Respecting Russian design philosophy. Decades ago a friend had bought two Lada cars. He invited me over to see him change the engines. Each car came with a simple tool kit you could dismantle the entire car with, plus rope and block and tackles. He pushed one car under a tree set up the ropes, disconnected the engine and pulled it out, on his own, no help needed from me. He then did the same with the second engine but dropped it into the first car. I think the process took about an hour. This car was designed to be fixable in the middle of nowhere or unstuck by winching it back onto a drivable surface. All you needed were some trees. This is design appropriate to the operating conditions. These simple cars weren’t the best but they sure were robust and easy to fix.
Don't know what they were supplying to the West (most likely quality control was thousand times better than for the internal "market") but the problem with Lada (and other Soviet/Russian cars) was that you spend "fixing" them much more time than driving them. They are also known to be getting eaten bu the rust in a record time. Awful cars. Much easier and cheaper is to drive some German car where you need to take out the whole engine out to replace light bulb than those garage queens.
@@alexx86hater older american cars suffered the same problems, every single lower middle class and even lower class person had to be a mechanic back then because of it. new materials and designs came out but repairability was abandoned. i have no doubt an easy to repair long lasting car could be made but nobody at the top wants it. there's a niche market for import from russia because of the repairability that can't be forcibly abandoned by the upper class because of the harshness of eastern russia landscape.
Lada is an old Fiat simplified and manufactured to lower standard. You are right that regualr divers were requiered to fix their cars in USSR, but that was simply due to central planning prohibiting spending more resourses on repair stations. In USSR one could not just open a garage and openly start repairing cars, that would take away from the war economy. As a result repairs were mostly DIY and goind to exteme lengths to get spare parts, often on a black market.
A manufacturer that spends less time on the engine running properly and more on the convenience of changing it when it inevitably breaks down. Pretty sure this anecdote did not come across the way you'd intended.
Thanks for this wonderful, comprehensive video. I'd be very interested in hearing more about Su-57 related developments in the past 2-3 years (including with the Okhotnik): the new engine, its testing, the flat nozzles etc.
WHat? this guy has never met a Russian aircraft he didnt love, never has a good thing to say about US aircraft, i dont think you understand what unbiased means.
He's biased for Russian technology over American or Chinese. And he takes TASS and RT at their word even when their claims are ridiculous, like when they say they have more than 7 SU57 lmao
@@ezorb1 I guess he is opposite from being biased for Russian aircraft, in fact most of hist video about anything related to Russian are full of suspicions, and call almost everything (a propaganda)
When it comes to aviation and such stuff, you are simply the best, no bias and propaganda, just level headed analysis and digging through tons of info, thanks as usual, your videos are as interesting as it can get, i grab some snacks a couple of drinks and enjoy the show, you are awesome.
Idk it’s bullshit. If Russia really was confident in the Su-57, they’d be risking it more in Ukraine and it would be dominating the skies. They’re so scared of potentially losing one and what that would do to foreign sales, they will not use it for anything other than firing standoff munitions from relative safety. Same with the T-14 Armata.
Actually, this is the BEST overview with a lot of interesting information about this new jet. Just cannot believe how many sources you read to combine together in just 38 minutes. Awesome!!!
1) VKS has policy to order only 2-engine manned aircrafts - and nothing stop them from unmanned ones. 2) Composite panels of Su-57 do have integrated radar absorbing layer - officials. 3) The Area Rule does implemented in Su-75. Take note, that when you're doing calculation for the rule, the volume of air ducts should be subtracted from the volume of the aircraft. So, the best illustration of this rule is B-58 Hustler. 4) DSI intake could be optimised for any target speed. You could say to engineers "do me a DSI design for the Mach 2.0" - and they'll made it for you. But if your target speed is, for example, Mach = 1.3, then the max speed limit is Mach ~ 1.8 - and the most powerfull engine in the world couldn't breake through the limit. Another disadvantage of DSI is its requirement of being covered with thick radar absorbing structures. 5) When it comes to Su-75's tale, check the Su-47. 6) One engine is a problem, and two engines are two problems. 7) "Izdelie 30" is completely new engine designed from the scratch. By the way, it seems that there would be a bit downsized version of AL-51F to replace the AL-31F's in all those Flankers. (The diameter of AL-51F and AL-41F1 is a bit bigger compared to AL-31F, so newer ones would not fit as is). 8) Dry thrust of AL-51F is still unknown - and I don't know credible estimation. Full afterburner's thrust is unknown either - but estimates are available.
I completely disagree with point 6. Two engines are always safer for the plane and pilot - there could be a malfunction, a hit, a birdstrike if you want. Single engine planes are done for in these cases, whille dual engines can still return safely to base. I've read a lot of cases during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan where Su-25s were returning with 1 engine blown/damaged by enemy fire.
Su75 sounds like a perfect teritorial defense and intercept aircraft, as long as it is stealthy to anti air munitions the ability to come roaring off the nearby step at mulitple altitudes unseen and hit incoming targets then disappear into the landscape flying low while the heavies line up and come in with the bigger ordinance sounds like a very useful capability; small, light, cheap and stealthy is a win for that.
According to sandboxx these planes have simmilar radar cross sections to a f18 super hornet without external mountings. If that is true it won't sneak up on anything on the modern battlefield.
@@baronvonlimbourgh1716 I'm more concerned with the state of Russian engines. Have they gotten that part sorted out? There's lots of talk of the next generation of engines, but they seem to have short lives and don't really live up to expectations.
9 месяцев назад+2
@@Calzaghe83 they finally produce SU-57 with the 5th gen engine, how will it operate is to be seen tho.
@baronvonlimbourgh1716 that's the su57 not the su75. It's not based on research it's based on russia stated radar cross section. Also that is compared to a modernized clean f18. Which is the most stealthy of the modernized 4th gen aircraft. So basically the su57 is a little stealthy with weapons and the f18 is a little stealthy without weapons.
It is looking quite impressive. On paper. There is nothing wrong with looking good on paper. I would hold my horses with the praise until that thing is operational though, for very obvious reasons.
Absolutely. Truth be told, I bought into the marketing and was deeply, deeply sceptical about Su-57. It exceeded my expectations. My experience with Russian managers tells me that if something is said to be delivered in 2-3 years, one might expect it in 4-6 years. But that's ok, because if something is said to be delivered in 8 years, it is never going to be delivered. So, when they claim short terms, it's generally a good sign. It means that at least they know what they are doing and are pretty confident about ability to get the job done (though, obviously they're going to be late by ~3 years).
@@klaasvakie without having the margin for making a costly mistake you’re not going to be on the leading edge of technology, and manufacturing. For the same reason that a failed experiment is just as important as a successful one.
@@klaasvakie Which comes out to around 28.5k per flight hour. Which is only marginally higher than the F-15 at 27k. What people tend to forget with those $1.5 trillion number, is that that includes all operating costs, maintenace, personel and the airframes for around 2500 airframes in 3 vastly different configurations over 60+ years. So every time the projected lifetime of the whole system gets extended, that number gets naturally bigger, due to having to cover even more years of operational costs. If we only look at actual procurement cost, the F-35A, which importantly is still getting continously cheaper, at $82 million per airframe is already cheaper than quite a few of its competitors like the Saab JAS 39E/F at $85 million, the Rafale at $115 million, the J-20 at $110 million, the F15-EX at $117 million, or even the SU-35 at $85 million. Or if you want to see a really expensive plane; the SU-57 at a currently projected eyewatering $200+, due to only 76 being projected to be manufactured. Current unit cost is around $420 million, due to only 32 having been manufacured so far.
Thank you for taking the time to do your own research and combining it with your expertise to make great analyses for us. I hope it will pay off for you:)
He is a fantastic RUclipsr in this regard. (Sadly, even RUclipsrs in easy to understand popular fields are too often too unskilled or lazy to do their own research and analysis. So many knock-off video channels on so many popular and popular science topics.)
UAE has done a massive Rafale order and the French have created a 3rd generation stealth system that is no more in need of what you know about stealth, they can make anything stealth. The system comes with Rafale F4 as well as the M51.3 SLBM Rafale's cost of use is half of the F-16, its engine allows to fly 12 hours a day and has already done 20,000 km missions into 28 hours with a single stopover : Bordeaux (France) - Corona, CA stopover - maritime strike drill on a fleet invading Tahiti - landing in Nouméa, New-Caledonia
Possibly because the lifetime cost of ownership is predictable and lower than the Russian equivalents which have a low upfront cost but significantly higher lifetime price tag. That was a major influence in India's replacement fighter decision and has been a key decider in many other procurements.
I like how every other country is struggling together to develop a plane that is basically the f-22 but 30 years later and yet they "aspire" to 6th gen
Basically they’re trying not to look as far behind as they really are. Hell the F-35 isn’t even totally complete and was only recently approved for full rate production, yet all these other countries bout a crap load of them to catch up
@@christopherchartier3017 that "not complete" f-35 is already participated in several battles in middle east and there are around 750 in service around the world. and wdym by "trying to not look as far behind"? far behind who? Russia? China? Iran?. vatniks ability to believe in any made up bullshit needs to be studied.
Thinking that su-57, is an f22 but 30 years later indicates on luck of competence and Superficial judgments that miss the essence of things. Just some food for thought: the Su-57 doesn’t have metallic electrical wiring, only fiber-optic cables.
@@christopherchartier3017LOL NATO countries yes because they have to! They are not allowed to buy planes from non NATO countries. Fyi the F-35 is a piece of 💩 plagued with problems as was the F22
I always enjoy your videos and find them very informative. But this may be your best video so far. Excellent work ! I particularly liked the use of inter-cards (the gray text pop-ups) to remind us what the acronyms mean. I paused and read the ones I needed, and the others did not delay my viewing. I think that concept is a keeper.
I see this as the succesor to the MiG-21, light, single engine, cheap, customizable, export oriented, quite capable. Designed to compete the F4? of our time the F 35. Algeria, Vietnam, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, India as feasibly customers.
They could but no in huge numbers 18~24 of them maybe. Venezuela could help Cuba with its oil production. Myanmar, Syria, Ethiopia could be added to the customers list.
Would also love analysis videos on other upcoming fighters as well. I learned quite a bit from this one. New designs have these weird straight angles on top where the canopy kind of seems like ends prematurely. I would love to know why almost all of new designs have this in common.
I know they try to design them so the pilot can see behind over his shoulder better, instead of just the wall. Not sure if that's what you're seeing, or if it's for radar signature, like the other guy said.
By far the best video on Su57.. eagerly waiting for your video on Tejas MK1a which IAF inked to buy in 83 + 97 numbers... also on Tejas MK2 which IAF agree to buy atleast 201... also if possible make video on Tejas crash & anything you could gather from crash video..
The approach you are suggesting with the engines and the flat nozzles is part of a long-standing Russian tradition of stepwise refinement in the vein of, "Get it flying first, fix it later." This is hardly surprising. The Su-75 is an interesting design, and you highlight it well.
