Correct…SU-37 was an experimental flanker variant (called the Terminator) with canards and thrust vectoring. The Berkut was originally called the S-37 and ater changed to SU-47.
I own an Su-37 Berkut. Spec's are: Wing, 1112mm/43.79in - Length, 1600mm/62.99in - All Up Weight, 2140gr/4.72lbs - Power, Twin 70mm/2.75in EDF's (Electric Ducted Fans) - Control, 50 Amp Brushless Speed Controller - Battery, 22.2v 6s 3600mah 25c Li-po (or 25 x 3.60amps = 90amp hrs / 50 = 1.8hrs of available flight time at full power). Realistically, most Radio Controlled flights are Ten minutes or less. I purchased it as an ARF (almost ready to fly), meaning all I had to do was install the R/C electronics (receiver/servos, battery), do a little gluing & screwdriver work, trim it out and Fly! The Wings were Carbon Fiber/Laminated Plywood composite construction making it light and free from distortion/flexing. It fly's Great. I purchased it for our R/C Model A/C Clubs annual "Warbirds" event here in SW Washington (all A/C had to be an actual "scale" model, even if there were only a "planned" version to be built for Military purposes). People loved it and it was a Show Stopper.
There is also additional problems with a forward swept wing. Basically in general for super sonic planes you want the whole plane behind the shock wave generated by the nose / tip of the aircraft. with FSW the wing tips are likely outside the first shock wave and create a second one.
So a lot of people could see all that Soviet nonsense wasnt for them - just like today. Putin wantsto bring back the soviet union because it makes him all misty eyed, but he doesnt himself want to live like a soviet citizen - he wants to keep his Billions...
*Su-37 : Flanker-F, nicknamed "Terminator"* *S-22 : original mock-up* *S-32 : one of the final designs for the actual prototype* *S-37 : Berkut, later redesignated Su-47, NATO reporting name "Firkin"*
Yup. It was funny in the game AC4 you had the SU-37 and the "S-37" opponents. And it threw me when I went to look it up and found it had already been changed to SU-47.
The Berkut was an interesting design. Russian ambitions frequently outstripped their ability to deliver, but Sukhoi did a lot of groundbreaking research for this design that has contributed in numerous ways to subsequent aircraft. Nicely Done!
@@Th3_Gael I assume you're referring to the VTOL design of the Yak-141, which, while important to Lockmart's design for the F-35B lift fan, is absolutely nowhere near as important as you make it sound. The F-35 comes in 3 variants, only one of them has STOVL capabilities, and these capabilities are not what makes this aircraft so dominant whatsoever. Its stealth, radar, avionics, sensors, networking, data fusion, situational awareness, and electronic warfare suite make it the powerhouse that it is, not the lift fan design
@@yomama629 It is not just the lift-fan concept that was "borrowed" (note: other Nations out of necessity came with this idea too - kinda necessary for VTOL - French and German if not mistaken). The whole main engine exhaust swivel mechanism is Yakovlev's and THIS is the MAIN contribution of the Yak-141 to the F-35B, not the lift-fan.
As mentioned late in the video, the US X-29 from Grumman had FSW and first flew in 1984, over 10 years before the Su-37 did. The single-engine X-29 used a version of the engine used in the F-18. Both planes were experimental technology demonstrators. The X-29 was retired in 1991. The F-22, which has thrust vectoring, began operational testing in 1997, and became operational in the end of 2005.
It was the X-31 that pioneered American thrust vectoring technology. But F-22's thrust vectoring was even more advanced, since it had a rectangular output and was stealthy, which is quite a feat for a thrust vectoring nozzle.
I'd expect the wing twisting problem could not be overcome at very high speeds but I could see how wing morphing dynamically in flight would work great at low speeds and then revert to being swept for high speeds, I think DARPA is working on such technologies right now. I'm amazed it flew at all and more amazed that they suckered a pilot into testing it!!! It is a cool looking jet though...!
alot of computer controls were needed . our X plane with reverse swept wings wasn't supersonic but it took 3 redundant computers to keep it flying , without the fly by wire the plane would just disintegrate instantly
X29 test pilot said the same thing regarding instability, also with the aerolastic wing of the x-29, that was a solution to a problem nobody was asking as computer controlled leading edge flaps could perform the same function without the cons of the fsw. As a tech demonstration it was useful, but not practical, took Russia another decade or two to realise the same thing.
I remember I was just enlisted into the USAF when this thing started being shown at airshows. Every news outlet was making it out to be a "Raptor killer". Yet every USAF fighter pilot I met said it was a beautiful aircraft, but no way in hell they'd ever fly in one.
@@captaintoyota3171 That's a software thing though. If the purpose of the hardware is to act as an expendable dogfighter or 'extended magazine' for piloted fighters then they have all the time they need to perfect that aspect of it. Not that Russia is capable of that without help.. At least, not without killing off a lot of smart minds for minor transgressions. Again.
I always use the SU47 Berkut in the Ace combat games, absolutely love the forward swept wing design!!! I`m all for the western jets and planes...but nothing compares to the Sukhoi jets :)
The forward wing idea was actively pursued in the US at the same timeframe. My dad designed military planes and sections (e.g., F-15, F-18) for McDonnell Douglas and they played with forward wing designs (FWDs). However, the US plays by hugely different set of military requirements (esp in 60s-90s) than the Russians, and the FWDs really required today's computing power if not AI to handle its huge instability and touchiness features/flaws. While we *could* of put a plane out there (also see the Gruman FWD), it just was not combat service feasible. Add the fact that the Russian loved putting out "technologically" superior show pieces that were not fit for extended combat (hmm this sounds familiar.. T-14 Armata anyone)? So yes, props to the Russkies for getting a plane out - genuine feat there. But temper the envy a bit.
