] to other airplanes,” Bogdan said in the interview. The statement was accurate for radar cross section, as measured in decibels, and range of detectability, he said, and he scoffed at the notion that anyone can tell how stealthy an aircraft is just by looking at it. --- Chief of Low Observability for the B-2 On the F-35 Stealth --- On a radar map, a 747 would appear the size of a hot air balloon and an F-16 would look like a beach ball. Drill down to legacy stealth aircraft and Lockheed’s F-117 Nighthawk would show up as a golf ball while an F-22 Raptor might appear as a pea. With the F-35, Lockheed is getting down to pebble size, according to Robert Wallace, senior manager for F-35 flight operations. Wallace, a former chief of low-observability for the US Air Force’s B-2 bomber, says the F-35 has leveraged LO qualities from the bomber - but he could not elaborate on specifics. Pilots will see a more advanced low-observable signature on the F-35 versus the F-22, but it’s the maintainers who see the greatest leap in durability. Each time a fighter returns from flight, maintainers must bring the aircraft’s stealth signature back to its original fidelity. But a fighter confronts more demanding missions than a bomber, pulling 9g while flying from hot, desert environments to high, cold altitudes. --- There's more quotes that corroborate this report but only provided these two for brevity

Hey Grim, I can't seem to create a PW for DCS. Any idea why Upper/Lower/Numbers of 10-12 digits is not acceptable?

i know nothing about flight sims, jets or anything, I don't know how I even fing found this. But I'm addicted. I watched some of those 2 hour full scale battles. Were dope af. What I am wondering is how long can you fly for?

im confused as to who to believe in here when it comes to the values of RCS on the Su-57. I mean Cap has a good point when given detailed breakdown of the RCS values, modelling, and photographic evidence by heat blast even though it is just speculation, it could well be that the production SU-57's in the photos dont even exist. it could be even be that russia has not one engineer competent in the area of aeronautical engineering or VLO tech development. I guess i just have to take all the veteran engineers in the comment section at their word with their solid convincing arguments such as "western tech is superior", "Russian tech is overrated", and "Russians dont have any understanding of VLO tech" and so on... I think ill just take Cap's stand on the issue and keep a narrow mind into thinking that there is no possibility that the russians could ever develop any kind of tech in any field whatsoever. Like Cap said "Its not my problem".

Personally, I like the longer videos. If I don't have time for the whole video I can always continue where I left off later. And usually KZfaq app saves your spot where you left off.

always enjoy watching your vids. Anyway plan to mod KC-135 to RC-135 W/V SIGINT/ELINT. It probably is Datalinked by now. They see everything not optical. RC-135S is for that.

I'm curious to know if you guys considered including the su-57 loyal wingman that is already in service to assist the 57s in the dogfight. I am unsure if it has ram as I think they are prioritizing the 57s with that though maybe

Yay!!!! Simba’s back!! ❤

2.5x reduction in radar cross section means 25% reduction in detection range. It's a 4th power relation.

WW2 Ghost squadron. Do an attack with war birds that have no RCS so they can only be detected visually and defend pearl harbor or something like that.

I say that you should use the new stealth model cause the production mode looks more like a stealthy that’s the first one the software that he was using looked vey accurate so prob it’s best to use it

I thinks it’s fair that if your using the the model for one it should be the same for both. So I side for the lowering of the f-35’s radar cross-section

logically speaking I'd believe public information on the f35 cross section being stated as 0.005m as if someone made a radar specifically to counter 0.005m cross section then you'd have a bit of an advantage. When dealing with fine stuff like taht it's nice. Also it's just a better way forward regardless of if it is right because it is unbiased. Everyone follows the same laws of physics in this sense. Regardless of the copium driven freeaboos and tankies :)

have you tried out Cubanaces ver4 of the Su57 yet??

Try: a pair of SU-57 and four SU-35s vs four F-22s and four F-35s (to explore the relative scarcity of airframes).