@@Silver_Prussian I'm not so sure that's the reason they do it that way, though. Stepwise refinement is a practical methodology for developing systems over time and spreading out the total cost, while still maintaining what made the design useful and desirable in the first place. The many iterations of the MiG-21 are just one example. I"m not saying it can't have the effect you describe, just that it might not really be the primary motivation.
@@silvestrenet That's as may be, friend, but the Russians have a very long history of it. (I'm not a huge fan of the F-35, either, for what that's worth. For what it does, it's too bloody expensive - that has more to do with politics than technical excellence, though.)
I usually listen to RUclips with just one earphone so I can hear my wife. But when you drop a video I say “Honey, it’s my favourite RUclipsr so I’ll have both earphones in for the next 40 minutes.” This is a tremendous compliment to your excellent videos. You are in a group of one. ☝️ As an aside, doesn’t the geometry of the Checkmate remind you of the YF-23?
@@Millennium7HistoryTech Indeed, the most striking similarity is the intake. However they differ considerably in geometry and function. A similar argument could be made that it resembles a stealth version of the A-7 Corsair II retrofitted with a modified delta wing and twin tail surfaces.
Ottimo video come al solito. E' bello vedere qualcuno che parla in maniera più neutra possibile, senza schierarsi a favore di una nazione o di un'altra😎
Air intake wise it feel like this one would suffer in the same way like the F16 for FOD. Maybe not a bit thing in general but russia have historically had a rough surfaces.
And historically they produce planes that can deal with it. Regarding SU 75 - we shall see how it goes. So far the airplane is being developed, there are some speculations it is mostly intended for export - which may be true as Su-75 departs from traditional Russian (or Soviet) design philosophy (single engine instead of traditional 2 engine set up). Time will tell.
Hi M7! As always You did great job,excellent analysis. LTS ( from Russian Light tactical aircraft ) has project code T-75 ( T from treugolnik or triangle, meaning triangle wings). Su-75 is not official name of course but it is highly possible that real military designation will be Su-75 and that name 'Checkmate' is from one of the Sukhoi designers. Only prototype that we could see is in fact T-75KNS as static one and with the real cockpit and many systems that can actually work ( can be tested).T-75 is the project of the single-engine stealth lightweight multi-role 5th gen fighter made only for export .Big advantage is that T-75 shares many systems and parts with actual ( serial and operational) twin-engine 5th gen heavy stealth fighter Su-57. From the wings ,vertical stabilisers ,engine, complete avionics and weapons and so on .Of course, avionics and weapons will be in export (downgraded) domain.E.g. frontal radar will be N036E centimetric X-band AESA ,then OLS-50E or 101KS-VE as IRST with LR/LD and LLLTV ,also there will be N036LE as decimetric L-band AESA for long-range search and IFF in wingslats and for the ECM in the corners of the wingtips. Under the fuselage will be KOEPS-75, yes ,something similar to EOTS in F-35. Note: T-75 has the same fuselage weapon compartment as Su-57 and it can accommodate even two heavy long-range AAM R-97 ( of course in export version) on two UVKU-50/75U catapult launchers.Two side weapon compartments can accommodate two short or medium range AAM's.Short-range AAM is from R-74 family and medium-range is from R-77 family but without famous latice stabilisers Aerodynamics: it is intereseting that Sukhoi LTS is very similar to famous MiG prototype-demonstrator for the soviet 5th gen fighter called MFI 1.44.This is particularly evident when we look at the angled and widely spaced vertical stabilizers and the upper part of the centerplane, i.e. the fuselage, Su-75 is of course a single-engine fighter.Air intake has fixed geometry, DSI-type but allows reaching true air speed over 2M.Wings from the Su-57 allows to climb to the high alt. and maintain level flight on that high alt.Also they provide excellent maneuverability and agility in troposphere and tropopause during intense and sharp turning.All-movable stabilisers give very good controllability like in Su-57. Gasodynamics:Engine AL-51F will provide high SEP and dynamic thrust to given inflight weight ratio.If we compare the Su-75 and the F-35 in the domain of the gasodynamics, the results of the compared parameters would be very similar, however, the Su-75 is certainly at an advantage due to its wings from the Su-57, which means it will have better aerodynamics than its potential rival ( of course test flights must prove this). Construction materials: Aluminum-Lithium type 1441 Alloy as the main ( like in Su-57), special Steel and Titanium Alloys in air intake and engine nacelle as in engine itself. Composite materials and Al-Li Alloy on the skin . About that price, one comparison, export price of the 'Su-75' will be around 30 mil $, only producton cost( fly-away cost) of the export version of F-35 is about 90 mil $! All the best !
And as soon as the Russians can reach that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, they can actually build one. Until then, no. Beside that, they no longer have the technical expertise to design cutting edge fighters.
@@karmakazi101 RuA&SF have almost 20 operational Su-57 right now.Until the end od 2027 ,they will produce 76 in total. Enough for them .Su-57 will equip three fighter air regiments with two sqn each ( 12 fighters in one sqn ) and with additional sqn of heavy combat UAV S-70 Hunter-B. Both Su-57 and this UAV are used during the SMO.
@@dzcav3 What an answer. They have static prototype and several flying in production so far. Russians already have not one but two flying prototypes of the new 6th gen fighter yes,they are prototypes of Su-57M number 058 and 511 blue. They already have completely new so called 'plasma' 6th gen engine for them ( it is on static-ground tests for years now) and from 2018 they have new so called quantum radars ( radio-optical phased array) in tests. Sergey Bogdan chief test pilot of the Sukhoi already had several test flights in prototype of Su-57M where he did nothing at all, from take off ,flying even some excercise- combat sorties and then landing. He only monitored the work of the systems and sybsystems in Su-57M. Let us see what western ( NATO ) countries have in this domain ? They have almost nothing at all in this field. USAF have only paper 6h gen fighter called NGAD, western Europian countries do not have any 5th gen fighter at all ( if we do not count US made F-35 ).Programs like BAE Systems Tempest, FCAS and so on are only programmes and projects ( in paper of course). Now let us see what Brits stated for their Tempest: ''The Tempest will be a sixth-generation jet fighter incorporating several new technologies including 1. deep learning AI, 2 .ability to fly unmanned, 3.swarming drones,4. directed-energy weapons,5.virtual cockpit in helmet and 6.hypersonic weapons.'' Russian 5th gen Su-57 already have and can all of this ! 1. got so called intelectual support systems,2.even MiG-25 from 70's had one special automated combat -nav mode where he could fly with pilot doing nothing at all and only job for pilot was squeezing trigger for launching AAM during intercept mission and taking control of the plane when he was 50m above runway during landing phase. This kind of automated combad-nav mode had and they have now MiG-29 and 31 and all FFF ( Flanker Family Fighters). New Su-57 has new advanced automated combat-nav system,Su-57M already proved that there is no need for pilot at all. 3.Su-57 already have this capability with combat UAV Hunter-B and with capability to wear packages of drones. 4. Su-57 already possess combat lasers as directed energy weapon in 101KS-O modules above and underneath the fuselage for blinding not only IR homing heads of AAM but for blinding all optical systems on enemy fighter ( HMS,HMD,IRST,MAWS and so on) during close-in combat.5. Su-57 got it with completely new ZSh-10 helmet ( Sergey Bogdan used this helmet with HMD) during test flightes on Su-57M to monitor flights and work of many systems. 6.Serial/operational Su-57 has many hypersonic missiles,like R-87 ( Product 180) as first in the world hypersonic long-range cruise AAM and heavy very long-range R-97( Product 810).There is also new hypersonic anti-radioation missile Kh-58UShK-TP. First jump then say hop.....All best !
@@karmakazi101 Incorrect, RuA&SF already has exactly 19 operational Su-57. Two new fighters will be delivered soon , before the end of 2023. Yes, Su-57M is the prototype of 6th gen fighter.
@@aviator77migsukhoi34 Thanks for the run down but it seems Russian hype machine continues in this case by using the terms "quantum" for a radar that does not use the effect and "plasma" for an engine that clearly is not plasma based.
This was a very interesting video. I was tied up to watch it all at once, but my dog and the nice weather forced me to press the pause button, the whole walk in the snow with the dog I looked forward to finish watching this clip to the end. Once again, an outstandingly, excellent good analysis of the Su-75 from Millenium7*.
Thank you for the video. The real issue is that a tactical single engine aircraft has a rather restricted payload-over-distance capability. Except when it is designed as a pure fighter, which is highly unlikely since the age of the manned tactical fighter has passed.
Thank you for your comment, I agree with your take on this aircraft as the same thing was said about the F35 a really LARGE single engined aircraft but will probably be the last single engined bird in the US inventory as both NGADs are twin engined and these we are being lead to believe are the last of the manned aircraft and the end of the Hi-Lo mix. This Checkmate is a day late and a dollar short maybe?
I love the cost graph there that supports Augustine's 16th Law ("In the year 2052 the entire US defense budget will be sufficient to purchase one tactical jet....")
Great video. It seems to me the questions are whether Sukhoi can use Stealthy materials/internal airframe design and very high tolerance manufacturing at maintain a rapid construction rate and whether the data processing software and computer systems they run on can match what the US/Europe and China are capable of doing to produce a combat aircraft which is capable against NGAD and Tempest/Dassault design and the new missile systems coming off the US design teams. Rumour has it the Su-57 design whilst stealthy isnt as stealthy as the F-35, which is already a very old design compared to what NGAD will deliver (and the B-21 design is just about to deliver to the US air force.
The Sukhoi company has long been using stealth technologies in the skin of the Su-57. Apparently, the same technologies will be used on the Su-75. At the same time, it was stated that the Su-75 will use open architecture software, which will allow the aircraft to be exported to different countries that use foreign types of weapons. Having an open architecture, the use of foreign weapons on an aircraft will no longer require serious modernization, but you will simply need to install the drivers for the corresponding weapons. This has the effect of reducing the export price, since there is no need to install foreign sighting systems and interface their software with the aircraft software. Sukhoi encountered these problems when exporting the Su-30MK to various countries, when it was necessary to install French equipment to control French missiles.
@@PavelMyth they’re using RAM coatings and larger sized skin components, to go with the design shape. There is more to stealth than this though. I have heard that stealth is also built into the fabric design under the skin although I have yet to see anything concrete. You would have to write Russian software for western weapons as well as the software architecture and do all of the weapons release physical testing work and consider whether the weapons and couplings fit into to the physical design of the pylons within the weapons bays. I doubt many will go to the expense of trying to fit western weapons. That also assumes western companies would give software access in the weapons to do it anyway.
While I also dislike the outright bashing of Russian technology... as half Ukrainian/Soviet Union born guy I know the the attitude towards engineering in general. Russia isn't the Soviet Union and even back then they did a lot of smoke and mirror and relied on greater numbers i.e. being easier/faster/cheaper to produce... this doesn't work anymore/simply isn't possible with the status Quo in military aviation technology. It took tons of funding/time/partners to get the JSF/F35 project running and the scale hasn't even reached close to what they (U.S and allies) wanted after all those years and delays. I REALLY doubt that they (i.e. Russia and their partners) can do anything similar in the near... or hell, even distant future.