Exactly. It was a dead end concept for many reasons and why you don't see any attempt to revive it today. They were trying to create something that could out maneuver and dogfight F-16s and F-15s, but as you say, this was just a show piece with no real practical application.
Military value aside is was simply technologically fascinating. Would the forward swept wing be as good as theory promised? Or would it fail miserably? And i still kind of wait for the answers.
@@smgdfcmfah One of the reasons I've seen on why forward swept wings were abandoned was that the concept was incompatible with 'stealth' technology, with all of those leading edge on wings and control services.
It's maneuverability advantages (and stability disadvantages) were soon overshadowed by vectored thrust which could be used on conventional configurations and more stable airframes, but the forward swept wing may still be a tenable solution for missiles requiring extreme vector changes for last millisecond guidance.
The HFB-320 or Hansa Jet, a forward swept wing business jet, first flew in 1964. It was a commercial failure like many other VIP transports of that era.
I remember watching the Berkut at MAKS 2001 and 2005. Early in this video it stated the flight trials began in December 2001 but I watched it perform in concert with Su-27 and Su-30 in August 2001 and in 2005. Essentially the Berkut was a test bed. Some of the technologies from Berkut may be in the Felon.
The final plane in UPEO Path in Ace Combat 3. Very good plane. Capable of going 90* down then around 2500m, turn 70* up and grace the surface of the water. Fun stuff!
"Soviets achieved what others could not" Sukhoi SU-47 Berkut first flight 25th Sept 1997. Grumman X-29 first flight 14th December 1984. The X-29 research helped determine why the F-22 has a diamond shaped wing. The forward sweep is good at high speed, the forward swept trailing edge is good at low speed.
The design of swept main wings and canard design forward wings might prove extremely suitable for combat drones because the much lighter weight of these might overcome some of the structural and control problems of full-sized aircraft.
Forward swept wings DO NOT reduce radar signiture. They dramatically increase it, by acting as a focusing mirror and site of constructive wave interference from a significant width of forward angle.
@@Blackreaper95Not really, they could have worked well in the era of close range engagements, but the fly by vire technology to make them usable wasnt there yet back then.
Dark Doc's forgot to include probably the biggest reason the Soviet Union collapsed, Chernobyl. You have to remember Chernobyl took place in 1986, just a few years before the collapse. The reason it was such a significant impact was because, aside from the first responding fire fighters, miners, scientists and people who worked at the plant, Chernobyl was dealt with completely by the military. From analyzing the damage to the clean-up to the construction to the original tomb it was encased in. All those people where contaminated by the radiation, so they went thru there people fast. They eventually would have to call up reserve units to replace the sick workers or workers who where on the site to long and close to getting dangerous levels of radiation and had to be rotated out. Which to the Soviet Unions credit, they did try to protect there soliders from as best the could with the limited resources and knowledge they had. However it wasn't enough, basically Chernobyl destroyed the Soviet Union's military by contaminating it's soliders. Not to mention the incredible cost of not only money, but resources they needed to contain the disaster and it's radiation(which will be there for over a thousand years). It pretty much bankrupted the country and left it without a large part of it's defensive forces. You also have to remember, Chernobyl happened in the Ukraine, not on actual "Russian" soil. The leaders made a decision like a doctor would make, cut off the infected(or in this case radiated) area to save the rest of the body. So if Russia was to survive, the Soviet Union had to die. Which is exactly what happened.
Stealth aircraft made this design a no go since those forward swept wings amplify radar returns, you'd be murdered in the modern day by even Gen 4 aircraft in BVR combat.
@@uruk-hai3647 I'm not a Ukraine bootlicker, but Russia really has been exposed. Their armor is weak and they have poor tactics. Their air force is sub par. They have, for the most part, left their best jets out of this to avoid a public humiliation, but they've lost SU-34's. 10% of their fleet to be exact. Reference Combat Aircraft magazine and not CNN here is all I'm saying. If they had to go against a modern force, Russia would get wiped off the face of the earth. They're military is a step above 3rd world.
I recall as a preteen around 12 or so. The US was testing just the same kind of plane it was called the X29 and went through extensive flight testing with NASA and the airforce... Ground breaking stuff that needed computers to keep it stable enough for flight
As I understand it the biggest issue with FSW tech is that it causes physiological stresses (when taken past human capacity, which it can do very easily) that mean that a pilot is not an option. The video talks about out manouvreing F15 / F16 aircraft; but they are already operating at the limit of human capacity in terms of negative and positive g forces. So a Berkut for tomorrow would have to be a drone; and we now have sufficient IT capacity to make it. Then the main issue is how important are manouvering aircraft, compared to arsenal aircraft with hundreds of AAM using at least Home on Radar, Home on Jam, Active Radar with passive flight to engagement distance and of course the good old IR seeker, again modified to seek after an inertial flight distance. Needless to say, the active radar source could easily be hundreds of km behind the arsenal a/c should it have a suitable power plant for its radar. Or, civilian radio transmitters, let alone military ones, have been demonstrated to give sufficient signal strength to track, and almost certainly provide targeting iformation to software systems to allow track in a passive mode to many current missile frames.
the fsw isnt really needed anymore because vectored thrust and canards have really pushed the human limit on fighters today . the f15 and f16 aren't quite to that point, they do lag behind fighters like the f22, su57, Eurofighter and gripen as well as the upgraded mig 29s and su35s .
