Thrust vectoring is more important for super high altitude maneuverability when air is thin, as opposed to maneuvering tightly in the mostly non existentant dogfight. Or so I hear, I ain’t a pilot or aeronautical engineer.
The leading edge by the wing root is also above the engine inlet. So yes, it will affect wing loading as it changes angles, but it will also alter the engine inlet. I believe it changes based on air speed more than stick angle. It also appears the entire leading edge of the wing has a small movable element. This element could be interesting if used correctly to create less load on one wing while keeping the other with more left for maneuverability. Must have been how they made Rooster's jaw drop in the documentary.
y̶e̶a̶h̶,̶ ̶v̶a̶r̶i̶a̶b̶l̶e̶ ̶g̶e̶o̶m̶e̶t̶r̶y̶ ̶i̶n̶t̶a̶k̶e̶s̶ ̶l̶i̶k̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶f̶1̶5̶.̶ actually looking at a photo of the underneath of the jet it looks like the air travelling under the wing root control surface doesn't flow into the inlet, the inlet is separated from the body (very bad for stealth). they must act kind of like canards then just attached to the main wing. I'm pretty sure that the leading edge control surface is basically a slat like the f16 has, it's used in the same regard as flaps to make the wing have more lift. fun fact is that the leading-edge slat actually houses a search radar. the SU57 has 5 radars, one main one in the nose, two looking sideways out from the side of the cockpit and two in the wings, they also planned to put another in the tail but it wasn't implemented in the final plan.
Wing Loading in the aeronautical engineering sense is defined as weight divided by wing area. (W/S). These are not considered leading edge slats in the strict sense of the term. Slats typically extend and open up slots. Yes, the BF-109 had automatically deployed leading edge slats. The Komet had fixed slots. What we see here is simply known as a leading edge flap. Because it actuates exactly like a plain flap. It does not translate forward not open a slot, it simply bend downward. This significant reduces The leading edge suction peak of thin-airfoils at high angle of attack. This increases the "area under the curve" of velocity distribution over the suction surface (upper wing surface). Improving lift. This method functions at all airspeeds, but is especially effective at transonic velocities where any maneuvering load will cause the leading edge airflow to exceed mach, creating excessive drag and substantial loss in maximum lift in the M0.7~M1.05 regime. The F-16 improved in this area specifically to counter the Mig-21 based on experience from Vietnam. Russia followed suit. The problem with leading edge flaps, slots, and slats, is they increase radar returns especially when deployed. While they are used on the F-22, and now SU-57 its optimized for air superiority as a primary objective with stealth as a high but not primary priority. The F-22 is probably going to utilize a computer algorithm to optimize its stealth signature based on all detected threats and their bearing, and this almost certainly includes optimal deflection of the LE flaps. The SU-57 design choice to have leading edge flaps on the engine nacelles/extensions doesn't make much sense. Yes it will improve lift slightly, but that area is very low aspect ratio so it wont be that effective. It also need a large leading edge suction peak in that area to generate the strong vortex flow over the wing in that juncture. So, I don't know why they opted for this design feature, but I suspect its because that leading edge sweep over that portion was reduced to allow better stealth signature. And by having leas sweep, it generates a weaker vortex, and/or it "hangs on" at very high angle of attack and causes an aft-pitching moment that reduces stability and they wanted to reduce that negative effect at extreme angle of attack, while improving lift in that area at low angles of attack, which led them to the complexity and reduced stealth of the current design.
I beleive sukhoi were unhappy with the turbulence directly behind the canards of SU33 and other similar canard-fitted airframes, the cause apparently being the gap between canard and wing. Their solution was to incorporate both in the SU57, smoothing out the airflow
@@dunneemofozilla5718 yeah thats a really good point and it seems like it would help stealth too. I’m surprised the ‘movable leading edge extension’ idea isn’t used more as it seems a lot more efficient than canards
Yes the rudders are all moving. As an aerodynamic concept I think it’s very potent. It appears optimised for high super cruise. I guess the stealth is the area not completely clear…
2:34 "It's kinda like the Tu-50 and the B-29. If you put enough pictures they can copy it." I think you mean the Tu-4 which was a copy of the B-29. Also the Soviets had more than pictures. 4 B-29s were damaged during raids on Japan and landed in Vladivostok where they were interned. Another 1 crashed in the USSR. They were able to reverse-engineer the Tu-4 from those planes.
They weren't merely reverse engineered. Stalin directed they be *clone correct* copies. They even copied the anticorrosion paint colors on the interior. Tupolev realized he couldn't duplicate the American landing gear and make it work with Soviet components and literally feared going to Stalin to get permission to change the landing gear wheel layout to accommodate the *superior* (and it really was superior to the one on USAAF B-29s) landing gear.
@@geodkyt looks like those 4 american planes had soviet engines and turrets. Or someone was really brave... Or you didn't have to be brave to make reasonable changes
When Stalin said EXACT clones, they took it so literally they cast the Boeing script logo in the rudder pedals of their Tu-4. Another difference was in the skin. They couldn't duplicate the exact alloy nor as thin as the Boeing aluminum. The Tu-4 ended up being a little bit heavier and shorter range in the end. Another Russian curiosity in their espionage and copying: some group of Russians were allowed to tour an engine factory long time ago. Don't recall who it was. They gave these dignitaries special shoes for the tour and special instructions. The shoe soles were made of gummy, soft unvulcanized rubber and to try to step in metal shavings in the machining areas to imbed the chips in the shoe soles so they could analyze our metallurgy. Industrial espionage! For a long time Russian jet engine development lagged behind western designs so this was very valuable information.
The USA got an Mig-25 and pretty much squeezed everything it could from it. They also got numerous engineers from the luftwaffe after WW2 to help them with jet propulsion development. The british all but stole VTOL from Yakovlef and created the Harrier alongside the USA. This happens, its not something new.
Having a second look at the wing root of the SU-57 it looks like something similar to the F-15 where the engine cells can actually pivot downwards or upwards.
But those parts have different functions The su-57 has levcons which control the strength of vorteces above the wings. The F-15 has a variable inlet lip which controls the amount of air that goes into the engine (I believe)
@@onyxfinger7431you’re correct, the 15 uses a “ramp” system to divert and slow down inlet air for various reasons. One main reason being to slow down air when supersonic.
Su-57 is a misunderstood air frame. Partially due to all the PR it got from both Russian and Foreign press. When it came down to actual design specifications I am very confident that Russian Air Force and Sukhoi bureau had to make some compromises on Want vs. Can design/build/maintain. To me the real value of Su-57 is in pushing the research and development beyond USSR designs like Su-27/30/35. Effectively it's a flying prototype/testbed that keeps the national industry moving. Lot of the technology/experience gained on program was applied to Su-35. I personally think it's still work in progress in terms avionics/engine and weapon systems. Hence the limited adoption. And that's smart - why burn money on 70% aircraft when you have reliable and well understood Su-30/35 for better price? The close-up of rivets made some noise back in the day BUT there were talks of new RAM coating + most existing aircraft are hand build test prototypes. Last year KNAAZ plant were Sukhoi 30/35/57 are built made announcement about beginning of dedicated Su-57 assembly line construction. There were also screenshot of new engine with flat or new engines with square nozzles on testbed from Saturn design bureau surfacing on Russian message board this year. Bottom line is - real capability of Su-57 is unknown. It's definitely not as good as Russian propaganda makes it look, but also probably not as bad as Western arrogance suggests.
I’m sure you’re right about most of this. I’ll add though that Russian airframes are never vetted like American designs ->as a result they’ll never be as refined, or in other words they’ll never be as good as they can be. American designs also stretch much further than the airframe: the avionics, the missiles, the engines, the radar, the electronics package, the electronic warfare suite, sensors, and all the support systems including AWACS aircraft, satellites, communications, etc are always more advanced than the Russian stuff. So even if this aircraft were as good as an F-22, its support systems simply don’t have the same budget behind them and as a result will never meet the US standards of air combat.
Certainly, the Su-57 is a capable aircraft. But like anything Russian, it's not as capable as Russia would have you believe. Still, at least in my eye, it is one of the prettiest fighters out there.
one big difference is that russian aircraft are actually flying in a real combat zone with real threats both in the air and on the ground not just bombing insurgents with old ak's and zero anti air capabilities like in afghanistan, iraq, yemen, libya etc.
