Double check if Byelka AESA Fire Control Radar much less cheek AESA are being deployed in serial Su57 instead of IrbisE PESA - otherwise latest Su35 would also be getting Byelka FCR...
If you can do a video on the difference between the R.A.M coating on the F-35 vs F-22? F-22 is painted F-35 is baked? Does it have Prototype Nano skin??
A Chinese lady taught me a great quote, she said, "Whoever jingles the loudest has the most change." That's so true, any person (or country) that actually has, and gets things done, doesn't need to brag.
self-satisfied Yankees always lose to the Russians (Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Africa, Ukraine, Syria), but they don’t want to admit that their weapons are garbage ha ha ha Su57 is a 6th generation aircraft. mig41 will be the 7th generation. you may not believe it, your narcissism and Russophobia will not reduce the superiority of Russian weapons
One of the most hilarious things, I think, is when armchair analysts get a spreadsheet of new equipment from China and are like NATO'S NEW TANK IS ALREADY OBSOLETE. That's not remotely how any of this works.
Yeah the best refutation of that was a US Army study of 73 Easting that concluded that if the US and Iraq had traded their M1s and T-72s the battle would have gone basically the same way. But if the US forces had made some classic noob mistakes they'd probably have lost and concluded that training is vastly more important than hardware.
@@j.f.fisher5318Not just training, but logistics, doctrine and strategy. You need equiment you can actually manufacture with quality control, deliver where you need it, maintain where you keep it, and replace when it's lost, and you need to implement with it tactics that actually make you win the war against the specific opponent you'll have.
A simple fictitious example: a fighter that delays your opponent's theoretically superior fighter while you contest the air space and win the war with superior land forces is, in fact, the superior fighter at a strategic level. It wins the war.
Equipment doesn't exist in a vacuum. A lot of how good a system is is decided by what it is up against. It's why drones like Bayraktar are insanely amazing for countries like Somalia where organizations like Al-Shahaab are getting devastated by large drones because they don't have any AD available.
@@DrVictorVasconcelosstrategy changes based on situation. There's lots of situations where you want a superior plane that don't involve a war or ground troops at all. But indeed, situationally useful is always more valuable than theoretically better.
@@Soccera0they were founded in Russia, they actually spent more time based in Russia than they have spent in Hungary. They also had some controversy a while ago when a logo of theirs showed up in a Russian propaganda video about Russian separatists in the Donbas.
Alex, thanks for ruining my ability to enjoy any other TH-cam military channels. Your world-class informative videos have left me watching other military channels shaking my head saying, no, that's not correct; no, that's not correct either......
Lazerpig is also pretty good. Has more humor most of the time, but he knows his stuff and will be the first to admit it when he gets something wrong (after doing more research to figure out if he actually got it wrong or if someone is being a troll)
I mean, technically you're not wrong. It stems from the same time-frame. There was a significant influx of money with the gas/oil boom that Russia enjoyed in the early 2000's to the mid-2010's. This was the same time the AK-12 (the real one, not the eventual bodykit that showed up...), the influx of new naval vessels, the upgraded 'RATNIK' programme for infantry, the Armata and its variants...the PAK-FA (turned Su-57), etc. It's all from the same 'wave' of intent...and was very likely never going to materialize. There was a short period where Russia looked very capable of re-emerging as a new type of Soviet Union (in the early 2010's, I believe, for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union they spent 'Cold War' level money on their military, etc.)- with its states being beholden to Russia via gas/oil instead of military might, etc...but then that bubble burst.
I’m not sure he is, Alex. Some have speculated that he’s a Russian man-droid or one of those lizard people…there are even rumours stirring that he’s a figment of our imagination
Regardless of its capabilities, you can’t deny that the Su-57 is beautiful. It has some fantastic lines. I still think the YF-23 is the king for looks from that era, but the Su-57 is darn close.
Yes, the US does design planes with beautiful lines, and the Russians to an excellent job of copying those lines. Virtually all of their aircraft post 1990 look like mirror images of US fight aircraft.
The problem is that F22 was produced from 1997-2011 and the SU-57, not in full serial production in 2024, is still no match for it until everyone closes to gun range. By then, F22 should be out of rockets and scurrying toward a horde of F15 EXs with more rockets the F22 can guide to SU-57... If the SU-57 gets to gun range with the F15, things have gone *_very wrong_* for USAF & NATO... Will F15's record suddenly worsen to 104:1??
He had a good start I agree, however in the end it slipped into "the west is good and Russia is bad category" which is the absolute he was supposedly trying to avoid in the beginning.
It's not the plane it's the f,king missile that counts. If you have a F 22 and you throw sticks.... what's the point 👉👉👉 . Let your opponent to believe he has the best equipment 😂😂😂😂😂
OH man, do you ever nail it there: "the internet hates nuance" !! --- and unfortunately that conflicts with the stark reality that almost nothing is ever 'black and white'. Even in the darkest of space, there are photons.
"In real warfare, a cutting edge fighter can lose a fight to a cropduster...." The math on this checks out. AirTractor makes an armed version of one of their crop-dusting airframes. No I'm not kidding. I don't think it's gotten much interest, but it DOES exist! Fit that armed crop-duster with a radar, look-down shoot-down system and the right air-to-air missiles, (ideally from another airframe so that they are already integrated with each other) and that high-speed low-drag stealth fighter might have a nasty surprise headed towards its tailpipe. Doubly so because there's another kind of steath besides radar and thermal stealth. Stealth by visual mimicry. No matter what gubbins they hang off the wings of it, that crop duster is still gonna look like a crop duster on first glance, and given the small windows for decision making in air combat, mistaking a missile-armed crop duster for one "armed" with pesticides or fertilizer can easily be the last mistake a pilot makes.
In a war, there are not just 1 plane. A single 1-on-1 dogfight have a small chance that the weaker one will win. But at 100 vs 100, it is translated into a 99 to 1 win…
@@jamescarter8311 All the fancy whis-bang gizmos in the world, inside a cutting edge fighter, will still not make up for the failings of a cut-rate pilot. Nothing can. Point is, no pilot should be doing the "mistook an armed crop duster for one that's actually just dusting crops" mistake. The high-tech of the AIM-9X fitted to such a crop duster would be doing the "heavy lifting" of the combat engagement from the point of view of the crop duster. A-10's carry AIM-9's, and some people play DCS with a "meme loadout" of "anti-air A-10" which is about as close to a cropduster as you can get. And they splash bandits because they think "Oh it's just an ordinary ground-pound....what the heck is that missile warning from?" before they get splashed. I'm not saying DCS is a particularly good representation of IRL air combat, but I am saying that neither pilot in DCS is as skilled as an Air Force or Navy pilot, who would not make that mistake. I have no clue about the skill level of Russian pilots, but the war in Ukraine tells me that they're not all they're hyped up to be, skill wise.
It’s not even that the plane is trash (which it is) their problem is that even if the felon was the world’s best stealth fighter it still wouldn’t matter. Russia has no idea how to use it. And even if they did know how to use it, they still wouldn’t give their pilots enough training to make them proficient enough to use that tool.
Alex, are the Su-57s that are being very very slowly produced now using the new engine that was going to originally be on this aircraft? Or have they still not finished making the engines yet?
The RCS of just the body before the paint is applied is 0.3 m2 which is pretty good for what it is. The real RCS of both the F22 and F35 is much greater than advertised. The advertised RCS is from a very specific angle, in reality it's somehere around 0.06 for the F35. Also I should mention that the SU57 is equipped with L band radar so while it cannot effectively track the F35 at longer distances it can see it coming and react adequately
@@ChucksSEADnDEADThe F22s first kill was a Chinese balloon! But even if we took you at your word that it dropped bombs and scored classified kills against opponents with virtually no air defense to speak of, then by that logic, the SU57 probably was also engaged in Syria and Ukraine that we don't know about.
@@Mastakilla91 you only have what 10 to 20 su57s that can go into combat right now? And that's being generous. It's radar is also 15 years behind the f22s radar. Keep coping with the fact your once great military is a shell of it's former self. You guys should just reform the USSR honestly. The state your military is in is just embarrassing at this point.
Ultimately it all comes down to "can you afford it?", in which Russia simply doesn't have the economy to sustain serious RnD for an ATF type of program. We know as U.S. taxpayers that this shit is comically expensive, I mean the f-35s were supposed to run us a trillion during its 2-3 decade life cycle, then DOD said it's 1.7 trillion, and now it's over 2 trillion. I'm surprised they even got production going after India pulled out, seriously impressed with what the Russian's accomplished with that they had to work with. It may not be a proper 5th gen but it's undeniably a monstrous 4th gen.
We should not underestimate Russia but we should also have strong confidence in our own military capacity. I'm quite aware about how Russian propaganda works. I was born and raised in a Warsaw Pact country. That helps.
Great analysis as usual 👍 Why don’t you make a video about the Rafale (2nd most sold fighter jet worldwide behind the F35) and especially its latest F4 version? Cheers!
On the subject of that nuclear torpedo: I think the claims of speeds up to 100 knots may also be, if not complete bunk, at least heavily exaggerated or taken well out of context. Any nuclear propulsion reactor needs to be able to reject heat to the environment to be able to produce power, just as a consequence of thermodynamics. Being surrounded by seawater, the system 6 is fundamentally limited in the amount of heat it can dissipate because it needs to be able to transfer that heat through a heat exchanger without boiling the seawater around it. This matters because if the seawater boils, the heat exchanger would become encrusted with salt deposits and become unable to function effectively, leading to the reactor melting down and the torpedo self-destructing. So I doubt very much that it could achieve 100kts for its entire range
16:09 Too true The first thing all armchair specialists learned is that logistics win wars. If you can produce 1 excellent plane per year and your opponent produces 100, you lose. If your fleet has 50% operational readiness and your opponent has 80%, you lose. If your planes have 5,000 flight-hours lifetime and your opponent has 10,000, you lose. If your pilots, because all the above, have 100 hours training and your opponent...
Logistics yes but you also need training and determination. Get everyone to the theater and supply them all you want but if they sit down and play poker instead of fight for you... you have to maintain the will to fight and live long enough to learn how.
its probably fine for a 4.5 gen, but given the circumstances into which it is, eh hem, being 'produced' it's like developing an inter-war era gran prix car to compete in modern F1 series.
@@korana6308 one, the Su-57 isn't much of a stealth fighter-not when it has the RCS of a CLEAN F-18! Two, that's the assessment of a former USAF fighter pilot who flew the F-15E and the F-16 with the Thunderbirds. I think he might know a thing or two about fighters, don't you? BTW, that veteran, USAF fighter pilot is here on TH-cam. His channel is called Max Afterburner. You should check him out some time...
@@korana6308 at best, the Su-57 could be characterized as a 4+ gen fighter that has some 5th gen features. Don't take my word for it, though; take the word of TH-camr Max Afterburner, former F-15E pilot and flew the F-16 with the USAF Thunderbirds. I think he'd know a thing or two about fighters. Don't you?
I'd be willing to cut Russia slack about new-tech teething and developmental issues, but they have been bragging for over a decade that this plane is everything America claims its planes are and more.
For the time being, Russia's Su-57s are about as strategically useful as their "aircraft carrier". In addition to their inherent weaknesses and lack of true stealth, Russia can't even field an active squadron of them.
Which could actually happen in certain circumstances, which is the exact point of this video. Every feature given has a downside, every piece of military hardware is a compromise, and a worse fighter may well do better in the grand scheme of things despite being inferior 1 to 1 to the opponent's top fighter.
@@DrVictorVasconcelosSu-57 is still detectable on radar within AIM-120 distances not AIM-9, while it needs to get within IRST range of 5th gen fighters. Then you add data links that allow even non-stealth fighters to engage it once the 5th gen fighters acquire it. And as someone once said, "quantity has a quality of it's own" and it's losing the quantity side of any fight with any but the smallest western airforces.