They couldnt compete in the long range missile game, and attempted to make something that could rush into fox 2 range guided by IRST and swat raptors in manouvering fight. It obviously wouldnt have worked.
While this is interesting, the chronology is messed up. As mentioned at 3:46, this fighter was first flown in 1997, yet the American version, the X-29 was first flown 13 years earlier, in 1984 and had a marginally faster top speed despite being smaller and with just one engine. The X-29 was researched, deemed not worth further development and was retired in 1991, 6 years before the Berkut's first flight. I think the X-29 and its prominence prior to the Berkut deserved more historical context than the side note provided about the X-29 here.
The SU-37 is probably in the top 5 coolest planes ever created/designed. Along with the SR-71, F-117, B-2/B-21 and it's honestly between either the F-22 or the YF-23 for the final spot. I can't decide, Although the F-22 was the plane the U.S. military ended up choosing between the two. Any other suggestions for the top 5 are most certainly welcome.
NASA built an experimental jet with forward swept wings with canards in the early 80’s. Grumman X-29. It incorporated composite materials, titanium and fly by wire control systems.
At least we got to see this bird in the Acecombat series and became notorious as an antagonist or hero fighter.. including it's never built counterpart the S-32.. Which was seldom seen in Acecombat games except for 5. X and X2..
Actually NASA had developed and flown a reverse wing aircraft back in 1984. It was called the X-29. It was designed by Grumman. They found it to be inherently unstable in flight and could lead to structural failure. So, it was discontinued.
If it doesn't look right, it won't fly right. When I first saw swept forward wings I thought, uh-uh , no, I don't think so. I think this video confirms my suspicions. Thanks Dark Skies, awesome channel, great content.
Maybe a transsonic drone could benefit from forward swept wings. It might not need fancy high maneuverability, so the wings aren't terribly stressed, nor the high supersonic speed that could be an issue for the forward wingtips.
The Berkut was the SU-47... It first flew in 1997. I guess you never heard of the Grumman X-29. It first flew in 1984. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Increased tendency for aerodynamic twisting of the wing leading to run away overstressing. A bend in the wing produced more forces to bend the wing until failure. Needs modern computer analysis and materials to control the aeroelasticity. The main advantage is that the wing vortex shed from the end of all wings, will migrate toward the fuselage giving reduced drag and possibly enhanced lift. Drawbacks include difficulty in hanging stores near the COG and unstable control regime.
The forward swept wing was a gimmick in the Berkut. NASA was testing forward swept wing design and concluded that it had very little benefit over positive or backward swept wings.
What Soviet ingenuity? It was a copy of the US X-29 that flew a decade before the SU-47… if the design was so great the US military wouldn’t have abandoned it.
The Berkut was designated su 47, not 37, which was the designation given to the "terminator," which was derived from the su 27.I believe that we haven't heard the last of the su 47,much like the USAF's yf-23 ,both may well appear,in improved forms,as 6th gen fighters.
Russia doesn't have the economy for a 6th gen fighter. But the idea of the YF-23 or a derivative re-emerging as the airframe for a 6th gen makes sense, honestly. The YF-22 had low-speed maneuverability over the YF-23 which is what got it the nod, but if a few sacrifices in the realm of low-speed maneuverability means more stealth, speed, possibly a bigger payload, then I wouldn't be surprised to see the YF-23 re-emerge.
Mikoyan-Gurevich Design Bureau succeeded creating the MiG-31 "Firefox", used in a Warner Bros movie under the same name and acted by Clint Eastwood. Not entirely a work of fiction, however it was featuring the first Russian built plane to feature an airframe, composed mostly of titanium and SS-118, a very thin aspect-ratio to the leading/trailing edges of the wings, much like the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter, radar absorbent material (RAM), ECM and powered by an RJ-15BD-600, which could achieve incredible thrust to weight ratio and excellent high-altitude air-breathing qualities, capable of reaching a top speed of Mach 6. While this impressive speed was possible, it was also considered its ‘maximum’ speed, and not efficient for a prolonged period, due to the MiG’s massive fuel consumption. Had this been a real Aircraft, it would have been not only the greatest Russian plane ever made, it would have been the best in the world.
There have been so many airplanes that look good on paper or in stated parameters. Many never become operationally successful. The forward swept wing has many disadvantages. One of the most difficult to overcome is the cost in money and weight to build a strong forward swept wing. We have mastered flight control systems that take care of instability, but in an aircraft big enough to carry a man, the forward swept wings drives the cost to high. In small unmanned aircraft the weight and cost penalties are not as high
Yall got to get better at reviewing your script. Everyone else already said it but SU-37 is the Terminator while this is the S-37 Berkut (later SU-47). Also you stated the engines were turboshaft engines which is wrong because turboshafts are helicopter engines because they have a driveshaft to turn the rotors. Should have said turbofan unstead.
I dont think more time and resources would have fixed the issues because even with all the advancements we have today the Russians and the US still have the same issues with the plane. Now a one time use drone on the other hand .....