@@Editzify I have yet to see any pictures of a Su-57 with the fully grey paint indicative of RAM coatings. Seeing how far behind the Russians are to the West in materials science I highly doubt they are able to develop effective RAM
Su-57 has some interesting things going on with its sensors. It's the first fighter jet ever to be equipped with Directional Infrared Counter Measures (DIRCM) (only helicopters had them before). 101KS-U: Ultraviolet missile approach warning system. Two extra x-band AESA radars on its cheek for increased angular coverage. L-band AESA on wings. Things like this never happened with any fighter before. The 101KS "Atoll" electro-optical system consisted of the 101KS-V infrared search and track (IRST), 101KS-O directional infrared counter measures (DIRCM), 101KS-U ultraviolet missile approach warning sensors (MAWS), 101KS-P thermal imager for low altitude flight and landing, and 101KS-N navigation and targeting pod and So On. The thing is, the Russians always take a very different approach in their design. May seem 'bad' according to western standards and ideology. Millenium 7* history tech Channel have some in-depth analysis about its technology. He concluded that Su-57 would probably be the least 'Surprised' fighter against western 5th Gens.
Su-57's radar is about on par with an F-15's, it stands absolutely no chance at defeating VLO aircraft like F-22 or F-35 which have far more powerful radars. And btw F-35 has DAS, which is far more capable at detecting incoming threats than anything on a Russian fighter. Russian approach to design is "it looks cool at air shows", because they are too far behind the West in every technology that matters
@@yomama629 "Su-57's radar is about on par with an F-15's, it stands absolutely no chance at defeating VLO aircraft like F-22 or F-35 which have far more powerful radars" Proove it " And btw F-35 has DAS, which is far more capable at detecting incoming threats than anything on a Russian fighter." DAS is weak compared to 101KS-O which is not only a laser dazzler, but also a proper IRST constantly spinning 360 degrees scanning for threats in IR band. And don't forget about those distributed UV sensors
It's about capabilities, look at f15s just dominating older Soviet aircraft. You're better off having the right capability with the right numbers. It's a balancing act
I mean ironically the situation in Ukraine is like THE situation that stealth aircraft are meant to prevent or stop. The fact we don’t see SU-57s flying deep strike missions, conducting SEAD, or doing anything 5th gens are meant to do in a war like this, I think tells us a lot about how confident the Russian military is with the SU-57.
@@jonathanpfeffer3716 particularly during the collapse and the "anarchy" of 1990s Russia had to prioritise with what she had available... that's why rocketry progra.s went ahead, as did submarines, in effect bolstering the nuclear deterrents on la d and sea (like the USA, Russia was phasing out gravity dropped nuclear bombs as obsolete thanks to MIRVs on land, sea) this was sensible and the legacy is a military still in a state of change but with state of the art missiles which were prioritised over, what has proven for those who attempt it, ludicrously expensive 5th gen fighter bombers which might be rendered obsolete si.ply through cost by continuous development of anti-aircraft missile systems, drone swarms and the like. Patriot Pac3 launching 2x$4 million interceptors against everything it registers as a threat? Yikes
The S-70 Okhotnik UCAV, in contrast, has excellent stealth and a very low IR emission. The Su-57, on the other hand, isn't very stealthy ( 0.05 RCS). As a result, the two vehicles will cooperate, with the drone serving as a "spotter" to illuminate targets for the Su-57 to "snipe" at. It poses a threat because it is armed with long-range missiles like the R-37M and the R-77 ramjet variant. Note: Please be aware that the drone will be equipped with a maximum of 16 mini R-77s in interceptor mode, similar to the Peregrine and CUDA missiles. It will fly at an altitude of 22 to 25 km when in AI-piloted interdiction mode.
The Raptor has such ginormous rudders that I find it hard to believe it needs extra yaw control. Seriously, they’re literally the size of an F16’s entire wing.
@@JanNovak-pg8oeI was under the impression that the USN never installed gunpods, and their kills during Vietnam were done via missile, and in fact most of Vietnam's A2A kills were done by missiles even after the USAF installed gunpods on their F4s?
It is like that really expensive gun you have in your gun safe. It's a called a gun safe queen. They are so proud of them they would not use it against a real foe.
I really think people need to talk in a more sophisticated manor, when dealing with the SU57's RCS. Here's a few points that everybody seems to just brush over. 1. The first stage engines (AL41). HUGE. Clearly mucking up it's stealth profile. Not in any way shape or form designed with stealth in mind. The AL51 second stage engines are! 2. Air intakes. The block 2 will reportedly be fitted with intake grilles. People scoff at this as a stealth solution. You know what ELSE had intake grilles... The F117... 3. The weapons bays hadn't been perfected, until recently! Not an easy fix. 4. No SU57 flying, has ever had R.A.M applied. Apparently, it's just too expensive to keep applying, for what little benefit it should afford them, while they haven't fixed the issues above. BUT, that said, the R.A.M is supposed to offer -45db of reduction! Which is pretty decent! All told, this is how they get to 0.008. And that is a mean average. Not just best angles, the way America reports.
Left out the lack of a S Duct and a photo taken from the front showed it had semi recessed fan blades like the Super Hornet because you can literally see the fan blades front directly head on.
The Su-57 is an interesting bit to get into. While the avionics are no doubt capable; especially by Russian standards, the stealth is guaranteed to be pretty lacking compared to other 5th gen fighters. Granted, it's stealthy for a plane of its size, but that's not saying much when your frontal RCS is somewhat similar to an F/A-18E even if your ECM is doing some extra lifting. That's just what exposed turbines and a less advanced stealth coating get you. Kinetically, the plane is certainly going to be quick, and certainly would be capable of matching most aircraft operating nowadays for speed, with some extra supercruise to boot. It certainly would give anything it merged with a heart attack, but dogfight performance is largely irrelevant in a modern setting. Bottom line is that it would be better to call the Su-57 a reduced-observability heavy 4.5th generation fighter that sports better systems and survivability than Russia's existing air fleet. But in no way would it stack up well against an F-35 or an F-22 due to the disparity in RCS. And this isn't even accounting for the increased maintenance usually required for Russian engines, which on average need to get sent back to the factory for overhaul twice as often as engines found on western contemporaries.
Sorry if I'm a bit late but I personally think this is one of the biggest misconceptions of the Su-57. The 0.1m^2 figure shown in the patent isn't the frontal RCS but an AVERAGE RCS meaning that they take the RCS of all angles and create an average value from them. It's also physically impossible for the Su-57 to have the same frontal RCS as the F-18 as the F-18 lacks a ton of geometric stealth features. The majority of the radar-reducing features for the F-18 are RAM coating and radar blockers something that the Su-57 also has. In regards to exposed rivets, they're mostly present on the prototype T-50 but serial production models are much cleaner even by just looking at them there's a significant difference. TLDR: The patent was misunderstood by many as the Americans use frontal RCS as the RCS figure for most of their aircraft while the Russians use average RCS (at least for the Su-57). Lots of the stealth-reducing features that were missing from the prototype are now present on the serial models (however, they are still missing some things like complete S-ducts and serrated engine flaps and blades).
From memory the program ran into difficulty in the early days , was meant to have to have polymorphic surfaces , I don’t think it has not sure , there is a documentary on the net but it’s in Russian with subtitles
The Su-57 has the same single-axis (sometimes called "2D") thrust vectoring engines that the Su-30/35 have. The axes, however, are arranged in a V orientation rather than straight up and down, which trades off some of the vectoring force for the ability to vector somewhat in yaw. This is not the same as the multi-axis (or "3D") thrust vectoring that has been experimented with in the west. The Russian system would seem to enable some pretty spectacular maneuverability for airshows, but not so much for precise control of the nose that might be useful for combat in certain situations. In contrast, the F-22 has pitch-only vectoring and uses its aerodynamic control surfaces for yawing and velocity vector rolling at high alpha. This may or may not enable it to appear as agile at airshows, but might well give it better nose control.
There is a lot that we still don't know about it. Even when we look at the videos, that they've put out of it, we don't know if they're of production aircraft or prototypes.