лол, су 57 в разы дешевле ф35, пока вы оперируете домыслами, су 57 практикуется в стрельбе над украиной. Американцы настроили 900 ф 35, с одной стороны круто, с другой они их никак довести не могут, больше 30 несчастных случаев -- очень дофига
Well your example in fact shows that going fo the top notch magic silver bullet does not work either. F-35 as a PROJECT was a failure as it fell short on several points and got much more expensive than needed. Was a risky risky project that could only be completed due to USA throwing money at it. It proved that such projects are unfeasible to any other country. They need to make their forces dangerous enoguh but not cripple their economy alongside it.
Even in the case of product that actually meet the spec its not always as simple as better spec equal better product. For instance there was a comparison between IS-2 and tiger tank and just looking at the specs IS-2 is consideral better, and it really is. But that is on the bakside of basically everything else.
Very interesting work, and I'm inclined to agree with your conclusions. After all, once it's fully developed, what's the Russian Air Force going to do? Fund development for a completely new aircraft for their high/low mix, or just go with what's available and home-made?
I read somewhere that russians need a (reliable) single engine fighter that can use the same armament their su 27 and its variants use. Their rule to buy only twin engine fighters is mainly because they don't have a reliable, efficient and powerful enough engine that can be used for single-engine fighters. The problem with twin engines in f.e SU-27 case is that they eat fuel double the amount F-16 uses or even more while MIG-29 has a very low operational range. If mig-29 had such a single engine i think the planes that would be used in Ukraine would be them and their modern variants not su-27s and its variants. There are no mig-29 on duty in Ukraine conflict from the Russian side, while Ukraine uses them more or less as a point AA.
Great video Wondering if any new information has come out since this video was released . Would love to have an updated video about the checkmate if that's the case
Questions for Russia concerning Su-75. Where will it get: 1. Sophisticated machine tools for production (US, Japan, and Germany are off the table.) 2. Sophisticated electronics (Russia has no indigenous modern IC fab. Western sources are off the table.) 3. High-tech workforce (Ukraine war resulted in brain drain, or literal brain death of many young people.) 4. Development money 5. Top level engineers 6. Customers (Iran will only have money if Biden gives them more. Vietnam is a possibility. India has found Russia to be unreliable, and its aircraft of poor quality. Argentina just elected a pro-Western leader. UAE doesn't want to run afoul of US. African nations don't have the money. Russia itself won't have the money.) Russia couldn't put the Su-57 or T14 tank into production when it was experiencing better times than now or the future. (It also hasn't built a single navy destroyer this century.) The Su-75 is only marginally cheaper than the Su-57. I remain skeptical that this plane makes it into production.
*Dude, don’t write nonsense, ask what the Baikal processor is, and take an interest in the Project 22350 and 22350M frigate, which carries the 3M22 Zircon hypersonic missiles, and the Shkval supersonic torpedo, such a frigate alone is capable of destroying an aircraft carrier group!* ruclips.net/video/72Sq4oZxQNI/видео.html ruclips.net/video/r1u6NfPlPJU/видео.html
Thinking of the new russian allies in central africa and maybe central america, it could be sold to this states for re-financing the rebuilding of the russian airforce. Like the F-16 was sold to US allies in large numbers.
Russia have to built many of them, if they have only 10-11 SU-57 so far, 5th gen fighter , when they build hundred " Checkmate " for export ? Technically is a great plane, capable, but without numbers, it's only russian propaganda. F-16 was built in thousands, and from 2019 production re-open.
Great video. Informative, long/short enough, entertaining. Far more insight than the usual superficial RUclips crap, yet condensed so I dont have to invest hours of research to assess the basic concepts and requirements of the aircraft.
-Millennium 7 is a a bit of a Russian Fanboy you have to admit and over compensates for the anti Russian bias. -Anyone that spends time on line is used to endless Russian hype of the "might"" and invincibility of their systems. S-400, Su-35, Su-34, Kinzahl, Zirkon etc. Russian weapons hype ios part of the way they seek to intimidate the nations around then as they seek to expand and establish to Russian Empire of the Tsars and there Soviet by a series of invasions, annexations and espionage drive coupe d'etate. -Analysis of the Su-57 is necessary but it will soon be accompanied by exaggerated claims of invincibility or supremacy both to drive Russian weapons exports but mainly as part of the bellicose threats and intimidation of targeted countries and to develop a sense of supremacy within Russia. -We are thus right to mock these claims when they are hype.
@@williamzk9083 было бы странно если бы оборонный комплекс обклеивал баллистические ракеты и танки наклейками с русалками и дельфинчиками и красил бы самолеты в розовый только чтобы уважаемые партнеры не подумали что им угрожают. В сша ведь так не делают, да? И никуда не вторгаются, и войн не развязывают. Хотите бояться - бойтесь
Note that the bottom edge of the inlet is divided into two segments, each aligned with the corresponding wing. We also see this in the Kratos XQ-58's top inlet and in the Anduril Fury concept for CCA. I agree with your take that this concept shows very good attention to "stealth basics". It may not be as refined as some others, but it seems to get the fundamentals right. IMO the US needs to learn to do more like this if it is to keep the cost of the CCA at a level where >1000 can be procured. The composite skin on the fuselage will need to be minimally transmissive to radar to avoid exposing returns from the structure underneath, so at least in that respect the composites will need to be optimized for stealth. With regard to your comments about exhaust-hiding at 19:45, I agree that the new configuration is better optimized for hiding the exhaust, though the nozzle doesn't seem to be recessed quite as deeply as on the F-35 or F-22. It's also not clear if they're using a bypass-air-mixing scheme similar to what the F-22 and F-35 both employ. Nice job looking at this in a even-handed way and trying to engage with this design on its own terms instead of from a Western perspective. I think that the performance that the AL-51 is claiming is feasible with an ordinary turbofan, but only with an extraordinarily high turbine inlet temperature (hotter even than F135). That would explain the interminable development, since getting good reliability that way requires fundamental improvements in materials and manufacturing. Pratt proved capable of meeting impressively high reliability objectives with the F135, but only after very protracted development.
Was very eagerly awaiting this video as soon as I learned the subject matter. And what a stellar analysis of the aircraft, systems and what it means for the VKS and future potential customers. Quite frankly the Flanker family has reached the end of its usefulness in anything resembling conventional wars against a roughly peer opponent. Unless the VKS somehow managed to gather overwhelming tactical, operational and strategic strength comparable to USAF or the PLAAF than non LO aircraft will be disproportionately attrited and objectives not met. The VKS actually IMO did the best of all the services early in the Ukraine war but still its taskings were too much, its opponents resourceful and resilient and the other services fumbled and tripped. But the Su-75 represents a potential lifeline for the VKS. Finally giving its fighter squadrons a good quality LO aircraft to procure in numbers to complement the higher end Su-57's and 30/35's that the Fulcrums simply could not deliver. A true potential revival of something like Frontal Aviation for the 21st century. For a force that needs to recover from losses and learn what needs to be changed at a tactical, training and force composition level , this is something I am sure the VKS bigwigs are eyeing with interest. And if a substantial order is eventually placed, then I am sure nations like Vietnam would be more willing to follow suit. A stellar analysis M7. Where much of RUclips is all clickbait trash without substance, your eye and expertise is something I always learn from.
I agree. Sukhoi is going to have a much easier time selling the aircraft if the Russians are using it themselves. Nobody want to be the sole customer, bearing all the maintenance, spares and upgrade development risk.
Well, okay, I’m still ready to accept the usual, fanatical statement about the “overwhelming tactical and strategic power of US aviation,” but use the definition of “overwhelming power of the PLA” when comparing the Russian and Chinese air forces, and even include “strategic power” in this definition! are you out of your mind?! China still flies on Russian engines and gliders copied from the Russian Federation and the United States, and has no “strategic” aviation at all (unless you consider copies of Soviet medium-range bombers of the Stalin era to be strategic aviation in the modern sense of the term)))))
Dunno if this will actually end up existing as an aircraft (my money's on no until 2030 at least) but it would be a cool idea if it did. Nice to see a stealth design that isn't just Flying Wing But With a New Intake Shape or F-35 Clone #62 (looking at you, KF-21 and JC-31)
"The VKS, with the Su-30SM, Su-35S, Su-57 and MiG-35S multirole fighters and heavy Su-34 fighter-bomber in current production, is not interested in buying another tactical combat aircraft. But the VKS would buy the Su-75 if the political authorities deem it necessary to keep the project alive and support its export."
I had dismissed this fighter as a copy of the MRF-54e from Northrop. Thank you for taking the time to examine why it's not. If Russia can get the funding to get this plane off of the ground, it should be successful. Not as good as the F-35, but if it's affordable, it doesn't need to be as good as.
@@Max_Da_G Not only is a T-75 unlikely to ever have the same operational value that an F-35 brings, but it is unlikely they will ever get the economies of scale to produce them for as little as F-35s are being produced right now.
As a chess ♟️ player when someone say checkmate, it means you can make any further moves,the game is over. SU75 checkmate; is most beautiful design I have seen.
I have noticed that Russians release new magic weapon every two years, we had SU57 followed by Magic tsunami torpedo followed by Su75, what do you think comes next? Maybe a Teleport or photon cannons in 2024?
Excellent report for a very fuzzy subject. The first prototype images have me thinking they were using SU-57 wings all together! - The last concept pictured seems to be closer to a diamond profile. Al for the thrust vectoring, I really don't think of that design to be aimed towards super-maneuveravility. The lighter rear structure and the focus or titanium reinforcement on the middle, in front of the engine, doesn't seem to be prepared for the engine to twist, just to push. The removable cannon is a solution that should've be implemented a while ago! Specially on light fighters where you just can't afford to carry extra weight not needed for the mission, more over when using stand-off weapons (the Super-Etendard replaces his cannons with the electronics needed to operate the Exoset).
Indeed it's not aimed to super maneuverability like the su 57 looks like the russian aiming for stealthier aircraft and its design actually resembles the northrop mrp from the front and the yf 23 from the rear I think its gonna be stealthier than the f35
If the Su-75 ends up having a super small radar cross section watch how the U.S fanboys will immediately switch to another feature and say its the only important thing.
Thank you for video! 26:20 - you may just swipe left-right tail elevons for better nozzle movement. Inside you get 90 degree, outside line behind wing will continued. Also heard that su75 will have swappable nose variants
Note: Argentina will not buy F16 or any main US aircraft because they could and would be blocked in a confrontation with England. Buying attemps are just corruption attemps.
Except the US is overriding British votes on the matter. In addition, previous attempts at purchasing western weapons like the FA-50 were blocked due to British components on those weapons. F-16 is a domestic U.S. product so they override any British complaints, even with British components in them. Now if there is money to buy and maintain them is a whole sail issue altogether.
@@gregs7562 I mentioned it before, even if it has UK components, the US will and has overridden the decision by the Uk government. The US government decision in this matter has more power than the UK decision. If not the sale could have never proceeded.
This is the second video of yours that I see and I have to confirm the same opinion I had from the previous content: you are a brilliant guy kudos and much simpathy to you
@Millennium7HistoryTech thank you for your videos. Those, who feel themselves as "warriors" always will make silly remarks. But as an engineer myself (in different discipline), i really could hear your love for engineering and interesting decisions.
