Olisiko tuo BM21-DP?
inhaa itäkalustoa
- Viestiketjun aloittaja baikal
- Aloitus PVM
122 mm A-215 “Grad-M” MLRS on suunniteltu tuhoamaan rannalla olevaa elävää voimaa ja kalustoa maihinnousujen aikana, tukemaan sen toimintaa sekä suojelemaan maihinnousualuksia vihollisalusten hyökkäyksiltä merta ylittäessä.
Päivitetty A-215 "Grad-M" RSF on osa 21630 "Buyan" -luokan korvetti -tykistöalusten aseita. 21630-projektin 1. alus laskettiin 30. tammikuuta 2004 Pietarissa OAO “Almaz” telakalla ja sai nimen “Astrakhan” (h/n 701). 7. lokakuuta 2005 alus laskettiin vesille ja vuonna 2006 se otettiin käyttöön.
| Caliber, mm | 122 |
| Shaft number | 40 |
| The range of fire is maximum, m | 20700 |
| Range of fire minimum tabular, m | around 2,000 |
| Angle of vertical guidance, hail | between -6 and +93 |
| Angle of horizontal guidance, hail | ±164 |
| Vertical Guidance Speed, deg/s | 26,4 |
| Horizontal pointing speed, deg/s | 29 |
| Weight of unit with storage and feeding devices, kg | 16500 |
| Weight of the complex without shells and ZIP, kg | 20727 |
| Weight of the complex with shells and ZIP, kg | some 31,000 |
| The size of the cellar, m: – length – width – altitude | 4.5 4 3.8 |
| Dimensions of PU in camping position without bags, mm: – width – altitude | 1710 2100 |
| Swimming radius, mm | 1500 |
| Calculation, man. | 2 |
| The interval between the launches of shells in the salvo, s | 0,5 |
| Charging time from the first shot, s | 46 |
| Recharging time, s | 120 |
| Time of firing of all ammunition, mines. | 7,3 |
Kyllä. 122mm raketinheittimiä oli Ivan Rogov- ja Ropucha-luokissa. Polnocnyissä oli 140-milliset. Alligatoreissakin oli heittimiä, samoin Zubr-luokan ilmatyynyaluksissa. Niiden vväljyyttä en muista, mutta Google varmaan kertoo senkin.
Dragonslayer
Kapteeni
Hypersoonisten aseiden osalta en täysin ymmärrä hyperventilointia. Kun kiinteäpolttoaineiset ohjukset + MIRV + valemaalikombo otettiin käyttöön 1970-luvulla on torjunnan ohittaminen ollut kustannustehokasta torjuntaan verrattuna. Hypersooniset aseet eivät sinänsä muuta tätä strategista kombinaatiota.
Suurin riskihän on eskalatorinen - miten erottaa hypersooninen SRBM joka menee taktiseen maaliin (esim. lentotukialus) iskusta joka on tulossa kotialueelle.
Suurin riskihän on eskalatorinen - miten erottaa hypersooninen SRBM joka menee taktiseen maaliin (esim. lentotukialus) iskusta joka on tulossa kotialueelle.
Olympiakasarmi
Kenraali
Ballistisen ohjuksen rata on helpompi laskea hypersooniseen verrattuna ja hypersooninen ohjus voi tulla myös matalammalta, joten torjunta on vaikeampaa.
Dragonslayer
Kapteeni
Ballististenkin ohjusten torjunta on osoittautunut käytännössä hyvin vaikeaksi vaikka torjuttavina on ollut kehitysmaiden ohjuksia ilman kehittyneitä taistelukärkiä, valemaaleja ym. Jos suuria teknologisia läpimurtoja (avaruuteen sijoitettavat aseet? Laserit? ym) ei tapahdu, on halvempaa rakentaa enemmän hyökkäysohjuksia kuin puolustusohjuksia.
Juu. Mutta DP on raketti joka on tarkoitettu satamien ja matalien vesialueiden puolustukseen (pienoissuvet ja sukeltajat). Ei tuolla kummoista Normandiaa tehdä. Toki enemmän kuin ei mitään, mutta siltikin.
Lyhyt juttu itänaapurin piakkoin käyttöön tulevista optisista tiedustelusatelliiteista.
space.skyrocket.de
Razdan (14F156)
The Razdan satellite is reportedly a new electro-optical reconnaissance satellite designed as a successor to the Persona (Kvarts) satellites.
Jon Laken analyysia Suhoin Checkmatesta, lähteenä https://www.facebook.com/aerospaceanalysis:
Sukhoi LTA T.75 Checkmate
Chimera or reality?
A2&I has been looking into the new Checkmate fighter since it first appeared at MAKS in July 2021. We’ve been mulling over what we saw, what the experts have told us and what we’ve read, and we’ve been analysing everything we know about the programme, and considering what it means. These are our conclusions.
The Merriam Webster dictionary defines a chimera as: “an imaginary monster compounded of incongruous parts” and as “an illusion or fabrication of the mind especially: an unrealizable dream.” This could have been written for the new Sukhoi Checkmate that was unveiled at the recent MAKS 2021 International Aviation and Space Salon at Zhukhovskii. The showing of a new fifth generation fighter immediately generated much excitement. But is it a real but nascent combat aircraft, or no more than an illusion?
The aircraft had appeared with almost no warning, there was no Russian Aerospace Forces requirement for a new fighter, and there had been no reports that Sukhoi was working on a new design. In fact, Russia’s future fighter needs are already being taken care of. Sukhoi is developing the heavyweight twin-engined T.50 (service designation Su-57) to meet the PAK FA (Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii, or prospective aeronautical complex of front-line air forces) requirement, and 78 are to be acquired. Meanwhile Mikoyan is working on the single-engined LMFS (Liogkiy Mnogofunktsionalniy Frontovoi Samolyet —or Light Multi-Function Frontal Aircraft) programme. Mikoyan reportedly signed a contract with the UAE covering some degree of LMFS co-development in 2017, bolstering funding for the project.
This would seem to leave no obvious gap for the new Sukhoi with the Russian Aerospace Forces – unless it replaces the MiG LMFS.
Some sources have suggested that this is exactly what has happened, and that although the aircraft has been presented as a new development, it is actually based on the Mikoyan Design Bureau light fighter concept originally developed more than seven years ago. Given Sukhoi’s influence and prominence, and with Russia’s aerospace industry undergoing a major consolidation process, such an outcome can’t be entirely discounted. Both Sukhoi and Mikoyan are subsidiary divisions of the United Aircraft Corporation, which is, in turn, part of the Rostec group, but there have been periodic reports of efforts to combine and merge the two entities to create a single fighter/fast jet design ‘powerhouse’.
One Moscow-based Russian aircraft industry source said that: "It is somewhat surprising that this design is now being attributed to the Sukhoi, since most of the serious work to create this kind of single-engine platform was done long ago on the MiG." This allegation cannot be confirmed, however, and it has been energetically denied by Sukhoi!
Mikhail Strelets, First Deputy Managing Director of the Sukhoi Design Bureau, and Chief Designer of the Checkmate said that the aircraft was: “a new light tactical fighter that we are developing on our own initiative.”