Regarding stealth, the Su-57 has standard-looking nozzles and IRST "balls" that don't seem to be stealthy at all. The engineers wouldn't do this if the Su-57 were VLO (very low observable) stealth like the F-22 and F-35. The rivets might not matter as much as it appears, but are an indication that not nearly as much care was taken in its RCS reduction measures. Additionally, the Su-57's canopy has a seam at the front that doesn't appear to be stealthy at all. There is a reason that the F-22 and F-35 have continuous one-piece canopies (the F-35's bow is on the inside as reinforcement, not a seam, of course). Even the F-16's canopy seems stealthier than the Su-57's at the front. The bottom line is that the Su-57 does not appear to be a true VLO stealth fighter or even close to that. With its form and internal weapon bays, it's probably the stealthiest fighter besides the F-22 or F-35, but I bet that it isn't remotely a match for them in this respect, and doesn't even try to be.
The super cruise claims are based on the imaginary engine it is yet to receive. Instead, it's fitted with the same engine used by Su-35 with added FADEC.
As military aviation expert and The Merge newsletter editor, Pako Benitez, has stated, the Felon airframe is very 6th gen, but with 4th gen intakes and engines. If the Russians figure out those two things, they'll have something legit. Doesn't anyone find it strange that the only other predominantly white, predominantly Christian country besides the USA is labeled a primary enemy of the US? Jamie Raskin even said the quiet part out loud one time when he mentioned Russia being targeted for these exact reasons. Also, isn't it a little weird that the US is still conducting joint operations/missions/research with the Russians as it concerns space exploration, even though we are allegedly at war with them?
My fathers brother was a polish MiG 29 pilot and he expressed his love for the Sukhoi 57 also concerning that they want to build more… I hope they stop at 50 units I heard they already having microchip building problems…. That should delay them!!!!!!!!!!!
Questions: can an AWACS see a missile once it's fired at a friendly jet? And, why aren't missiles made to be stealthy? It seems to me that the true threat is a TWS shot in BVR.
The U.S. has stealthy missiles. They are called the JASSM and LRASSM. Used for taking out ships and stationary land targets. They have the (public data) radar cross section of a large bumblebee. And an absorbent RAM coating, as well as the ability to filter it's targets and deconflict with other missiles. It can also recalculate it's path if it's target has been destroyed. It also will be smart enough to scan all available targets with it's radar, and designate a target other than the one it was launched at, as priority. Meaning, if we launch it at an S-300 sam site, and the missile scans the area in flight, and sees that there's an S-400 that we didn't see, it'll go "Ah, I'm gonna hit that instead since it's more valuable" and change course. In reality they're probably even harder to see than that.
Maybe, but depending on the missile it may be too small for the radar to detect it. Also, missiles aren’t usually stealthy because they don’t need to be. Planes are stealthy because things track them and try to fire weapons at them. Nobody is doing that to air to air missiles yet. Although there is one exception, which is a special variant of the AIM-9X meant to be carried by the F35. Since it has to be carried externally, it was modified to be stealthier as to not increase the F35s RCS as much when carrying it.
I'm not a Russian troll or fanboy, but you guys seem to jump to the su 57 being a yf-23 derivative, which may be correct, but they seem significantly different (how would I know anyways :) ) However, Rick Abell didn't seem to know that the su 57 had thrust vectoring. He must not be paying much attention lately, not that it matters, just weird to do an analysis and not know anything about the aircraft. "May be canards, i don't know", he doesn't seem interested in getting into details haha. Anyway, not a big deal, bring on lots of engineers to talk about the aircraft, I love it!
the picture of the su-57 without flush screws was of one of the prototypes a decade ago, also the screws weren't sticking up they were sunk in a few mm so they could be filled. this attitude is a problem with americans. We would have got smoked in war in europe in the 1980s in large part because the MIG-31 that guys like him said sucked was a much better BVR fighter than the f-15. it's radar was a generation ahead, much more powerful, and the r-33 they had was a generation ahead of the aim-7 we would have been crushed unless they could the carriers there in time because the f-14 was the only match for the mig-31 and it was like that with our most important equipment. we thought were amazingly superior. the s-300 ad system is still operating efficetively in ukraine now. it's the same exact system with the same missile they had in huge numbers in 1985. the PAC patriot wouldn't become that good for another 15 years until 1999 almost. hubris will get us all destroyed.
Well said. It is an elitist stance that had lead to a Special Operations Command approach to solve everything. The US isn't capable to fight large scale wars, anymore - the reduced procurement of the F-22A and 'lightweight' Joint Strike Fighter F-35A, no service can afford or keep mission capable with their budgets is exactly a reflection of that structural problem. To be fair, the channel is critical of this trajectory, here it's just more of a blooper than a serious conversation...
The RAM (radar absorbing material) coatings on US LO designs (aircraft and missiles) are the most essential part beyond basic shapes and angles. Doubtful Russians have mastered the RAM coatings and the regular maintenance to the degree US LO aircraft maintainers have. The difference in proper in RAM coating maintenance is at least an order of magnitude RCS reduction, that is 0.01 m^2 versus 0.1 m^2 with poor RAM.
The point about assembly quality and service life is relevant, effecting the actual combat value. The Soviet had preferred to throw away what would stop working and produce instead more, with mineral resources and labor being abundant... If the MiG-25PD - or even the MiG-29A were the last aircraft, however Rick had read up upon in reports then his impressions may be dated. The Russian Su-30SM - basically adopting the export standard - isn't described as prone to stall or as maintenance intensive as the MiG-21 or MiG-23 at Area-51... Nobody cares much either about low observability or flight performance of the F-35A - the decisive feature is it's sensor-fusion and a broadband data-link, capable to integrate sensors and weapons in a dispersed 'formation' and among future mass deployed Collaborative Combat Aircraft. The same goes for the Su-57 and the respective Su-70 development...
Listening to you, I guess we are still stuck in inches and feet. Topical refusing inreligent metric system witch is used in the whole world except UK and Us
One thing I’ve noticed that the F-119 engines has quite a high military thrust, 26000lbf of thrust smthing, almost as powerful as the engines on the su30 on full ab. I think that is why the F-22 can go supercruise at mach 1.8+.
One thing nobody has talked about with the Su-57 is it's radar. Can that be unpacked a little bit? Because I personally can't see a Raptor or F-35 sneaking up on this thing but I am ready to be proved wrong. From the little bit I have read, it looks like its right up there with the Tomcat and the Eagle as far as BVR.
There are 5 primary factors in any AESA / PESA radar. Diameter, TR modules, power input, physical module design, and software. Across the board, the Byelka doesn't compare favorably with the AN/APG-81 on the F-35 and especially compared to the AN/APG-77v1 on the Raptor. It has 8% fewer TR modules than the F-35 and 20% fewer than the Raptor. It's diameter is about the same as the AN/APG-81, and about 30% lower than the Raptor's. It's power output is the same as the AN/APG-77 at 20kW, but slightly better than the AN/APG-81s 18kW, although power output is actually not as important as the other factors since range is determined by the fourth root of the power. Doubling the power would result in just 20% greater range. The Raptor and lightning use the more efficient and effective notch antenna design versus the Su-57s slotted antenna array. And to top it off, this is the first AESA radar Russia has built. The processing and software aren't as effective and aren't as developed as the AESA radars we have. It's certainly the most capable radar on any Russian combat jet, but when up against the radars equipping America's F-35s and especially the F-22, it is far behind. It's probably comparable to the drop in upgraded radars for 4th gen jets like the AN/APG-84 for some F-16s or AN/APG-79 for the Super Hornets. Maybe slightly better than those
@@ImBigFloppabro you are lying the radar on the su 57 is far better than those on f16 and super hornet, the su 57 has a very decent radar and it can go toe to toe with the American 5th gen admit it, and stop deceiving yourself
It has a small horizontal stab/elevator for the wing goes back so far that it's almost a delta wing and probably also uses elevons. That plus the thrust vectoring is probably adequate, although definitely not as good as a proper tail like the F-22 has (in addition to its own thrust vectoring).
-- Only "commi" units can be calculated in the head... To calculate in SAE units US Navy ask for ENIAC computer, because, you know figuring out anything in SAE system by means of "ruler" type calculators got old pretty quick!
Meanwhile the guy was like in charge for the F4 Phantom development, i doubt everything in technology and even theory has remained 100% the same since then :)
@@CWLemoine this guy looks like he's 80 (if not older) but yeah even so the F22 was in development since the 80's i think? Regardless we didn't hear anything important from him on the SU-57, seems he hasn't looked into it at all.