Iran have just signed a deal for SU35 & Yak 130 trainers & Mil Mi helicopter gunships, I dare they'll be interested. Despite the trolls anti Russian bias the SU 57 has been performing really well & is the only gen 5 fighter with a any official kills. Russia had a lot more money to invest than people believe. It'll be interesting to see what develops with this fighter.
Funny how you decry trolls when you yourself are a conspiracy theorist as one click on your channel reveals. And what is this about the Su-57 performing well? Where? We have seen nothing about the Su-57s performance. It absolutely has no official kill.
There is literally no evidence whatsoever to support the claim that the Su-57 got a kill. The only "proof" is that Russia said so, and when they are genuinely claiming to have destroyed more Ukrainian plains than even existed in the country prior to the war, most of which were scrap metal, I'd take that claim with a mountain sized piece of salt.
9-A-7759 "Гром" (Thunder) is not a serial product and is still very far from being a serial product. As far as I know, there is not a single solid proof that this bomb was ever dropped from a carrier, even with a training warhead. This is not to mention the stillborn idea of modularity of this kind of bombs.
hope your confidence is well founded and will be rewarded .my self I think the russian aircraft leave a lot to be desired ,the original engines on su 57 were very loud in flight ,I would desribe it as a scream ,it was not stealthy at all,except if you were deaf ,but then again you might be alerted by the vibrations .India pulled out of buying them . With the russian civilian air fleet being almost all from the west ,makes me think the su75 is all smoke and mirrors ,as I collect model russian aircraft cannot wait for the model to come ouy in 1/72nd ,but then again may be not in my life time.
On the topic of modern composites. The Russians lag far, far behind the US and West in this area. First true US composite aircraft was the A-12/SR-71 in the 1960s (15 percents by weight - the rest was mostly titanium). Then the F-111, F-14 and F/A-18 used composites in limited ways. The AV-8B (US first true composite fighter) used composites extensively. As later the F-22 and F-35. The Super Hornet also applies extensive composites, but to a much lesser degree compared to the AV-8B, F-22 and F-35. For comparison, the Russian's first used limited composites on the Flanker in the 1980s. The YAK-41 in the 80s used composites extensively, but only a few prototypes were produced. The SU-35S applies some additional composites. The SU-57 is Russia's first true composite fighter, but only a handful of aircraft have been produced. So the US has produced about 1500 true composites fighters (AV-8B, F-22, F-35) racking up several million operational flight hours. For comparison, the 20 or so SU-57s produced so far probably has a few thousands flight hours. In other words, the US experience in manufacturing and operating composite fighters far outreaches the Russians. And the same applies to AESA radars.
Thing about fancy US fighters is that they're overly fragile and overly expensive. Useless in austere conditions like the Ukrainian conflict. Hubris is why America has lost every conflict and turned tail since 1945 🤷♂️
I haven't run the CFD analysis, but that inlet seems awful small for a modern turbofan engine. Good video but was hoping to hear a bit more about that...
Either the Sukhoi engineers still know how to make a jet intake and have built it properly, or they have forgotten how to build a jet intake. Without evidence for the latter, the former appears far more probable.
@@DecidedlyNinja It is not only the Sukhoi bureau who is involved in that kind of research but also TsAGI. And TsAGI guys know what aerodynamics is. 😊
nice overview, however i just want to point out that the russians have no interest in the su-75, they will use the su-57 as the multirole fighter, as for interception and air to air battles, they will use the mig 41 that will be able to reportedly go mach 4+ that is being developed as we speak. even if its not stealth(no reports on its stealth capabilities yet) it should be able to outfly most missiles the west can currently field.
33:50 about totally passive firing solutions, that was already in the Su-27S from 1982. The system use datalink from the whole air defense network, or the flight generated data by triangulating the targets ranges by combining each wingmen located targets. The Su-27 family is as well capable to guide each others missiles if pilots coordinates the engagement. So it is logical that Russian's will just carry these old methods to new fighters.
Su 75 check mate will be a couple decades behind the 6th gen aircraft that we release. So the name is a little silly. Its like winning a chess match in your head that you had 20 years ago. Yep, check mate!
I suspect that a big air-to-air missile will be integrated, especially if the VKS adopts the design. That said, it'd likely be limited to two missiles per aircraft. But they (R-37 / RVV-BD class weapons) seem to have been very popular in the current war.
Another great video, thanks for explaining the patents it great learn as you watch the video. It is for sure my favorite video of 2023. I definitely think it will be part of VKS I have read that head of UAC has said it will 100% be part of Russian air force. They did put out patent last week for a 2 seat stealth fighter, many believe this is the 2 seat SU-57. Also I have read that the flat nozzle engine is a totally separate engine from Al-51-F1. There were rumor last year they had done more modification to AL-41-F1 plus Izdeliye 30 and clean sheet flat nozzle engine. I will try find links, I always forget to bookmark this stuff. Again great video best content for real aircraft lovers.
@@antoniohagopian213 Actually no, I believe it was patented by Sukhoi and some think it may even be stealth version of the SU-30. The MiG-41 is supposed to fly by end of this year there would be no need for a patent at this point.
judging by the drawings of the patent, the fighter's "nose" + cockpit can be dismantled and the 'nose' installed without the cockpit. thus the Su75 turns into a drone. it can be a wingman of the Su57, or independently fight (having a powerful radar), like a robot fighter with AI, having 5 missiles in its compartments with a range of up to 100 miles
I think with the current situation in Russia, Russian Air Force may become first customer, because this thing is simpler and cheaper than building a single su35s
Brother I'm not a troll it's just a facts. Russia doesn't have the funding or resources at this time it's a great concept like they always have but they won't have the funding to produce anything of mass amounts to create any type of damage. They might have five or six of these planes but that's it just like the other s fighters they put out in recent times.
5:05 for the prospect of export to Vietnam, VN military has been quite conservative about new technology - they prefer proven & well-matured technologies, and such will stay close to the Su-30 Flanker family instead VN people's air force likely will not buy Su-75 until at least 5 countries has started flying the aircraft
I imagine like all other countries decisions will take into consideration potential adversaries. If other, older aircraft are expected to quite well against China's J-20 and J-10C, countries may be reluctant to introduce a major new aircraft and related systems to their arsenal..
This A/C is a typically, but thoroughly elaborated approach on the "quality / quantity" interpretation (expressions like hi-low mix et such just lack the essence). The only drawback of this A/C it's his name. I missed this naughty bot Otis. Be well...
@@Greasy__BearF-35 is genuinely the safest fighter jet on the planet, both in terms of losses per flight hour, and in total of losses per air frame per year
It is. It really is. As much as you can appreciate the design of Russian planes, comparing their modern counterparts to the F-35 is a losing game. @@ImBigFloppa
Oh this is a great video, lots of good details, so much better than the average "military news" slop you see on youtube everywhere, well done! The Checkmate looks like a very serious, very fearsome plane; it's definitely going to be a scary opponent for anyone who has to face it no matter which currently existing flying airplane they're on. I also can't wait to see the engine/nozzle developments, i expect we're going to see flat nozzles on the next versions of the 57 and 75; maybe it's development was difficult or it was too expensive, but i wouldn't be surprised if we see the next Su-57 and 75 versions with F-22 style nozzles. Especially interested to see how the optionally manned fighters are going to be used and evolved, drones are the future of air warfare and they're going to change things in ways we can't imagine yet.
The Russians gave up trying to copy the F-22's engine paddle nozzles because it's designed shape was too complicated, it was prohibitively costly, and they didn't have the manufacturing and material science to create them. They couldn't do it back then and they still will not be able to in the near future.
@@BagoPorkRinds the "near future" goes by a lot faster than you think, they'll figure it out eventually, they're not cavemen. The F-22 is like 30 years old.
@@belliduradespicio8009 The technology materials is even older at over 30 years AND YET neither Russia or China still have not come close to fully emulating what the Americans have created from the ATF program (YF-22 & YF-23). By the time they do, the U.S. has already moved on to even more sophisticated, complex, and expensive technologies and materials. Russia will never catch up because they do not have the industries, the economy, and importantly unlike in the U.S. with thousands of sub-contractors building highly sophisticated parts and electronics to sustain even modest manufacturing numbers.
@@belliduradespicio8009 30+ years later and the F-22 is still far more sophisticated and capable than either Su-57 or China's J-20. Checkmate would not make a dent. Neither will China's J-31.
Respecting Russian design philosophy. Decades ago a friend had bought two Lada cars. He invited me over to see him change the engines. Each car came with a simple tool kit you could dismantle the entire car with, plus rope and block and tackles. He pushed one car under a tree set up the ropes, disconnected the engine and pulled it out, on his own, no help needed from me. He then did the same with the second engine but dropped it into the first car. I think the process took about an hour. This car was designed to be fixable in the middle of nowhere or unstuck by winching it back onto a drivable surface. All you needed were some trees. This is design appropriate to the operating conditions. These simple cars weren’t the best but they sure were robust and easy to fix.
Don't know what they were supplying to the West (most likely quality control was thousand times better than for the internal "market") but the problem with Lada (and other Soviet/Russian cars) was that you spend "fixing" them much more time than driving them. They are also known to be getting eaten bu the rust in a record time. Awful cars. Much easier and cheaper is to drive some German car where you need to take out the whole engine out to replace light bulb than those garage queens.
@@alexx86hater older american cars suffered the same problems, every single lower middle class and even lower class person had to be a mechanic back then because of it. new materials and designs came out but repairability was abandoned. i have no doubt an easy to repair long lasting car could be made but nobody at the top wants it. there's a niche market for import from russia because of the repairability that can't be forcibly abandoned by the upper class because of the harshness of eastern russia landscape.
Lada is an old Fiat simplified and manufactured to lower standard. You are right that regualr divers were requiered to fix their cars in USSR, but that was simply due to central planning prohibiting spending more resourses on repair stations. In USSR one could not just open a garage and openly start repairing cars, that would take away from the war economy. As a result repairs were mostly DIY and goind to exteme lengths to get spare parts, often on a black market.
A manufacturer that spends less time on the engine running properly and more on the convenience of changing it when it inevitably breaks down. Pretty sure this anecdote did not come across the way you'd intended.
Yes, lets build a shit engine in a shit car that can be easily and quickly swapped with another shit engine.
Thanks for this wonderful, comprehensive video. I'd be very interested in hearing more about Su-57 related developments in the past 2-3 years (including with the Okhotnik): the new engine, its testing, the flat nozzles etc.
Yes! Ditto! Such an interesting presentation! A great channel!
You are one of the most unbiased researcher for aviation. Big kudos to your work. Thank you.
true =)
WHat? this guy has never met a Russian aircraft he didnt love, never has a good thing to say about US aircraft, i dont think you understand what unbiased means.
@@ezorb1 Did you watch any video on this channel?
He's biased for Russian technology over American or Chinese. And he takes TASS and RT at their word even when their claims are ridiculous, like when they say they have more than 7 SU57 lmao
@@ezorb1 I guess he is opposite from being biased for Russian aircraft, in fact most of hist video about anything related to Russian are full of suspicions, and call almost everything (a propaganda)
When it comes to aviation and such stuff, you are simply the best, no bias and propaganda, just level headed analysis and digging through tons of info, thanks as usual, your videos are as interesting as it can get, i grab some snacks a couple of drinks and enjoy the show, you are awesome.
