I have a feeling the Su-57 will end up like the T-34. An amazing concept, but due to cost cutting just a barely good enough product in serial production.
Also the F-35 is so radically different between the 3 branches it's now basically 3 different fighter aircraft with a visually similar skin - they might as well have just built 2 aircraft, one for the Navy and one for the Airforce and forced the marines to use the Navy one at this point.
Valid point...the US didn't buy Hawker Harriers...they bought the license for McDonnell Douglas to make their own version of the Harrier...there's a significant difference.
Where NGAD? It's literally the most Amazing Future Aircraft of them all, and we don't even know much about it due to immense amounts of classified information regarding it, which just makes it all the more amazing IMO
I suggest the 'best submarines' like the Type U-139 (Imperial German Navy's 'Big Chungus'), the 'Rubis' (or (Ruby) a minelaying Free French thorn in the side of the Kriegsmarine) and Tambor class (the class with the most decorated US submarine of WW2, USS Thresher )
Russia has a habit of overselling it's aircraft. Case in point, the mig 25. Had great performance numbers (when empty but they left that out) that lead to the US developing the greatest air superiority fighter of all time, the f-15 eagle, that actually could do all of the claimed numbers the mig could. Then we finally captured one, and it was all a lie.
Bit late to this one... but I wanted to say that it's highly likely the Invictus will win over the Raider X for one very simple reason: Maitainence... what I mean is it's less complex meaning matinance is easier, and It fallows traditional attack helicopter design more then the Raider X does, meaning they can rely on existing knowledge of how that kind of helicopter is laid out to speed up training for both maintenance crews and pilots when replacing the older platforms.
So the f-2 is based on an f-16, but that's about it. It's bigger, has larger wing surfaces making it more maneuverable, and it's weapons load out is quite a bit more deadly. Avionics is also better, carrying aesa radar before any of our aircraft did, and uses stealth composites. The Japanese also made a mini c 5 galaxy, named the Kawasaki c 1 and c 2 basically is just a twin engined smaller version.
Sorry, but we here in germany have not bought them yet. We ordered some, but had to reduce the order allready and it might get cancelled totally, because it is possible that it is not allowed to be used here at all!!!
And it is a whole lot more complicated. The transmission has to be huge and complicated to drive two rotors and a propeller. That size is also going to make the silhouette laegee.
It's possible that the SU-57 could be a match for the F-35 in 1v1 combat... but 1v1 combat becomes a lot less likely when Russia have very few SU-57s (somewhere in the tens), but there are _over 900_ F-35s in existence. Russia does not have the industrial base or the economy to compete in a numbers game. Having a fighter of equal capability means _they lose._ And because there are so few SU-57s, comitting them to combat is a last resort because losing their best planes costs Russia reputation, not just material and personnel. As for underestimating your enemy, the War in Ukraine is ongoing proof of Russia's massive military incompetence. We assumed they were a lot more powerful than they actually are. (EDIT) Yeah, I see you addressed all this in the video. Also, "Checkmate" is not the NATO reporting name for the SU-75. The Russian (formerly Soviet) Air Force does not usually assign names to its warplane designs. Suddenly doing it now, and using a word that means "I win", is almost certainly intended as propaganda to fool westerners who don't know that, and would therefore assume NATO is scared of it.
please look more into the su57’s build quality it’s really a piece of junk if it was so good why isn’t in being used in current conflicts and not being bought quicker than they can build them. we (usa) we’re throwing f-117s into the gulf war like know ones business 30 years ago to see what they can do historically as i’m sure you know russians haven’t ever really been known for building great machines but building a lot of mediocre ones
They play up the F-35s stealth but then show it with pylons loaded with external stores. What is its total internal capacity? Also for cost it is only marginally more maneuverable than the F-16.
The SU-57's a joke. It's never going to see actual service because they can barely get them functioning. It's just like that T-14 Armata they love parading around until it inevitably breaks down.
I have a feeling the Su-57 will end up like the T-34. An amazing concept, but due to cost cutting just a barely good enough product in serial production.
I just wanted to say I love your content and appreciate the time and showmanship you put into your videos. Keep up the good work man and thank you
8:40 when the USA says "we've been trying to contact you about your fighter's extended warranty"
The F-35 is actually 3 different planes with a very high parts commonality.
The A, B, and C, yes. Absolutely correct. I just simplified my explanation for pacing reasons.
Isn't this true for pretty much every aircraft out there... well.. not specifically 3.. but more than 1.
@@matsv201
No. It is three similar but separate designs.
F-35 is 1 plane with 3 different modifications.
A for Airforce
B for marines
C for navy
Nope, three separate airframes.
And on the day of retirement for each of these aircrafts we will have a B-52 fly over to honor them.
Also the F-35 is so radically different between the 3 branches it's now basically 3 different fighter aircraft with a visually similar skin - they might as well have just built 2 aircraft, one for the Navy and one for the Airforce and forced the marines to use the Navy one at this point.
Got to love it when Darkness starts geeking out
Siri ! Fox 2!
( gets shot to hell )
Siri !?
Siri : oops something went wrong
Did you forget the B-57 Canberra? The US built licensed versions of the British English Electric Canberra.
Valid point...the US didn't buy Hawker Harriers...they bought the license for McDonnell Douglas to make their own version of the Harrier...there's a significant difference.
The Japanese gen 6 fighter is based on the Yf-23 Black Widow II
For the future!