@@CWLemoine not the one who did a video on the SU57, right? Anyways I'm not a flying boy or an aircraft mechanic/developer (my tour has been with the MLRS and Leopard 2s with K4 in Kosovo) but i would had liked to learn something new by watching this video, that's all.
Great video. As a complete military history nerd, this was my favorite aircraft ever built. Purely because of the thrust vectoring. Really great idea. Especially for a stealth aircraft, wish we kept building up the YF 23!!
@@phill5917you can guesstimate, it's not as stealthy as a J-20 or f35, probably on par with LO aircraft like the EF2000 from front aspect, it's unknown how Russia is trying to reduce RCS in combat environments
The important point is: a F-18 WITHOUT weapons, pylons, whatsoever, they meant a absolutely sucked clean F-18, while the SU-57 has the same RCS with a full weapon load... bc of the internal bays... and i believe even this is still BS...
You guys are so filled with pride and you think the f22 and the f35 is perfect, well you will be shocked to find out that those airplanes will not perform as expected trust me and go mark my words down
If you look closely the newer Russian "Super" Jets have engines that are set slightly off center and angled incrementally out as opposed with The F22,F15,FA 18 etc..... and their straight engine and air frame alignment. I wonder if this puts extra load on the crafts backs bones and ad's too their exceptionally hard and constant maint.
That’s not true the why are not out in more numbers is because they are producing a new engine. The engine that is the su-57 is the one from the previous jet so they are changing it.
I’m sure it’s a formidable machine… However shout out to American Engineers as it seems like other countries copy the sh*t out of our designs… J20 looks like a bootleg F35/22 and the Felon looks like the YF-23…
The reports coming out on this thing are so contradictory. Depending on who you ask it's supposed to compete with the F-22 then other reports say Russia wants it to be a work horse.
All interner agree, that the felon ia not as stealthy as an F22. But im very curios, how the made the felon be a ton ligther that the Raptor, being at least 10% bigger
@@tirsofelipeduranmendoza5432 "how the made the felon be a ton ligther that the Raptor, being at least 10% bigger" Radar absorbent material and coatings on the F-22A - which explains also the difference in RADAR Cross Section - as well as why the production run was stopped 100 planes, short as respective maintenance is costly...
@@tirsofelipeduranmendoza5432 "Carbon fiber composits are no havier." You mean applying them will make the Su-57 lighter than it is... A hint for slow minds, no RAM have been applied yet as the development is not in that phase and it doesn't need them for the current tests.
Metric units are not "commie units". Every decent democracy on earth uses metric units, and even US law has US customary units defined by the metric system. By law a foot is defined as being as long as 304.8 mm.
@@CWLemoine well... i think its more bc they are afraid to change it, bc it could cause miscalculations and misunderstandings, rather than it being a "worse" system...
My guess - maybe worse stealth than the Chinese J-20 but with better engines, weapons and avionics. Nothing revolutionary, just another evolution of the Flanker. Capable but not scary.
The 0.1m2 RCS is based on using the IZD 30 engines, and not the AL-41 engines that are in most existing Su-57s. The same goes for supercruise. The Saturn IZD 30 engines have a ceramic front fan section, and don't reflect back radar signals like the AL-41 fans. This wouldn't have been as big a problem if the Felon had serpentine intake ducts, like the Lockheed jets. The F-23 had even better stealth than the F-22, and was much more advanced than the Su-57. The Indian Air Force was so disappointed with the Su-57 prototypes, that they pulled out of the program. The aircraft didn't meet the design goals, and was way more expensive and less capable that what the Indians wanted.
He managed the Advanced Tactical Fighter program - engineering studies aside, he did that with common sense. It'd be up for the channel to come up with a detailed analysis and comparison, instead of an interview 'blooper'.
Lol what no they didn't. The ATF program started in 1981 and the first YF-23 was completed in 1990, the USSR dissolved at the end of 1991. No chance in hell Sukhoi and any DoD partner would have collaborated on anything at the time
There are so much media out on the internet about the Su-57 and they literally picked the worst website to show a picture of the Su-57.
Easy way to convert Feet to Meters in your head. Triple the feet, then add 10%. 8 meters x 3 = 24 + 10% = ~26.4 feet.
THANKS!
Su 57 has 3D thrust vectoring nozzle which is different from rectangular nozzles of the F 22
Just as their other jets... but supermanueverability isn't just what the Raptor has to offer
@@nabilbudiman271 yeah obv Raptor is the king of air superiority it has the lowest RCS supercruise at mach 1.8 speed of mach 2.25 its the best
Thrust vectoring is more important for super high altitude maneuverability when air is thin, as opposed to maneuvering tightly in the mostly non existentant dogfight.
Or so I hear, I ain’t a pilot or aeronautical engineer.
2D, slanted in V like on Su-30 and 35
@capella95 It loses stealth capability from the complete rotation.
The leading edge by the wing root is also above the engine inlet. So yes, it will affect wing loading as it changes angles, but it will also alter the engine inlet. I believe it changes based on air speed more than stick angle. It also appears the entire leading edge of the wing has a small movable element. This element could be interesting if used correctly to create less load on one wing while keeping the other with more left for maneuverability. Must have been how they made Rooster's jaw drop in the documentary.
y̶e̶a̶h̶,̶ ̶v̶a̶r̶i̶a̶b̶l̶e̶ ̶g̶e̶o̶m̶e̶t̶r̶y̶ ̶i̶n̶t̶a̶k̶e̶s̶ ̶l̶i̶k̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶f̶1̶5̶.̶ actually looking at a photo of the underneath of the jet it looks like the air travelling under the wing root control surface doesn't flow into the inlet, the inlet is separated from the body (very bad for stealth). they must act kind of like canards then just attached to the main wing.
I'm pretty sure that the leading edge control surface is basically a slat like the f16 has, it's used in the same regard as flaps to make the wing have more lift. fun fact is that the leading-edge slat actually houses a search radar. the SU57 has 5 radars, one main one in the nose, two looking sideways out from the side of the cockpit and two in the wings, they also planned to put another in the tail but it wasn't implemented in the final plan.
@@_cyantist leading edge slat is nothing new. Some German WW2 aircraft had them.
Wing Loading in the aeronautical engineering sense is defined as weight divided by wing area. (W/S).
These are not considered leading edge slats in the strict sense of the term. Slats typically extend and open up slots. Yes, the BF-109 had automatically deployed leading edge slats. The Komet had fixed slots.
What we see here is simply known as a leading edge flap. Because it actuates exactly like a plain flap. It does not translate forward not open a slot, it simply bend downward. This significant reduces The leading edge suction peak of thin-airfoils at high angle of attack. This increases the "area under the curve" of velocity distribution over the suction surface (upper wing surface). Improving lift. This method functions at all airspeeds, but is especially effective at transonic velocities where any maneuvering load will cause the leading edge airflow to exceed mach, creating excessive drag and substantial loss in maximum lift in the M0.7~M1.05 regime. The F-16 improved in this area specifically to counter the Mig-21 based on experience from Vietnam. Russia followed suit.
The problem with leading edge flaps, slots, and slats, is they increase radar returns especially when deployed. While they are used on the F-22, and now SU-57 its optimized for air superiority as a primary objective with stealth as a high but not primary priority. The F-22 is probably going to utilize a computer algorithm to optimize its stealth signature based on all detected threats and their bearing, and this almost certainly includes optimal deflection of the LE flaps.
The SU-57 design choice to have leading edge flaps on the engine nacelles/extensions doesn't make much sense. Yes it will improve lift slightly, but that area is very low aspect ratio so it wont be that effective. It also need a large leading edge suction peak in that area to generate the strong vortex flow over the wing in that juncture. So, I don't know why they opted for this design feature, but I suspect its because that leading edge sweep over that portion was reduced to allow better stealth signature. And by having leas sweep, it generates a weaker vortex, and/or it "hangs on" at very high angle of attack and causes an aft-pitching moment that reduces stability and they wanted to reduce that negative effect at extreme angle of attack, while improving lift in that area at low angles of attack, which led them to the complexity and reduced stealth of the current design.