Sergei Chemezov, the CEO of the Rostec Corporation has said that the aircraft was developed as a private venture, at the company’s own initiative, “without federal budget funds,” though it is widely believed that at least part of the funding was provided by the Russian Ministry of Industry and Commerce (as was the case for the PAK FA programme) and that the work was co-ordinated with the Russian military. More funding may have come from the United Arab Emirates following a 2017 agreement.
Yuri Slyusur, UAC’s head, said that: “This is a domestic product. Although, of course, we were guided by the various requirements of our foreign partners in the formation of framework requirements for the new aviation complex. If foreign partners are interested, we do not exclude the creation of international cooperation. The possibility of technology transfer is traditionally one of the advantages of Russian weapons.”
Slyusur also said that his marketing plan envisioned the sale of 300 aircraft over the next 15 years. Our accompanying video looks in detail at the four potential ‘customers’ hinted at in pre-launch marketing efforts – Argentina, India, the UAE and Vietnam, none of which seem like particularly strong ‘prospects’ for this aircraft. This must put the 300 aircraft target in real doubt (though Yuri Borisov said that the fighter would be marketed to African countries, India, and Vietnam, and also estimated a demand for more than 300 fighters “in the near future”.
But while exports would seem to be vital for the programme’s future they are, at the same time, extremely unlikely to materialise in the numbers required. Sergei Chemezov has insisted that the Russian MoD will eventually purchase the Sukhoi Checkmate fighter, while Yuri Slyusar, General Director of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), has also predicted that the aircraft would find its place in the Russian aerospace forces of the future.
First appearance
In December 2020, RBC published a lengthy interview with Russian Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov, including some photos taken in his office. One of these showed a desk model of a then-unidentified fighter with a distinctive chin intake – possibly the first appearance of what we now call the Checkmate, though it went unremarked in the article.
On 26 May 2021 Russia’s state-run TASS news agency reported that Sukhoi was developing what it described as “the first Russian single-engine light tactical fighter with hypersonic speed and low radar signature.” Hypersonic was a misprint, the article going on to attribute Mach 2 performance to the new aircraft. Maximum take-off weight was given as up to 18 tonnes, and it was said that the new aircraft would “be a universal platform in manned and unmanned versions.”
On the 13th of July the Russian State Corporation for Assistance to Development, Production and Export of Advanced Technology Industrial Products (better known as ROSTEC) issued a press release in the run up to the MAKS-2021 air show. This promised that one of ROSTEC’s subsidiaries, the United Aircraft Corporation (Sukhoi’s parent company), would present what the release described as a “fundamentally new military aircraft” on the 20th of July, the first day of the MAKS show.
The ROSTEC Press Release was followed by a campaign of social media posts, teaser videos and finally leaked photos of a heavily shrouded airframe being towed around the airfield at Zhukhovskii. Broad hints were dropped that the new aircraft would be called the Checkmate, and that it was primarily designed for export.
Finally, on Day One of the MAKS show, the new aircraft was presented to President Vladimir Putin, before a public unveiling later that day. Interestingly, Putin failed to make even the slightest expression of any interest in the new aircraft for Russia’s own armed forces, quietly undermining hints from programme insiders that the Russian Aerospace Forces might be the ‘anchor customer’ for the new aircraft, and contradicting his own Prime Minister, Borisov, who also hinted that VKS orders were likely.
At MAKS it was revealed that the new aircraft was named Checkmate, and was officially designated as the LTA. The aircraft wore the Bort number ‘Blue 75’ and the serial RF-00075, perhaps confirming reports that the design was designated as the T.75 using Sukhoi’s own nomenclature.
More questions than answers
The Checkmate’s unveiling raised a lot more questions than it answered. It was immediately apparent to most observers that the aircraft on display was a hybrid – a mock up incorporating some real aircraft sub-assemblies (which seemed to be parts from a crashed T.50 prototype) with some new sections constructed simply from fibreglass or plywood. Some Russian sources said that the mock up was intended primarily as part of a presentation intended to solicit investors, while others insisted that it was part of a real fighter programme.
Alexei Bulatov the deputy chief designer and project manager of the LTS said that the new aircraft was a prototype, albeit in a “non-flight configuration for ground tests” and said that a “revision” was planned for the subsequent flight-worthy model.
The mock up used a T.50 nose, wings and tailfins. If this was done for convenience and speed, in order to have something to show at MAKS, then that level of reuse was probably an eminently sensible strategy. If, however, a definitive production aircraft retains these design elements, then there will be real questions to be asked.
The relatively lightweight single-engined T.75 simply does not need the T.50’s wing area, nor the drag penalty that this would bring with it, and nor should it need the same tailfins. The US TX competition clearly demonstrated the low cost of designing and building a new airframe when Boeing’s new T-7A Red Hawk was able to beat the in-production KAI T-50 and Leonardo M-346 on price. Adapting an existing airframe makes even less sense today than it did in years gone by – and it has never been an efficient solution.
Checkmate designated
Whether it was a mock-up, a prototype, or something in between, the Checkmate shown at MAKS purported to be representing a real programme, and representative of the actual design. And while we at A2&i do not believe that this is true, for the remainder of this article, we will attempt to suspend our disbelief, and we will write about it as though it is exactly what it purports to be.
ROSTEC, the United Aircraft Corporation and Sukhoi jointly presented the new lightweight fighter at MAKS 2021, exhibiting what was described by one official as a ground test vehicle, and what others described as a mock up. No internal Sukhoi designation was given (the Su-57, for example, uses the Sukhoi designation T.50), nor would you expect the aircraft to have a formal air force ‘Sukhoi-Su-‘ type designation at this stage of its development. If one were to be allocated, it would be expected to have an ‘odd number’ (used by fighters) and to be next in the existing sequence, so Su-59 or Su-61 would be possible. Bulatov has reportedly said that the Design Bureau wants to assign the Su-75 designation to the domestic version of the aircraft.
The aircraft is not simply a product of the Sukhoi Design Bureau, however. It is perhaps better viewed as being the product of a risk-sharing partnership of key industrial partners drawn from across the entire ROSTEC aviation cluster. This approach promises to allow the aircraft (and future versions of the aircraft) to be designed, tested, manufactured and deployed in a reasonable timescale and at a lower overall product cost.
The Checkmate will be assembled at the Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aviation Plant named after Y. A. Gagarin (KnAAZ), a division of the PJSC Sukhoi Company which has, according to some reports, already begun work on the first prototype of the fighter.
The requirement
Because the Checkmate is being developed as a private venture for export, there is no formally stated requirement. ROSTEC, the United Aircraft Corporation and Sukhoi have, however, identified a real market need for the new fighter – an informal, unstated but very real requirement, in other words.
The companies behind Checkmate have identified what UAC boss Yuri Slyusur called “an obvious trend towards an increase in the cost of developing combat aircraft.” He attributed this to: “the constantly increasing complexity of aviation systems, numerous prototype tests. Often, the introduction of an unjustifiably large number of technical innovations affects the reliability of the aircraft, increases the time for fine-tuning the machine and leads to a significant increase in the cost of the entire programme.”
To counter this, ROSTEC, UAC and Sukhoi have struck a careful balance was observed between the use of innovative new technologies and proven (and paid for!) technical solutions. In particular, the aircraft makes extensive use of technologies developed for the PAK-FA (Su-57) programme, and for the Su-35S. Denis Manturov, the head of Russia’s Ministry of Industry and Trade, said that: "Today we need to unify as much as possible with the Su-57, perhaps use some components of the Su-35 in order for this machine to be cheaper."