@@DrVictorVasconcelosfor sure. But also, the strengths of the F22 make it less likely that Felon will be able to use its strengths. It's not just that the raptor is better long range. It's that the F22 (and mission planning and international diplomacy) has to fail spectacularly first before the su57 even has a chance to try.
17:41 With the exception, of course, that Russia has thousands of nuclear bombs and missiles. That's something, we, the West, seems to conveniently forget. Nuclear weapons are the Great Equalizers in any war. It doesn't matter how much other nations have equipment that is superior or not to Russia, at the end of the day, it's impossible to ever invade Russia without the risk of total annihilation for your own country. There are only a handful of countries having nukes, and Russia has the most of them all. As long as it has those, nomatter how we might spin it, Russia remains a superpower, at least on the military front. As Stalin already said many years ago: "Quantity is a quality if its own". It's also not much of a long shot to deduce that after this war with Ukraine, their military will actually be much stronger than it ever was for the last 3 decades. There are no absolutes, indeed, but the West has - much like the author of this vid - a strong tendency to both overestimate, but also underestimate Russia. This has always been the case, even before Napoleon, and even after Hitler. Yet, we, the West, ultimately always bit the dust when playing our hand against Russia, and claiming their technology was worse than ours.
Nobody wants to take over Russia. It's full of Russians, which drives down the real estate value. Their military is weaker. They lost most of the repairable Soviet stockpiles, and their professional military had to be replaced by convicts and mobilized men.
“The best fighter on the planet can lose a dogfight to a crop duster in the right set of circumstances” could be the mission statement of your channel. It’s all about the situation, logistical support and real world repeatability of any military aircraft. This is why I love your perspective.
For people who commented this is a great informative video and these are the truth, daman someone who thinks felons RCS is 0.1 bcz of a 2010 patent for the airframe,, naahh this nothing but bias, in the same vain of western game changing super weapons in Ukraine 😅
Could you make a video about how most "new" Russian military equipment was actually under development just before the Soviet Union fell apart and was just re-started in the 2000s?
The Su-57 is actually a capable platform, and was meant to be the star of Russia's 5th generation export market to its usual buyers. The problem is that the Ukraine conflict has altered so much of the former geopolitical map and international relations, that Russia has lost tremendous market share across multiple domains of arms exports (losing ~ 30% of its historical levels during the past 5-year period according to the SIPRI data). Between increased domestic consumption to fuel continuing operations, sanctions on imported western electronics and engine components and even the perception of reputational loss based on the under-performance of various platforms in Ukraine. Russia simply does not have the economy or logistics at this time that would benefit the Su-57 to develop the production scale that has transformed the F-35 from an expensive boondoggle to the premier western platform adopted across multiple NATO countries for less than a Saab Grippen. It's unlikely the Su-57 will ever be fielded in sufficient numbers to make a strategic difference unless the issues plaguing Russia change dramatically.
You misread the patent (at 4:25 in the timeline). It refers to the RCS of the airframe shape per se, before being covered by RAM material. For F-35 fighter the airfarme RCS is quoted as 0.7 m2, for Su-57 it is said to be 0.4 m2. The numbers of course, would vary somewhat depending on exactly how RCS values for different angles are averaged.
Liar. The F-35's radar cross section (RCS) is comparable to a golf ball, around 0.0015 square meters. The Su-57's RCS is similar to that of a clean F/A-18 Super Hornet, but 1,000 times larger than the F-35. It’s why experts even question if the Su-57 is really a 5th generation fighter.
@@oboguev4798 When I read a comment like yours that’s obviously made up nonsense, it makes me question why people like you are even allowed to comment. The shape of a fighter predominantly determines if it’s stealth or not. RAM has a much more minor role. You’re stating the Su-57’s has a better stealth signature than the F-35, which is complete nonsense, and not one credible expert will back your argument. In fact, one of the primary reasons why India left the partnership to develop the Su-57 was because of its lack of stealth features. “According to India’s Business Standard, the Su-57’s actual low-observable characteristics were among the biggest issues. A jet’s fan face produces a massive radar signature. Modern high-performance stealthy aircraft designs use ‘S’ shaped ducts to hide their engines from most or all line of sight aspects, with radar return scrambling baffles being built under the duct surface scrambling returns even more. Some aircraft, like the Super Hornet, use a slotted baffle that covers the fan faces of their engine, which are hidden only partially by the aircraft’s duct shape. This measure reduces the aircraft’s frontal radar signature, but it is less effective than an s shaped duct and may impact certain aspects of engine performance. Many other features on the T-50 also put a high level of low observability in doubt.”
@@oboguev4798 I understand what it says, and it’s nonsense. What’s your source? In fact, one of the main reasons why India left partnership to develop the Su-57 was because of its poor stealth signature. According to India’s Business Standard, “the Su-57’s actual low-observable characteristics were among the biggest issues.”
@@oboguev4798 The article goes on to state, the Su-57’s jet’s fan face produces a massive radar signature. Modern high-performance stealthy aircraft designs use ‘S’ shaped ducts to hide their engines from most or all line of sight aspects, with radar return scrambling baffles being built under the duct surface scrambling returns even more. Some aircraft, like the Super Hornet, use a slotted baffle that covers the fan faces of their engine, which are hidden only partially by the aircraft’s duct shape. This measure reduces the aircraft’s frontal radar signature, but it is less effective than an s shaped duct and may impact certain aspects of engine performance. Many other features on the T-50 also put a high level of low observability in doubt.”
I think the Su-57 is more for national prestige and to keep a toe in the advanced aircraft develpment pond. It has very little impact on Russias ability to wage war. They seem to have done a pretty good job resisting the combined forces of NATO in all but name and 'the international rules based order' TM over the last two years (and lets not pretend that wasn't happening). I don't think the US military model of high tech low quantity warfare systems will fare well against the Russian 'its good enough churn them out' approach in a war of attrition. The US hasn't had any experience of since Korea, and it shows - their Ukrainian trainees are now ignoring their advice on the battlefield as what worked in the mddle east against low grade insurgents us no use against a well equiped army. Anyway, let the down voting commence!
Over the past week, the Russian Armed Forces have captured more than 30 settlements. And by the way, Russia never declared that it would capture Ukraine in three days.
@@anigmaYT Russia poses a real threat to all states that have been seen as friends with the modern USA and EU. These military-political blocs act on behalf of the devil himself and must be punished.
I LOVE your content as I am an engineering / military nerd myself. I’m shocked when you mention the F-15 and 16 are still in service though….do you think a video on current US deployed aircraft and their differences is warranted? Say this because I was shocked to find out the F-15 was still even ‘out there.’ Let alone the F-16. I think you’d hit a home run with that but maybe just me 🙃. Cheers and thanks for all the great info and content!!!!
Well, there's also the political aspect. India would rather design and build their own aircraft these days than piss off the west by buying from Russia. Or so I would assume. Not to mention that India is rapidly becoming an engineering powerhouse. Their aerospace industry is pretty decent these days. I wouldn't be surprised if they start catching up to China in the next decade.
@@tarmaque India is NOT an engineering power house and neither is China. I've dealt with their "engineering" first hand in the form of re-engineering their crappy stuff so that it will work for customers who were duped into buying their junk.
By this logic, everybody would own the exact same model of everything, because it's "good". I don't understand what it is with you people, it's like some psychological thing. Maybe just low IQ.
So the Russian military machine leaves us all with an impression of their intended and hopeful capabilities instead of their actual ability? They'd do great in the corporate world! The tech industry should hire them all as media consultants.
The 57 could be the most effective and dangerous combat aircraft ever built and it wouldn't matter. They can't afford to build the aircraft in the huge numbers needed to counter NATO. Russia is nothing but an energy production company. This war in Ukraine has done serious damage to their oil infrastructure and the second wave of sanctions has driven countries like China and India away from buying Russian oil almost completely. So Putin's money is drying up fast. But the real problem is Russia can't, even if it wanted to, sell the 57 to allies so they can make money to mass build them for the Russian air force. This is how the US is capable of mass production of the 35. We sell basic versions to our allies and that allows us, not just through the profit, but the actual mass production of the aircraft drives the cost down and we get the 35 at a much cheaper price. Russian allies, BRICS, can't afford a fleet of 57's, Brazil couldn't afford one and China has its own J-20.
Doesn't this sentiment also reflect on the US vs. China? China will outproduce us in fighters. They have enormous numbers of the J-20 on order. What does that say about American air superiority?
@meintingles4396 Your comment shows the exact point Alex was making about up or down thumbs. China "may" be able to produce a lot of J-20s but that doesn't mean that they are on par with any American made 5th Generation fighters. You are also ignoring the fact that the US is actively developing 6th generation fighters already.
I think russia has lost those customers that could chose between russia or Nato gear like India. These countries could pay in € or $ which, no doubt, would work for russia. Now, i think they will have to compete with north korea which may want to buy from russia but can’t pay with a decent currency.
Incorrect. If the US can build the deadliest fighter, NGAD for example, what does it matter if they cannot produce them in sufficient quantities? It's applying the same logic from Russia to the US. Remember, China plans to build 1,000 J-20's vs our 200 NGAD.@@marktisdale7935
No The Su-57 is a waste of time When the F-22 was built, targeting pods were still new yet the Su-57 which came much latter has to still externally carry its targeting pod The Su-57 program was so far behind that they to retrofit Su-35 engine and avionics just to get it to testing and avoid all out cancellation The program is finally off the rails but the design is still heavily flawed Ukraine has the defenses that it was designed to evade yet its still on the sideline of the time
this video is a joke for example the rcs figure shown in the vid is that of the t50 prototype with had open screws and had no stealth coating and the maker of the video knows it because he showed the patents and therefore read them aswell but chose to lie
@@rick7424people are silly. Russia has a different doctrine than the states. The u.s has an aggressive air force so it needs stealth planes where as Russia has a more defensive air force and doesn't need to sacrifice manueverability for too much stealth. If the two planes ever fight it would be u.s going to Russia's air space and the stealth will be compromised.
Well all we really know about this aircraft is Russian propaganda as the few that have been built have been kept under wraps and not risked in the Ukraine. The fact that there are so few would indicate its not going well at all.
@@oskar6661umm... I'm no fan of the land of Pooh, but China has a very long history with warfare that goes back to pre-Roman times. Shit man, the CCP was formed after a brutal multi year civil war that also happened to include the Japanese invasion during WW2. It's pretty well known that Chinese soldiers and equipment played a part in both Korea and Vietnam, also... "absolutely zero experience with any kind of warfare..ever" Spreading blatantly false information about your opponent doesn't make them look weaker, it makes you sound stupid (which I'm pretty sure you're not). Don't do that.
@@oskar6661 I assume you're joking about the Chinese because what you stated is not even remotely true. They did take several decades off to smoke opium prior to and after the Boxer Rebellion up until the Nationalist/Communist civil war and, of course, the Korean War
@@oskar6661I’d actually argue less so, while China may lack experience, they also seem to be making a genuine effort to learn and develop. And while there are bots online that may spew out Chinese propaganda you don’t see China officially making the kind of outlandish claims that Russia does. Like I don’t think I’ve ever seen China claim that the J-20 is some ultimate fighter that will counter the F-22 or F-35. China seems like much more of a legitimate threat than Russia.
Frankly, the EX doesn't even have to see the target personally. Someone just has to. Maybe a forward deployed F35. Maybe AWACS. Maybe Aegis. But yeah, net-centric warfare ftw.