I beleive sukhoi were unhappy with the turbulence directly behind the canards of SU33 and other similar canard-fitted airframes, the cause apparently being the gap between canard and wing. Their solution was to incorporate both in the SU57, smoothing out the airflow
@@dunneemofozilla5718 yeah thats a really good point and it seems like it would help stealth too. I’m surprised the ‘movable leading edge extension’ idea isn’t used more as it seems a lot more efficient than canards
I believe the entire rudder moves for yaw so that’s why they are small. I could be mistaken but I’m pretty sure
Yes the rudders are all moving. As an aerodynamic concept I think it’s very potent. It appears optimised for high super cruise. I guess the stealth is the area not completely clear…
Would be great to see a similar analysis on the J-10, J-20, J-31/J-35 and JH-7!
2:34 "It's kinda like the Tu-50 and the B-29. If you put enough pictures they can copy it." I think you mean the Tu-4 which was a copy of the B-29. Also the Soviets had more than pictures. 4 B-29s were damaged during raids on Japan and landed in Vladivostok where they were interned. Another 1 crashed in the USSR. They were able to reverse-engineer the Tu-4 from those planes.
They weren't merely reverse engineered. Stalin directed they be *clone correct* copies. They even copied the anticorrosion paint colors on the interior. Tupolev realized he couldn't duplicate the American landing gear and make it work with Soviet components and literally feared going to Stalin to get permission to change the landing gear wheel layout to accommodate the *superior* (and it really was superior to the one on USAAF B-29s) landing gear.
@@geodkyt looks like those 4 american planes had soviet engines and turrets. Or someone was really brave... Or you didn't have to be brave to make reasonable changes
When Stalin said EXACT clones, they took it so literally they cast the Boeing script logo in the rudder pedals of their Tu-4. Another difference was in the skin. They couldn't duplicate the exact alloy nor as thin as the Boeing aluminum. The Tu-4 ended up being a little bit heavier and shorter range in the end.
Another Russian curiosity in their espionage and copying: some group of Russians were allowed to tour an engine factory long time ago. Don't recall who it was. They gave these dignitaries special shoes for the tour and special instructions. The shoe soles were made of gummy, soft unvulcanized rubber and to try to step in metal shavings in the machining areas to imbed the chips in the shoe soles so they could analyze our metallurgy. Industrial espionage! For a long time Russian jet engine development lagged behind western designs so this was very valuable information.
The USA got an Mig-25 and pretty much squeezed everything it could from it. They also got numerous engineers from the luftwaffe after WW2 to help them with jet propulsion development. The british all but stole VTOL from Yakovlef and created the Harrier alongside the USA. This happens, its not something new.
@dilet1114 yeah my bad, even typed hornet instead of harrier :)
I love when Mover says Tomcats™️ when he says Tomcats. 😂
Always great to see Rick and him doing good. We need more
“We need units in feet”
Oh heck no. Nothing beats the glory of the metric system
Having a second look at the wing root of the SU-57 it looks like something similar to the F-15 where the engine cells can actually pivot downwards or upwards.
But those parts have different functions
The su-57 has levcons which control the strength of vorteces above the wings. The F-15 has a variable inlet lip which controls the amount of air that goes into the engine (I believe)
@@onyxfinger7431you’re correct, the 15 uses a “ramp” system to divert and slow down inlet air for various reasons. One main reason being to slow down air when supersonic.
Wrong, these LERX are not part of the inlet and cannot produce the effects of the F-15 inlet. Research more
@@onyxfinger7431that’s correct
Su-57 is a misunderstood air frame. Partially due to all the PR it got from both Russian and Foreign press.
When it came down to actual design specifications I am very confident that Russian Air Force and Sukhoi bureau had to make some compromises on Want vs. Can design/build/maintain.
To me the real value of Su-57 is in pushing the research and development beyond USSR designs like Su-27/30/35. Effectively it's a flying prototype/testbed that keeps the national industry moving. Lot of the technology/experience gained on program was applied to Su-35. I personally think it's still work in progress in terms avionics/engine and weapon systems. Hence the limited adoption. And that's smart - why burn money on 70% aircraft when you have reliable and well understood Su-30/35 for better price?
The close-up of rivets made some noise back in the day BUT there were talks of new RAM coating + most existing aircraft are hand build test prototypes. Last year KNAAZ plant were Sukhoi 30/35/57 are built made announcement about beginning of dedicated Su-57 assembly line construction.
There were also screenshot of new engine with flat or new engines with square nozzles on testbed from Saturn design bureau surfacing on Russian message board this year.
Bottom line is - real capability of Su-57 is unknown. It's definitely not as good as Russian propaganda makes it look, but also probably not as bad as Western arrogance suggests.
F-35 concurrency wastes a lot of money. Russia doesn't have much money to waste, so slow ramp-up of production is probably better.
I’m sure you’re right about most of this. I’ll add though that Russian airframes are never vetted like American designs ->as a result they’ll never be as refined, or in other words they’ll never be as good as they can be. American designs also stretch much further than the airframe: the avionics, the missiles, the engines, the radar, the electronics package, the electronic warfare suite, sensors, and all the support systems including AWACS aircraft, satellites, communications, etc are always more advanced than the Russian stuff. So even if this aircraft were as good as an F-22, its support systems simply don’t have the same budget behind them and as a result will never meet the US standards of air combat.
Well, it's almost certainly closer to the evaluation of ''Western arrogance'' than it is to the Russian propaganda.
Quick armchair warriors, to the comment section!
Certainly, the Su-57 is a capable aircraft. But like anything Russian, it's not as capable as Russia would have you believe. Still, at least in my eye, it is one of the prettiest fighters out there.
one big difference is that russian aircraft are actually flying in a real combat zone with real threats both in the air and on the ground not just bombing insurgents with old ak's and zero anti air capabilities like in afghanistan, iraq, yemen, libya etc.
It's always cool to get perspectives of the old school pros. Sometimes they don't say much, but what they do say, is chocked with value.
Love the pixel camo on it though.
So do radars, since it's clear evidence that these aircraft don't have RAM coatings
@@yomama629 the prototypes dont have it the productions one do
@@Editzify I have yet to see any pictures of a Su-57 with the fully grey paint indicative of RAM coatings. Seeing how far behind the Russians are to the West in materials science I highly doubt they are able to develop effective RAM
@@yomama629 you realise ram coating isnt grey paint right
Flankers got the wanker! 😂
Su-57 has some interesting things going on with its sensors. It's the first fighter jet ever to be equipped with Directional Infrared Counter Measures (DIRCM) (only helicopters had them before). 101KS-U: Ultraviolet missile approach warning system. Two extra x-band AESA radars on its cheek for increased angular coverage. L-band AESA on wings. Things like this never happened with any fighter before. The 101KS "Atoll" electro-optical system consisted of the 101KS-V infrared search and track (IRST), 101KS-O directional infrared counter measures (DIRCM), 101KS-U ultraviolet missile approach warning sensors (MAWS), 101KS-P thermal imager for low altitude flight and landing, and 101KS-N navigation and targeting pod and So On.
The thing is, the Russians always take a very different approach in their design. May seem 'bad' according to western standards and ideology. Millenium 7* history tech Channel have some in-depth analysis about its technology. He concluded that Su-57 would probably be the least 'Surprised' fighter against western 5th Gens.
Interesting as, multiple radars is interesting. Different tactics.
Data fushion
Su-57's radar is about on par with an F-15's, it stands absolutely no chance at defeating VLO aircraft like F-22 or F-35 which have far more powerful radars. And btw F-35 has DAS, which is far more capable at detecting incoming threats than anything on a Russian fighter. Russian approach to design is "it looks cool at air shows", because they are too far behind the West in every technology that matters
@@yomama629 f35 is absolutely insane
@@oldfashionedwrx3574An F-35 picked up a Falcon-9 launch from >800 miles away.
@@yomama629 "Su-57's radar is about on par with an F-15's, it stands absolutely no chance at defeating VLO aircraft like F-22 or F-35 which have far more powerful radars"
Proove it
" And btw F-35 has DAS, which is far more capable at detecting incoming threats than anything on a Russian fighter."
DAS is weak compared to 101KS-O which is not only a laser dazzler, but also a proper IRST constantly spinning 360 degrees scanning for threats in IR band. And don't forget about those distributed UV sensors
Threat brief- no threat! Dismissed
The F-22 is being retired, while the rest of the world is still trying to catch up to it.
retired bc of cost, not bc of age... remind yourself they are still buying new F-15's...