Yuri Slyusar, General Director of the United Aircraft Corporation has pointed out the continuing steady demand for single-engined lightweight fighters, and has noted that: “Few can afford to deploy infrastructure for fifth-generation heavy aviation systems.”
He has said that: “There is no single-engined fifth generation fighter offered at reasonable prices that most countries could afford. These are countries in Southeast Asia, Latin America and Africa, and we need an inexpensive combat jet that would meet their needs, and that is configurable to meet their needs.”
The new aircraft is intended to fill exactly that gap – providing a modern, well-equipped LO aircraft, that is versatile, cheap to buy, and inexpensive to operate, with outstanding range, speed, and payload for an aircraft of its class. Slyusur has described the Checkmate as a new generation ‘workhorse’ - an aircraft that is optimal for most combat missions, but which is also designed to take account of the real economic constraints affecting potential customer air forces.
“An important advantage of the new aircraft is the low cost of a flying hour. This is often the defining moment for market success,” Slyusur observed at MAKS, promising that the operating costs of the Checkmate were: “predicted to be about seven times less than that of an aircraft such as the F-35, and comparable to the cost of a flight hour of the Gripen NG. At the same time, the combat capabilities of LTS Checkmate are significantly higher than the latter.”
Sergei Chemezov, head of the ROSTEC state corporation, compared the new Checkmate lightweight fifth-generation fighter with the Lockheed Martin F-35, the Saab Gripen, and the Dassault Rafale. “Only we have set ourselves the task of delivering a very cheap and efficient aircraft. We will have a price, I hope, somewhere from $25 to $30 million, and they have from $60 to $90 million,” he said.
Checkmate – A modern stealth fighter?
Though its creators have been wont to describe the Checkmate as a fifth generation fighter, it is probably more accurately designated as a Low Observable (LO) aircraft, rather than as a VLO (Very Low Observable) fighter, with a reduced level of all aspect radar stealthiness compared to aircraft like the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter.
The Checkmate does have a configuration and shape consistent with low observability, but manufacturing tolerances, production standards, materials and surface finish, are simply not up to the standards found on aircraft like the F-22 and the F-35.
It is, perhaps, broadly comparable to aircraft like the Korean KF-21 Boramae – it looks, at first sight, as though it ought to be stealthy, but lacks some of the ‘attention to detail’ incorporated in the US stealth fighters, and may not benefit from the same advanced materials and thermal management.
This could be a quite deliberate design choice, and could be compensated for by the use of longer range stand off weapons, by greater use of electronic warfare and jamming, and by co-ordinating the aircraft’s operations with those by stealthier unmanned systems, from small expendable and attritable systems to larger ‘loyal wingmen’.
Like the rival Franco-German-Spanish FCAS, and like Britain’s Tempest and the new US NGAD, the Checkmate manned fighter will form just one element (albeit the most important element) within a ‘system of systems’ which includes unmanned systems and smart, data-driven weapons, all operating together in a highly connected and co-ordinated manner within a network-centric combat system. The aircraft also shares a modular approach and open architecture design with these rivals, promising greater adaptability to meet customer needs.
The Checkmate described
The aircraft’s overall configuration, with a trapezoidal, ‘cropped Delta’ wing and canted tailfins, is reminiscent of the McDonnell MFVT (Mixed Flow Vectored Thrust) ASTOVL concept, the same company’s JSF proposal, or NASA’s Subsonic High Alpha Research Concept (SHARC) from the 1990s.
In detail, though, the Checkmate looked very much like a single-engined T.50/Su-57, with the same cropped delta wing, and the same widely-splayed tailfins.
When we say “the same cropped delta wing” we don’t just mean a wing of the same planform as is used by the Su-57, scaled to suit the smaller Checkmate – we mean an identical wing – a wing actually taken from the Su-57 (from a crashed T.50 prototype in the case of the mock-up)! It’s the same story for the nose section, and for the tailfins. Our accompanying video discusses why this might be a sub-optimal approach! More sensible is the decision to use the engine and many of the on-board systems of the Su-57, and indeed to incorporate lessons from actual operational deployments by the type, and from real world combat use of other modern Sukhoi fighters.
Obvious differences from the T.50/Su-57 were the lack of horizontal tailplanes on the Checkmate, and the distinctive underslung chin inlet, closely wrapped around the lower fuselage. The latter was vaguely reminiscent of the intake used on the Boeing X-32, one of the unsuccessful competitors in the US Joint Strike Fighter programme, which also had no horizontal tailplanes in its original form – very much like Northrop’s unsuccessful contender in the USAF's Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) competition, the YF-23.
This kind of configuration means that the canted fins act as a butterfly tail, operating as ruddervators, providing control in both pitch and yaw. It allows a reduced radar cross section compared to a more conventional empennage, with lower drag.
Drawbacks of the V-tail include the need for a more complex flight control system, because the two surfaces have to be used to control pitch and yaw simultaneously, causing relatively large roll moments when yawing. The control surfaces will tend to lack control effectiveness and authority because neither will be orthogonal to the desired force vector when pitching or yawing.
The tails are augmented by unusual paddle ‘elevons’ located on each side of the jet pipe, inboard of the structure carrying the tails. These are new to the Checkmate, and may compensate, to some extent, for the lack of conventional horizontal tailerons. It is unclear whether they are designed to move up and down, or whether they split like an F-16’s airbrakes.
The new chin intake provides the most obvious visual difference between the Su-57 and the new Checkmate. This forms a diverterless supersonic inlet (DSI), with a forward-swept inlet cowl and a ‘bump’ working together to compress the air to slow it down from supersonic to subsonic speeds and to divert boundary layer airflow away from the aircraft's engine, all without using a conventional splitter plate and heavy and complex variable intake ramps.
The intake position may be more susceptible to ingesting debris while the configuration may limit high Alpha capability unless it incorporates some kind of vari-cowl.
In order to maintain a low RCS, the aircraft incorporates internal weapons bays, though, like the F-35, the Checkmate will be able to carry weapons on external underwing pylons when Low Observability is not required.
The Checkmate incorporates weapons bays for single RVV-MD short-range air-to-air missiles on either side of the forward fuselage, while a more capacious fuselage bay can carry up to three longer-range RVV-SD missiles. This means that in LO configuration the aircraft can carry up to 5 AAMs in (two SRAAMs in the side bays and three MRAAMs in the main bay). A gun pack can be mounted in the main weapons bay, with the gun itself protruding below the fuselage.
Full-sized models of the RVV-MD short-range air-to-air missile, the RVV-SD medium-range air-to-air missile, and KTRV's Kh-59MK air-to-surface missile, were displayed alongside the Checkmate mock-up at MAKS, which also carried Kh-38MLE and Grom-E1 air to surface missiles in the fuselage weapons bay.
Chief Designer Mikhail Strelets claims that the Checkmate has what he calls “a record-breaking payload for this class - 7400 kg.” At MAKS Sukhoi detailed an impressive range of air-to-surface weaponry that will be carried by the aircraft. This includes Kh-38MLE, Kh-58USHKE (AS-11 ‘Kilter’), Grom-E1/E2, Kh-59MK, Kh-31PD (AS-17 ‘Krypton’), and Kh-35UE (AS-20 ‘Kayak’) air-to- surface missiles, KAB-250LG-E, K08BE, K029BE, FAB-100, FAB-250, and FAB-500 bombs and S-8 and S-13 rockets.