A detail people speaking with confidence/authority need to get straight: The X designation on American aircraft denotes strictly experimental status. Y designation indicates candidacy for standard production (there's a _possible_ limited exception with the YF-12, owing to rumors that it briefly saw actual service; though, that's not particularly verifiable, considering it was still a CIA jet at that time). If DARPA is involved - and even more so if NASA, or JPL is - that aircraft is being used for research with the intent of informing future designs from various airframe builders. To that end, the X-29 wasn't _cancelled_ because the Air Force didn't want to make a fighter out of it. The project was concluded because it did what it set out to do, and all parties involved learned critical data they were able to apply forward. Also, there was only so much flight time they could get out of the X-29s, considering they were built from existing F-5 donors that had already been taken out of regular service; lifespan was then further compounded by increased stresses at the wing roots and outer ~1/3 of the ailerons - all just a natural consequence of the forward swept wing design. It's also worth noting that forward swept wing designs run into flight speed limitations - both physical and operational. The degree of wing twist increases in relation to airspeed, also increasing instability with it to the point that flight computers eventually wouldn't be able to compensate. So, you're guaranteed to wear out the wing faster than normal, at almost any given air speed, neverminding the cost of higher grade computers to keep things stable at the higher speeds. And that fact absolutely applies to the Berkut as well, as tipped off by the severe disparity between it's maximum speed at altitude versus sea level (Mach 2.2 and 1.1, respectively, though some reports indicate it's stable maximum at altitude is actually Mach 1.7).
If anyone goes on Google Maps and types in Sukhoi SU-47 Berkut or MIG 1.44 you can see them along with a myriad of other Russian aircraft (SU-57s included) at MAKS.
I often used these while playing ace combat games. The wing design made it unique and cool looking.
Same here. Ace combat electrosphere.
I actually had to stop selecting it. It was one of those airframes that I would forget my mission and just have fun watching her dance in the sky.
My plane of choice in any Ace Combat game ❤
Ace Combat 6 that was a good ass plane but the Northrop Grumman YF-23 always looked and played better to me with the DEW...
I played HAWX before I ever played Ace Combat. Su-47 was the main plane of the “villian” who showed up every so often and it’s lived my head since
The 37 was the terminator the 47 was the Berkut if I’m not mistaken
You are correct, at least regarding the Berkut is Su 47.
i think the prototype of 47 was s-37
@@Massakre8492nd yes. S-37 not SU-37
@@Stormidze but You can see where the mistake came from, it was glanced over during research and it stuck.
Correct…SU-37 was an experimental flanker variant (called the Terminator) with canards and thrust vectoring. The Berkut was originally called the S-37 and ater changed to SU-47.
This was one of the first planes i built when I got back into aircraft modeling. There's just something super sleek and sexy looking about it.
I've one on the shelf of doom. Time to revisit it methinks.
I own an Su-37 Berkut. Spec's are: Wing, 1112mm/43.79in - Length, 1600mm/62.99in - All Up Weight, 2140gr/4.72lbs - Power, Twin 70mm/2.75in EDF's (Electric Ducted Fans) - Control, 50 Amp Brushless Speed Controller - Battery, 22.2v 6s 3600mah 25c Li-po (or 25 x 3.60amps = 90amp hrs / 50 = 1.8hrs of available flight time at full power). Realistically, most Radio Controlled flights are Ten minutes or less.
I purchased it as an ARF (almost ready to fly), meaning all I had to do was install the R/C electronics (receiver/servos, battery), do a little gluing & screwdriver work, trim it out and Fly! The Wings were Carbon Fiber/Laminated Plywood composite construction making it light and free from distortion/flexing. It fly's Great. I purchased it for our R/C Model A/C Clubs annual "Warbirds" event here in SW Washington (all A/C had to be an actual "scale" model, even if there were only a "planned" version to be built for Military purposes). People loved it and it was a Show Stopper.
Berkut and the US made X29 were spectacular aircraft, with the Berkut taking it to the next level.
There is also additional problems with a forward swept wing. Basically in general for super sonic planes you want the whole plane behind the shock wave generated by the nose / tip of the aircraft. with FSW the wing tips are likely outside the first shock wave and create a second one.
It was only meant as Technology demonstrator
That's why swept forward wings have to be variable geometry, like the F-14.
And yet the X29 did it's supersonic flight test with flying colors. So either the shockwave issue was not as important, or the technology overcame it.
@seanprice7645dog fighting days are over
@@selassietetevie4966 That's what they thought in the 60s and were wrong then as
well
The Soviet Union did not "fall" in 1989. Several SSRs were actively trying to break away in 1990, but it was officially dissolved in December 1991.
All true, but once the Wall came down, the unthinkable became the inevitable.
In other words, they are inseperable events.
So it "fell apart"
@@EpicLoLs89 Thanks to the US actions and long internal problems
So a lot of people could see all that Soviet nonsense wasnt for them - just like today. Putin wantsto bring back the soviet union because it makes him all misty eyed, but he doesnt himself want to live like a soviet citizen - he wants to keep his Billions...
@@EpicLoLs89 not in 1989
*Su-37 : Flanker-F, nicknamed "Terminator"*
*S-22 : original mock-up*
*S-32 : one of the final designs for the actual prototype*
*S-37 : Berkut, later redesignated Su-47, NATO reporting name "Firkin"*
Yup. It was funny in the game AC4 you had the SU-37 and the "S-37" opponents. And it threw me when I went to look it up and found it had already been changed to SU-47.
thank you
@@corvetteworldrob8586 in ac3 it was su-43 berkut II
he was never called "terminator", do not compose.
@@alexgainsborough4921 He?
I loved the hell out of all the SU aircraft on the Ace Combat games!
Man must mimic nature. Just another example. Very interesting and great show.
I was fortunate to see it fly at MAKS (1999, I think). Highlight of the show.
Soviet Union fell in '91. It was the Berlin Wall that fell in '89.
Script writers must have been drunk again. *shrug*
and it was not 'felt'. all people were voting for USSR to stay. some ones helped it to fall, including people in gov of Russia.