Aussieairpower, a top Australian think tank, has an assessment of the T50 stealth. It is their assessment that is is similar to an F35 from the front and worse from the side and below. They tested it across quite a wide range of frequency bands. It's a complicated read full of mathematics and radar heat maps, but a refreshing change from "It's got screws so not stealth." or the hopeless reliance on dated patent papers. Surely no one who is serious believes the patent for a classified aircraft gives away accurate performance information? Also all modern radars can target aircraft whilst flying perpendicular to the target, that's why the radar is on a mechanical arm, it tilts.
@@herberthonegger Yeah, its why they had to lock the SU57 wiki page. Wasn't that long ago we had to argue with a guy trying to claim "There is no evidence the weapon bay doors can actually open.". Seriously bro, cope less, Russia can build a door.
How old is the article? What’s its release date and title of the article? Everything I have read states that the Su-57’s RCS is somewhere between 0.1 and 0.5 to 1 square meters, while the F-35’s is significantly less at around 0.0015 square meters. Early on in its development developers of the Su-57 even admitted that stealth wasn’t their biggest concern as they didn’t want to change the structure too much where it would impair its performance.
@@Thetequilashooter1 the article is the most up to date of publically released information that I am aware of. It is 10 years old. Everything you read is simply quoting the Sukhoi patent, in some truly absurd belief that the Russians just straight up declared their true RCS in the patent. Information on the 747 is often 40 years old, and its still true. Age doesn't matter if things haven't changed, and the geometry of the SU57 has not changed much. Later less official sourced that give specular radar reflection of the SU57 show excellent frontal stealth and poor banked and rear stealth. For the record the SU35 is similar, with a very bad belly reflection from the curved belly. Keep in mind, specular models cannot account for advanced RCS materials, F35 might have materials that can make up for its terrible shapes. Also keep in mind, the F35 RCS is a lie they told you, and they didn't even have the decency to tell you what what radar frequency that lie is at least vaguely true. Russia has the RCS of F35 and F22 from the Syria campaigns. They got to have the SU35 and SU57 radar and IRST on it from short ranges. But its classified still, just like the Eurofighters RCS is. Everyone but the average joe knows, such is life it seems.
@ It’s not a lie, you’re just making up crap. You won’t find one credible expert who agrees with you. The Rand report you’re referring to was probably the one released before the F-35 was even undergoing testing in the very early stages of its development when they knew little about it. It was when the Aussies wanted the F-22, not the F-35. The report is widely mocked for its inaccuracies. Provide in quotes from any expert who agrees with your analysis of the F-35’s shape. You won’t find any. The Su-57’s is significantly worse, and you’ll find many experts who say so. Even Russian officials admitted early on during the PAK-FA’s (T-50/Su-57) early development that stealth wasn’t their primary concern. They preferred functionality over stealth. “According to available information, the Su-57's all-aspect radar cross-section (RCS) is estimated to be between 0.1 and 1 square meter; meaning its radar signature is designed to be relatively small when viewed from any angle…” “The F-35's all-aspect Radar Cross Section (RCS) is generally reported to be around 0.0015 square meters (or equivalent to a very small radar signature), making it highly stealthy from most angles.” These are the all aspect stealth figures. That’s comparing apples to apples, not apples to oranges like you’re claiming. Russia also doesn’t have the RCS of the F-22 or F-35. When the aircraft were fighting alongside the Russians to fight against ISIS, the aircraft carried the Luneburg Lens, which is a radar reflector that intentionally increases the plane’s RCS so that the opposing side won’t know its real value.
Ahh yes. The Russia is the second most powerful military on the planet bit. They aren’t even the second best force in Ukraine and aren’t even the best force in Russia itself
Our own military and Military contractors willingly go along with the idea that Russia has some high level of capability that must be countered. US military spending and budgets are built up to offset this mythical capability and that's certainly in the best interests of those who benefit from those increased budgets.
I'm sorry but I have to highlight the insane levels of hypocrisy in this video. "Many of the Su-57's claimed capabilities are still just that, claims that cannot actually be used in combat". Um, hello, the F-35 is the absolute poster child for this very thing and you think it's without equal. "these are aircraft that saw their 1st deployments 6 years ago" Ya, six years is a long time to still be working the bugs out of a multi-million dollar 5th gen fighter. Oh, wait, the F-35 first flew in (checking my maths)... 2006 and will cost over a trillion dollars! So after nearly 20 years of development, the F-35 still has an ejection system that will break the necks of female pilots, a helmet so large pilots can't turn their heads without hitting the canopy, a gun that can't fire with any accuracy or for longer than 2 seconds, a targeting system that can't fire missiles 4th gen fighters have used for decades and a design so bad it can't go supersonic without damaging it's stealth coating (much less super cruise like the SU-57). Yes, it's true that Russia has only produced 20 or so examples of their SU-57 while Lockheed has pumped out 600+ F-35's. But Lockheed produced 600+ fighters that couldn't perform the mission they'd been given, all of which either have been or will need to be brought back in for updates and repairs in order to achieve the originally stated capabilities sometimes at a cost exceeding that of the entire aircraft itself. So what's worse - limited production of a still in development aircraft or producing hundreds of defective jets that have to be fixed and charging the tax payer for each one? "The SU-57 is vaporware come to life..." And what would you call the F-35? Next up, blaming the US media for overstating Russia's capabilities. Anyone that follows defense happenings as even a hobby knew full well that Russia's capabilities were overblown and had been so for over two decades. You weren't unique. Russia "manipulates the US media...to bolster their foreign weapons sales." No, the US defense industry, lobbyists and war mongering politicians manipulated the US media by painting Russia as the boogie man in order to increase US defense spending. All the while ignoring the actually troubling military developments in China because US big business has such strong ties to China. "whether or not those nations have a media that is legally allowed to hold their government accountable for spreading false information" Are you kidding me?!? Hunter's laptop, the WIV origins of COVID, the efficacy and side effects of MRNA vaccines, the effectiveness of ivermectin, the Twitter Files...the list goes on and on and on. All instances of the US gov't using it's power and it's proxies to manipulate media platforms and censor valid but inconvenient truths. And lastly, citing the 2MT yield of the Status-6 "doomsday torpedo" as another example of Russian ineptitude. Are you implying that Russia is incapable of producing anything larger?!? Russia was building and detonating 100MT thermonuclear devices 60 YEARS AGO. Or are you implying that 2 megatons is weak? FYI- The largest nuclear warhead the US currently has in it's arsenal is HALF that size (1.2MT). It think 2MT is more than capable of delivering what the Russian leadership have asked. Or shall we keep poking them until they dial up the yield to 50 or 100 megatons so it leaves the entire East Coast inhabitable. It's been really disappointing to witness your descent into yet another US military industrial complex fan boy...
The F-35 is great my guy, what are you on about? The F-35 will cost over a trillion once you figure ARMAMENT, REPAIRS, PARTS, MAINTENANCE, REFUELING, ETC for almost 60 years with a fleet around 2000 planes large. Any other aircraft will cost a trillion by having the sum of all operatong costs for decades.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD The F-35 is great? Last summer the DOD put a COMPLETE FREEZE on accepting new F-35's until Lockheed fixed all the hardware and software issues. Lockheed is literally running out of space to park all the rejected F-35's. In terms of cost, the fifth generation F-22 cost taxpayers $66 Billion, yet the F-35 program is pushing the $2 TRILLION mark. So the F-35 program is 30X more costly than the more capable, combat ready F-22 program. You don't seem to grasp what an absurd figure $2 TRILLION dollars is so let me write that out for you....$2,000,000,000,000.00 for a jet so flawed the DOD refuses to even take delivery of it. You really think the US will still be flying F-35's in 60 YEARS?!? Let me also put 60 years in perspective for you - that's the equivalent of the US military still flying 3rd gen F-4 Phantoms, F-5 Tigers and F-105 Thunderchiefs in 2024. FYI - all three of those fighters were retired last century. Anything else you'd like me to correct?
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD The F-35 is great? Last summer the DOD put a COMPLETE FREEZE on accepting new F-35's until Lockheed fixed all the hardware and software issues. Lockheed is literally running out of space to park all the rejected F-35's. In terms of cost, the fifth generation F-22 cost taxpayers $66 Billion, yet the F-35 program is pushing the $2 TRILLION mark. So the F-35 program is 30X more costly than the more capable, combat ready F-22 program. You don't seem to grasp what an absurd figure $2 TRILLION dollars is so let me write that out for you....$2,000,000,000,000.00 for a jet so flawed the DOD refuses to even take delivery of it. You really think the US will still be flying F-35's in 60 YEARS?!? Let me also put 60 years in perspective for you - that's the equivalent of the US military still flying 3rd gen F-4 Phantoms, F-5 Tigers and F-105 Thunderchiefs in 2024. FYI - all three of those fighters were retired last century. Anything else you'd like me to correct?
The F-35 is great? Last summer the DOD put a COMPLETE FREEZE on accepting new F-35's until Lockheed fixed all the hardware and software issues. Lockheed is literally running out of space to park all the rejected F-35's. In terms of cost, the fifth generation F-22 cost taxpayers $66 Billion, yet the F-35 program is pushing the $2 TRILLION mark. So the F-35 program is 30X more costly than the more capable, combat ready F-22 program. You don't seem to grasp what an absurd figure $2 TRILLION dollars is so let me write that out for you....$2,000,000,000,000.00 for a jet so flawed the DOD refuses to even take delivery of it. You really think the US will still be flying F-35's in 60 YEARS?!? Let me also put 60 years in perspective for you - that's the equivalent of the US military still flying 3rd gen F-4 Phantoms, F-5 Tigers and F-105 Thunderchiefs in 2024. FYI - all three of those fighters were retired last century. Anything else you'd like me to correct?
I’ve heard that the SU-57 thrust vectoring engine has now been made rectangular, rather than, the traditional circular shape you’ve featured in this video…also hear they may have developed a ‘wingman’ stealth drone that can be controlled by the SU-57 pilot also. Also hear that the new square thrust vector engine may well be being fitted to this. May be worthy of a video if you’ve not done one already?
@@weedfreerJet engines require a fan to absorb air and burn said air. The F-35, F-22, and any other good stealth planes uses S-ducts to hide away the fan. Meanwhile in vodka land, the fan significantly increases RCS.
@@TonyChan-eh3nz I've worked alongside jet engine production lines, and, am aware of the fanjet/turbojet configurations. I was of the understanding that in a stealth jet however, the fact that the engine components are contained within the fabric of the airframe would have negated any concerns as to their visibility. As such, the feedback regards the S duct is of some interest to me...thanks! That said, again, yet more fodder for a comparison/technology review video I should have thought ☺️
@@TonyChan-eh3nzThe fan has other methods to decrease RCS. While not as good as S-ducts, the RAM coated radar blocker and RAM in the intakes would decrease the RCS by a lot. For example, by putting RAM around the engines the Su-35 cut its RCS in half when compared to the original Su-27.
This is a bit of a pet peeve of mine, and maybe everyone else understands it perfectly well. But the idea of something being x TIMES smaller than something else has always felt like a very odd way to communicate something. The other thing is 25 times bigger. Makes perfect sense. The thing your examining is 1/25 the size. Makes perfect sense. The thing is 25 TIMES smaller... Just doesn't compute with me. There's a comic routine based around a book saying something was 10 times colder than something else, and they make the same observations. It's just weird.
Russia has brilliant engineers and they will definitely fix that at some point... at some level, no matter how bad their⸺well, whole thing⸺may be, we can't forget their engineers' achievements. They did a lot of great stuff during the space age even though the USSR's GDP was about 75% smaller than the US's.
@@DrVictorVasconcelosTo quote Oxide, TH-cam's resident body armor aficionado and Apache pilot in training: "I respect the hell out of the Soviets. Russia is _not_ the Soviets."