The Checkmate cockpit retains a distinctly ‘Soviet’ feel, with the panels painted in the peculiar duck egg blue colour that Russian human factors experts have deemed to be most soothing to pilots in all lighting conditions, with a stick that looks similar to those fitted to the Su-27 and MiG-29 and with the familiar triangular red seat pan handles for the Zvezda K-36D5 ejection seat. The main panel is dominated by a panoramic large area touch screen display, and the aircraft also has a wide-angle (30° by 22°) head up display and up-front control display/control panel, and direct voice input is also reportedly incorporated.
The aircraft will reportedly incorporate an LPI/LPD AESA radar – possibly a downgraded version of the N036 used by the Su-57, with fewer Transmit/Receive Modules, and crucially without the ‘cheek’ mounted antennas used by the Su-57 to augment the fixed AESA array in the nose. This radar will reportedly be able to track up to 30 aircraft and engage up to six targets simultaneously even in heavy ECM. (This is about half the number of targets previously announced for the N036 radar). The radar will be augmented by a KOEPS-75 optical-electronic sighting system, developed by the Ural Optical and Mechanical Plant named after E.S. Yalamov (UOMZ) – part of the Shvabe holding.
The KOEPS-75 is an integrated electro-optical sensor suite, incorporating a 101KS-V IRST system for air-to-air use, a dedicated air-to-ground EO sensor and probably some kind of distributed aperture system like that fitted to the F-35.
The aircraft will incorporate advanced networking communications, and a powerful integrated defensive electronics suite, though details of this remain sketchy.
Artificial intelligence technology is used to provide self-checking and decision-making support functions to reduce pilot workload and to act as a ‘virtual co-pilot’, especially in complex operational scenarios. The Checkmate also incorporates an automated logistics system known as Matryoshka, which is similar in scope to the F-35's ALIS/ODIN systems. According to Mikhail Strelets, it uses “the latest predictive analytics methods, the system will track the technical condition of the aircraft in real time throughout the entire life cycle. This will make it possible to plan preventive and repair work, significantly reduce the cost and increase the efficiency of the after-sales service.”
The Checkmate appears to be powered by the same NPO-Saturn AL-41F1 (izdeliye 117) turbofan that is currently used in the Su-57, presumably modified for the new single-engined application. The AL-41F is a thrust-vectoring derivative of the AL-31 that powers most Su-27 variants, and is unrelated to the similarly designated AL-41 developed for the Mikoyan Project 1.44 in the early 1980s.
It is expected that the Checkmate will eventually use the new NPO Saturn Izdeliye 30 engine, which is in development to power the definitive production version of the Su-57. The new engine offers about 10% more thrust and increased reliability compared to the AL-41F1, but is still some way from production.
It is not known whether the claimed ability to supercruise (defined in this instance as the ability to fly supersonically without the use of afterburner) is based on the use of the new engine.
Both the AL-41F1 and the new Izdeliye 30 feature thrust-vectoring for improved maneuverability and for enhanced Short Take Off and Landing (STOL) capability. This accounts for the claimed take off distance of just 1,480 ft for the Checkmate. STOL capability is felt to be important for a number of potential customer countries who “would not want to incur serious infrastructure restructuring costs,” according to Yuri Slyusur. These customers will also appreciate the Checkmate’s integral APU, which further enhances its ability to operate from relatively primitive airstrips!
The thrust vectoring engine will certainly bestow a degree of super-manoeuvrability on the new fighter, allowing it to follow in the footsteps of aircraft like the MiG-29OVT and various members of the Su-27/30/35 family, and indeed the Su-57.
Programme and production
The first flight of a prototype has been set for 2023, and the type is due to enter series production in 2026, with deliveries following in 2027. Slyusar says that this ambitious timescale has been made possible “thanks to computer simulations and virtual tests.”
Mikhail Strelets, the First Deputy Managing Director of the Sukhoi Design Bureau, and Chief Designer of the Checkmate has said that the Checkmate is: “the first Russian aircraft to be fully digitally calculated. This significantly reduced development time and technical risks during testing.”
This follows the example of Saab’s Gripen-E, Boeing’s T-7A Red Hawk and the UK’s Tempest programme, all of which were designed using a ‘digital thread’, which enables the integration of new systems, concepts and capabilities faster and more affordably by harnessing the power of the latest supercomputers for model-based design, computer-driven manufacturing techniques and virtual testing. The use of agile software development, digital engineering processes, and an open architecture mission system enable more rapid and affordable development, and this drives down cost. In the US T-X competition, it allowed Boeing’s clean sheet of paper, new design to beat the existing KAI T-50 on price, and Sukhoi hope that it will do the same for the Checkmate.
Mikhail Strelets, the Chief Designer of the Checkmate said that the aircraft was always “conceived as a platform with modular modification potential,” allowing foreign-made equipment to be integrated, or permitting new variants to be produced. “This is accomplished by replacing the fuselage head and adapting systems at the factory,” Strelets said. Yuri Slyusar, General Director of the United Aircraft Corporation said that a two-seat version, an optionally piloted variant and an unmanned derivative were also being considered, as well as a carrier-based version. A reinforced airframe suitable for a carrier aircraft (and indeed for the unmanned version, which will be stressed for 11-12g) forms the basis of the base version.
Taken at face value, the Checkmate represents an effort by Russia to provide an affordable yet highly capable modern fighter, primarily for the export market, using a single-engined configuration and technology from the Su-57 and Su-35, coupled with advanced model-based computer-drivendesign and manufacturing techniques, to drive down costs. In some respects this makes the Checkmate a spiritual successor to aircraft like the MiG-21 and it marks a return to the single-engined fighter configuration for the first time in more than 40 years.
“Our country has experience of global leadership in the segment of light single-engine fighters,” Yuri Slyusur explained. “The legendary MiG-15, the MiG-21, a series based on the Su-17 have been literally hits on the international market for many decades. Today we are returning to this field. We are making a multifunctional, affordable, well-armed aviation complex with the capabilities of tomorrow. Our ambition is to change the existing status quo, in a sense, to ‘turn the tide of the game’ on the global market.”
Rather forced chess analogies aside, the Checkmate could represent a low cost alternative to the Su-57 for export customers for Russian fighters, and perhaps as a useful adjunct to that aircraft for the Russian Aerospace Forces, sacrificing some combat radius and payload for significantly lower operating costs.
“This is a rational choice for a large number of countries in countering regional threats,” Slyusur avers. “The aircraft is capable of effectively destroying land, sea, and air targets, including foreign fifth-generation aircraft.”
Preliminary, provisional specification
Length: 17.25 metres (56 ft 7 in)
Wingspan: 12.0 metres (39 ft 4 in)
Height: 4.7 metres (15 ft 5 in)
Limiting Mach No.: Mach 1.8
Maximum speed: 1,900 kmh speed (1,026 knots, 1,181 mph)
Maximum range: 3,000 km (1,620 nm, 1,864 miles)
NB: Range without external fuel is also quoted as 2,000 km+ (1,080 nm+, 1,245 miles+)
and as 2,800 km (1,512 nm, 1,740 miles)
Combat radius: 1.500 km (810 nm, 932 miles)
Empty weight: 12,750 kg (28,109 lb)
Normal weight: 18,790 kg (41,425 lb)
Fuel weight: 5,000 kg (11,023 lb)
Maximum payload: 7,000 kg (15,432 lb), 7400kg payload (16,314 lb)
Maximum landing weight: 18,000 kg (39,683 lb)
Maximum take off weight: 25,000 kg (55,115 lb)
Mtow also quoted as ‘around 18 tonnes’.