This airplane always remind me of the movie 'Firefox'.
Beautiful thing.
That's a beautiful looking aircraft.
The Berkut was an interesting design. Russian ambitions frequently outstripped their ability to deliver, but Sukhoi did a lot of groundbreaking research for this design that has contributed in numerous ways to subsequent aircraft. Nicely Done!
They had some absolutely brilliant engineers in aerospace industries.
@@martinjrgensen8234so brilliant that the F35 would never have flown without them
Амбиции оставь своей стране. Мы реалисты. Это прототип. Изучили сильные и слабые стороны и отказались от такой конструкции.
@@Th3_Gael I assume you're referring to the VTOL design of the Yak-141, which, while important to Lockmart's design for the F-35B lift fan, is absolutely nowhere near as important as you make it sound. The F-35 comes in 3 variants, only one of them has STOVL capabilities, and these capabilities are not what makes this aircraft so dominant whatsoever. Its stealth, radar, avionics, sensors, networking, data fusion, situational awareness, and electronic warfare suite make it the powerhouse that it is, not the lift fan design
@@yomama629 It is not just the lift-fan concept that was "borrowed" (note: other Nations out of necessity came with this idea too - kinda necessary for VTOL - French and German if not mistaken). The whole main engine exhaust swivel mechanism is Yakovlev's and THIS is the MAIN contribution of the Yak-141 to the F-35B, not the lift-fan.
As mentioned late in the video, the US X-29 from Grumman had FSW and first flew in 1984, over 10 years before the Su-37 did. The single-engine X-29 used a version of the engine used in the F-18. Both planes were experimental technology demonstrators. The X-29 was retired in 1991. The F-22, which has thrust vectoring, began operational testing in 1997, and became operational in the end of 2005.
Also of note: not only did the X-29 fly 13 years before the Su-47, the US built twice as many X-29's.
It was the X-31 that pioneered American thrust vectoring technology. But F-22's thrust vectoring was even more advanced, since it had a rectangular output and was stealthy, which is quite a feat for a thrust vectoring nozzle.
@@erichammond93082 😊
The single-engine X-31 did over 500 test flights from 1990-1995. It also used the engine used by the F-18.
Hey, give them a break... it took that long to get their intelligence out of the states.
I'd expect the wing twisting problem could not be overcome at very high speeds but I could see how wing morphing dynamically in flight would work great at low speeds and then revert to being swept for high speeds,
I think DARPA is working on such technologies right now.
I'm amazed it flew at all and more amazed that they suckered a pilot into testing it!!!
It is a cool looking jet though...!
alot of computer controls were needed . our X plane with reverse swept wings wasn't supersonic but it took 3 redundant computers to keep it flying , without the fly by wire the plane would just disintegrate instantly
X29 test pilot said the same thing regarding instability, also with the aerolastic wing of the x-29, that was a solution to a problem nobody was asking as computer controlled leading edge flaps could perform the same function without the cons of the fsw. As a tech demonstration it was useful, but not practical, took Russia another decade or two to realise the same thing.
I remember I was just enlisted into the USAF when this thing started being shown at airshows. Every news outlet was making it out to be a "Raptor killer". Yet every USAF fighter pilot I met said it was a beautiful aircraft, but no way in hell they'd ever fly in one.
That's a pretty standard response when discussing most Soviet and Russian technology.
@@Comanchee0689no wonder they are very enthusiastic about their vodka, I would also. 😅
@@Comanchee0689 I noticed that. Then I got to turn a wrench on an AN-12. Then I understood. That's some "Wild west" levels of crazy.
In America, you build fighter planes. In Soviet Union we built planes that fight YOU!...😉
Soviets build the best planes of the time. Simple as that. They also beat the usa in the space race.
"A new voice actor doing the narrating is just what this channel has been looking for." -- Sukhoi
One of the best looking planes ever made.
By far one of the most beautiful aircraft designs ever
EDIT: Huh, using forward swept wings on UCAVs is actually a pretty great idea.
Yes it sounds like it might have interesting potential. So, the legacy of the Berkut lives on and on.
Yeah but at supersonic speeds etc its bad move, plus requires insane avionics to control instabilities.
@@captaintoyota3171 That's a software thing though. If the purpose of the hardware is to act as an expendable dogfighter or 'extended magazine' for piloted fighters then they have all the time they need to perfect that aspect of it.
Not that Russia is capable of that without help.. At least, not without killing off a lot of smart minds for minor transgressions. Again.
I always use the SU47 Berkut in the Ace combat games, absolutely love the forward swept wing design!!!
I`m all for the western jets and planes...but nothing compares to the Sukhoi jets :)
Except the pilots flying them… American pilots the best in the world!!!! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Grown man playing games wow
Keep walking!@@wallybraveheart6896
@@brianmck7363No they aren't. British are.
@robertwillis4061 I'd believe the Israelis are better pilots before I believed the British were.
The forward wing idea was actively pursued in the US at the same timeframe. My dad designed military planes and sections (e.g., F-15, F-18) for McDonnell Douglas and they played with forward wing designs (FWDs). However, the US plays by hugely different set of military requirements (esp in 60s-90s) than the Russians, and the FWDs really required today's computing power if not AI to handle its huge instability and touchiness features/flaws. While we *could* of put a plane out there (also see the Gruman FWD), it just was not combat service feasible. Add the fact that the Russian loved putting out "technologically" superior show pieces that were not fit for extended combat (hmm this sounds familiar.. T-14 Armata anyone)? So yes, props to the Russkies for getting a plane out - genuine feat there. But temper the envy a bit.