@@electricspeedkiller8950 Only the Felon post-dates the USSR in terms of design. Every other mainline fixed wing aircraft was developed under the Soviet regime, and have only received updates post-collapse. It's worth noting that the Soviets nearly managed to build a 5th-gen fighter of their own with MiG's project 1.44/1.42, which many current Russian engineers suspect served as the inspiration for the J-20.
The comparison makes sense because they might face each other. What doesn't make sense is to assume that they WILL, INVARIABLY, face each other on even odds.
We should always remember when Hitler approved Operation Barbarossa because he thought the Wehrmacht's 6,000 tanks could take on the USSR's 11,000... Almost 2 to 1, but it might work, right? Well, it turned out the USSR had 21,000.
It matches some of the capabilities of the Raptor. Unfortunately for Russian those were the capabilities that were a bone thrown to the fighter mafia and have been basically irrelevant in modern air to air combat since the late cold war.
Dr.victor - why do you think Russia had that many tanks.....AMERICA, THATS WHY! 11 Billion dollars worth in 1940's money! Not because Russia was capable of building great numbers of incredible weapons..because America sold them everything that they never paid for including 4.5 million pounds of food and 53% of all of America's ammunition production, half a million trucks 2,500 trains with 11,000 train cars and 14,000 airplanes. The only reason those worthless people aren't speaking German right now is because of us.
i wouldnt say pathetic doctrine, but they simply fail to conduct it. the cant maintain their tanks, they cant maintain their aircrafts, ships, logistics, reinforcements or anything may it be infantry, artillery ANYTHING! their upper command is corrupt and incompetent and has been running this excuse of a military for decades now. the only thing that really changed from 1990 to now, is that the russian military lost its bite and their upper command got some yachts in south europe. That is the only major difference and that is effing pathetic. the doctrine is pretty badass, but you have to be able to grind your men to meat towards victory, if you are too dumb to even get that done you should become a pacifist nation.
Another factor that we tend to forget, is that in the late 40s and early 1950s, American military analysts discounted Russian capabilities too much. We were telling ourselves how backward they were, and then in quick succession they developed the A-bomb, copied the B-29 as the Tu-4 Bull, took the British Nene jet engine and made the MiG-15, and then made an H-Bomb much quicker than anyone expected. That made the US choose to never underestimate the Russians again. That has led to often overestimating them. Of course, the good side of that is that we have avoided becoming complacent in large part and been able to get funding to keep our edge. Except during the "peace dividend" period, we have remained vigilant, which to me is a better thing than being swell-headed and complacent. Thanks for a balanced view of the Su-57. I don't know that I would want to be flying a Rafale, Eurofighter, or older F-16 against a fully finished production model of the Su-57. It might just sneak up on you, or maybe shoot a missile at you while flying past beside you.
So they copied a bunch of stuff (they had spies steal nuclear secrets from the US). Basically had the Brits not allowed them to buy jet engines and walked around the shop floor for the shoes to pick up metal shavings, and had the US actually cracked down on leftist sympathizers, the Soviet Union would have been nerfed.
The TH-cam comments section trolls claim SR-71 is a stealth plane because they hit it with radar and made changes to the airframe. Well, if that’s the case, SU-57 is totally a stealth plane 🙄🤣
No, they’re not TH-cam trolls they’re just uninformed! The SR 71 blackbird is indeed a self fighter, but not because it has a small radar return, but because it was designed specifically for stealth recon‘s missions, which means that it was designed to fly an extremely high altitudes, which made it nearly impossible to see what alone here and a lot of the missiles in that time. Couldn’t intercept it because it was flying so high that the amount of air was very thin so the missiles would often malfunction before getting to it. I mean, the SR 71 is the equivalent of a two engine rocket with wings. The only thing that prevents it from being able to go into space entirely is the fact that it runs on an air powered jet engine.. and the thing was also the SR 71 flus so fast it could not really be seen from the ground at all so you wouldn’t even know one was watching you because it would be so high. You couldn’t see it or hear it and it would be moving so fast you can see it or hear it. So make no mistake the SR 71 is indeed a stealth platform just not conventional stealth..
The SU-57 in not we consider a 5th gen system, certainly not in many parameters that are required. But more importantly it’s not a factor either. With so few in existence. It’s not a threat. We have already broken records with our air dominance project. Russia and China have significant distance to cover if they are to be where we are.
I think a lot of this back and forth on what actually designates what generational technology is so convoluted when radar cross section is the superior metric used to determine what is or isn't a generational technology, I don't think their are any Romulan Bird of Prey cloaking device on the near horizons so basically it boils down to a who can see who first. It reminds me of that old auto shop joke "you can put a Cadillac motor in a Pinto and all you got is a Pinto with a Cadillac motor. Here's the problem generational technology in regards to RCS is fast approaching its diminishing return limitations even with new composites and resin epoxies while radar technology with its multi approach and capability of detection using over the horizon link systems it has much more robust future and will eventually win the race.
As far as the Poseidone Torpedoe goes, I'd be more more worried about if it was true that it has the ability to sneak right into a harbor and sit on the bottom until the Russians decide to detonate it a day, a month, a year later❓❓ Who cares what size warhead it has, whether it's 100 sticks of dynamite or 100 Mega-tons worth of Nuclear Dynamite.... What truly matters is if they can lay it up inside an Enemy's harbor and set it off whenever they want....
Silly take. Russia's air force is defensive and has a different doctrine. They don't need to sacrifice manueverability for stealth since it's purpose is to defend Russian airspace not invading countries across the world using stealth on poor countries.
And the sad thing is, that the US Air Force DOES operate an Armed Crop Duster. So, we might actually see a possibility of a High Tech Jet losing to the Sky Warden.
The SU-57, is a maneuverable aircraft with some stealth characteristics. If we use the F-22 as the benchmark for 5th Generation, then the SU-57 is an upper echelon 4th generation aircraft. It has many great features on paper. We have yet to see most of it in actual use yet.
Download War Thunder for FREE and get your bonus! ► Use my link - playwt.link/sandboxx #ad
I wonder if there will ever be a collab between Alex and PhlyDaily... 🤔😊
@@Genericyoutubeuser0 pm
Double check if Byelka AESA Fire Control Radar much less cheek AESA are being deployed in serial Su57 instead of IrbisE PESA - otherwise latest Su35 would also be getting Byelka FCR...
If you can do a video on the difference between the R.A.M coating on the F-35 vs F-22?
F-22 is painted
F-35 is baked? Does it have Prototype Nano skin??
ALEX🇺🇸
The trouble is, T-72 turrets have more flight hours than this plane.
Ok. That's good.
My friend, that single joke has turned my day around. I may actually end up enjoying the rest of it.
Those aren't T-72 turrets, they're advanced state-sponsored aerodynamics test beds.
@@USS-SNAKE-ISLANDgood lord that is good, I mean really good!
Probably fly just as high too.
A Chinese lady taught me a great quote, she said, "Whoever jingles the loudest has the most change." That's so true, any person (or country) that actually has, and gets things done, doesn't need to brag.
We can extend that to Presidents of the United States.
Or as the soundtrack to the classic film Office Space, real gangsta a** n*****s don’t flex nuts because real gangsta a** n******s know they got ‘em.
Yours truely Americans...
self-satisfied Yankees always lose to the Russians (Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Africa, Ukraine, Syria), but they don’t want to admit that their weapons are garbage ha ha ha
Su57 is a 6th generation aircraft. mig41 will be the 7th generation. you may not believe it, your narcissism and Russophobia will not reduce the superiority of Russian weapons
You do know that the US is by far the biggest bragger?
One of the most hilarious things, I think, is when armchair analysts get a spreadsheet of new equipment from China and are like NATO'S NEW TANK IS ALREADY OBSOLETE. That's not remotely how any of this works.
Yeah the best refutation of that was a US Army study of 73 Easting that concluded that if the US and Iraq had traded their M1s and T-72s the battle would have gone basically the same way. But if the US forces had made some classic noob mistakes they'd probably have lost and concluded that training is vastly more important than hardware.
@@j.f.fisher5318Not just training, but logistics, doctrine and strategy. You need equiment you can actually manufacture with quality control, deliver where you need it, maintain where you keep it, and replace when it's lost, and you need to implement with it tactics that actually make you win the war against the specific opponent you'll have.
A simple fictitious example: a fighter that delays your opponent's theoretically superior fighter while you contest the air space and win the war with superior land forces is, in fact, the superior fighter at a strategic level. It wins the war.
Equipment doesn't exist in a vacuum. A lot of how good a system is is decided by what it is up against. It's why drones like Bayraktar are insanely amazing for countries like Somalia where organizations like Al-Shahaab are getting devastated by large drones because they don't have any AD available.
@@DrVictorVasconcelosstrategy changes based on situation. There's lots of situations where you want a superior plane that don't involve a war or ground troops at all. But indeed, situationally useful is always more valuable than theoretically better.
The irony of having a discussion about a plane’s capabilities sponsored by War Thunder
That’s how you know it’s credible
At least it was the best chance of getting reliable info on it
alex might just be trolling to get some russian to publish the real specs on a war thunder forum
Aren’t their Internet forums the source for a lot of leaked information?
with regular TS leaks of vehicle performance, WT is only becoming more accurate over time
*sponsored by Warthunder*
"this video is about theSu-57"
yeah, that scans
My exact thought
Most of these TH-camrs don't even know that Warthunder is Russian owned and of course..these Ytuber get pay for the sponsor.
@@SCH292 They're not based in russia...
War Thunder never beating the allegations.
@@Soccera0they were founded in Russia, they actually spent more time based in Russia than they have spent in Hungary.
They also had some controversy a while ago when a logo of theirs showed up in a Russian propaganda video about Russian separatists in the Donbas.
I've heard that there are so few Su-57's that the West has mostly only seen them on radar screens.
lol noice
3 fewer after Top Gun Maverick😊
There are around 30 Su 57 planes. However they are being produced. Unlike the US F22s which can not be produced anymore.
@@korana6308that's fine, we have hundreds of F-35s that are in production.
And those may well have been Boeing 737's
Alex, thanks for ruining my ability to enjoy any other TH-cam military channels. Your world-class informative videos have left me watching other military channels shaking my head saying, no, that's not correct; no, that's not correct either......
Honestly perun is the only other one that matches Alex's honesty
If i could like this comment twice, i would.
why not buy him dinner and introduce him to your goat ?
@@Kenny-yl9pcnope, Perun is a defense economics/purchasing consultant. He clearly knows his stuff.
Lazerpig is also pretty good. Has more humor most of the time, but he knows his stuff and will be the first to admit it when he gets something wrong (after doing more research to figure out if he actually got it wrong or if someone is being a troll)
It's a flying T-14 Armata.
I mean, technically you're not wrong. It stems from the same time-frame. There was a significant influx of money with the gas/oil boom that Russia enjoyed in the early 2000's to the mid-2010's. This was the same time the AK-12 (the real one, not the eventual bodykit that showed up...), the influx of new naval vessels, the upgraded 'RATNIK' programme for infantry, the Armata and its variants...the PAK-FA (turned Su-57), etc. It's all from the same 'wave' of intent...and was very likely never going to materialize.
There was a short period where Russia looked very capable of re-emerging as a new type of Soviet Union (in the early 2010's, I believe, for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union they spent 'Cold War' level money on their military, etc.)- with its states being beholden to Russia via gas/oil instead of military might, etc...but then that bubble burst.
Did you come up with that one yourself? That's pretty creative! I'm in awe of your ingenuity.
points for trying
Armata...not Armada...but the Russians would like to have an armada of the Armata.
Does it have a cage welded to the top of it? The Armada tank does and it looks like I welded it with scraps in my back yard.
Reminds me of one of my favorite Murphy's Laws, "Beauty maybe only skin deep but ugly goes right down to the bone."