Definitely we should just move into full prediction based modeling, so 0.002 for our lovely fat Amy! Looking forward to seeing a better modeled J-20A with RAM and WS-15 taking into consideration too; then we can have a more fact (or better speculation) based comparsion of 5th gen jets in DCS.

The first thing I did when ED brought Cyprus into the Syria map was to fly to Larnaca Airport and bomb both the customs building and the DHL depot. No reason but if you have ever tried receiving a package from the UK, you'll understand.

I would like to see one of you in Felons hit high speed and go way off to a side, get seen and then hit the deck and do a 180. Have the others following about half as far to the side and do a radial sweep to see about catching the 5th Gen moving to the original flanker's decoy move.

Yeah the 0.005 figure is from 2005 so they must be lower today move to 0.002

Simba almost taken out by his own missile.

I think the RAM-coated Felons should be the standard Felons going forward. The same goes for the improved F-35s. They both help to keep the matches unpredictable and unpredictable equals interesting. I won't be surprised if future Felons come with improved RAM coatings IRL. Now I want to see if the RAM-coated Felons will make life harder for the fourth gen fighters in future battles. The non-coated Felons had a life expentacy measured in seconds whereas the RAM-coated Felons were able to hang on for a little longer. The F-35s sidekick mod is meant for six fox threes only. The A and C variants will be getting them but the B will not due to its smaller weapon bays.

Please let’s upgrade let’s see the difference I’m sure the model is accurate. I’m excited to see it!

Very interesting stuff. I have asked before, but can't remember and anyway it was a while ago,, if DCS does bother with the RCS aspects. for example the SU57 in the discord images there seems to be very visible directly from the sides. Which is highly interesting as you tend to fly sideways to an incoming missile to "notch" it. (tactics,, is it better to wait until you are locked on, instead of pre-emptively notch?? maybe a video if DCS can do it?) If DCS does do some kind of RCS calculations, it might be interesting to dive deeper into how it does that.

Make a small jet stealthy, mark 1 eyeball right? Griper, F16, etc.

Keep the simulated f-35, heat blast has fancy confusing models so i trust them 🙃

This awsome u should keep the new coating felon 🎉 so there better challeng for american stealt nice

There needs to be a handicap on the Sukoi pilot based on the limited number of flight hours they get to log. These days maybe even based on their lack of experienced pilots for the overall air force. I mean it is almost comical.

Another thought is that less of the SU-57's front profile is RAM coatable. They can't cover the front of the IR targeting thing with anything, and the engines' air intakes are straight, so you'll get some reflection off the non-coatable turbo fan blades. The side profile too, clearly has some of the engines' outlets exposed. So I'd say the theoretical minimum rcs would be around 20% of the full cross section or 0.024m^2, leaving an rcs of 0.098m^2 that could be RAM coatable. So I wouldn't go any lower than 0.034m^2 for the SU-57s RCS.

I think to be fair that both should use the simulated values, as both versions of the 57 are using it. That or bump up the Su-57 to 0.03m^2 to as the F-35's simulated RCS is 2.5 times smaller than the public figures.

A ram painted Gripen simulation would be cool, it has half the frontal area compared to a F-35.

Petition to get cap to show us his baby. You gotta show us your family Cap, specially the babyyyyyy.

How about something even more silly, a random encounter of stealth on stealth, meaning one side do not know what sort of stealth plane they may face at Bullseye. However with an interesting twist, one of the "stealth" planes is a modded Warbird with a very low RCS, stealthified basically. Opponent doesn't know if it is a stealth jet they are facing or a potential warbird, and how would that affect the dogfight since you are fast and now can't rely on radar to locate the opponent again.

Since this would be Russia's first time using RAM coating I doubt it would be as good as say the United States. There was a lot of issues with the United States and developing their RAM coating so I doubt it would be as efficient as predicted. But I don't care what you guys run it at. I do want to see the f-35 at the .002 though.