Idk it’s bullshit. If Russia really was confident in the Su-57, they’d be risking it more in Ukraine and it would be dominating the skies. They’re so scared of potentially losing one and what that would do to foreign sales, they will not use it for anything other than firing standoff munitions from relative safety. Same with the T-14 Armata.
true❤
Actually, this is the BEST overview with a lot of interesting information about this new jet.
Just cannot believe how many sources you read to combine together in just 38 minutes.
Awesome!!!
I love the F22. Was very proud when it was introduced 27 years ago. But the Su-75 is beautiful. It's lines are pure and its' shape, amazing.
Su75 top view: Gorgeous, beautiful, amazing, 10/10
Su75 front view: troll.
1) VKS has policy to order only 2-engine manned aircrafts - and nothing stop them from unmanned ones.
2) Composite panels of Su-57 do have integrated radar absorbing layer - officials.
3) The Area Rule does implemented in Su-75. Take note, that when you're doing calculation for the rule, the volume of air ducts should be subtracted from the volume of the aircraft. So, the best illustration of this rule is B-58 Hustler.
4) DSI intake could be optimised for any target speed. You could say to engineers "do me a DSI design for the Mach 2.0" - and they'll made it for you. But if your target speed is, for example, Mach = 1.3, then the max speed limit is Mach ~ 1.8 - and the most powerfull engine in the world couldn't breake through the limit. Another disadvantage of DSI is its requirement of being covered with thick radar absorbing structures.
5) When it comes to Su-75's tale, check the Su-47.
6) One engine is a problem, and two engines are two problems.
7) "Izdelie 30" is completely new engine designed from the scratch. By the way, it seems that there would be a bit downsized version of AL-51F to replace the AL-31F's in all those Flankers. (The diameter of AL-51F and AL-41F1 is a bit bigger compared to AL-31F, so newer ones would not fit as is).
8) Dry thrust of AL-51F is still unknown - and I don't know credible estimation. Full afterburner's thrust is unknown either - but estimates are available.
BTW, check the tale of Douglas F4D.
The composite RCS is surface is fiberglass based
I completely disagree with point 6. Two engines are always safer for the plane and pilot - there could be a malfunction, a hit, a birdstrike if you want. Single engine planes are done for in these cases, whille dual engines can still return safely to base. I've read a lot of cases during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan where Su-25s were returning with 1 engine blown/damaged by enemy fire.
Su75 sounds like a perfect teritorial defense and intercept aircraft, as long as it is stealthy to anti air munitions the ability to come roaring off the nearby step at mulitple altitudes unseen and hit incoming targets then disappear into the landscape flying low while the heavies line up and come in with the bigger ordinance sounds like a very useful capability; small, light, cheap and stealthy is a win for that.
Нет его ещё это концепт
According to sandboxx these planes have simmilar radar cross sections to a f18 super hornet without external mountings.
If that is true it won't sneak up on anything on the modern battlefield.
@@baronvonlimbourgh1716 I'm more concerned with the state of Russian engines. Have they gotten that part sorted out?
There's lots of talk of the next generation of engines, but they seem to have short lives and don't really live up to expectations.
@@Calzaghe83 they finally produce SU-57 with the 5th gen engine, how will it operate is to be seen tho.
@baronvonlimbourgh1716 that's the su57 not the su75. It's not based on research it's based on russia stated radar cross section. Also that is compared to a modernized clean f18. Which is the most stealthy of the modernized 4th gen aircraft.
So basically the su57 is a little stealthy with weapons and the f18 is a little stealthy without weapons.
It is looking quite impressive. On paper. There is nothing wrong with looking good on paper. I would hold my horses with the praise until that thing is operational though, for very obvious reasons.
Absolutely. Truth be told, I bought into the marketing and was deeply, deeply sceptical about Su-57. It exceeded my expectations. My experience with Russian managers tells me that if something is said to be delivered in 2-3 years, one might expect it in 4-6 years. But that's ok, because if something is said to be delivered in 8 years, it is never going to be delivered. So, when they claim short terms, it's generally a good sign. It means that at least they know what they are doing and are pretty confident about ability to get the job done (though, obviously they're going to be late by ~3 years).
@@vasjaforutube1and they don't go spending $1.5 trillion on a project, only to find out it's a hangar queen
@@klaasvakie without having the margin for making a costly mistake you’re not going to be on the leading edge of technology, and manufacturing. For the same reason that a failed experiment is just as important as a successful one.
@@klaasvakie Which comes out to around 28.5k per flight hour. Which is only marginally higher than the F-15 at 27k.
What people tend to forget with those $1.5 trillion number, is that that includes all operating costs, maintenace, personel and the airframes for around 2500 airframes in 3 vastly different configurations over 60+ years. So every time the projected lifetime of the whole system gets extended, that number gets naturally bigger, due to having to cover even more years of operational costs.
If we only look at actual procurement cost, the F-35A, which importantly is still getting continously cheaper, at $82 million per airframe is already cheaper than quite a few of its competitors like the Saab JAS 39E/F at $85 million, the Rafale at $115 million, the J-20 at $110 million, the F15-EX at $117 million, or even the SU-35 at $85 million.
Or if you want to see a really expensive plane; the SU-57 at a currently projected eyewatering $200+, due to only 76 being projected to be manufactured. Current unit cost is around $420 million, due to only 32 having been manufacured so far.
I see the spirit of the Mig 21 in this SU 75, a single-engine, agile, cheap and for export to countries with a low budget.
Thank you for taking the time to do your own research and combining it with your expertise to make great analyses for us. I hope it will pay off for you:)
He is a fantastic RUclipsr in this regard.
(Sadly, even RUclipsrs in easy to understand popular fields are too often too unskilled or lazy to do their own research and analysis. So many knock-off video channels on so many popular and popular science topics.)
UAE has done a massive Rafale order and the French have created a 3rd generation stealth system that is no more in need of what you know about stealth, they can make anything stealth. The system comes with Rafale F4 as well as the M51.3 SLBM
Rafale's cost of use is half of the F-16, its engine allows to fly 12 hours a day and has already done 20,000 km missions into 28 hours with a single stopover : Bordeaux (France) - Corona, CA stopover - maritime strike drill on a fleet invading Tahiti - landing in Nouméa, New-Caledonia
Possibly because the lifetime cost of ownership is predictable and lower than the Russian equivalents which have a low upfront cost but significantly higher lifetime price tag. That was a major influence in India's replacement fighter decision and has been a key decider in many other procurements.
I like how every other country is struggling together to develop a plane that is basically the f-22 but 30 years later and yet they "aspire" to 6th gen
Basically they’re trying not to look as far behind as they really are. Hell the F-35 isn’t even totally complete and was only recently approved for full rate production, yet all these other countries bout a crap load of them to catch up
China already caught up@@christopherchartier3017
@@christopherchartier3017 that "not complete" f-35 is already participated in several battles in middle east and there are around 750 in service around the world. and wdym by "trying to not look as far behind"? far behind who? Russia? China? Iran?. vatniks ability to believe in any made up bullshit needs to be studied.
Thinking that su-57, is an f22 but 30 years later indicates on luck of competence and Superficial judgments that miss the essence of things. Just some food for thought: the Su-57 doesn’t have metallic electrical wiring, only fiber-optic cables.
@@christopherchartier3017LOL NATO countries yes because they have to! They are not allowed to buy planes from non NATO countries. Fyi the F-35 is a piece of 💩 plagued with problems as was the F22
So much information without any bs. Rare gem, nowadays.
@@davout5775you're right, it's scary how little we really do know about Russia's technical superiority!
@@klaasvakie Or lack thereof.
How do you know that?
I always enjoy your videos and find them very informative. But this may be your best video so far. Excellent work ! I particularly liked the use of inter-cards (the gray text pop-ups) to remind us what the acronyms mean. I paused and read the ones I needed, and the others did not delay my viewing. I think that concept is a keeper.
Nyet!
You can always tell when someone enjoys their work. This guy LOVES his work.
I really like the look of the updated Su-75. It has some very interesting innovations in the tail.
I see this as the succesor to the MiG-21, light, single engine, cheap, customizable, export oriented, quite capable. Designed to compete the F4? of our time the F 35.
Algeria, Vietnam, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, India as feasibly customers.
Could North Korea afford it?
@@mitchjames9350same with Cuba and their tropical North Korean Air Force lmao
@@mitchjames9350 I guess NK paid with free workers they offer.
They could but no in huge numbers 18~24 of them maybe. Venezuela could help Cuba with its oil production.
Myanmar, Syria, Ethiopia could be added to the customers list.
well, basically, all those already sanctioned, 'cos nobody wants to face sanctions for buying Russian tech...
Thanks!
Thank you to you!
Would also love analysis videos on other upcoming fighters as well. I learned quite a bit from this one. New designs have these weird straight angles on top where the canopy kind of seems like ends prematurely. I would love to know why almost all of new designs have this in common.
Radar signature.
I know they try to design them so the pilot can see behind over his shoulder better, instead of just the wall. Not sure if that's what you're seeing, or if it's for radar signature, like the other guy said.
By far the best video on Su57.. eagerly waiting for your video on Tejas MK1a which IAF inked to buy in 83 + 97 numbers... also on Tejas MK2 which IAF agree to buy atleast 201... also if possible make video on Tejas crash & anything you could gather from crash video..
The approach you are suggesting with the engines and the flat nozzles is part of a long-standing Russian tradition of stepwise refinement in the vein of, "Get it flying first, fix it later." This is hardly surprising. The Su-75 is an interesting design, and you highlight it well.
"Get it flying first, fix it later" seems to be the way China does things too.
Well yeah, you kinda have to intimidate the enemy. The best way of defeating someone is by convincing them to not fight you.
@@Silver_Prussian I'm not so sure that's the reason they do it that way, though. Stepwise refinement is a practical methodology for developing systems over time and spreading out the total cost, while still maintaining what made the design useful and desirable in the first place. The many iterations of the MiG-21 are just one example.
I"m not saying it can't have the effect you describe, just that it might not really be the primary motivation.
"Fly first and fix it later" seems more likely to me to be an "F-35" if it survives the first flight.
@@silvestrenet That's as may be, friend, but the Russians have a very long history of it.
(I'm not a huge fan of the F-35, either, for what that's worth. For what it does, it's too bloody expensive - that has more to do with politics than technical excellence, though.)
I usually listen to RUclips with just one earphone so I can hear my wife. But when you drop a video I say “Honey, it’s my favourite RUclipsr so I’ll have both earphones in for the next 40 minutes.” This is a tremendous compliment to your excellent videos. You are in a group of one. ☝️
As an aside, doesn’t the geometry of the Checkmate remind you of the YF-23?
A bit, similar stealth but different wing
@@Millennium7HistoryTech Indeed, the most striking similarity is the intake. However they differ considerably in geometry and function. A similar argument could be made that it resembles a stealth version of the A-7 Corsair II retrofitted with a modified delta wing and twin tail surfaces.