He is Alex Hollings.
it's a little more nuanced than that....
And that is airpower!!!!
@@Eddie_MunsterNuance rejected. Dumb it down pls
@@BoschhammerActualThe Su57 is garbage
I’m not sure he is, Alex. Some have speculated that he’s a Russian man-droid or one of those lizard people…there are even rumours stirring that he’s a figment of our imagination
Regardless of its capabilities, you can’t deny that the Su-57 is beautiful. It has some fantastic lines. I still think the YF-23 is the king for looks from that era, but the Su-57 is darn close.
Yes, the US does design planes with beautiful lines, and the Russians to an excellent job of copying those lines. Virtually all of their aircraft post 1990 look like mirror images of US fight aircraft.
(SEE: Soviet Tu-4.)
The problem is that F22 was produced from 1997-2011 and the SU-57, not in full serial production in 2024, is still no match for it until everyone closes to gun range. By then, F22 should be out of rockets and scurrying toward a horde of F15 EXs with more rockets the F22 can guide to SU-57...
If the SU-57 gets to gun range with the F15, things have gone *_very wrong_* for USAF & NATO...
Will F15's record suddenly worsen to 104:1??
Actually, most of Russias jets looked cool. I think most of them were behind in performance to American jets, but they looked just as good.
@@USS-SNAKE-ISLAND that's a lie. The Su 57 is a unique plane.
The Beginning sums up why I watch you. Nothing in reality is absolute.
except on reddit
That's not true! I absolutely love Alex's videos.
He had a good start I agree, however in the end it slipped into "the west is good and Russia is bad category" which is the absolute he was supposedly trying to avoid in the beginning.
That sounds like an absolute statement
oh I wouldnt say that ;}
I didn't know the Russians are ordering stealth fighters from Temu 😂
I heard SU 57 got it's name from 22+35 (F22 + F35). It was touted to beat both.
😂😂😂
😂😂😂
It's not the plane it's the f,king missile that counts. If you have a F 22 and you throw sticks.... what's the point 👉👉👉 . Let your opponent to believe he has the best equipment 😂😂😂😂😂
that would be so meme worthily awesome
I mean since the su57 isn't really stealth missels have a much easier times
According to redditors, all aircraft's evaluation data can be reduced to 1 bit. It's basically, "Smash or Pass."
OH man, do you ever nail it there: "the internet hates nuance" !! --- and unfortunately that conflicts with the stark reality that almost nothing is ever 'black and white'. Even in the darkest of space, there are photons.
Upvote 100 times.
Its pretty much a flanker at heart and base just heavily modified into a "maybe could be possibly stealth" design
"In real warfare, a cutting edge fighter can lose a fight to a cropduster...."
The math on this checks out. AirTractor makes an armed version of one of their crop-dusting airframes. No I'm not kidding.
I don't think it's gotten much interest, but it DOES exist!
Fit that armed crop-duster with a radar, look-down shoot-down system and the right air-to-air missiles, (ideally from another airframe so that they are already integrated with each other) and that high-speed low-drag stealth fighter might have a nasty surprise headed towards its tailpipe.
Doubly so because there's another kind of steath besides radar and thermal stealth. Stealth by visual mimicry.
No matter what gubbins they hang off the wings of it, that crop duster is still gonna look like a crop duster on first glance, and given the small windows for decision making in air combat, mistaking a missile-armed crop duster for one "armed" with pesticides or fertilizer can easily be the last mistake a pilot makes.
In a war, there are not just 1 plane. A single 1-on-1 dogfight have a small chance that the weaker one will win. But at 100 vs 100, it is translated into a 99 to 1 win…
Apparently American special forces use them already
If it loses to a crop duster, it was never actually cutting edge.
@@jamescarter8311
All the fancy whis-bang gizmos in the world, inside a cutting edge fighter, will still not make up for the failings of a cut-rate pilot. Nothing can.
Point is, no pilot should be doing the "mistook an armed crop duster for one that's actually just dusting crops" mistake.
The high-tech of the AIM-9X fitted to such a crop duster would be doing the "heavy lifting" of the combat engagement from the point of view of the crop duster.
A-10's carry AIM-9's, and some people play DCS with a "meme loadout" of "anti-air A-10" which is about as close to a cropduster as you can get. And they splash bandits because they think "Oh it's just an ordinary ground-pound....what the heck is that missile warning from?" before they get splashed.
I'm not saying DCS is a particularly good representation of IRL air combat, but I am saying that neither pilot in DCS is as skilled as an Air Force or Navy pilot, who would not make that mistake. I have no clue about the skill level of Russian pilots, but the war in Ukraine tells me that they're not all they're hyped up to be, skill wise.
It’s not even that the plane is trash (which it is) their problem is that even if the felon was the world’s best stealth fighter it still wouldn’t matter. Russia has no idea how to use it. And even if they did know how to use it, they still wouldn’t give their pilots enough training to make them proficient enough to use that tool.
Exactly and their logistics suck.
Ooo, thats why USN lost 17 sailors when it smacked Civillian Cargo vessels?.
@@ulooqulg No, that was a command problem.
@@ulooqulg Holy king of whataboutism... what about when a Russian nuclear missile failed in the arctic in 2019??? What about that one?
@@ulooqulgthat's so childish, "we're not shit because you are" is not a defense!
Alex, are the Su-57s that are being very very slowly produced now using the new engine that was going to originally be on this aircraft? Or have they still not finished making the engines yet?
I haven't heard anything about the proposed "actual" engines being produced/installed.
I don’t think they are finishing any new developments anytime soon, due to their wars and sanctions.
still not being produced, unless the dedicated watchers have missed it
It's got new engines. With 18 tons of thrust. AL 51F
@@kotor1892 No it didn’t. None of these engines are operational.
The RCS of just the body before the paint is applied is 0.3 m2 which is pretty good for what it is. The real RCS of both the F22 and F35 is much greater than advertised. The advertised RCS is from a very specific angle, in reality it's somehere around 0.06 for the F35. Also I should mention that the SU57 is equipped with L band radar so while it cannot effectively track the F35 at longer distances it can see it coming and react adequately
+ Regarding it's use in Ukraine, the F22 has been here for decades without actually engaging targets in a protected airspace lol
No point at explaining it to insecure Pentagon zombies
@@videorowtv5198 The F-22 dropped bombs in Syria. The F-35 already flew over Iran, causing the head of air defense to be fired over that blunder.
@@ChucksSEADnDEADThe F22s first kill was a Chinese balloon! But even if we took you at your word that it dropped bombs and scored classified kills against opponents with virtually no air defense to speak of, then by that logic, the SU57 probably was also engaged in Syria and Ukraine that we don't know about.
@@Mastakilla91 you only have what 10 to 20 su57s that can go into combat right now? And that's being generous. It's radar is also 15 years behind the f22s radar. Keep coping with the fact your once great military is a shell of it's former self. You guys should just reform the USSR honestly. The state your military is in is just embarrassing at this point.
Ultimately it all comes down to "can you afford it?", in which Russia simply doesn't have the economy to sustain serious RnD for an ATF type of program. We know as U.S. taxpayers that this shit is comically expensive, I mean the f-35s were supposed to run us a trillion during its 2-3 decade life cycle, then DOD said it's 1.7 trillion, and now it's over 2 trillion. I'm surprised they even got production going after India pulled out, seriously impressed with what the Russian's accomplished with that they had to work with. It may not be a proper 5th gen but it's undeniably a monstrous 4th gen.
Can you make a price breakdown of planes? I’m tired of the “350million F-22 vs 40million Su-57” posts, like I’m comparing a $60k BMW to a $600 Toyota…
Unfortunately in a war, it is the performance and numbers matter. You don’t win war with price tag
There's no middle ground on TH-cam so I gave you a thumbs up😂 Good work, love all your content, very captivating.
I love that this video is sponsored by War Thunder! It’s so wonderfully appropriate.
We should not underestimate Russia but we should also have strong confidence in our own military capacity. I'm quite aware about how Russian propaganda works. I was born and raised in a Warsaw Pact country. That helps.
You see, it does have a form of stealth! If detected on radar, it's return is so big it'll probably be mistaken as an Airbus!
Given its made in Russia(very crashy), probably a Boeing would be more likely be mistaken as
Great analysis as usual 👍
Why don’t you make a video about the Rafale (2nd most sold fighter jet worldwide behind the F35) and especially its latest F4 version? Cheers!
On the subject of that nuclear torpedo: I think the claims of speeds up to 100 knots may also be, if not complete bunk, at least heavily exaggerated or taken well out of context. Any nuclear propulsion reactor needs to be able to reject heat to the environment to be able to produce power, just as a consequence of thermodynamics. Being surrounded by seawater, the system 6 is fundamentally limited in the amount of heat it can dissipate because it needs to be able to transfer that heat through a heat exchanger without boiling the seawater around it. This matters because if the seawater boils, the heat exchanger would become encrusted with salt deposits and become unable to function effectively, leading to the reactor melting down and the torpedo self-destructing. So I doubt very much that it could achieve 100kts for its entire range
Read up a little on convective heat transfer... 🤔
One of the theories of how to travel fast underwater involves boiling the water in front of the torpedo.
Restated as a 50knot speed!😊
Why do you use the lowest RCS for the other stealth aircraft but thr average RCS for thr Su-57?
he thinks people are stupid
Inflating the military capability of countries like Russia and China definitely help to justify military budgets.
wot and whos radar are u using in rcs ？
16:09 Too true
The first thing all armchair specialists learned is that logistics win wars.
If you can produce 1 excellent plane per year and your opponent produces 100, you lose. If your fleet has 50% operational readiness and your opponent has 80%, you lose.
If your planes have 5,000 flight-hours lifetime and your opponent has 10,000, you lose. If your pilots, because all the above, have 100 hours training and your opponent...
Logistics yes but you also need training and determination. Get everyone to the theater and supply them all you want but if they sit down and play poker instead of fight for you... you have to maintain the will to fight and live long enough to learn how.
its probably fine for a 4.5 gen, but given the circumstances into which it is, eh hem, being 'produced' it's like developing an inter-war era gran prix car to compete in modern F1 series.
TH-camr Max Afterburner, a former USAF fighter pilot, classifies the Su-57 as a 4+ generation fighter.
Well then it's a lie. Because it's not a 4th gen. It's a 5th gen stealth fighter.
@@korana6308 one, the Su-57 isn't much of a stealth fighter-not when it has the RCS of a CLEAN F-18! Two, that's the assessment of a former USAF fighter pilot who flew the F-15E and the F-16 with the Thunderbirds. I think he might know a thing or two about fighters, don't you?
BTW, that veteran, USAF fighter pilot is here on TH-cam. His channel is called Max Afterburner. You should check him out some time...
It's barely stealth 💀 @@korana6308
@@korana6308 at best, the Su-57 could be characterized as a 4+ gen fighter that has some 5th gen features. Don't take my word for it, though; take the word of TH-camr Max Afterburner, former F-15E pilot and flew the F-16 with the USAF Thunderbirds. I think he'd know a thing or two about fighters. Don't you?
@korana6308 it's not
su57 I think is the prettiest active fighter. on a poster or desktop wallpaper it is such a good looking plane
I'd be willing to cut Russia slack about new-tech teething and developmental issues, but they have been bragging for over a decade that this plane is everything America claims its planes are and more.
I get so excited when I see a new thumbnail from you. Every video is great
For the time being, Russia's Su-57s are about as strategically useful as their "aircraft carrier". In addition to their inherent weaknesses and lack of true stealth, Russia can't even field an active squadron of them.
Good video and well-timed message.
The Felon is a great match for the Raptor if we live in a world of dogfighting with guns and short-range air-to-air missiles.