Gruman X-29
Exactly. It was a dead end concept for many reasons and why you don't see any attempt to revive it today. They were trying to create something that could out maneuver and dogfight F-16s and F-15s, but as you say, this was just a show piece with no real practical application.
Was berkut spied out from X29?
Military value aside is was simply technologically fascinating.
Would the forward swept wing be as good as theory promised?
Or would it fail miserably? And i still kind of wait for the answers.
@@smgdfcmfah One of the reasons I've seen on why forward swept wings were abandoned was that the concept was incompatible with 'stealth' technology, with all of those leading edge on wings and control services.
Wow, with the truck pulling it for size comparison, I had no idea that fighter was so large!
It's maneuverability advantages (and stability disadvantages) were soon overshadowed by vectored thrust which could be used on conventional configurations and more stable airframes, but the forward swept wing may still be a tenable solution for missiles requiring extreme vector changes for last millisecond guidance.
The HFB-320 or Hansa Jet, a forward swept wing business jet, first flew in 1964. It was a commercial failure like many other VIP transports of that era.
... but provided valuable service as a VIP transport and ECM training to West Germany's Air Force
0:51 the Soviet Union ceased to exist in December of 1991, not in 1989.
The forward swept wings helped with the diamond wing shape of the F22
The best lookin plane to ever come out of russian. Ive loved the Berkut since i was a youngun
I remember watching the Berkut at MAKS 2001 and 2005. Early in this video it stated the flight trials began in December 2001 but I watched it perform in concert with Su-27 and Su-30 in August 2001 and in 2005. Essentially the Berkut was a test bed. Some of the technologies from Berkut may be in the Felon.
The final plane in UPEO Path in Ace Combat 3. Very good plane. Capable of going 90* down then around 2500m, turn 70* up and grace the surface of the water.
Fun stuff!
Ace Combat love that aircraft❤
US had the X-29 but never went beyond a testing platform
This was fascinating!
"Soviets achieved what others could not"
Sukhoi SU-47 Berkut first flight 25th Sept 1997.
Grumman X-29 first flight 14th December 1984.
The X-29 research helped determine why the F-22 has a diamond shaped wing. The forward sweep is good at high speed, the forward swept trailing edge is good at low speed.
One of my favorite planes!
Great video and details about this fascinating aircraft. Any chance of doing one about its contender counterpart the Mig 1.44 MFI?
I think he already did. Look under Chinese J-20.
Yes, other channels have examined the connection.
Trying so hard to sound spectacular, sensational is a detriment to your presentation.
The forward swept wing fighter bomber was the Barkut or bear cat
The design of swept main wings and canard design forward wings might prove extremely suitable for combat drones because the much lighter weight of these might overcome some of the structural and control problems of full-sized aircraft.
Forward swept wings DO NOT reduce radar signiture. They dramatically increase it, by acting as a focusing mirror and site of constructive wave interference from a significant width of forward angle.
Which is why they were abandoned dead end design pretty much.
@@Blackreaper95Not really, they could have worked well in the era of close range engagements, but the fly by vire technology to make them usable wasnt there yet back then.
people bothered by the misdesignation of the Su-47, but what really bothered me was when he called the Yak-141 a "WHY-AY-KAY 141"
Dark Doc's forgot to include probably the biggest reason the Soviet Union collapsed, Chernobyl. You have to remember Chernobyl took place in 1986, just a few years before the collapse. The reason it was such a significant impact was because, aside from the first responding fire fighters, miners, scientists and people who worked at the plant, Chernobyl was dealt with completely by the military. From analyzing the damage to the clean-up to the construction to the original tomb it was encased in. All those people where contaminated by the radiation, so they went thru there people fast. They eventually would have to call up reserve units to replace the sick workers or workers who where on the site to long and close to getting dangerous levels of radiation and had to be rotated out. Which to the Soviet Unions credit, they did try to protect there soliders from as best the could with the limited resources and knowledge they had. However it wasn't enough, basically Chernobyl destroyed the Soviet Union's military by contaminating it's soliders. Not to mention the incredible cost of not only money, but resources they needed to contain the disaster and it's radiation(which will be there for over a thousand years). It pretty much bankrupted the country and left it without a large part of it's defensive forces. You also have to remember, Chernobyl happened in the Ukraine, not on actual "Russian" soil. The leaders made a decision like a doctor would make, cut off the infected(or in this case radiated) area to save the rest of the body. So if Russia was to survive, the Soviet Union had to die. Which is exactly what happened.
Great video about Bearcut!
Absolutely one of the most eye watering aircraft designs ever produced. It's unfortunate - for our sake, fortunate - that it was undtable.
Based on what we’re seeing in the Ukraine, there was never any reason to be concerned….
@@elvisischrist dam man, you should stop watching TheSun and CNN 🤣
Stealth aircraft made this design a no go since those forward swept wings amplify radar returns, you'd be murdered in the modern day by even Gen 4 aircraft in BVR combat.
@@uruk-hai3647 How old are you - too young to remember the x-29??? That's a been there done that by the US some 40 years ago...
@@uruk-hai3647 I'm not a Ukraine bootlicker, but Russia really has been exposed. Their armor is weak and they have poor tactics. Their air force is sub par. They have, for the most part, left their best jets out of this to avoid a public humiliation, but they've lost SU-34's. 10% of their fleet to be exact. Reference Combat Aircraft magazine and not CNN here is all I'm saying. If they had to go against a modern force, Russia would get wiped off the face of the earth. They're military is a step above 3rd world.