Intake resembles Boeing X-32
YF-23 had hidden exhaust nozzles. Due to those exposed nozzles on the Su-75, it will not have as low an RCS as others.
Ottimo video come al solito. E' bello vedere qualcuno che parla in maniera più neutra possibile, senza schierarsi a favore di una nazione o di un'altra😎
🤌😄
a MIG 41 video would be interesting
The Mig 41 was fictional,even the author said that
@@fqeagles21 then what is MIG doing ?
Closest thing to a mig 41 is the PAK-DP mentioned in the video
@@iplaygames8090 that is just the real name for the MIG 41
@@avus-kw2f213 probably still a mig 41 but different from the one you saw online, that was fictional
Air intake wise it feel like this one would suffer in the same way like the F16 for FOD. Maybe not a bit thing in general but russia have historically had a rough surfaces.
And historically they produce planes that can deal with it.
Regarding SU 75 - we shall see how it goes.
So far the airplane is being developed, there are some speculations it is mostly intended for export - which may be true as Su-75 departs from traditional Russian (or Soviet) design philosophy (single engine instead of traditional 2 engine set up).
Time will tell.
Hi M7!
As always You did great job,excellent analysis. LTS ( from Russian Light tactical aircraft ) has project code T-75 ( T from treugolnik or triangle, meaning triangle wings). Su-75 is not official name of course but it is highly possible that real military designation will be Su-75 and that name 'Checkmate' is from one of the Sukhoi designers. Only prototype that we could see is in fact T-75KNS as static one and with the real cockpit and many systems that can actually work ( can be tested).T-75 is the project of the single-engine stealth lightweight multi-role 5th gen fighter made only for export .Big advantage is that T-75 shares many systems and parts with actual ( serial and operational) twin-engine 5th gen heavy stealth fighter Su-57. From the wings ,vertical stabilisers ,engine, complete avionics and weapons and so on .Of course, avionics and weapons will be in export (downgraded) domain.E.g. frontal radar will be N036E centimetric X-band AESA ,then OLS-50E or 101KS-VE as IRST with LR/LD and LLLTV ,also there will be N036LE as decimetric L-band AESA for long-range search and IFF in wingslats and for the ECM in the corners of the wingtips. Under the fuselage will be KOEPS-75, yes ,something similar to EOTS in F-35.
Note: T-75 has the same fuselage weapon compartment as Su-57 and it can accommodate even two heavy long-range AAM R-97 ( of course in export version) on two UVKU-50/75U catapult launchers.Two side weapon compartments can accommodate two short or medium range AAM's.Short-range AAM is from R-74 family and medium-range is from R-77 family but without famous latice stabilisers
Aerodynamics: it is intereseting that Sukhoi LTS is very similar to famous MiG prototype-demonstrator for the soviet 5th gen fighter called MFI 1.44.This is particularly evident when we look at the angled and widely spaced vertical stabilizers and the upper part of the centerplane, i.e. the fuselage, Su-75 is of course a single-engine fighter.Air intake has fixed geometry, DSI-type but allows reaching true air speed over 2M.Wings from the Su-57 allows to climb to the high alt. and maintain level flight on that high alt.Also they provide excellent maneuverability and agility in troposphere and tropopause during intense and sharp turning.All-movable stabilisers give very good controllability like in Su-57.
Gasodynamics:Engine AL-51F will provide high SEP and dynamic thrust to given inflight weight ratio.If we compare the Su-75 and the F-35 in the domain of the gasodynamics, the results of the compared parameters would be very similar, however, the Su-75 is certainly at an advantage due to its wings from the Su-57, which means it will have better aerodynamics than its potential rival ( of course test flights must prove this).
Construction materials: Aluminum-Lithium type 1441 Alloy as the main ( like in Su-57), special Steel and Titanium Alloys in air intake and engine nacelle as in engine itself. Composite materials and Al-Li Alloy on the skin .
About that price, one comparison, export price of the 'Su-75' will be around 30 mil $, only producton cost( fly-away cost) of the export version of F-35 is about 90 mil $!
All the best !
And as soon as the Russians can reach that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, they can actually build one. Until then, no.
Beside that, they no longer have the technical expertise to design cutting edge fighters.
@@karmakazi101 RuA&SF have almost 20 operational Su-57 right now.Until the end od 2027 ,they will produce 76 in total. Enough for them .Su-57 will equip three fighter air regiments with two sqn each ( 12 fighters in one sqn ) and with additional sqn of heavy combat UAV S-70 Hunter-B. Both Su-57 and this UAV are used during the SMO.
@@dzcav3 What an answer. They have static prototype and several flying in production so far. Russians already have not one but two flying prototypes of the new 6th gen fighter yes,they are prototypes of Su-57M number 058 and 511 blue. They already have completely new so called 'plasma' 6th gen engine for them ( it is on static-ground tests for years now) and from 2018 they have new so called quantum radars ( radio-optical phased array) in tests. Sergey Bogdan chief test pilot of the Sukhoi already had several test flights in prototype of Su-57M where he did nothing at all, from take off ,flying even some excercise- combat sorties and then landing. He only monitored the work of the systems and sybsystems in Su-57M.
Let us see what western ( NATO ) countries have in this domain ? They have almost nothing at all in this field. USAF have only paper 6h gen fighter called NGAD, western Europian countries do not have any 5th gen fighter at all ( if we do not count US made F-35 ).Programs like BAE Systems Tempest, FCAS and so on are only programmes and projects ( in paper of course). Now let us see what Brits stated for their Tempest:
''The Tempest will be a sixth-generation jet fighter incorporating several new technologies including 1. deep learning AI, 2 .ability to fly unmanned, 3.swarming drones,4. directed-energy weapons,5.virtual cockpit in helmet and 6.hypersonic weapons.''
Russian 5th gen Su-57 already have and can all of this ! 1. got so called intelectual support systems,2.even MiG-25 from 70's had one special automated combat -nav mode where he could fly with pilot doing nothing at all and only job for pilot was squeezing trigger for launching AAM during intercept mission and taking control of the plane when he was 50m above runway during landing phase. This kind of automated combad-nav mode had and they have now MiG-29 and 31 and all FFF ( Flanker Family Fighters). New Su-57 has new advanced automated combat-nav system,Su-57M already proved that there is no need for pilot at all.
3.Su-57 already have this capability with combat UAV Hunter-B and with capability to wear packages of drones. 4. Su-57 already possess combat lasers as directed energy weapon in 101KS-O modules above and underneath the fuselage for blinding not only IR homing heads of AAM but for blinding all optical systems on enemy fighter ( HMS,HMD,IRST,MAWS and so on) during close-in combat.5. Su-57 got it with completely new ZSh-10 helmet ( Sergey Bogdan used this helmet with HMD) during test flightes on Su-57M to monitor flights and work of many systems. 6.Serial/operational Su-57 has many hypersonic missiles,like R-87 ( Product 180) as first in the world hypersonic long-range cruise AAM and heavy very long-range R-97( Product 810).There is also new hypersonic anti-radioation missile Kh-58UShK-TP.
First jump then say hop.....All best !
@@karmakazi101 Incorrect, RuA&SF already has exactly 19 operational Su-57. Two new fighters will be delivered soon , before the end of 2023. Yes, Su-57M is the prototype of 6th gen fighter.
@@aviator77migsukhoi34 Thanks for the run down but it seems Russian hype machine continues in this case by using the terms "quantum" for a radar that does not use the effect and "plasma" for an engine that clearly is not plasma based.
Another massively amazing analysis! Thank you for your hard work M7.
This was a very interesting video. I was tied up to watch it all at once, but my dog and the nice weather forced me to press the pause button, the whole walk in the snow with the dog I looked forward to finish watching this clip to the end. Once again, an outstandingly, excellent good analysis of the Su-75 from Millenium7*.
Hi dog
Excellent researched presentation as always 😊
Thank you for the video. The real issue is that a tactical single engine aircraft has a rather restricted payload-over-distance capability. Except when it is designed as a pure fighter, which is highly unlikely since the age of the manned tactical fighter has passed.
Thank you for your comment, I agree with your take on this aircraft as the same thing was said about the F35 a really LARGE single engined aircraft but will probably be the last single engined bird in the US inventory as both NGADs are twin engined and these we are being lead to believe are the last of the manned aircraft and the end of the Hi-Lo mix. This Checkmate is a day late and a dollar short maybe?
@@billhanna2148 Good points you both 👍 Kudos!
I love the cost graph there that supports Augustine's 16th Law ("In the year 2052 the entire US defense budget will be sufficient to purchase one tactical jet....")
Very enjoyable video, i learned a lot of stuff with you over the past couple of years, please keep it up and never give those trolls any time of day.
what a beautifully composed video :)
Great video. It seems to me the questions are whether Sukhoi can use Stealthy materials/internal airframe design and very high tolerance manufacturing at maintain a rapid construction rate and whether the data processing software and computer systems they run on can match what the US/Europe and China are capable of doing to produce a combat aircraft which is capable against NGAD and Tempest/Dassault design and the new missile systems coming off the US design teams.
Rumour has it the Su-57 design whilst stealthy isnt as stealthy as the F-35, which is already a very old design compared to what NGAD will deliver (and the B-21 design is just about to deliver to the US air force.
The Sukhoi company has long been using stealth technologies in the skin of the Su-57. Apparently, the same technologies will be used on the Su-75.
At the same time, it was stated that the Su-75 will use open architecture software, which will allow the aircraft to be exported to different countries that use foreign types of weapons. Having an open architecture, the use of foreign weapons on an aircraft will no longer require serious modernization, but you will simply need to install the drivers for the corresponding weapons.
This has the effect of reducing the export price, since there is no need to install foreign sighting systems and interface their software with the aircraft software. Sukhoi encountered these problems when exporting the Su-30MK to various countries, when it was necessary to install French equipment to control French missiles.
@@PavelMyth they’re using RAM coatings and larger sized skin components, to go with the design shape. There is more to stealth than this though. I have heard that stealth is also built into the fabric design under the skin although I have yet to see anything concrete.
You would have to write Russian software for western weapons as well as the software architecture and do all of the weapons release physical testing work and consider whether the weapons and couplings fit into to the physical design of the pylons within the weapons bays. I doubt many will go to the expense of trying to fit western weapons. That also assumes western companies would give software access in the weapons to do it anyway.
The U.S. is already testing the X-58 armed “wingman”drone.
While I also dislike the outright bashing of Russian technology... as half Ukrainian/Soviet Union born guy I know the the attitude towards engineering in general. Russia isn't the Soviet Union and even back then they did a lot of smoke and mirror and relied on greater numbers i.e. being easier/faster/cheaper to produce... this doesn't work anymore/simply isn't possible with the status Quo in military aviation technology. It took tons of funding/time/partners to get the JSF/F35 project running and the scale hasn't even reached close to what they (U.S and allies) wanted after all those years and delays.
I REALLY doubt that they (i.e. Russia and their partners) can do anything similar in the near... or hell, even distant future.