Service ceiling: 54,000 ft ( metres)
Maximum loading: 8 g
NB: Contradictary (and often widely differing) figures have been given for many parameters
Chimera or reality?
A2&I has been looking into the new Checkmate fighter since it first appeared at MAKS in July 2021. We’ve been mulling over what we saw, what the experts have told us and what we’ve read, and we’ve been analysing everything we know about the programme, and considering what it means. These are our conclusions.
The Merriam Webster dictionary defines a chimera as: “an imaginary monster compounded of incongruous parts” and as “an illusion or fabrication of the mind especially: an unrealizable dream.” This could have been written for the new Sukhoi Checkmate that was unveiled at the recent MAKS 2021 International Aviation and Space Salon at Zhukhovskii. The showing of a new fifth generation fighter immediately generated much excitement. But is it a real but nascent combat aircraft, or no more than an illusion?
The aircraft had appeared with almost no warning, there was no Russian Aerospace Forces requirement for a new fighter, and there had been no reports that Sukhoi was working on a new design. In fact, Russia’s future fighter needs are already being taken care of. Sukhoi is developing the heavyweight twin-engined T.50 (service designation Su-57) to meet the PAK FA (Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii, or prospective aeronautical complex of front-line air forces) requirement, and 78 are to be acquired. Meanwhile Mikoyan is working on the single-engined LMFS (Liogkiy Mnogofunktsionalniy Frontovoi Samolyet —or Light Multi-Function Frontal Aircraft) programme. Mikoyan reportedly signed a contract with the UAE covering some degree of LMFS co-development in 2017, bolstering funding for the project.
This would seem to leave no obvious gap for the new Sukhoi with the Russian Aerospace Forces – unless it replaces the MiG LMFS.
Some sources have suggested that this is exactly what has happened, and that although the aircraft has been presented as a new development, it is actually based on the Mikoyan Design Bureau light fighter concept originally developed more than seven years ago. Given Sukhoi’s influence and prominence, and with Russia’s aerospace industry undergoing a major consolidation process, such an outcome can’t be entirely discounted. Both Sukhoi and Mikoyan are subsidiary divisions of the United Aircraft Corporation, which is, in turn, part of the Rostec group, but there have been periodic reports of efforts to combine and merge the two entities to create a single fighter/fast jet design ‘powerhouse’.
One Moscow-based Russian aircraft industry source said that: "It is somewhat surprising that this design is now being attributed to the Sukhoi, since most of the serious work to create this kind of single-engine platform was done long ago on the MiG." This allegation cannot be confirmed, however, and it has been energetically denied by Sukhoi!
Mikhail Strelets, First Deputy Managing Director of the Sukhoi Design Bureau, and Chief Designer of the Checkmate said that the aircraft was: “a new light tactical fighter that we are developing on our own initiative.”
Sergei Chemezov, the CEO of the Rostec Corporation has said that the aircraft was developed as a private venture, at the company’s own initiative, “without federal budget funds,” though it is widely believed that at least part of the funding was provided by the Russian Ministry of Industry and Commerce (as was the case for the PAK FA programme) and that the work was co-ordinated with the Russian military. More funding may have come from the United Arab Emirates following a 2017 agreement.
Yuri Slyusur, UAC’s head, said that: “This is a domestic product. Although, of course, we were guided by the various requirements of our foreign partners in the formation of framework requirements for the new aviation complex. If foreign partners are interested, we do not exclude the creation of international cooperation. The possibility of technology transfer is traditionally one of the advantages of Russian weapons.”
Slyusur also said that his marketing plan envisioned the sale of 300 aircraft over the next 15 years. Our accompanying video looks in detail at the four potential ‘customers’ hinted at in pre-launch marketing efforts – Argentina, India, the UAE and Vietnam, none of which seem like particularly strong ‘prospects’ for this aircraft. This must put the 300 aircraft target in real doubt (though Yuri Borisov said that the fighter would be marketed to African countries, India, and Vietnam, and also estimated a demand for more than 300 fighters “in the near future”.
But while exports would seem to be vital for the programme’s future they are, at the same time, extremely unlikely to materialise in the numbers required. Sergei Chemezov has insisted that the Russian MoD will eventually purchase the Sukhoi Checkmate fighter, while Yuri Slyusar, General Director of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), has also predicted that the aircraft would find its place in the Russian aerospace forces of the future.
First appearance
In December 2020, RBC published a lengthy interview with Russian Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov, including some photos taken in his office. One of these showed a desk model of a then-unidentified fighter with a distinctive chin intake – possibly the first appearance of what we now call the Checkmate, though it went unremarked in the article.
On 26 May 2021 Russia’s state-run TASS news agency reported that Sukhoi was developing what it described as “the first Russian single-engine light tactical fighter with hypersonic speed and low radar signature.” Hypersonic was a misprint, the article going on to attribute Mach 2 performance to the new aircraft. Maximum take-off weight was given as up to 18 tonnes, and it was said that the new aircraft would “be a universal platform in manned and unmanned versions.”
On the 13th of July the Russian State Corporation for Assistance to Development, Production and Export of Advanced Technology Industrial Products (better known as ROSTEC) issued a press release in the run up to the MAKS-2021 air show. This promised that one of ROSTEC’s subsidiaries, the United Aircraft Corporation (Sukhoi’s parent company), would present what the release described as a “fundamentally new military aircraft” on the 20th of July, the first day of the MAKS show.
The ROSTEC Press Release was followed by a campaign of social media posts, teaser videos and finally leaked photos of a heavily shrouded airframe being towed around the airfield at Zhukhovskii. Broad hints were dropped that the new aircraft would be called the Checkmate, and that it was primarily designed for export.
Finally, on Day One of the MAKS show, the new aircraft was presented to President Vladimir Putin, before a public unveiling later that day. Interestingly, Putin failed to make even the slightest expression of any interest in the new aircraft for Russia’s own armed forces, quietly undermining hints from programme insiders that the Russian Aerospace Forces might be the ‘anchor customer’ for the new aircraft, and contradicting his own Prime Minister, Borisov, who also hinted that VKS orders were likely.
At MAKS it was revealed that the new aircraft was named Checkmate, and was officially designated as the LTA. The aircraft wore the Bort number ‘Blue 75’ and the serial RF-00075, perhaps confirming reports that the design was designated as the T.75 using Sukhoi’s own nomenclature.
More questions than answers
The Checkmate’s unveiling raised a lot more questions than it answered. It was immediately apparent to most observers that the aircraft on display was a hybrid – a mock up incorporating some real aircraft sub-assemblies (which seemed to be parts from a crashed T.50 prototype) with some new sections constructed simply from fibreglass or plywood. Some Russian sources said that the mock up was intended primarily as part of a presentation intended to solicit investors, while others insisted that it was part of a real fighter programme.