If i was caught in a big, attritional war i wouldnt bother making advanced jets that'd be on the back burner for now
The problem is that less advanced jets will get attrited away without acomplishing much.
It's about capabilities, look at f15s just dominating older Soviet aircraft.
You're better off having the right capability with the right numbers.
It's a balancing act
1 jet or 100,000 drones? Easy.
I mean ironically the situation in Ukraine is like THE situation that stealth aircraft are meant to prevent or stop.
The fact we don’t see SU-57s flying deep strike missions, conducting SEAD, or doing anything 5th gens are meant to do in a war like this, I think tells us a lot about how confident the Russian military is with the SU-57.
@@jonathanpfeffer3716 particularly during the collapse and the "anarchy" of 1990s Russia had to prioritise with what she had available... that's why rocketry progra.s went ahead, as did submarines, in effect bolstering the nuclear deterrents on la d and sea (like the USA, Russia was phasing out gravity dropped nuclear bombs as obsolete thanks to MIRVs on land, sea) this was sensible and the legacy is a military still in a state of change but with state of the art missiles which were prioritised over, what has proven for those who attempt it, ludicrously expensive 5th gen fighter bombers which might be rendered obsolete si.ply through cost by continuous development of anti-aircraft missile systems, drone swarms and the like. Patriot Pac3 launching 2x$4 million interceptors against everything it registers as a threat? Yikes
"Whatever" is the best summary of the Su-57 I've ever heard.
The S-70 Okhotnik UCAV, in contrast, has excellent stealth and a very low IR emission. The Su-57, on the other hand, isn't very stealthy ( 0.05 RCS). As a result, the two vehicles will cooperate, with the drone serving as a "spotter" to illuminate targets for the Su-57 to "snipe" at. It poses a threat because it is armed with long-range missiles like the R-37M and the R-77 ramjet variant. Note: Please be aware that the drone will be equipped with a maximum of 16 mini R-77s in interceptor mode, similar to the Peregrine and CUDA missiles. It will fly at an altitude of 22 to 25 km when in AI-piloted interdiction mode.
SU-57 has multi directional thrust vector. unlike F22 which vectors thrust up or down. Is there a significant difference in performance? who knows?
Doesn't matter, most air combat are BVR anyway.
The Raptor has such ginormous rudders that I find it hard to believe it needs extra yaw control. Seriously, they’re literally the size of an F16’s entire wing.
@@jonathanpfeffer3716the entirety of the stabilizers on the su57 is a control surface, as opposed to a section of it like on the f22.
@@Apollo-tj1vm ...said someone in USN before Vietnam and removed cannon from F-4 specs. And got surprised. 😀
@@JanNovak-pg8oeI was under the impression that the USN never installed gunpods, and their kills during Vietnam were done via missile, and in fact most of Vietnam's A2A kills were done by missiles even after the USAF installed gunpods on their F4s?
5:54 "whatever" pretty much sums it up.
It is like that really expensive gun you have in your gun safe. It's a called a gun safe queen. They are so proud of them they would not use it against a real foe.
Commie units is the most aggressive diss at the metric system I've heard XD
Especially when it has nothing to do with commies.
Exposed rivets on the canopy. Probably not as stealthy as they want you to believe.
This is there first attempt at a stealth aircraft so thats impressive on its own so im more interested on what its successor will look like
Successor*
@@WannabecopAdamHolen thanks
I really think people need to talk in a more sophisticated manor, when dealing with the SU57's RCS. Here's a few points that everybody seems to just brush over.
1. The first stage engines (AL41). HUGE. Clearly mucking up it's stealth profile. Not in any way shape or form designed with stealth in mind. The AL51 second stage engines are!
2. Air intakes. The block 2 will reportedly be fitted with intake grilles. People scoff at this as a stealth solution. You know what ELSE had intake grilles... The F117...
3. The weapons bays hadn't been perfected, until recently! Not an easy fix.
4. No SU57 flying, has ever had R.A.M applied. Apparently, it's just too expensive to keep applying, for what little benefit it should afford them, while they haven't fixed the issues above.
BUT, that said, the R.A.M is supposed to offer -45db of reduction! Which is pretty decent!
All told, this is how they get to 0.008. And that is a mean average. Not just best angles, the way America reports.
Left out the lack of a S Duct and a photo taken from the front showed it had semi recessed fan blades like the Super Hornet because you can literally see the fan blades front directly head on.
The Su-57 is an interesting bit to get into. While the avionics are no doubt capable; especially by Russian standards, the stealth is guaranteed to be pretty lacking compared to other 5th gen fighters. Granted, it's stealthy for a plane of its size, but that's not saying much when your frontal RCS is somewhat similar to an F/A-18E even if your ECM is doing some extra lifting. That's just what exposed turbines and a less advanced stealth coating get you. Kinetically, the plane is certainly going to be quick, and certainly would be capable of matching most aircraft operating nowadays for speed, with some extra supercruise to boot. It certainly would give anything it merged with a heart attack, but dogfight performance is largely irrelevant in a modern setting.
Bottom line is that it would be better to call the Su-57 a reduced-observability heavy 4.5th generation fighter that sports better systems and survivability than Russia's existing air fleet. But in no way would it stack up well against an F-35 or an F-22 due to the disparity in RCS. And this isn't even accounting for the increased maintenance usually required for Russian engines, which on average need to get sent back to the factory for overhaul twice as often as engines found on western contemporaries.
Sorry if I'm a bit late but I personally think this is one of the biggest misconceptions of the Su-57. The 0.1m^2 figure shown in the patent isn't the frontal RCS but an AVERAGE RCS meaning that they take the RCS of all angles and create an average value from them. It's also physically impossible for the Su-57 to have the same frontal RCS as the F-18 as the F-18 lacks a ton of geometric stealth features. The majority of the radar-reducing features for the F-18 are RAM coating and radar blockers something that the Su-57 also has. In regards to exposed rivets, they're mostly present on the prototype T-50 but serial production models are much cleaner even by just looking at them there's a significant difference.
TLDR: The patent was misunderstood by many as the Americans use frontal RCS as the RCS figure for most of their aircraft while the Russians use average RCS (at least for the Su-57). Lots of the stealth-reducing features that were missing from the prototype are now present on the serial models (however, they are still missing some things like complete S-ducts and serrated engine flaps and blades).
Не пали контору!@@artyommakarov403
From memory the program ran into difficulty in the early days , was meant to have to have polymorphic surfaces , I don’t think it has not sure , there is a documentary on the net but it’s in Russian with subtitles
*Love this Video* I personally think that the SU 57 is the most beautiful aircraft ever made, you know where they got inspired from.
The Su-57 has the same single-axis (sometimes called "2D") thrust vectoring engines that the Su-30/35 have. The axes, however, are arranged in a V orientation rather than straight up and down, which trades off some of the vectoring force for the ability to vector somewhat in yaw. This is not the same as the multi-axis (or "3D") thrust vectoring that has been experimented with in the west. The Russian system would seem to enable some pretty spectacular maneuverability for airshows, but not so much for precise control of the nose that might be useful for combat in certain situations.
In contrast, the F-22 has pitch-only vectoring and uses its aerodynamic control surfaces for yawing and velocity vector rolling at high alpha. This may or may not enable it to appear as agile at airshows, but might well give it better nose control.
There is a lot that we still don't know about it. Even when we look at the videos, that they've put out of it, we don't know if they're of production aircraft or prototypes.
Regarding stealth, the Su-57 has standard-looking nozzles and IRST "balls" that don't seem to be stealthy at all. The engineers wouldn't do this if the Su-57 were VLO (very low observable) stealth like the F-22 and F-35. The rivets might not matter as much as it appears, but are an indication that not nearly as much care was taken in its RCS reduction measures.
Additionally, the Su-57's canopy has a seam at the front that doesn't appear to be stealthy at all. There is a reason that the F-22 and F-35 have continuous one-piece canopies (the F-35's bow is on the inside as reinforcement, not a seam, of course). Even the F-16's canopy seems stealthier than the Su-57's at the front.
The bottom line is that the Su-57 does not appear to be a true VLO stealth fighter or even close to that. With its form and internal weapon bays, it's probably the stealthiest fighter besides the F-22 or F-35, but I bet that it isn't remotely a match for them in this respect, and doesn't even try to be.