Which could actually happen in certain circumstances, which is the exact point of this video. Every feature given has a downside, every piece of military hardware is a compromise, and a worse fighter may well do better in the grand scheme of things despite being inferior 1 to 1 to the opponent's top fighter.
@@DrVictorVasconcelosSu-57 is still detectable on radar within AIM-120 distances not AIM-9, while it needs to get within IRST range of 5th gen fighters. Then you add data links that allow even non-stealth fighters to engage it once the 5th gen fighters acquire it. And as someone once said, "quantity has a quality of it's own" and it's losing the quantity side of any fight with any but the smallest western airforces.
Nah, more with the F15EXs
@@DrVictorVasconcelosfor sure. But also, the strengths of the F22 make it less likely that Felon will be able to use its strengths. It's not just that the raptor is better long range. It's that the F22 (and mission planning and international diplomacy) has to fail spectacularly first before the su57 even has a chance to try.
Their radar is composed of washing and dryer, microwaves and odds and other bits of electronic parts they can salvage 😂😂😂
What a beauty is the Su57 😍
17:41 With the exception, of course, that Russia has thousands of nuclear bombs and missiles. That's something, we, the West, seems to conveniently forget. Nuclear weapons are the Great Equalizers in any war. It doesn't matter how much other nations have equipment that is superior or not to Russia, at the end of the day, it's impossible to ever invade Russia without the risk of total annihilation for your own country.
There are only a handful of countries having nukes, and Russia has the most of them all. As long as it has those, nomatter how we might spin it, Russia remains a superpower, at least on the military front. As Stalin already said many years ago: "Quantity is a quality if its own".
It's also not much of a long shot to deduce that after this war with Ukraine, their military will actually be much stronger than it ever was for the last 3 decades. There are no absolutes, indeed, but the West has - much like the author of this vid - a strong tendency to both overestimate, but also underestimate Russia. This has always been the case, even before Napoleon, and even after Hitler. Yet, we, the West, ultimately always bit the dust when playing our hand against Russia, and claiming their technology was worse than ours.
Absolutely right. There is no winner in nuclear war, that is what clowns and chair experts under this video should remember.
Nobody wants to take over Russia. It's full of Russians, which drives down the real estate value.
Their military is weaker. They lost most of the repairable Soviet stockpiles, and their professional military had to be replaced by convicts and mobilized men.
We were talking about the same thing back in the 80's when I was at Benning.
“The best fighter on the planet can lose a dogfight to a crop duster in the right set of circumstances” could be the mission statement of your channel. It’s all about the situation, logistical support and real world repeatability of any military aircraft. This is why I love your perspective.
For people who commented this is a great informative video and these are the truth, daman someone who thinks felons RCS is 0.1 bcz of a 2010 patent for the airframe,, naahh this nothing but bias, in the same vain of western game changing super weapons in Ukraine 😅
Could you make a video about how most "new" Russian military equipment was actually under development just before the Soviet Union fell apart and was just re-started in the 2000s?
Non stealth, only 12 working planes, not used in combat with Ukraine.
10:50 to skip the ad
The Su-57 is actually a capable platform, and was meant to be the star of Russia's 5th generation export market to its usual buyers. The problem is that the Ukraine conflict has altered so much of the former geopolitical map and international relations, that Russia has lost tremendous market share across multiple domains of arms exports (losing ~ 30% of its historical levels during the past 5-year period according to the SIPRI data). Between increased domestic consumption to fuel continuing operations, sanctions on imported western electronics and engine components and even the perception of reputational loss based on the under-performance of various platforms in Ukraine.
Russia simply does not have the economy or logistics at this time that would benefit the Su-57 to develop the production scale that has transformed the F-35 from an expensive boondoggle to the premier western platform adopted across multiple NATO countries for less than a Saab Grippen. It's unlikely the Su-57 will ever be fielded in sufficient numbers to make a strategic difference unless the issues plaguing Russia change dramatically.
You misread the patent (at 4:25 in the timeline). It refers to the RCS of the airframe shape per se, before being covered by RAM material. For F-35 fighter the airfarme RCS is quoted as 0.7 m2, for Su-57 it is said to be 0.4 m2. The numbers of course, would vary somewhat depending on exactly how RCS values for different angles are averaged.
Liar. The F-35's radar cross section (RCS) is comparable to a golf ball, around 0.0015 square meters. The Su-57's RCS is similar to that of a clean F/A-18 Super Hornet, but 1,000 times larger than the F-35. It’s why experts even question if the Su-57 is really a 5th generation fighter.
@@Thetequilashooter1 When you attempt to answer a comment, it is advisable to have as a prerequisite an IQ sufficient to understand what it says.
@@oboguev4798 When I read a comment like yours that’s obviously made up nonsense, it makes me question why people like you are even allowed to comment. The shape of a fighter predominantly determines if it’s stealth or not. RAM has a much more minor role. You’re stating the Su-57’s has a better stealth signature than the F-35, which is complete nonsense, and not one credible expert will back your argument. In fact, one of the primary reasons why India left the partnership to develop the Su-57 was because of its lack of stealth features.
“According to India’s Business Standard, the Su-57’s actual low-observable characteristics were among the biggest issues. A jet’s fan face produces a massive radar signature. Modern high-performance stealthy aircraft designs use ‘S’ shaped ducts to hide their engines from most or all line of sight aspects, with radar return scrambling baffles being built under the duct surface scrambling returns even more. Some aircraft, like the Super Hornet, use a slotted baffle that covers the fan faces of their engine, which are hidden only partially by the aircraft’s duct shape. This measure reduces the aircraft’s frontal radar signature, but it is less effective than an s shaped duct and may impact certain aspects of engine performance. Many other features on the T-50 also put a high level of low observability in doubt.”
@@oboguev4798 I understand what it says, and it’s nonsense. What’s your source?
In fact, one of the main reasons why India left partnership to develop the Su-57 was because of its poor stealth signature. According to India’s Business Standard, “the Su-57’s actual low-observable characteristics were among the biggest issues.”
@@oboguev4798 The article goes on to state, the Su-57’s jet’s fan face produces a massive radar signature. Modern high-performance stealthy aircraft designs use ‘S’ shaped ducts to hide their engines from most or all line of sight aspects, with radar return scrambling baffles being built under the duct surface scrambling returns even more. Some aircraft, like the Super Hornet, use a slotted baffle that covers the fan faces of their engine, which are hidden only partially by the aircraft’s duct shape. This measure reduces the aircraft’s frontal radar signature, but it is less effective than an s shaped duct and may impact certain aspects of engine performance. Many other features on the T-50 also put a high level of low observability in doubt.”
The SU-57 is 4.5 gen not 5 gen.
what?
Lets be honest, Alex did the War Thunder ad read because he's hoping for more leaks to make videos about. ;)
The su-75 checkmate might not be real but damn does it look good
The Su-75 Checkmate looks like the bastard love child of the X-35 and X-32!
Yes, the Russians are *excellent* at copying US airframe designs. (They've been at it since the end of WWII.)
Smart ass jokes aside, see the American YF-23... mystery solved.
@@USS-SNAKE-ISLAND No? They maybe similar but definitely not copies.
I think the Su-57 is more for national prestige and to keep a toe in the advanced aircraft develpment pond. It has very little impact on Russias ability to wage war. They seem to have done a pretty good job resisting the combined forces of NATO in all but name and 'the international rules based order' TM over the last two years (and lets not pretend that wasn't happening).
I don't think the US military model of high tech low quantity warfare systems will fare well against the Russian 'its good enough churn them out' approach in a war of attrition. The US hasn't had any experience of since Korea, and it shows - their Ukrainian trainees are now ignoring their advice on the battlefield as what worked in the mddle east against low grade insurgents us no use against a well equiped army.
Anyway, let the down voting commence!
They do make pretty jets…
16:54 This brings to mind the confrontation between the German Tiger and the US M8 Greyhound on Dec. 18th 1944 in Belgium. Tactics is everything!
Over the past week, the Russian Armed Forces have captured more than 30 settlements. And by the way, Russia never declared that it would capture Ukraine in three days.
Yeah sure the us took Iraq in 1 month then nato took Iraq 100 hours
this 30 settlements are so relevant that you wouldn't be able to say the name of 5 of those without using google.
So stop acting like russia is a threat to anybody except Africa and miniature countries
@@anigmaYT Russia poses a real threat to all states that have been seen as friends with the modern USA and EU. These military-political blocs act on behalf of the devil himself and must be punished.
@@anigmaYT NATO did not take Iraq. It was just the US, UK, Australia and Poland.
I LOVE your content as I am an engineering / military nerd myself. I’m shocked when you mention the F-15 and 16 are still in service though….do you think a video on current US deployed aircraft and their differences is warranted? Say this because I was shocked to find out the F-15 was still even ‘out there.’ Let alone the F-16. I think you’d hit a home run with that but maybe just me 🙃. Cheers and thanks for all the great info and content!!!!
If it was good India wouldn’t have pulled out of the 57 program.
Well, there's also the political aspect. India would rather design and build their own aircraft these days than piss off the west by buying from Russia. Or so I would assume. Not to mention that India is rapidly becoming an engineering powerhouse. Their aerospace industry is pretty decent these days. I wouldn't be surprised if they start catching up to China in the next decade.
@@tarmaque India said the plane was not stealthy enough. Has nothing to fo with what you say
If I’m not mistaken, there were other technological short-comings. Stealth, or lack of, was just the biggest
@@tarmaque India is NOT an engineering power house and neither is China. I've dealt with their "engineering" first hand in the form of re-engineering their crappy stuff so that it will work for customers who were duped into buying their junk.
By this logic, everybody would own the exact same model of everything, because it's "good". I don't understand what it is with you people, it's like some psychological thing. Maybe just low IQ.
So the Russian military machine leaves us all with an impression of their intended and hopeful capabilities instead of their actual ability? They'd do great in the corporate world! The tech industry should hire them all as media consultants.
The 57 could be the most effective and dangerous combat aircraft ever built and it wouldn't matter. They can't afford to build the aircraft in the huge numbers needed to counter NATO. Russia is nothing but an energy production company. This war in Ukraine has done serious damage to their oil infrastructure and the second wave of sanctions has driven countries like China and India away from buying Russian oil almost completely. So Putin's money is drying up fast. But the real problem is Russia can't, even if it wanted to, sell the 57 to allies so they can make money to mass build them for the Russian air force. This is how the US is capable of mass production of the 35. We sell basic versions to our allies and that allows us, not just through the profit, but the actual mass production of the aircraft drives the cost down and we get the 35 at a much cheaper price. Russian allies, BRICS, can't afford a fleet of 57's, Brazil couldn't afford one and China has its own J-20.
Doesn't this sentiment also reflect on the US vs. China? China will outproduce us in fighters. They have enormous numbers of the J-20 on order. What does that say about American air superiority?
@meintingles4396 Your comment shows the exact point Alex was making about up or down thumbs. China "may" be able to produce a lot of J-20s but that doesn't mean that they are on par with any American made 5th Generation fighters. You are also ignoring the fact that the US is actively developing 6th generation fighters already.
I think russia has lost those customers that could chose between russia or Nato gear like India. These countries could pay in € or $ which, no doubt, would work for russia. Now, i think they will have to compete with north korea which may want to buy from russia but can’t pay with a decent currency.