лол, су 57 в разы дешевле ф35, пока вы оперируете домыслами, су 57 практикуется в стрельбе над украиной. Американцы настроили 900 ф 35, с одной стороны круто, с другой они их никак довести не могут, больше 30 несчастных случаев -- очень дофига
Well your example in fact shows that going fo the top notch magic silver bullet does not work either. F-35 as a PROJECT was a failure as it fell short on several points and got much more expensive than needed. Was a risky risky project that could only be completed due to USA throwing money at it. It proved that such projects are unfeasible to any other country. They need to make their forces dangerous enoguh but not cripple their economy alongside it.
Even in the case of product that actually meet the spec its not always as simple as better spec equal better product.
For instance there was a comparison between IS-2 and tiger tank and just looking at the specs IS-2 is consideral better, and it really is.
But that is on the bakside of basically everything else.
The Su-57/75 are nowhere as ambitious as the F-35.
Soviet Union had a good track record of fighter jets design. With only one stinker, Mig-23 iirc
The best and most complete analysis of the Su-75. Excellent job! You gained a new subscriber (from Brazil)!
Very interesting work, and I'm inclined to agree with your conclusions. After all, once it's fully developed, what's the Russian Air Force going to do? Fund development for a completely new aircraft for their high/low mix, or just go with what's available and home-made?
I read somewhere that russians need a (reliable) single engine fighter that can use the same armament their su 27 and its variants use. Their rule to buy only twin engine fighters is mainly because they don't have a reliable, efficient and powerful enough engine that can be used for single-engine fighters. The problem with twin engines in f.e SU-27 case is that they eat fuel double the amount F-16 uses or even more while MIG-29 has a very low operational range. If mig-29 had such a single engine i think the planes that would be used in Ukraine would be them and their modern variants not su-27s and its variants. There are no mig-29 on duty in Ukraine conflict from the Russian side, while Ukraine uses them more or less as a point AA.
Great video
Wondering if any new information has come out since this video was released .
Would love to have an updated video about the checkmate if that's the case
i love this guy’s videos. i hope he does one on the raptor
A naval variant is pointless the admiral krapalot isn't going to sea anytime soon
Questions for Russia concerning Su-75. Where will it get:
1. Sophisticated machine tools for production (US, Japan, and Germany are off the table.)
2. Sophisticated electronics (Russia has no indigenous modern IC fab. Western sources are off the table.)
3. High-tech workforce (Ukraine war resulted in brain drain, or literal brain death of many young people.)
4. Development money
5. Top level engineers
6. Customers (Iran will only have money if Biden gives them more. Vietnam is a possibility. India has found Russia to be unreliable, and its aircraft of poor quality. Argentina just elected a pro-Western leader. UAE doesn't want to run afoul of US. African nations don't have the money. Russia itself won't have the money.)
Russia couldn't put the Su-57 or T14 tank into production when it was experiencing better times than now or the future. (It also hasn't built a single navy destroyer this century.) The Su-75 is only marginally cheaper than the Su-57. I remain skeptical that this plane makes it into production.
*Dude, don’t write nonsense, ask what the Baikal processor is, and take an interest in the Project 22350 and 22350M frigate, which carries the 3M22 Zircon hypersonic missiles, and the Shkval supersonic torpedo, such a frigate alone is capable of destroying an aircraft carrier group!*
ruclips.net/video/72Sq4oZxQNI/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/r1u6NfPlPJU/видео.html
Ooooo another long-format video right before the work week! What a treat
Thinking of the new russian allies in central africa and maybe central america, it could be sold to this states for re-financing the rebuilding of the russian airforce. Like the F-16 was sold to US allies in large numbers.
Russia have to built many of them, if they have only 10-11 SU-57 so far, 5th gen fighter , when they build hundred " Checkmate " for export ? Technically is a great plane, capable, but without numbers, it's only russian propaganda. F-16 was built in thousands, and from 2019 production re-open.
Great video. Informative, long/short enough, entertaining.
Far more insight than the usual superficial RUclips crap, yet condensed so I dont have to invest hours of research to assess the basic concepts and requirements of the aircraft.
Thanks for the disclaimer in the beginning! 🤣
-Millennium 7 is a a bit of a Russian Fanboy you have to admit and over compensates for the anti Russian bias.
-Anyone that spends time on line is used to endless Russian hype of the "might"" and invincibility of their systems. S-400, Su-35, Su-34, Kinzahl, Zirkon etc. Russian weapons hype ios part of the way they seek to intimidate the nations around then as they seek to expand and establish to Russian Empire of the Tsars and there Soviet by a series of invasions, annexations and espionage drive coupe d'etate.
-Analysis of the Su-57 is necessary but it will soon be accompanied by exaggerated claims of invincibility or supremacy both to drive Russian weapons exports but mainly as part of the bellicose threats and intimidation of targeted countries and to develop a sense of supremacy within Russia.
-We are thus right to mock these claims when they are hype.
@@williamzk9083True
@@williamzk9083 было бы странно если бы оборонный комплекс обклеивал баллистические ракеты и танки наклейками с русалками и дельфинчиками и красил бы самолеты в розовый только чтобы уважаемые партнеры не подумали что им угрожают. В сша ведь так не делают, да? И никуда не вторгаются, и войн не развязывают. Хотите бояться - бойтесь
Note that the bottom edge of the inlet is divided into two segments, each aligned with the corresponding wing. We also see this in the Kratos XQ-58's top inlet and in the Anduril Fury concept for CCA.
I agree with your take that this concept shows very good attention to "stealth basics". It may not be as refined as some others, but it seems to get the fundamentals right. IMO the US needs to learn to do more like this if it is to keep the cost of the CCA at a level where >1000 can be procured.
The composite skin on the fuselage will need to be minimally transmissive to radar to avoid exposing returns from the structure underneath, so at least in that respect the composites will need to be optimized for stealth.
With regard to your comments about exhaust-hiding at 19:45, I agree that the new configuration is better optimized for hiding the exhaust, though the nozzle doesn't seem to be recessed quite as deeply as on the F-35 or F-22. It's also not clear if they're using a bypass-air-mixing scheme similar to what the F-22 and F-35 both employ.
Nice job looking at this in a even-handed way and trying to engage with this design on its own terms instead of from a Western perspective.
I think that the performance that the AL-51 is claiming is feasible with an ordinary turbofan, but only with an extraordinarily high turbine inlet temperature (hotter even than F135). That would explain the interminable development, since getting good reliability that way requires fundamental improvements in materials and manufacturing. Pratt proved capable of meeting impressively high reliability objectives with the F135, but only after very protracted development.
Was very eagerly awaiting this video as soon as I learned the subject matter. And what a stellar analysis of the aircraft, systems and what it means for the VKS and future potential customers.
Quite frankly the Flanker family has reached the end of its usefulness in anything resembling conventional wars against a roughly peer opponent. Unless the VKS somehow managed to gather overwhelming tactical, operational and strategic strength comparable to USAF or the PLAAF than non LO aircraft will be disproportionately attrited and objectives not met. The VKS actually IMO did the best of all the services early in the Ukraine war but still its taskings were too much, its opponents resourceful and resilient and the other services fumbled and tripped.
But the Su-75 represents a potential lifeline for the VKS. Finally giving its fighter squadrons a good quality LO aircraft to procure in numbers to complement the higher end Su-57's and 30/35's that the Fulcrums simply could not deliver. A true potential revival of something like Frontal Aviation for the 21st century. For a force that needs to recover from losses and learn what needs to be changed at a tactical, training and force composition level , this is something I am sure the VKS bigwigs are eyeing with interest. And if a substantial order is eventually placed, then I am sure nations like Vietnam would be more willing to follow suit.
A stellar analysis M7. Where much of RUclips is all clickbait trash without substance, your eye and expertise is something I always learn from.
What does "LO aircraft" mean? Thanks!
@ytsm Low Observable. It's a term to describe an aircraft with reduced radar and infrared observability to detection.
I agree. Sukhoi is going to have a much easier time selling the aircraft if the Russians are using it themselves. Nobody want to be the sole customer, bearing all the maintenance, spares and upgrade development risk.
Well, okay, I’m still ready to accept the usual, fanatical statement about the “overwhelming tactical and strategic power of US aviation,” but use the definition of “overwhelming power of the PLA” when comparing the Russian and Chinese air forces, and even include “strategic power” in this definition! are you out of your mind?! China still flies on Russian engines and gliders copied from the Russian Federation and the United States, and has no “strategic” aviation at all (unless you consider copies of Soviet medium-range bombers of the Stalin era to be strategic aviation in the modern sense of the term)))))
Thank you @@cannonfodder4376 !!
Being for export market usually means that it is not the pinnacle of possible technology. There are probably many trade offs to be relatively cheap.
Dunno if this will actually end up existing as an aircraft (my money's on no until 2030 at least) but it would be a cool idea if it did. Nice to see a stealth design that isn't just Flying Wing But With a New Intake Shape or F-35 Clone #62 (looking at you, KF-21 and JC-31)
😊❤ Haven't heard from the "Checkmate" program in quite a while. Thanks 😂❤
"The VKS, with the Su-30SM, Su-35S, Su-57 and MiG-35S multirole fighters and heavy Su-34 fighter-bomber in current production, is not interested in buying another tactical combat aircraft. But the VKS would buy the Su-75 if the political authorities deem it necessary to keep the project alive and support its export."
Excellent. Could't stop watching to the end. Thanks.
Top-notch work as usual per your standards! Grazie mille.
I had dismissed this fighter as a copy of the MRF-54e from Northrop. Thank you for taking the time to examine why it's not. If Russia can get the funding to get this plane off of the ground, it should be successful. Not as good as the F-35, but if it's affordable, it doesn't need to be as good as.
@@Max_Da_G Not only is a T-75 unlikely to ever have the same operational value that an F-35 brings, but it is unlikely they will ever get the economies of scale to produce them for as little as F-35s are being produced right now.
I think this was a very reasonable summation of the Su-75 design and its probably use.... Very good job!
As a chess ♟️ player when someone say checkmate, it means you can make any further moves,the game is over.
SU75 checkmate; is most beautiful design I have seen.
Alright, now it's time to watch 😏
I learn so much from your videos. You put a lot of work behind this. Appreciated. ...
You didn't tell the main thing about this plane without a pilot. Artificial intelligence instead of a pilot checkmate ♟♠
Maybe the Chinese models. No one else has AI hardware to waste 😂
Congrats on 100k👍
Thank you 🙌
I have noticed that Russians release new magic weapon every two years, we had SU57 followed by Magic tsunami torpedo followed by Su75, what do you think comes next? Maybe a Teleport or photon cannons in 2024?
If you are aviation fan you will know the su57 already known since the 2000s
Whatever it is, India will buy it.
@@shanecameron6371 India cancelled that contract. Now they are suing trying to get back their money as SU57 turned out to be scam.
@@shanecameron6371not anymore, Ukraine has kinda shown russian gear up for what it is
@@B.D.E. Are you talking about what happened to all that western armour?
Thanks, I really think Otis should be given a promotion to coffee maker, just need some limbs, he certainly has an opinion.
Excellent report for a very fuzzy subject.