Su57 looks like an F22 someone left out in the sun for too long.
The super cruise claims are based on the imaginary engine it is yet to receive. Instead, it's fitted with the same engine used by Su-35 with added FADEC.
As military aviation expert and The Merge newsletter editor, Pako Benitez, has stated, the Felon airframe is very 6th gen, but with 4th gen intakes and engines.
If the Russians figure out those two things, they'll have something legit.
Doesn't anyone find it strange that the only other predominantly white, predominantly Christian country besides the USA is labeled a primary enemy of the US? Jamie Raskin even said the quiet part out loud one time when he mentioned Russia being targeted for these exact reasons.
Also, isn't it a little weird that the US is still conducting joint operations/missions/research with the Russians as it concerns space exploration, even though we are allegedly at war with them?
Yeah make fun all u want but usaf has no balls to send any stealth birds to Ukraine
Eats F35s for breakfast
I would love to see the 11 operational SU-57s take on 965 operational F-35s 😂
In a dogfight maybe but not in BVR
Threat brief was way too brief
My fathers brother was a polish MiG 29 pilot and he expressed his love for the Sukhoi 57 also concerning that they want to build more… I hope they stop at 50 units I heard they already having microchip building problems…. That should delay them!!!!!!!!!!!
the su-57 now has a flat nozel, with thrust vectoring and a much more powerful engine.
Seems to me the turkey feathers would be quite visible to a radar return from a trailing adversary.
Questions: can an AWACS see a missile once it's fired at a friendly jet? And, why aren't missiles made to be stealthy?
It seems to me that the true threat is a TWS shot in BVR.
Stealth missiles sound kinda cool
The U.S. has stealthy missiles. They are called the JASSM and LRASSM. Used for taking out ships and stationary land targets.
They have the (public data) radar cross section of a large bumblebee. And an absorbent RAM coating, as well as the ability to filter it's targets and deconflict with other missiles. It can also recalculate it's path if it's target has been destroyed. It also will be smart enough to scan all available targets with it's radar, and designate a target other than the one it was launched at, as priority. Meaning, if we launch it at an S-300 sam site, and the missile scans the area in flight, and sees that there's an S-400 that we didn't see, it'll go "Ah, I'm gonna hit that instead since it's more valuable" and change course.
In reality they're probably even harder to see than that.
Maybe, but depending on the missile it may be too small for the radar to detect it.
Also, missiles aren’t usually stealthy because they don’t need to be. Planes are stealthy because things track them and try to fire weapons at them. Nobody is doing that to air to air missiles yet. Although there is one exception, which is a special variant of the AIM-9X meant to be carried by the F35. Since it has to be carried externally, it was modified to be stealthier as to not increase the F35s RCS as much when carrying it.
I'm not a Russian troll or fanboy, but you guys seem to jump to the su 57 being a yf-23 derivative, which may be correct, but they seem significantly different (how would I know anyways :) ) However, Rick Abell didn't seem to know that the su 57 had thrust vectoring. He must not be paying much attention lately, not that it matters, just weird to do an analysis and not know anything about the aircraft. "May be canards, i don't know", he doesn't seem interested in getting into details haha. Anyway, not a big deal, bring on lots of engineers to talk about the aircraft, I love it!
the picture of the su-57 without flush screws was of one of the prototypes a decade ago, also the screws weren't sticking up they were sunk in a few mm so they could be filled. this attitude is a problem with americans. We would have got smoked in war in europe in the 1980s in large part because the MIG-31 that guys like him said sucked was a much better BVR fighter than the f-15. it's radar was a generation ahead, much more powerful, and the r-33 they had was a generation ahead of the aim-7 we would have been crushed unless they could the carriers there in time because the f-14 was the only match for the mig-31 and it was like that with our most important equipment. we thought were amazingly superior. the s-300 ad system is still operating efficetively in ukraine now. it's the same exact system with the same missile they had in huge numbers in 1985. the PAC patriot wouldn't become that good for another 15 years until 1999 almost. hubris will get us all destroyed.
TRIPLE THE DEFENSE BUDGET
Thanks bro you said it all
Well said.
It is an elitist stance that had lead to a Special Operations Command approach to solve everything.
The US isn't capable to fight large scale wars, anymore - the reduced procurement of the F-22A and 'lightweight' Joint Strike Fighter F-35A, no service can afford or keep mission capable with their budgets is exactly a reflection of that structural problem.
To be fair, the channel is critical of this trajectory, here it's just more of a blooper than a serious conversation...
To quote general turgidson " the russki talks big, but lacks in technical knowhow" amazing how things dont change😂
By now, they should have integrated cassette tape players.
Все покажет реальный бой и подготовка пилотов,а все остальное это гадание на кофейной гуще)
But apparently, there are not too many of those.
The RAM (radar absorbing material) coatings on US LO designs (aircraft and missiles) are the most essential part beyond basic shapes and angles. Doubtful Russians have mastered the RAM coatings and the regular maintenance to the degree US LO aircraft maintainers have. The difference in proper in RAM coating maintenance is at least an order of magnitude RCS reduction, that is 0.01 m^2 versus 0.1 m^2 with poor RAM.
Best fighter plane in the world
The Gripen has a lower RCS than the SU-57 because it never got the redesign and new engines.
The point about assembly quality and service life is relevant, effecting the actual combat value.
The Soviet had preferred to throw away what would stop working and produce instead more, with mineral resources and labor being abundant...
If the MiG-25PD - or even the MiG-29A were the last aircraft, however Rick had read up upon in reports then his impressions may be dated.
The Russian Su-30SM - basically adopting the export standard - isn't described as prone to stall or as maintenance intensive as the MiG-21 or MiG-23 at Area-51...
Nobody cares much either about low observability or flight performance of the F-35A - the decisive feature is it's sensor-fusion and a broadband data-link, capable to integrate sensors and weapons in a dispersed 'formation' and among future mass deployed Collaborative Combat Aircraft.
The same goes for the Su-57 and the respective Su-70 development...
Listening to you, I guess we are still stuck in inches and feet. Topical refusing inreligent metric system witch is used in the whole world except UK and Us
One thing I’ve noticed that the F-119 engines has quite a high military thrust, 26000lbf of thrust smthing, almost as powerful as the engines on the su30 on full ab. I think that is why the F-22 can go supercruise at mach 1.8+.
supercruise at 1.8? that sounds alot, you sure thats not the top speed?
@@Scoobydcs you infidel, where's your belief in wikipedia numbers?
@@Scoobydcs top speed is mach 2.2+
@@Scoobydcstop supercruise speed, yes.
@@jonathanpfeffer3716the parameters are actually around 1.5
There are some rumors that after edges rcs of raptor wouldnt be calculated
So a "threat brief" where none of you have read up about the plane at all. Well if this video was anything it was definitely painfully American.
Boiler plate riveting techniques are not going to be good for RCS. But then looking at the back end none of that is going to be stealthy, in RF or IR.
One thing nobody has talked about with the Su-57 is it's radar. Can that be unpacked a little bit? Because I personally can't see a Raptor or F-35 sneaking up on this thing but I am ready to be proved wrong. From the little bit I have read, it looks like its right up there with the Tomcat and the Eagle as far as BVR.
There are 5 primary factors in any AESA / PESA radar. Diameter, TR modules, power input, physical module design, and software.
Across the board, the Byelka doesn't compare favorably with the AN/APG-81 on the F-35 and especially compared to the AN/APG-77v1 on the Raptor. It has 8% fewer TR modules than the F-35 and 20% fewer than the Raptor. It's diameter is about the same as the AN/APG-81, and about 30% lower than the Raptor's.
It's power output is the same as the AN/APG-77 at 20kW, but slightly better than the AN/APG-81s 18kW, although power output is actually not as important as the other factors since range is determined by the fourth root of the power. Doubling the power would result in just 20% greater range.
The Raptor and lightning use the more efficient and effective notch antenna design versus the Su-57s slotted antenna array.
And to top it off, this is the first AESA radar Russia has built. The processing and software aren't as effective and aren't as developed as the AESA radars we have.