Incorrect. If the US can build the deadliest fighter, NGAD for example, what does it matter if they cannot produce them in sufficient quantities? It's applying the same logic from Russia to the US. Remember, China plans to build 1,000 J-20's vs our 200 NGAD.@@marktisdale7935
No
The Su-57 is a waste of time
When the F-22 was built, targeting pods were still new yet the Su-57 which came much latter has to still externally carry its targeting pod
The Su-57 program was so far behind that they to retrofit Su-35 engine and avionics just to get it to testing and avoid all out cancellation
The program is finally off the rails but the design is still heavily flawed
Ukraine has the defenses that it was designed to evade yet its still on the sideline of the time
@Sandboxx do you have any plans to talk about the upcoming E-7A wedgetail? Thanks man! Love your stuff
this video is a joke for example the rcs figure shown in the vid is that of the t50 prototype with had open screws and had no stealth coating and the maker of the video knows it because he showed the patents and therefore read them aswell but chose to lie
That is not true
@@rick7424people are silly. Russia has a different doctrine than the states. The u.s has an aggressive air force so it needs stealth planes where as Russia has a more defensive air force and doesn't need to sacrifice manueverability for too much stealth. If the two planes ever fight it would be u.s going to Russia's air space and the stealth will be compromised.
Well all we really know about this aircraft is Russian propaganda as the few that have been built have been kept under wraps and not risked in the Ukraine. The fact that there are so few would indicate its not going well at all.
I found most of the sayings in this clip about Russia's military prowess bluff applies to China.
You could argue even moreso...with China having all but absolutely zero experience in any kind of warfare...ever.
@@oskar6661umm... I'm no fan of the land of Pooh, but China has a very long history with warfare that goes back to pre-Roman times.
Shit man, the CCP was formed after a brutal multi year civil war that also happened to include the Japanese invasion during WW2.
It's pretty well known that Chinese soldiers and equipment played a part in both Korea and Vietnam, also...
"absolutely zero experience with any kind of warfare..ever"
Spreading blatantly false information about your opponent doesn't make them look weaker, it makes you sound stupid (which I'm pretty sure you're not).
Don't do that.
@@oskar6661 I assume you're joking about the Chinese because what you stated is not even remotely true. They did take several decades off to smoke opium prior to and after the Boxer Rebellion up until the Nationalist/Communist civil war and, of course, the Korean War
@@oskar6661I’d actually argue less so, while China may lack experience, they also seem to be making a genuine effort to learn and develop.
And while there are bots online that may spew out Chinese propaganda you don’t see China officially making the kind of outlandish claims that Russia does.
Like I don’t think I’ve ever seen China claim that the J-20 is some ultimate fighter that will counter the F-22 or F-35.
China seems like much more of a legitimate threat than Russia.
AESA was in the Mig 31. The first with this tech if I remember correctly.
First PESA
My only question is, think the F15EX can see the SU-57 in time and with the upcoming missiles to get first shot capability?
It has the same RCS as an unloaded F18, so I'd say yes.
Frankly, the EX doesn't even have to see the target personally. Someone just has to. Maybe a forward deployed F35. Maybe AWACS. Maybe Aegis. But yeah, net-centric warfare ftw.
@@prfwrx2497yea good point
@@prfwrx2497 the EX radar can see what Russian pilots are thinking its so powerful.
Given how powerful the radar was on the F-15C was .....I'm pretty sure the new F-15EX can see it hundreds of miles away.
Idk if you’ll see this, but honestly this is the most well informed and objectively truthful analysis of the Russian military industry
No it's not wtf. The guy has a massive bias againts russia, watch milenium 7 if you want an unbias breakdown of su 57
@@fbi8372prove it. State what major points this video missed or what he was wrong about.
Prove he deliberately lied.
Aussieairpower, a top Australian think tank, has an assessment of the T50 stealth. It is their assessment that is is similar to an F35 from the front and worse from the side and below. They tested it across quite a wide range of frequency bands. It's a complicated read full of mathematics and radar heat maps, but a refreshing change from "It's got screws so not stealth." or the hopeless reliance on dated patent papers. Surely no one who is serious believes the patent for a classified aircraft gives away accurate performance information? Also all modern radars can target aircraft whilst flying perpendicular to the target, that's why the radar is on a mechanical arm, it tilts.
Propaganda blah. This channel is known for it.
@@herberthonegger Yeah, its why they had to lock the SU57 wiki page. Wasn't that long ago we had to argue with a guy trying to claim "There is no evidence the weapon bay doors can actually open.". Seriously bro, cope less, Russia can build a door.
How old is the article? What’s its release date and title of the article? Everything I have read states that the Su-57’s RCS is somewhere between 0.1 and 0.5 to 1 square meters, while the F-35’s is significantly less at around 0.0015 square meters. Early on in its development developers of the Su-57 even admitted that stealth wasn’t their biggest concern as they didn’t want to change the structure too much where it would impair its performance.
@@Thetequilashooter1 the article is the most up to date of publically released information that I am aware of. It is 10 years old.
Everything you read is simply quoting the Sukhoi patent, in some truly absurd belief that the Russians just straight up declared their true RCS in the patent.
Information on the 747 is often 40 years old, and its still true. Age doesn't matter if things haven't changed, and the geometry of the SU57 has not changed much.
Later less official sourced that give specular radar reflection of the SU57 show excellent frontal stealth and poor banked and rear stealth.
For the record the SU35 is similar, with a very bad belly reflection from the curved belly.
Keep in mind, specular models cannot account for advanced RCS materials, F35 might have materials that can make up for its terrible shapes.
Also keep in mind, the F35 RCS is a lie they told you, and they didn't even have the decency to tell you what what radar frequency that lie is at least vaguely true.
Russia has the RCS of F35 and F22 from the Syria campaigns. They got to have the SU35 and SU57 radar and IRST on it from short ranges. But its classified still, just like the Eurofighters RCS is. Everyone but the average joe knows, such is life it seems.
@ It’s not a lie, you’re just making up crap. You won’t find one credible expert who agrees with you. The Rand report you’re referring to was probably the one released before the F-35 was even undergoing testing in the very early stages of its development when they knew little about it. It was when the Aussies wanted the F-22, not the F-35. The report is widely mocked for its inaccuracies.
Provide in quotes from any expert who agrees with your analysis of the F-35’s shape. You won’t find any. The Su-57’s is significantly worse, and you’ll find many experts who say so. Even Russian officials admitted early on during the PAK-FA’s (T-50/Su-57) early development that stealth wasn’t their primary concern. They preferred functionality over stealth. “According to available information, the Su-57's all-aspect radar cross-section (RCS) is estimated to be between 0.1 and 1 square meter; meaning its radar signature is designed to be relatively small when viewed from any angle…”
“The F-35's all-aspect Radar Cross Section (RCS) is generally reported to be around 0.0015 square meters (or equivalent to a very small radar signature), making it highly stealthy from most angles.”
These are the all aspect stealth figures. That’s comparing apples to apples, not apples to oranges like you’re claiming.
Russia also doesn’t have the RCS of the F-22 or F-35. When the aircraft were fighting alongside the Russians to fight against ISIS, the aircraft carried the Luneburg Lens, which is a radar reflector that intentionally increases the plane’s RCS so that the opposing side won’t know its real value.
Context king 👑 Why I sub to your channel! Thanks
Ty for posting
"In the sky today."
Did it fly today? Yesterday even?
How about in Syria back in 2018?
@@kotor1892 You missed it.
@@SaltyMeatHook it flew in 🇸🇾 and has been flying since June 2022.
Ahh yes. The Russia is the second most powerful military on the planet bit. They aren’t even the second best force in Ukraine and aren’t even the best force in Russia itself
Used to be ..notanymore
@@DeadDogSandersUkraine will receive 61 billon from the US and 51 billion from NATO tells me things are a changing.
Our own military and Military contractors willingly go along with the idea that Russia has some high level of capability that must be countered. US military spending and budgets are built up to offset this mythical capability and that's certainly in the best interests of those who benefit from those increased budgets.
Wonder who benefited from the "missile gap" in the 60s. It's probably the same folks Ike warned JFK about.
Alex choosing this topic for the Warthunder sponsorship is going to make some Warthunder devs very angry
Good. Fuck the devs (i have over 3000 hours in warthunder)
You can call russian bias all you want but the reason russia is so good in game is because of the US's lack of AIM-9X and AIM-120.
Hey Alex and Team, how would you rank the militaries of the world?
I'm sorry but I have to highlight the insane levels of hypocrisy in this video.
"Many of the Su-57's claimed capabilities are still just that, claims that cannot actually be used in combat".
Um, hello, the F-35 is the absolute poster child for this very thing and you think it's without equal.
"these are aircraft that saw their 1st deployments 6 years ago"
Ya, six years is a long time to still be working the bugs out of a multi-million dollar 5th gen fighter. Oh, wait, the F-35 first flew in (checking my maths)... 2006 and will cost over a trillion dollars! So after nearly 20 years of development, the F-35 still has an ejection system that will break the necks of female pilots, a helmet so large pilots can't turn their heads without hitting the canopy, a gun that can't fire with any accuracy or for longer than 2 seconds, a targeting system that can't fire missiles 4th gen fighters have used for decades and a design so bad it can't go supersonic without damaging it's stealth coating (much less super cruise like the SU-57).
Yes, it's true that Russia has only produced 20 or so examples of their SU-57 while Lockheed has pumped out 600+ F-35's. But Lockheed produced 600+ fighters that couldn't perform the mission they'd been given, all of which either have been or will need to be brought back in for updates and repairs in order to achieve the originally stated capabilities sometimes at a cost exceeding that of the entire aircraft itself. So what's worse - limited production of a still in development aircraft or producing hundreds of defective jets that have to be fixed and charging the tax payer for each one?
"The SU-57 is vaporware come to life..."
And what would you call the F-35?
Next up, blaming the US media for overstating Russia's capabilities. Anyone that follows defense happenings as even a hobby knew full well that Russia's capabilities were overblown and had been so for over two decades. You weren't unique.
Russia "manipulates the US media...to bolster their foreign weapons sales."
No, the US defense industry, lobbyists and war mongering politicians manipulated the US media by painting Russia as the boogie man in order to increase US defense spending. All the while ignoring the actually troubling military developments in China because US big business has such strong ties to China.
"whether or not those nations have a media that is legally allowed to hold their government accountable for spreading false information"
Are you kidding me?!? Hunter's laptop, the WIV origins of COVID, the efficacy and side effects of MRNA vaccines, the effectiveness of ivermectin, the Twitter Files...the list goes on and on and on. All instances of the US gov't using it's power and it's proxies to manipulate media platforms and censor valid but inconvenient truths.
And lastly, citing the 2MT yield of the Status-6 "doomsday torpedo" as another example of Russian ineptitude. Are you implying that Russia is incapable of producing anything larger?!? Russia was building and detonating 100MT thermonuclear devices 60 YEARS AGO. Or are you implying that 2 megatons is weak? FYI- The largest nuclear warhead the US currently has in it's arsenal is HALF that size (1.2MT). It think 2MT is more than capable of delivering what the Russian leadership have asked. Or shall we keep poking them until they dial up the yield to 50 or 100 megatons so it leaves the entire East Coast inhabitable.
It's been really disappointing to witness your descent into yet another US military industrial complex fan boy...
The F-35 is great my guy, what are you on about?
The F-35 will cost over a trillion once you figure ARMAMENT, REPAIRS, PARTS, MAINTENANCE, REFUELING, ETC for almost 60 years with a fleet around 2000 planes large. Any other aircraft will cost a trillion by having the sum of all operatong costs for decades.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD The F-35 is great? Last summer the DOD put a COMPLETE FREEZE on accepting new F-35's until Lockheed fixed all the hardware and software issues. Lockheed is literally running out of space to park all the rejected F-35's. In terms of cost, the fifth generation F-22 cost taxpayers $66 Billion, yet the F-35 program is pushing the $2 TRILLION mark. So the F-35 program is 30X more costly than the more capable, combat ready F-22 program. You don't seem to grasp what an absurd figure $2 TRILLION dollars is so let me write that out for you....$2,000,000,000,000.00 for a jet so flawed the DOD refuses to even take delivery of it. You really think the US will still be flying F-35's in 60 YEARS?!? Let me also put 60 years in perspective for you - that's the equivalent of the US military still flying 3rd gen F-4 Phantoms, F-5 Tigers and F-105 Thunderchiefs in 2024. FYI - all three of those fighters were retired last century. Anything else you'd like me to correct?