Alexei Bulatov the deputy chief designer and project manager of the LTS said that the new aircraft was a prototype, albeit in a “non-flight configuration for ground tests” and said that a “revision” was planned for the subsequent flight-worthy model.
The mock up used a T.50 nose, wings and tailfins. If this was done for convenience and speed, in order to have something to show at MAKS, then that level of reuse was probably an eminently sensible strategy. If, however, a definitive production aircraft retains these design elements, then there will be real questions to be asked.
The relatively lightweight single-engined T.75 simply does not need the T.50’s wing area, nor the drag penalty that this would bring with it, and nor should it need the same tailfins. The US TX competition clearly demonstrated the low cost of designing and building a new airframe when Boeing’s new T-7A Red Hawk was able to beat the in-production KAI T-50 and Leonardo M-346 on price. Adapting an existing airframe makes even less sense today than it did in years gone by – and it has never been an efficient solution.
Checkmate designated
Whether it was a mock-up, a prototype, or something in between, the Checkmate shown at MAKS purported to be representing a real programme, and representative of the actual design. And while we at A2&i do not believe that this is true, for the remainder of this article, we will attempt to suspend our disbelief, and we will write about it as though it is exactly what it purports to be.
ROSTEC, the United Aircraft Corporation and Sukhoi jointly presented the new lightweight fighter at MAKS 2021, exhibiting what was described by one official as a ground test vehicle, and what others described as a mock up. No internal Sukhoi designation was given (the Su-57, for example, uses the Sukhoi designation T.50), nor would you expect the aircraft to have a formal air force ‘Sukhoi-Su-‘ type designation at this stage of its development. If one were to be allocated, it would be expected to have an ‘odd number’ (used by fighters) and to be next in the existing sequence, so Su-59 or Su-61 would be possible. Bulatov has reportedly said that the Design Bureau wants to assign the Su-75 designation to the domestic version of the aircraft.
The aircraft is not simply a product of the Sukhoi Design Bureau, however. It is perhaps better viewed as being the product of a risk-sharing partnership of key industrial partners drawn from across the entire ROSTEC aviation cluster. This approach promises to allow the aircraft (and future versions of the aircraft) to be designed, tested, manufactured and deployed in a reasonable timescale and at a lower overall product cost.
The Checkmate will be assembled at the Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aviation Plant named after Y. A. Gagarin (KnAAZ), a division of the PJSC Sukhoi Company which has, according to some reports, already begun work on the first prototype of the fighter.
The requirement
Because the Checkmate is being developed as a private venture for export, there is no formally stated requirement. ROSTEC, the United Aircraft Corporation and Sukhoi have, however, identified a real market need for the new fighter – an informal, unstated but very real requirement, in other words.
The companies behind Checkmate have identified what UAC boss Yuri Slyusur called “an obvious trend towards an increase in the cost of developing combat aircraft.” He attributed this to: “the constantly increasing complexity of aviation systems, numerous prototype tests. Often, the introduction of an unjustifiably large number of technical innovations affects the reliability of the aircraft, increases the time for fine-tuning the machine and leads to a significant increase in the cost of the entire programme.”
To counter this, ROSTEC, UAC and Sukhoi have struck a careful balance was observed between the use of innovative new technologies and proven (and paid for!) technical solutions. In particular, the aircraft makes extensive use of technologies developed for the PAK-FA (Su-57) programme, and for the Su-35S. Denis Manturov, the head of Russia’s Ministry of Industry and Trade, said that: "Today we need to unify as much as possible with the Su-57, perhaps use some components of the Su-35 in order for this machine to be cheaper."
Yuri Slyusar, General Director of the United Aircraft Corporation has pointed out the continuing steady demand for single-engined lightweight fighters, and has noted that: “Few can afford to deploy infrastructure for fifth-generation heavy aviation systems.”
He has said that: “There is no single-engined fifth generation fighter offered at reasonable prices that most countries could afford. These are countries in Southeast Asia, Latin America and Africa, and we need an inexpensive combat jet that would meet their needs, and that is configurable to meet their needs.”
The new aircraft is intended to fill exactly that gap – providing a modern, well-equipped LO aircraft, that is versatile, cheap to buy, and inexpensive to operate, with outstanding range, speed, and payload for an aircraft of its class. Slyusur has described the Checkmate as a new generation ‘workhorse’ - an aircraft that is optimal for most combat missions, but which is also designed to take account of the real economic constraints affecting potential customer air forces.
“An important advantage of the new aircraft is the low cost of a flying hour. This is often the defining moment for market success,” Slyusur observed at MAKS, promising that the operating costs of the Checkmate were: “predicted to be about seven times less than that of an aircraft such as the F-35, and comparable to the cost of a flight hour of the Gripen NG. At the same time, the combat capabilities of LTS Checkmate are significantly higher than the latter.”
Sergei Chemezov, head of the ROSTEC state corporation, compared the new Checkmate lightweight fifth-generation fighter with the Lockheed Martin F-35, the Saab Gripen, and the Dassault Rafale. “Only we have set ourselves the task of delivering a very cheap and efficient aircraft. We will have a price, I hope, somewhere from $25 to $30 million, and they have from $60 to $90 million,” he said.
Checkmate – A modern stealth fighter?
Though its creators have been wont to describe the Checkmate as a fifth generation fighter, it is probably more accurately designated as a Low Observable (LO) aircraft, rather than as a VLO (Very Low Observable) fighter, with a reduced level of all aspect radar stealthiness compared to aircraft like the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter.
The Checkmate does have a configuration and shape consistent with low observability, but manufacturing tolerances, production standards, materials and surface finish, are simply not up to the standards found on aircraft like the F-22 and the F-35.
It is, perhaps, broadly comparable to aircraft like the Korean KF-21 Boramae – it looks, at first sight, as though it ought to be stealthy, but lacks some of the ‘attention to detail’ incorporated in the US stealth fighters, and may not benefit from the same advanced materials and thermal management.
This could be a quite deliberate design choice, and could be compensated for by the use of longer range stand off weapons, by greater use of electronic warfare and jamming, and by co-ordinating the aircraft’s operations with those by stealthier unmanned systems, from small expendable and attritable systems to larger ‘loyal wingmen’.
Like the rival Franco-German-Spanish FCAS, and like Britain’s Tempest and the new US NGAD, the Checkmate manned fighter will form just one element (albeit the most important element) within a ‘system of systems’ which includes unmanned systems and smart, data-driven weapons, all operating together in a highly connected and co-ordinated manner within a network-centric combat system. The aircraft also shares a modular approach and open architecture design with these rivals, promising greater adaptability to meet customer needs.
The Checkmate described
The aircraft’s overall configuration, with a trapezoidal, ‘cropped Delta’ wing and canted tailfins, is reminiscent of the McDonnell MFVT (Mixed Flow Vectored Thrust) ASTOVL concept, the same company’s JSF proposal, or NASA’s Subsonic High Alpha Research Concept (SHARC) from the 1990s.
In detail, though, the Checkmate looked very much like a single-engined T.50/Su-57, with the same cropped delta wing, and the same widely-splayed tailfins.