It is still the most beautiful aircraft in the history of the world.
I recall as a preteen around 12 or so. The US was testing just the same kind of plane it was called the X29 and went through extensive flight testing with NASA and the airforce... Ground breaking stuff that needed computers to keep it stable enough for flight
As I understand it the biggest issue with FSW tech is that it causes physiological stresses (when taken past human capacity, which it can do very easily) that mean that a pilot is not an option. The video talks about out manouvreing F15 / F16 aircraft; but they are already operating at the limit of human capacity in terms of negative and positive g forces. So a Berkut for tomorrow would have to be a drone; and we now have sufficient IT capacity to make it. Then the main issue is how important are manouvering aircraft, compared to arsenal aircraft with hundreds of AAM using at least Home on Radar, Home on Jam, Active Radar with passive flight to engagement distance and of course the good old IR seeker, again modified to seek after an inertial flight distance.
Needless to say, the active radar source could easily be hundreds of km behind the arsenal a/c should it have a suitable power plant for its radar. Or, civilian radio transmitters, let alone military ones, have been demonstrated to give sufficient signal strength to track, and almost certainly provide targeting iformation to software systems to allow track in a passive mode to many current missile frames.
the fsw isnt really needed anymore because vectored thrust and canards have really pushed the human limit on fighters today . the f15 and f16 aren't quite to that point, they do lag behind fighters like the f22, su57, Eurofighter and gripen as well as the upgraded mig 29s and su35s .
Yep - hence the reason for indicating that there may still be a place for drones to use the technology.@@mikesmith-wk7vy
Yeah we had had an x craft base on foward swept wings to , but nobody has ever developed this into a practical aircraft yet.
I have been reading about the Berkut for decades now. From what I know there are TWO of these things.
I remember back in the late 70's we were playing with R/C planes with designs like this. The USSR was reinventing the wheel.
They couldnt compete in the long range missile game, and attempted to make something that could rush into fox 2 range guided by IRST and swat raptors in manouvering fight.
It obviously wouldnt have worked.
While this is interesting, the chronology is messed up. As mentioned at 3:46, this fighter was first flown in 1997, yet the American version, the X-29 was first flown 13 years earlier, in 1984 and had a marginally faster top speed despite being smaller and with just one engine. The X-29 was researched, deemed not worth further development and was retired in 1991, 6 years before the Berkut's first flight. I think the X-29 and its prominence prior to the Berkut deserved more historical context than the side note provided about the X-29 here.
Your videos feature good music soundtracks.
They were so close... too bad they stopped there... a diamond shape delta was all they needed
SU-47 BERKUT is one of my favorite aircraft.
The SU-37 is probably in the top 5 coolest planes ever created/designed. Along with the SR-71, F-117, B-2/B-21 and it's honestly between either the F-22 or the YF-23 for the final spot. I can't decide, Although the F-22 was the plane the U.S. military ended up choosing between the two. Any other suggestions for the top 5 are most certainly welcome.
You got this completely wrong. This is the su-47. Not the su-37.
NASA built an experimental jet with forward swept wings with canards in the early 80’s. Grumman X-29. It incorporated composite materials, titanium and fly by wire control systems.
At least we got to see this bird in the Acecombat series and became notorious as an antagonist or hero fighter.. including it's never built counterpart the S-32.. Which was seldom seen in Acecombat games except for 5. X and X2..
Thanks for this.
Actually NASA had developed and flown a reverse wing aircraft back in 1984. It was called the X-29. It was designed by Grumman. They found it to be inherently unstable in flight and could lead to structural failure. So, it was discontinued.
I know it's fictional but I liked the concept of the "Talons" on the movie Stealth!
*( MASTER LAYANGAN )* DaRi Indonesia 🇲🇨 hadir memantau. 👍👍👍
If it doesn't look right, it won't fly right.
When I first saw swept forward wings I thought, uh-uh , no, I don't think so. I think this video confirms my suspicions. Thanks Dark Skies, awesome channel, great content.
Maybe a transsonic drone could benefit from forward swept wings. It might not need fancy high maneuverability, so the wings aren't terribly stressed, nor the high supersonic speed that could be an issue for the forward wingtips.
Awesome aircraft!
God what a beautiful airframe!!!
The Berkut was the SU-47... It first flew in 1997.
I guess you never heard of the Grumman X-29. It first flew in 1984.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
The reduced radar signature was not a characteristic of the forward sweat wings. It was a characteristic of the material used to construct the wings.
This wing configuration simply is aerodynamically inefective: its been done before.
great work man👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Increased tendency for aerodynamic twisting of the wing leading to run away overstressing. A bend in the wing produced more forces to bend the wing until failure. Needs modern computer analysis and materials to control the aeroelasticity. The main advantage is that the wing vortex shed from the end of all wings, will migrate toward the fuselage giving reduced drag and possibly enhanced lift. Drawbacks include difficulty in hanging stores near the COG and unstable control regime.
May I present to you the US X-29. An F20 with the same configuration. Didn't make it forwards. Like the Berkut.
The forward swept wing was a gimmick in the Berkut. NASA was testing forward swept wing design and concluded that it had very little benefit over positive or backward swept wings.
I like this very interesting air craft
What Soviet ingenuity? It was a copy of the US X-29 that flew a decade before the SU-47… if the design was so great the US military wouldn’t have abandoned it.
What about the Grumman x-29??? Obviously this design was so good they do not use it......
The u.s. had a similar design made and tested and ditched because we didn't need an aircraft that good. XF-29.