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD The F-35 is great? Last summer the DOD put a COMPLETE FREEZE on accepting new F-35's until Lockheed fixed all the hardware and software issues. Lockheed is literally running out of space to park all the rejected F-35's. In terms of cost, the fifth generation F-22 cost taxpayers $66 Billion, yet the F-35 program is pushing the $2 TRILLION mark. So the F-35 program is 30X more costly than the more capable, combat ready F-22 program. You don't seem to grasp what an absurd figure $2 TRILLION dollars is so let me write that out for you....$2,000,000,000,000.00 for a jet so flawed the DOD refuses to even take delivery of it. You really think the US will still be flying F-35's in 60 YEARS?!? Let me also put 60 years in perspective for you - that's the equivalent of the US military still flying 3rd gen F-4 Phantoms, F-5 Tigers and F-105 Thunderchiefs in 2024. FYI - all three of those fighters were retired last century. Anything else you'd like me to correct?
The F-35 is great? Last summer the DOD put a COMPLETE FREEZE on accepting new F-35's until Lockheed fixed all the hardware and software issues. Lockheed is literally running out of space to park all the rejected F-35's. In terms of cost, the fifth generation F-22 cost taxpayers $66 Billion, yet the F-35 program is pushing the $2 TRILLION mark. So the F-35 program is 30X more costly than the more capable, combat ready F-22 program. You don't seem to grasp what an absurd figure $2 TRILLION dollars is so let me write that out for you....$2,000,000,000,000.00 for a jet so flawed the DOD refuses to even take delivery of it. You really think the US will still be flying F-35's in 60 YEARS?!? Let me also put 60 years in perspective for you - that's the equivalent of the US military still flying 3rd gen F-4 Phantoms, F-5 Tigers and F-105 Thunderchiefs in 2024. FYI - all three of those fighters were retired last century. Anything else you'd like me to correct?
You yell "Military Industrial Complex!!!" like it somehow disproves the claims about Russia or as if it is an argument in of itself. Neither are true.
I’ve heard that the SU-57 thrust vectoring engine has now been made rectangular, rather than, the traditional circular shape you’ve featured in this video…also hear they may have developed a ‘wingman’ stealth drone that can be controlled by the SU-57 pilot also.
Also hear that the new square thrust vector engine may well be being fitted to this.
May be worthy of a video if you’ve not done one already?
It will help a bit, but the exposed fan and other “features” still remain
@@TonyChan-eh3nz exposed fan?
@@weedfreerJet engines require a fan to absorb air and burn said air. The F-35, F-22, and any other good stealth planes uses S-ducts to hide away the fan. Meanwhile in vodka land, the fan significantly increases RCS.
@@TonyChan-eh3nz I've worked alongside jet engine production lines, and, am aware of the fanjet/turbojet configurations.
I was of the understanding that in a stealth jet however, the fact that the engine components are contained within the fabric of the airframe would have negated any concerns as to their visibility.
As such, the feedback regards the S duct is of some interest to me...thanks!
That said, again, yet more fodder for a comparison/technology review video I should have thought ☺️
@@TonyChan-eh3nzThe fan has other methods to decrease RCS. While not as good as S-ducts, the RAM coated radar blocker and RAM in the intakes would decrease the RCS by a lot.
For example, by putting RAM around the engines the Su-35 cut its RCS in half when compared to the original Su-27.
This is a bit of a pet peeve of mine, and maybe everyone else understands it perfectly well. But the idea of something being x TIMES smaller than something else has always felt like a very odd way to communicate something. The other thing is 25 times bigger. Makes perfect sense. The thing your examining is 1/25 the size. Makes perfect sense. The thing is 25 TIMES smaller... Just doesn't compute with me.
There's a comic routine based around a book saying something was 10 times colder than something else, and they make the same observations. It's just weird.
25 times smaller is still perfectly accurate math wise
Capable or not, the SU-57 is a BEAUTIFUL aircraft. It looks like what an operational YF-23 might've looked like.
I find it strange that a Russian developer is sponsoring this video
The anti-infrared missile laser was cool. If it works, we should get it too.
SU-57 still stands for "Single Use 57"
😂😂😂
Russia has brilliant engineers and they will definitely fix that at some point... at some level, no matter how bad their⸺well, whole thing⸺may be, we can't forget their engineers' achievements. They did a lot of great stuff during the space age even though the USSR's GDP was about 75% smaller than the US's.
@@DrVictorVasconcelosTo quote Oxide, TH-cam's resident body armor aficionado and Apache pilot in training:
"I respect the hell out of the Soviets. Russia is _not_ the Soviets."
@griffinfaulkner3514 for aviation, pretty much all of them are russian tho
@@electricspeedkiller8950 Only the Felon post-dates the USSR in terms of design. Every other mainline fixed wing aircraft was developed under the Soviet regime, and have only received updates post-collapse. It's worth noting that the Soviets nearly managed to build a 5th-gen fighter of their own with MiG's project 1.44/1.42, which many current Russian engineers suspect served as the inspiration for the J-20.
Unique take, unique contest, keep it up
People always try to compare it directly with the F-22, different jets with different purposes and applications. Not the best comparison maybe 🤷
The comparison makes sense because they might face each other. What doesn't make sense is to assume that they WILL, INVARIABLY, face each other on even odds.
We should always remember when Hitler approved Operation Barbarossa because he thought the Wehrmacht's 6,000 tanks could take on the USSR's 11,000... Almost 2 to 1, but it might work, right? Well, it turned out the USSR had 21,000.
It matches some of the capabilities of the Raptor. Unfortunately for Russian those were the capabilities that were a bone thrown to the fighter mafia and have been basically irrelevant in modern air to air combat since the late cold war.
Dr.victor - why do you think Russia had that many tanks.....AMERICA, THATS WHY! 11 Billion dollars worth in 1940's money! Not because Russia was capable of building great numbers of incredible weapons..because America sold them everything that they never paid for including 4.5 million pounds of food and 53% of all of America's ammunition production, half a million trucks 2,500 trains with 11,000 train cars and 14,000 airplanes. The only reason those worthless people aren't speaking German right now is because of us.
You reffered to others as "Europe hags" in a different comment. Quite frankly it is difficult to take you seriously.
0:38 Indeed, there are absolutely no absolutes in combat.
😉
Invading Ukraine was a big mistake for Russia, because it revealed how pathetic their doctrine is.
i wouldnt say pathetic doctrine, but they simply fail to conduct it. the cant maintain their tanks, they cant maintain their aircrafts, ships, logistics, reinforcements or anything may it be infantry, artillery ANYTHING! their upper command is corrupt and incompetent and has been running this excuse of a military for decades now. the only thing that really changed from 1990 to now, is that the russian military lost its bite and their upper command got some yachts in south europe. That is the only major difference and that is effing pathetic.
the doctrine is pretty badass, but you have to be able to grind your men to meat towards victory, if you are too dumb to even get that done you should become a pacifist nation.
13:50 Yessir, Brother.
Some of us were right there, too.
🙂
Another factor that we tend to forget, is that in the late 40s and early 1950s, American military analysts discounted Russian capabilities too much. We were telling ourselves how backward they were, and then in quick succession they developed the A-bomb, copied the B-29 as the Tu-4 Bull, took the British Nene jet engine and made the MiG-15, and then made an H-Bomb much quicker than anyone expected. That made the US choose to never underestimate the Russians again. That has led to often overestimating them.
Of course, the good side of that is that we have avoided becoming complacent in large part and been able to get funding to keep our edge. Except during the "peace dividend" period, we have remained vigilant, which to me is a better thing than being swell-headed and complacent.
Thanks for a balanced view of the Su-57. I don't know that I would want to be flying a Rafale, Eurofighter, or older F-16 against a fully finished production model of the Su-57. It might just sneak up on you, or maybe shoot a missile at you while flying past beside you.
So they copied a bunch of stuff (they had spies steal nuclear secrets from the US). Basically had the Brits not allowed them to buy jet engines and walked around the shop floor for the shoes to pick up metal shavings, and had the US actually cracked down on leftist sympathizers, the Soviet Union would have been nerfed.
Never forget when a single F-14 took out two SU-57’s in that documentary.
It's so good the Indians turned it down 🤣🤣
The TH-cam comments section trolls claim SR-71 is a stealth plane because they hit it with radar and made changes to the airframe.
Well, if that’s the case, SU-57 is totally a stealth plane 🙄🤣
No, they’re not TH-cam trolls they’re just uninformed! The SR 71 blackbird is indeed a self fighter, but not because it has a small radar return, but because it was designed specifically for stealth recon‘s missions, which means that it was designed to fly an extremely high altitudes, which made it nearly impossible to see what alone here and a lot of the missiles in that time. Couldn’t intercept it because it was flying so high that the amount of air was very thin so the missiles would often malfunction before getting to it. I mean, the SR 71 is the equivalent of a two engine rocket with wings. The only thing that prevents it from being able to go into space entirely is the fact that it runs on an air powered jet engine.. and the thing was also the SR 71 flus so fast it could not really be seen from the ground at all so you wouldn’t even know one was watching you because it would be so high. You couldn’t see it or hear it and it would be moving so fast you can see it or hear it. So make no mistake the SR 71 is indeed a stealth platform just not conventional stealth..
The SU-57 in not we consider a 5th gen system, certainly not in many parameters that are required. But more importantly it’s not a factor either. With so few in existence. It’s not a threat. We have already broken records with our air dominance project. Russia and China have significant distance to cover if they are to be where we are.
I think a lot of this back and forth on what actually designates what generational technology is so convoluted when radar cross section is the superior metric used to determine what is or isn't a generational technology, I don't think their are any Romulan Bird of Prey cloaking device on the near horizons so basically it boils down to a who can see who first. It reminds me of that old auto shop joke "you can put a Cadillac motor in a Pinto and all you got is a Pinto with a Cadillac motor. Here's the problem generational technology in regards to RCS is fast approaching its diminishing return limitations even with new composites and resin epoxies while radar technology with its multi approach and capability of detection using over the horizon link systems it has much more robust future and will eventually win the race.
As far as the Poseidone Torpedoe goes, I'd be more more worried about if it was true that it has the ability to sneak right into a harbor and sit on the bottom until the Russians decide to detonate it a day, a month, a year later❓❓
Who cares what size warhead it has, whether it's 100 sticks of dynamite or 100 Mega-tons worth of Nuclear Dynamite....
What truly matters is if they can lay it up inside an Enemy's harbor and set it off whenever they want....
Total junk compared to western stuff.
Silly take. Russia's air force is defensive and has a different doctrine. They don't need to sacrifice manueverability for stealth since it's purpose is to defend Russian airspace not invading countries across the world using stealth on poor countries.
Reminder that the west is constantly putting out propaganda, just like the East. Keep an open mind, and try to stay informed and avoid picking sides.
@@budgieboi8979 Don't "both sides" this debate when the US does not use state sponsored media to pump out military propaganda.
And the sad thing is, that the US Air Force DOES operate an Armed Crop Duster.
So, we might actually see a possibility of a High Tech Jet losing to the Sky Warden.
The SU-57, is a maneuverable aircraft with some stealth characteristics. If we use the F-22 as the benchmark for 5th Generation, then the SU-57 is an upper echelon 4th generation aircraft. It has many great features on paper. We have yet to see most of it in actual use yet.