When we say “the same cropped delta wing” we don’t just mean a wing of the same planform as is used by the Su-57, scaled to suit the smaller Checkmate – we mean an identical wing – a wing actually taken from the Su-57 (from a crashed T.50 prototype in the case of the mock-up)! It’s the same story for the nose section, and for the tailfins. Our accompanying video discusses why this might be a sub-optimal approach! More sensible is the decision to use the engine and many of the on-board systems of the Su-57, and indeed to incorporate lessons from actual operational deployments by the type, and from real world combat use of other modern Sukhoi fighters.
Obvious differences from the T.50/Su-57 were the lack of horizontal tailplanes on the Checkmate, and the distinctive underslung chin inlet, closely wrapped around the lower fuselage. The latter was vaguely reminiscent of the intake used on the Boeing X-32, one of the unsuccessful competitors in the US Joint Strike Fighter programme, which also had no horizontal tailplanes in its original form – very much like Northrop’s unsuccessful contender in the USAF's Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) competition, the YF-23.
This kind of configuration means that the canted fins act as a butterfly tail, operating as ruddervators, providing control in both pitch and yaw. It allows a reduced radar cross section compared to a more conventional empennage, with lower drag.
Drawbacks of the V-tail include the need for a more complex flight control system, because the two surfaces have to be used to control pitch and yaw simultaneously, causing relatively large roll moments when yawing. The control surfaces will tend to lack control effectiveness and authority because neither will be orthogonal to the desired force vector when pitching or yawing.
The tails are augmented by unusual paddle ‘elevons’ located on each side of the jet pipe, inboard of the structure carrying the tails. These are new to the Checkmate, and may compensate, to some extent, for the lack of conventional horizontal tailerons. It is unclear whether they are designed to move up and down, or whether they split like an F-16’s airbrakes.
The new chin intake provides the most obvious visual difference between the Su-57 and the new Checkmate. This forms a diverterless supersonic inlet (DSI), with a forward-swept inlet cowl and a ‘bump’ working together to compress the air to slow it down from supersonic to subsonic speeds and to divert boundary layer airflow away from the aircraft's engine, all without using a conventional splitter plate and heavy and complex variable intake ramps.
The intake position may be more susceptible to ingesting debris while the configuration may limit high Alpha capability unless it incorporates some kind of vari-cowl.
In order to maintain a low RCS, the aircraft incorporates internal weapons bays, though, like the F-35, the Checkmate will be able to carry weapons on external underwing pylons when Low Observability is not required.
The Checkmate incorporates weapons bays for single RVV-MD short-range air-to-air missiles on either side of the forward fuselage, while a more capacious fuselage bay can carry up to three longer-range RVV-SD missiles. This means that in LO configuration the aircraft can carry up to 5 AAMs in (two SRAAMs in the side bays and three MRAAMs in the main bay). A gun pack can be mounted in the main weapons bay, with the gun itself protruding below the fuselage.
Full-sized models of the RVV-MD short-range air-to-air missile, the RVV-SD medium-range air-to-air missile, and KTRV's Kh-59MK air-to-surface missile, were displayed alongside the Checkmate mock-up at MAKS, which also carried Kh-38MLE and Grom-E1 air to surface missiles in the fuselage weapons bay.
Chief Designer Mikhail Strelets claims that the Checkmate has what he calls “a record-breaking payload for this class - 7400 kg.” At MAKS Sukhoi detailed an impressive range of air-to-surface weaponry that will be carried by the aircraft. This includes Kh-38MLE, Kh-58USHKE (AS-11 ‘Kilter’), Grom-E1/E2, Kh-59MK, Kh-31PD (AS-17 ‘Krypton’), and Kh-35UE (AS-20 ‘Kayak’) air-to- surface missiles, KAB-250LG-E, K08BE, K029BE, FAB-100, FAB-250, and FAB-500 bombs and S-8 and S-13 rockets.
The Checkmate cockpit retains a distinctly ‘Soviet’ feel, with the panels painted in the peculiar duck egg blue colour that Russian human factors experts have deemed to be most soothing to pilots in all lighting conditions, with a stick that looks similar to those fitted to the Su-27 and MiG-29 and with the familiar triangular red seat pan handles for the Zvezda K-36D5 ejection seat. The main panel is dominated by a panoramic large area touch screen display, and the aircraft also has a wide-angle (30° by 22°) head up display and up-front control display/control panel, and direct voice input is also reportedly incorporated.
The aircraft will reportedly incorporate an LPI/LPD AESA radar – possibly a downgraded version of the N036 used by the Su-57, with fewer Transmit/Receive Modules, and crucially without the ‘cheek’ mounted antennas used by the Su-57 to augment the fixed AESA array in the nose. This radar will reportedly be able to track up to 30 aircraft and engage up to six targets simultaneously even in heavy ECM. (This is about half the number of targets previously announced for the N036 radar). The radar will be augmented by a KOEPS-75 optical-electronic sighting system, developed by the Ural Optical and Mechanical Plant named after E.S. Yalamov (UOMZ) – part of the Shvabe holding.
The KOEPS-75 is an integrated electro-optical sensor suite, incorporating a 101KS-V IRST system for air-to-air use, a dedicated air-to-ground EO sensor and probably some kind of distributed aperture system like that fitted to the F-35.
The aircraft will incorporate advanced networking communications, and a powerful integrated defensive electronics suite, though details of this remain sketchy.
Artificial intelligence technology is used to provide self-checking and decision-making support functions to reduce pilot workload and to act as a ‘virtual co-pilot’, especially in complex operational scenarios. The Checkmate also incorporates an automated logistics system known as Matryoshka, which is similar in scope to the F-35's ALIS/ODIN systems. According to Mikhail Strelets, it uses “the latest predictive analytics methods, the system will track the technical condition of the aircraft in real time throughout the entire life cycle. This will make it possible to plan preventive and repair work, significantly reduce the cost and increase the efficiency of the after-sales service.”
The Checkmate appears to be powered by the same NPO-Saturn AL-41F1 (izdeliye 117) turbofan that is currently used in the Su-57, presumably modified for the new single-engined application. The AL-41F is a thrust-vectoring derivative of the AL-31 that powers most Su-27 variants, and is unrelated to the similarly designated AL-41 developed for the Mikoyan Project 1.44 in the early 1980s.
It is expected that the Checkmate will eventually use the new NPO Saturn Izdeliye 30 engine, which is in development to power the definitive production version of the Su-57. The new engine offers about 10% more thrust and increased reliability compared to the AL-41F1, but is still some way from production.
It is not known whether the claimed ability to supercruise (defined in this instance as the ability to fly supersonically without the use of afterburner) is based on the use of the new engine.
Both the AL-41F1 and the new Izdeliye 30 feature thrust-vectoring for improved maneuverability and for enhanced Short Take Off and Landing (STOL) capability. This accounts for the claimed take off distance of just 1,480 ft for the Checkmate. STOL capability is felt to be important for a number of potential customer countries who “would not want to incur serious infrastructure restructuring costs,” according to Yuri Slyusur. These customers will also appreciate the Checkmate’s integral APU, which further enhances its ability to operate from relatively primitive airstrips!
The thrust vectoring engine will certainly bestow a degree of super-manoeuvrability on the new fighter, allowing it to follow in the footsteps of aircraft like the MiG-29OVT and various members of the Su-27/30/35 family, and indeed the Su-57.