Like the video already said
The Berkut was designated su 47, not 37, which was the designation given to the "terminator," which was derived from the su 27.I believe that we haven't heard the last of the su 47,much like the USAF's yf-23 ,both may well appear,in improved forms,as 6th gen fighters.
Russia doesn't have the economy for a 6th gen fighter. But the idea of the YF-23 or a derivative re-emerging as the airframe for a 6th gen makes sense, honestly. The YF-22 had low-speed maneuverability over the YF-23 which is what got it the nod, but if a few sacrifices in the realm of low-speed maneuverability means more stealth, speed, possibly a bigger payload, then I wouldn't be surprised to see the YF-23 re-emerge.
@Ilyak1986 I'm sure they'll find the funds,after all they did develop the 5th gen SU 57.
I agree it was the su-47.
Some say the US allowed Saab access to some of the work of the flight controls of the X29 for the Gripen program
In ace combat it does have some fantastic maneuvers.
I still think this jet looks sick and futuristic 👍👍👍👍👍
Mikoyan-Gurevich Design Bureau succeeded creating the MiG-31 "Firefox", used in a Warner Bros movie under the same name and acted by Clint Eastwood. Not entirely a work of fiction, however it was featuring the first Russian built plane to feature an airframe, composed mostly of titanium and SS-118, a very thin aspect-ratio to the leading/trailing edges of the wings, much like the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter, radar absorbent material (RAM), ECM and powered by an RJ-15BD-600, which could achieve incredible thrust to weight ratio and excellent high-altitude air-breathing qualities, capable of reaching a top speed of Mach 6. While this impressive speed was possible, it was also considered its ‘maximum’ speed, and not efficient for a prolonged period, due to the MiG’s massive fuel consumption. Had this been a real Aircraft, it would have been not only the greatest Russian plane ever made, it would have been the best in the world.
The US had one. The X29 from Grumman
yooo i love the SU-47
Как-то недавно лазил по Гугл карте, спутниковые снимки. И под Москвой наткнулся на аэродром, где стоит су-47 под открытым небом:)
@DarkDocsSkies Oh, so you really mean the American made X-29 which came years before. You should make it more clear.
Su-47 Berkut "Firkin" - star of Ace Combat series.
There have been so many airplanes that look good on paper or in stated parameters. Many never become operationally successful. The forward swept wing has many disadvantages. One of the most difficult to overcome is the cost in money and weight to build a strong forward swept wing. We have mastered flight control systems that take care of instability, but in an aircraft big enough to carry a man, the forward swept wings drives the cost to high.
In small unmanned aircraft the weight and cost penalties are not as high
They also fuck up transsonic wavefront shape, and massively increase radar crossection.
Could you imagine if we debuted our top secret projects. The world would crap its pants all at once😂
Well,it looks cool.
Yall got to get better at reviewing your script. Everyone else already said it but SU-37 is the Terminator while this is the S-37 Berkut (later SU-47). Also you stated the engines were turboshaft engines which is wrong because turboshafts are helicopter engines because they have a driveshaft to turn the rotors. Should have said turbofan unstead.
I dont think more time and resources would have fixed the issues because even with all the advancements we have today the Russians and the US still have the same issues with the plane. Now a one time use drone on the other hand .....
This, yes they CAN build it and fly it but components required are outsource avionics is so complex for unstable design like this
You can think what you want, but the plane was looking more badass then the Raptor at the time.
A detail people speaking with confidence/authority need to get straight: The X designation on American aircraft denotes strictly experimental status. Y designation indicates candidacy for standard production (there's a _possible_ limited exception with the YF-12, owing to rumors that it briefly saw actual service; though, that's not particularly verifiable, considering it was still a CIA jet at that time). If DARPA is involved - and even more so if NASA, or JPL is - that aircraft is being used for research with the intent of informing future designs from various airframe builders. To that end, the X-29 wasn't _cancelled_ because the Air Force didn't want to make a fighter out of it. The project was concluded because it did what it set out to do, and all parties involved learned critical data they were able to apply forward. Also, there was only so much flight time they could get out of the X-29s, considering they were built from existing F-5 donors that had already been taken out of regular service; lifespan was then further compounded by increased stresses at the wing roots and outer ~1/3 of the ailerons - all just a natural consequence of the forward swept wing design.
It's also worth noting that forward swept wing designs run into flight speed limitations - both physical and operational. The degree of wing twist increases in relation to airspeed, also increasing instability with it to the point that flight computers eventually wouldn't be able to compensate. So, you're guaranteed to wear out the wing faster than normal, at almost any given air speed, neverminding the cost of higher grade computers to keep things stable at the higher speeds. And that fact absolutely applies to the Berkut as well, as tipped off by the severe disparity between it's maximum speed at altitude versus sea level (Mach 2.2 and 1.1, respectively, though some reports indicate it's stable maximum at altitude is actually Mach 1.7).
My second favourite plane in the world
It would be nice if you reviewed the less known Firefox.. I heard that it has voice controlled weapons
Try using them while pulling high g load
U mean the Clint Eastwood film b.s.? China russian have alot of paper tiger aircraft
Lol, true maybe slate it for next April 1st time frame.. I'd never want to knock the great content for this channel. Just thought it was a funny idea.
If anyone goes on Google Maps and types in Sukhoi SU-47 Berkut or MIG 1.44 you can see them along with a myriad of other Russian aircraft (SU-57s included) at MAKS.
It wasn't "secret weapon". It was just Soviet flying lab to test new solutions in aerodynamics to create the most efficient approaches for jets.
Yet F-16s and Mig-21s still do all the work.