Do the 5 best battery powered trains in history
I love history in the dark
Can't wait for pt II
Where NGAD? It's literally the most Amazing Future Aircraft of them all, and we don't even know much about it due to immense amounts of classified information regarding it, which just makes it all the more amazing IMO
SU-57 is supposed to have a detectability of 150km it has however been spotted from 600+ km so it's not that stealthy.
I've got Urban Strike still for the PlayStation
I know there's ace combat music in this video.
Maybe you should be doing marketing videos for Bell.
I suggest the 'best submarines' like the Type U-139 (Imperial German Navy's 'Big Chungus'), the 'Rubis' (or (Ruby) a minelaying Free French thorn in the side of the Kriegsmarine) and Tambor class (the class with the most decorated US submarine of WW2, USS Thresher )
were are the dutch trains from the future
Russia has a habit of overselling it's aircraft. Case in point, the mig 25. Had great performance numbers (when empty but they left that out) that lead to the US developing the greatest air superiority fighter of all time, the f-15 eagle, that actually could do all of the claimed numbers the mig could. Then we finally captured one, and it was all a lie.
And the SU-57 is only claimed to have the same RCS as the F/A-18
We captured a MiG25? I thought it was given to us by a defector.
I'm pretty sure that drone-wingman capability is supposed to be one of the defining characteristics of Gen6 aircraft...
"The most maneuverable out there"
Meanwhile... jas 39 gripen E.. can lock onto aircrafts behind it... not needing to be manuverable
And, yet, it's also pretty damned maneuverable...
@@AllTradesGeorge jupp..
Bit late to this one... but I wanted to say that it's highly likely the Invictus will win over the Raider X for one very simple reason: Maitainence... what I mean is it's less complex meaning matinance is easier, and It fallows traditional attack helicopter design more then the Raider X does, meaning they can rely on existing knowledge of how that kind of helicopter is laid out to speed up training for both maintenance crews and pilots when replacing the older platforms.
Russia is reportedly using the an-2 biplane. Being modified and converted to drones. Yes biplane drones
So the f-2 is based on an f-16, but that's about it. It's bigger, has larger wing surfaces making it more maneuverable, and it's weapons load out is quite a bit more deadly. Avionics is also better, carrying aesa radar before any of our aircraft did, and uses stealth composites.
The Japanese also made a mini c 5 galaxy, named the Kawasaki c 1 and c 2 basically is just a twin engined smaller version.
The MIG-31 led to the F15,so the SU57 responding to the F22 makes sense.
It was the 25 that did that. And us developing that lead to them building the 27, and so on.
The 35 was a cross nation build. The Brits made most of the complicated bits.
10:45 LESS GOOO ITS MY FAVORITE PLANE FUCK EVERYTHING ELSE IT DANCES LESSYOOOOO
Sorry, but we here in germany have not bought them yet.
We ordered some, but had to reduce the order allready
and it might get cancelled totally, because it is possible
that it is not allowed to be used here at all!!!
where is my FA XX, It is most likely to be the first Gen 6 come to service
Yeah, the NGAD is also not there, it's far more amazing than the other Sixth-Generation Projects being planned
Whilst the Invictus is drop dead gorgeous the Raider X looks more futuristic.
And it is a whole lot more complicated. The transmission has to be huge and complicated to drive two rotors and a propeller. That size is also going to make the silhouette laegee.
Quick. ....... hide em from Michael Bay!!!
He'll mess up another Transformers movie
I believe it's closer to 25 Su-57's but maybe I've been watching too much Artur Rehi and Russian Dude.
Edit: nevermind, Darkness addressed it.
It's possible that the SU-57 could be a match for the F-35 in 1v1 combat... but 1v1 combat becomes a lot less likely when Russia have very few SU-57s (somewhere in the tens), but there are _over 900_ F-35s in existence. Russia does not have the industrial base or the economy to compete in a numbers game. Having a fighter of equal capability means _they lose._ And because there are so few SU-57s, comitting them to combat is a last resort because losing their best planes costs Russia reputation, not just material and personnel. As for underestimating your enemy, the War in Ukraine is ongoing proof of Russia's massive military incompetence. We assumed they were a lot more powerful than they actually are.
(EDIT) Yeah, I see you addressed all this in the video.
Also, "Checkmate" is not the NATO reporting name for the SU-75. The Russian (formerly Soviet) Air Force does not usually assign names to its warplane designs. Suddenly doing it now, and using a word that means "I win", is almost certainly intended as propaganda to fool westerners who don't know that, and would therefore assume NATO is scared of it.
Exescuse me nit picker this is darkness video. He will cover what he wants to cover on the subject thank you.
please look more into the su57’s build quality it’s really a piece of junk if it was so good why isn’t in being used in current conflicts and not being bought quicker than they can build them. we (usa) we’re throwing f-117s into the gulf war like know ones business 30 years ago to see what they can do historically as i’m sure you know russians haven’t ever really been known for building great machines but building a lot of mediocre ones
F-35 the only plane which I refuse to fly in Ace Combat out of principle.
They play up the F-35s stealth but then show it with pylons loaded with external stores. What is its total internal capacity? Also for cost it is only marginally more maneuverable than the F-16.
UK and Japan start cooperating on building jets.
Russia: starts blasting general aviation in the North Sea because it thought it was the JASDF.
Japanese remilitarization?
The SU-57's a joke. It's never going to see actual service because they can barely get them functioning. It's just like that T-14 Armata they love parading around until it inevitably breaks down.
The Mitsubishi F-X isn't a true Japanese design
Think back to the Mitsubishi F1 and T2 and compare to Sepecat Jaguar.
That's not the future of aircraft it's just of laziness