It's certainly the most capable radar on any Russian combat jet, but when up against the radars equipping America's F-35s and especially the F-22, it is far behind. It's probably comparable to the drop in upgraded radars for 4th gen jets like the AN/APG-84 for some F-16s or AN/APG-79 for the Super Hornets. Maybe slightly better than those
@@ImBigFloppa Woah. Didn't expect that much info. Good on you, friend! Thanks!
@@ImBigFloppabro you are lying the radar on the su 57 is far better than those on f16 and super hornet, the su 57 has a very decent radar and it can go toe to toe with the American 5th gen admit it, and stop deceiving yourself
FACTORY NUMBER AT BOING .
It has a small horizontal stab/elevator for the wing goes back so far that it's almost a delta wing and probably also uses elevons. That plus the thrust vectoring is probably adequate, although definitely not as good as a proper tail like the F-22 has (in addition to its own thrust vectoring).
They can’t afford to lose them to pilot defection...
Just making up ya story as ya go, and still stagnant stand still, well known high tailing it to safe space fly Zones.
Acrobatic (Russia/China) vs Battle machines (USA/France/UK/Germany). Oh, please.
-- Yeah FYI, Gonky, metrics are actually French, and not "Commi" units... but I know it sounds cooler if you say its "Commi" units, so carry on...
-- Only "commi" units can be calculated in the head... To calculate in SAE units US Navy ask for ENIAC computer, because, you know figuring out anything in SAE system by means of "ruler" type calculators got old pretty quick!
Oh, good old "Newtons" / British units, lol 😂
P.S. don't write me a letter - I know its all part of system "Si", pst still French...
Su-57 performance at airshow is so boring, it can't even do Knife Edge, unlike Su-35 or F-22 which are a lot more interesting and aerobatic.
C'est ce qu'on appelle "une blague"
it may suck compared to the F-22 and F-35 but I think its the sexiest bird in the sky... second to TOMCATS
It is a nice looking plane, I'll give it that.
Meanwhile the guy was like in charge for the F4 Phantom development, i doubt everything in technology and even theory has remained 100% the same since then :)
You mean the F-22? Stupid comment.
@@CWLemoine this guy looks like he's 80 (if not older) but yeah even so the F22 was in development since the 80's i think? Regardless we didn't hear anything important from him on the SU-57, seems he hasn't looked into it at all.
And what are your qualifications?
@@CWLemoine not the one who did a video on the SU57, right? Anyways I'm not a flying boy or an aircraft mechanic/developer (my tour has been with the MLRS and Leopard 2s with K4 in Kosovo) but i would had liked to learn something new by watching this video, that's all.
If you had paid attention, you would have. And for the second time he was not a mechanic.
Great video. As a complete military history nerd, this was my favorite aircraft ever built. Purely because of the thrust vectoring. Really great idea. Especially for a stealth aircraft, wish we kept building up the YF 23!!
My understanding is that the SU-57 has about the same RCS as an F/A-18...
Sukhoi would NEVER give away the Su-57's true RCS. Too many people who are biased keep believing that.
@@phill5917you can guesstimate, it's not as stealthy as a J-20 or f35, probably on par with LO aircraft like the EF2000 from front aspect, it's unknown how Russia is trying to reduce RCS in combat environments
The important point is: a F-18 WITHOUT weapons, pylons, whatsoever, they meant a absolutely sucked clean F-18, while the SU-57 has the same RCS with a full weapon load... bc of the internal bays... and i believe even this is still BS...
@@melnik_edits rcs with stores from front aspect is still reduced, the Felon is almost always seen with full weapon load/externals
Pretty incredible to think how much money Sukhoi keeps invests just to build su 57 prototypes…. WOW!
Independent RCS calculations have shown that it has a much higher RCS in most bands than the F-35, so not very good.
You guys are so filled with pride and you think the f22 and the f35 is perfect, well you will be shocked to find out that those airplanes will not perform as expected trust me and go mark my words down
If you look closely the newer Russian "Super" Jets have engines that are set slightly off center and angled incrementally out as opposed with The F22,F15,FA 18 etc..... and their straight engine and air frame alignment. I wonder if this puts extra load on the crafts backs bones and ad's too their exceptionally hard and constant maint.
meter is commy.. okey bub (Im from germany)
What do German aircraft use?
@@CWLemoine :D :P miles
That’s not true the why are not out in more numbers is because they are producing a new engine.
The engine that is the su-57 is the one from the previous jet so they are changing it.
man i cannot wait for the putin youth to get their hands on the Su-57
I’m sure it’s a formidable machine… However shout out to American Engineers as it seems like other countries copy the sh*t out of our designs… J20 looks like a bootleg F35/22 and the Felon looks like the YF-23…
peace in the middle east and bronx nyc
"Commie Units".....love it!
french units
You calling the rest of the world commie. Allies wont like that.
In aviation, only commies use metric.
@@BBCRF use google and figure it out for yourself.
@@BBCRF did you figure it out yet?
It does look like the yf 23 Black widow.
The reports coming out on this thing are so contradictory. Depending on who you ask it's supposed to compete with the F-22 then other reports say Russia wants it to be a work horse.
All interner agree, that the felon ia not as stealthy as an F22. But im very curios, how the made the felon be a ton ligther that the Raptor, being at least 10% bigger
@@tirsofelipeduranmendoza5432
"how the made the felon be a ton ligther that the Raptor, being at least 10% bigger"
Radar absorbent material and coatings on the F-22A - which explains also the difference in RADAR Cross Section - as well as why the production run was stopped 100 planes, short as respective maintenance is costly...
@@christophmahler Radar abaorbing materials are ment to be ligther not havier. Carbon fiber composits are no havier.
@@tirsofelipeduranmendoza5432
"Carbon fiber composits are no havier."
You mean applying them will make the Su-57 lighter than it is...
A hint for slow minds, no RAM have been applied yet as the development is not in that phase and it doesn't need them for the current tests.
The 4-15 Russia has will be negligent in combat
Metric units are not "commie units". Every decent democracy on earth uses metric units, and even US law has US customary units defined by the metric system. By law a foot is defined as being as long as 304.8 mm.
How many use metric in aviation?
@@CWLemoine well... i think its more bc they are afraid to change it, bc it could cause miscalculations and misunderstandings, rather than it being a "worse" system...
*The Russians might* as well call it PAK WIDOW just like YF 23 BLACK WIDOW, LOL.
most of all your allies if not all use "commies" units.
None of them in aviation, however.
'Commie units'? Great analysis.
Name a non commie country that flies in metric.
@@CWLemoine it was the dimensions that seemed to confuse the analyst.
This is my favorite joke now because how riled up people get. 😂
@@CWLemoine Cheers CW, not everyone gets my humor
@@CWLemoineNothing beats units of measurement that put men on the moon 🇺🇲
Flanker got the Wanker! Haha! Put that thing away.
Guys...metric....like the rest of the world. Take to long with the maths and ur dead.
My guess - maybe worse stealth than the Chinese J-20 but with better engines, weapons and avionics. Nothing revolutionary, just another evolution of the Flanker. Capable but not scary.
The 0.1m2 RCS is based on using the IZD 30 engines, and not the AL-41 engines that are in most existing Su-57s. The same goes for supercruise. The Saturn IZD 30 engines have a ceramic front fan section, and don't reflect back radar signals like the AL-41 fans. This wouldn't have been as big a problem if the Felon had serpentine intake ducts, like the Lockheed jets. The F-23 had even better stealth than the F-22, and was much more advanced than the Su-57.
The Indian Air Force was so disappointed with the Su-57 prototypes, that they pulled out of the program. The aircraft didn't meet the design goals, and was way more expensive and less capable that what the Indians wanted.
"They never do what they're supposed to," lol. I.E., they lie a lot. XD.
Ouch
Do the Russians build their jets with a hammer and sickle?
The guy is not an engineer- he had no clue in modern aeronautics engineering
He managed the Advanced Tactical Fighter program - engineering studies aside, he did that with common sense.
It'd be up for the channel to come up with a detailed analysis and comparison, instead of an interview 'blooper'.
Sukoi worked with us company designing yf 23
Whatever you do, don't look into who designers of F-35 worked with ;)
Lol what no they didn't. The ATF program started in 1981 and the first YF-23 was completed in 1990, the USSR dissolved at the end of 1991. No chance in hell Sukhoi and any DoD partner would have collaborated on anything at the time