Programme and production
The first flight of a prototype has been set for 2023, and the type is due to enter series production in 2026, with deliveries following in 2027. Slyusar says that this ambitious timescale has been made possible “thanks to computer simulations and virtual tests.”
Mikhail Strelets, the First Deputy Managing Director of the Sukhoi Design Bureau, and Chief Designer of the Checkmate has said that the Checkmate is: “the first Russian aircraft to be fully digitally calculated. This significantly reduced development time and technical risks during testing.”
This follows the example of Saab’s Gripen-E, Boeing’s T-7A Red Hawk and the UK’s Tempest programme, all of which were designed using a ‘digital thread’, which enables the integration of new systems, concepts and capabilities faster and more affordably by harnessing the power of the latest supercomputers for model-based design, computer-driven manufacturing techniques and virtual testing. The use of agile software development, digital engineering processes, and an open architecture mission system enable more rapid and affordable development, and this drives down cost. In the US T-X competition, it allowed Boeing’s clean sheet of paper, new design to beat the existing KAI T-50 on price, and Sukhoi hope that it will do the same for the Checkmate.
Mikhail Strelets, the Chief Designer of the Checkmate said that the aircraft was always “conceived as a platform with modular modification potential,” allowing foreign-made equipment to be integrated, or permitting new variants to be produced. “This is accomplished by replacing the fuselage head and adapting systems at the factory,” Strelets said. Yuri Slyusar, General Director of the United Aircraft Corporation said that a two-seat version, an optionally piloted variant and an unmanned derivative were also being considered, as well as a carrier-based version. A reinforced airframe suitable for a carrier aircraft (and indeed for the unmanned version, which will be stressed for 11-12g) forms the basis of the base version.
Taken at face value, the Checkmate represents an effort by Russia to provide an affordable yet highly capable modern fighter, primarily for the export market, using a single-engined configuration and technology from the Su-57 and Su-35, coupled with advanced model-based computer-drivendesign and manufacturing techniques, to drive down costs. In some respects this makes the Checkmate a spiritual successor to aircraft like the MiG-21 and it marks a return to the single-engined fighter configuration for the first time in more than 40 years.
“Our country has experience of global leadership in the segment of light single-engine fighters,” Yuri Slyusur explained. “The legendary MiG-15, the MiG-21, a series based on the Su-17 have been literally hits on the international market for many decades. Today we are returning to this field. We are making a multifunctional, affordable, well-armed aviation complex with the capabilities of tomorrow. Our ambition is to change the existing status quo, in a sense, to ‘turn the tide of the game’ on the global market.”
Rather forced chess analogies aside, the Checkmate could represent a low cost alternative to the Su-57 for export customers for Russian fighters, and perhaps as a useful adjunct to that aircraft for the Russian Aerospace Forces, sacrificing some combat radius and payload for significantly lower operating costs.
“This is a rational choice for a large number of countries in countering regional threats,” Slyusur avers. “The aircraft is capable of effectively destroying land, sea, and air targets, including foreign fifth-generation aircraft.”
Preliminary, provisional specification
Length: 17.25 metres (56 ft 7 in)
Wingspan: 12.0 metres (39 ft 4 in)
Height: 4.7 metres (15 ft 5 in)
Limiting Mach No.: Mach 1.8
Maximum speed: 1,900 kmh speed (1,026 knots, 1,181 mph)
Maximum range: 3,000 km (1,620 nm, 1,864 miles)
NB: Range without external fuel is also quoted as 2,000 km+ (1,080 nm+, 1,245 miles+)
and as 2,800 km (1,512 nm, 1,740 miles)
Combat radius: 1.500 km (810 nm, 932 miles)
Empty weight: 12,750 kg (28,109 lb)
Normal weight: 18,790 kg (41,425 lb)
Fuel weight: 5,000 kg (11,023 lb)
Maximum payload: 7,000 kg (15,432 lb), 7400kg payload (16,314 lb)
Maximum landing weight: 18,000 kg (39,683 lb)
Maximum take off weight: 25,000 kg (55,115 lb)
Mtow also quoted as ‘around 18 tonnes’.
Service ceiling: 54,000 ft ( metres)
Maximum loading: 8 g
NB: Contradictary (and often widely differing) figures have been given for many parameters
Siinäpä saatu mukavasti tarkasteltua miten Bastion-järjestelmä tuodaan kohteeseen meritse.
planesandstuff.wordpress.com
On muuten kiehtova salapaikka muutenkin. Siinäpä viikonlopulle lukemista:
earth-chronicles.com
More information on “Bastion-P” Matua Island deployment
Deployment day is now knownMaxar and Sentinel capture deploymentIdentity of ships involved now known Following on from my previous blog on the deployment of Russian K-300P “Bastion-P” mobile coasta…
planesandstuff.wordpress.com
On muuten kiehtova salapaikka muutenkin. Siinäpä viikonlopulle lukemista:
Nuclear secrets of the island of Matua | Earth Chronicles News
As previously reported, the Russian defense Ministry has taken unprecedented measures to develop the military infrastructure on Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. Expedition of the Ministry of defense of the Russian Federation and the Russian geographical society (RGS) has started engineering work...
earth-chronicles.com
Ei tule mitään tästäkään
Ideoita ryssällä on ja joskus oikein näppäriä toteutuksia, mutta samoin kuin aikaisemmatkin suunnitelmat (Su-75, PAK-DA, MiG-41, PAK-VTA/Il-106) jäivät lähtötelineisiin, niin käy tämänkin kohdalla. Operatiiviseen käyttöön saadaan kovasti puristamalla ehkä 2025 jälkeen ja yksittäisiä kappaleita silloinkin.
Ei meillä pojat ole kohta mitään hätää...
Russian Air Force. Last Moments Before a Grand Regression [OPINION]
The Russian Air Force still remains the second air power globally. Nonetheless, their position is year by year, becoming weaker. Hundreds of aircraft inherited from the Soviet Union would soon be decommissioned, with no replacement in sight. Due to finances, technology, and the weaknesses of the...
defence24.com
Dragonslayer
Kapteeni
Ei tule mitään tästäkään
Ideoita ryssällä on ja joskus oikein näppäriä toteutuksia, mutta samoin kuin aikaisemmatkin suunnitelmat (Su-75, PAK-DA, MiG-41, PAK-VTA/Il-106) jäivät lähtötelineisiin, niin käy tämänkin kohdalla. Operatiiviseen käyttöön saadaan kovasti puristamalla ehkä 2025 jälkeen ja yksittäisiä kappaleita silloinkin.
Ei meillä pojat ole kohta mitään hätää...
Russian Air Force. Last Moments Before a Grand Regression [OPINION]
The Russian Air Force still remains the second air power globally. Nonetheless, their position is year by year, becoming weaker. Hundreds of aircraft inherited from the Soviet Union would soon be decommissioned, with no replacement in sight. Due to finances, technology, and the weaknesses of the...
Tämä on toisaalta huolestuttavaakin. Länsi voimistuu, Putin ikääntyy ja kalusto vanhenee tolpilleen samalla kun fossiilitalous katoaa savuna ilmaan. Voi tulla samanlainen aikaharha kuin aikoinaan Japanilla 1941 ja Saksalla 1914 sotaan lähdöstä, ts. pakko lähteä nyt koska pian tilanne on täysin toivoton. Onhan se toki nytkin, mutta silti...