The first prototype images have me thinking they were using SU-57 wings all together! - The last concept pictured seems to be closer to a diamond profile.
Al for the thrust vectoring, I really don't think of that design to be aimed towards super-maneuveravility.
The lighter rear structure and the focus or titanium reinforcement on the middle, in front of the engine, doesn't seem to be prepared for the engine to twist, just to push.
The removable cannon is a solution that should've be implemented a while ago! Specially on light fighters where you just can't afford to carry extra weight not needed for the mission, more over when using stand-off weapons (the Super-Etendard replaces his cannons with the electronics needed to operate the Exoset).
Indeed it's not aimed to super maneuverability like the su 57 looks like the russian aiming for stealthier aircraft and its design actually resembles the northrop mrp from the front and the yf 23 from the rear
I think its gonna be stealthier than the f35
@@HardCor3Essam Because it'll never reach production.
@@Techno_Idioto go troll somewhere else😂😂😂😂 same thing was said during the t50 tests
@@HardCor3Essam Calm down, vatnik, don't get your panties in a twist because I spoke the truth.
@@Techno_Idioto lol don't get your twisted home boii 🤣 go follow your western Bs media feeding you braindead info fits u perfectly
If the Su-75 ends up having a super small radar cross section watch how the U.S fanboys will immediately switch to another feature and say its the only important thing.
Thank you for video!
26:20 - you may just swipe left-right tail elevons for better nozzle movement. Inside you get 90 degree, outside line behind wing will continued.
Also heard that su75 will have swappable nose variants
It all sounds good. I'll believe it when i see it
Note: Argentina will not buy F16 or any main US aircraft because they could and would be blocked in a confrontation with England. Buying attemps are just corruption attemps.
lol malvinas
Except the US is overriding British votes on the matter. In addition, previous attempts at purchasing western weapons like the FA-50 were blocked due to British components on those weapons. F-16 is a domestic U.S. product so they override any British complaints, even with British components in them.
Now if there is money to buy and maintain them is a whole sail issue altogether.
@@UmbraHandif its fitted with a uk designed/built ejector seat it won't get sold to Argentina.
@@gregs7562 I mentioned it before, even if it has UK components, the US will and has overridden the decision by the Uk government. The US government decision in this matter has more power than the UK decision. If not the sale could have never proceeded.
@@UmbraHand US government will block the use and spare parts of their planes in favor of England.
This is the second video of yours that I see and I have to confirm the same opinion I had from the previous content: you are a brilliant guy
kudos and much simpathy to you
@Millennium7HistoryTech
thank you for your videos. Those, who feel themselves as "warriors" always will make silly remarks.
But as an engineer myself (in different discipline), i really could hear your love for engineering and interesting decisions.
Awesome work as always!!! Happy Monday!!!
Iran have just signed a deal for SU35 & Yak 130 trainers & Mil Mi helicopter gunships, I dare they'll be interested. Despite the trolls anti Russian bias the SU 57 has been performing really well & is the only gen 5 fighter with a any official kills. Russia had a lot more money to invest than people believe. It'll be interesting to see what develops with this fighter.
Funny how you decry trolls when you yourself are a conspiracy theorist as one click on your channel reveals. And what is this about the Su-57 performing well? Where? We have seen nothing about the Su-57s performance. It absolutely has no official kill.
There is literally no evidence whatsoever to support the claim that the Su-57 got a kill. The only "proof" is that Russia said so, and when they are genuinely claiming to have destroyed more Ukrainian plains than even existed in the country prior to the war, most of which were scrap metal, I'd take that claim with a mountain sized piece of salt.
9-A-7759 "Гром" (Thunder) is not a serial product and is still very far from being a serial product. As far as I know, there is not a single solid proof that this bomb was ever dropped from a carrier, even with a training warhead.
This is not to mention the stillborn idea of modularity of this kind of bombs.
hope your confidence is well founded and will be rewarded .my self I think the russian aircraft leave a lot to be desired ,the original engines on su 57 were very loud in flight ,I would desribe it as a scream ,it was not stealthy at all,except if you were deaf ,but then again you might be alerted by the vibrations .India pulled out of buying them . With the russian civilian air fleet being almost all from the west ,makes me think the su75 is all smoke and mirrors ,as I collect model russian aircraft cannot wait for the model to come ouy in 1/72nd ,but then again may be not in my life time.
My Favorite Italian!! Hello form Poland. Fantastic video. No BS.
On the topic of modern composites. The Russians lag far, far behind the US and West in this area. First true US composite aircraft was the A-12/SR-71 in the 1960s (15 percents by weight - the rest was mostly titanium). Then the F-111, F-14 and F/A-18 used composites in limited ways. The AV-8B (US first true composite fighter) used composites extensively. As later the F-22 and F-35. The Super Hornet also applies extensive composites, but to a much lesser degree compared to the AV-8B, F-22 and F-35.
For comparison, the Russian's first used limited composites on the Flanker in the 1980s. The YAK-41 in the 80s used composites extensively, but only a few prototypes were produced. The SU-35S applies some additional composites. The SU-57 is Russia's first true composite fighter, but only a handful of aircraft have been produced.
So the US has produced about 1500 true composites fighters (AV-8B, F-22, F-35) racking up several million operational flight hours. For comparison, the 20 or so SU-57s produced so far probably has a few thousands flight hours. In other words, the US experience in manufacturing and operating composite fighters far outreaches the Russians.
And the same applies to AESA radars.
Thing about fancy US fighters is that they're overly fragile and overly expensive. Useless in austere conditions like the Ukrainian conflict. Hubris is why America has lost every conflict and turned tail since 1945 🤷♂️
@@shanecameron6371 Except, of course, the Iraqi Gulf Wars and the Balkans.
Yo bruv is everything ok. What happened to your head? Great analysis just what I thought and verified by yourself. Big up😎
I haven't run the CFD analysis, but that inlet seems awful small for a modern turbofan engine. Good video but was hoping to hear a bit more about that...
Either the Sukhoi engineers still know how to make a jet intake and have built it properly, or they have forgotten how to build a jet intake. Without evidence for the latter, the former appears far more probable.
@@DecidedlyNinja It is not only the Sukhoi bureau who is involved in that kind of research but also TsAGI. And TsAGI guys know what aerodynamics is. 😊
@@DecidedlyNinjayou think fail35 intakes work? Literally choking the engine all the time. It takes 20 seconds more then a f16 to reach mach1.
Perhaps you should run that cod analysis and then comment back bus
Very informative, well presented both verbally and with great graphics / animation in good English of advanced Russian ingenuity.
Amca India... Will it be a good one? your view?
He probably waiting for the prototype to unveil first. Also he dislike India-Pakistan fanboy war. So hope viewer is calm enough for the vid
@@swordsman1137exactly but i would like to see design analysis from him .
nice overview, however i just want to point out that the russians have no interest in the su-75, they will use the su-57 as the multirole fighter, as for interception and air to air battles, they will use the mig 41 that will be able to reportedly go mach 4+ that is being developed as we speak. even if its not stealth(no reports on its stealth capabilities yet) it should be able to outfly most missiles the west can currently field.
Another excellent video. Very informative. Thank you.
33:50 about totally passive firing solutions, that was already in the Su-27S from 1982. The system use datalink from the whole air defense network, or the flight generated data by triangulating the targets ranges by combining each wingmen located targets. The Su-27 family is as well capable to guide each others missiles if pilots coordinates the engagement.
So it is logical that Russian's will just carry these old methods to new fighters.
Su 75 check mate will be a couple decades behind the 6th gen aircraft that we release. So the name is a little silly. Its like winning a chess match in your head that you had 20 years ago. Yep, check mate!
What 6th Gen plane is that then?
I suspect that a big air-to-air missile will be integrated, especially if the VKS adopts the design. That said, it'd likely be limited to two missiles per aircraft. But they (R-37 / RVV-BD class weapons) seem to have been very popular in the current war.
Another great video, thanks for explaining the patents it great learn as you watch the video. It is for sure my favorite video of 2023. I definitely think it will be part of VKS I have read that head of UAC has said it will 100% be part of Russian air force. They did put out patent last week for a 2 seat stealth fighter, many believe this is the 2 seat SU-57. Also I have read that the flat nozzle engine is a totally separate engine from Al-51-F1. There were rumor last year they had done more modification to AL-41-F1 plus Izdeliye 30 and clean sheet flat nozzle engine. I will try find links, I always forget to bookmark this stuff. Again great video best content for real aircraft lovers.
You sure it isn't the MiG-41? A interceptor that is replacing the MiG-31 could and would probably be a 2 seater too.
@@antoniohagopian213 Actually no, I believe it was patented by Sukhoi and some think it may even be stealth version of the SU-30. The MiG-41 is supposed to fly by end of this year there would be no need for a patent at this point.
judging by the drawings of the patent, the fighter's "nose" + cockpit can be dismantled and the 'nose' installed without the cockpit. thus the Su75 turns into a drone. it can be a wingman of the Su57, or independently fight (having a powerful radar), like a robot fighter with AI, having 5 missiles in its compartments with a range of up to 100 miles
SU-75 seems like the F-16 but with stealthier design. And most likely will fill the role of the next export jet.
Exactly pretty much every 6th gen looks like that and basically ripped off the American version.
I think with the current situation in Russia, Russian Air Force may become first customer, because this thing is simpler and cheaper than building a single su35s
@@farmcat9873 That probably has something to do with physics. 😉
@@farmcat9873 As if America is the first and only country to ever build a fighter jet, technology will never peak.
@@Mr.mysterious76they do have FAR more experience with stealth than anyone else combined. Plus the massive budget and export potential.
By the time this gets to production stage for sale around the world, 6th gen will be available lol
Brother I'm not a troll it's just a facts. Russia doesn't have the funding or resources at this time it's a great concept like they always have but they won't have the funding to produce anything of mass amounts to create any type of damage. They might have five or six of these planes but that's it just like the other s fighters they put out in recent times.
They also likely won't be as nearly capable as they were advertised either if they ever get produced.
Cool video mate - Love from Denmark 🇩🇰
5:05 for the prospect of export to Vietnam, VN military has been quite conservative about new technology - they prefer proven & well-matured technologies, and such will stay close to the Su-30 Flanker family instead
VN people's air force likely will not buy Su-75 until at least 5 countries has started flying the aircraft
I imagine like all other countries decisions will take into consideration potential adversaries. If other, older aircraft are expected to quite well against China's J-20 and J-10C, countries may be reluctant to introduce a major new aircraft and related systems to their arsenal..
This A/C is a typically, but thoroughly elaborated approach on the "quality / quantity" interpretation (expressions like hi-low mix et such just lack the essence). The only drawback of this A/C it's his name. I missed this naughty bot Otis. Be well...
Maybe it will feature Rapid Unscheduled Dissassembly! 🙂
I'm not sure If they want to copy that feature from the f35.
@@Greasy__Bearthey wouldn't. They'd be copying it from their own shitty planes 😂
@@ObiWanShinobi917ok boomer
@@Greasy__BearF-35 is genuinely the safest fighter jet on the planet, both in terms of losses per flight hour, and in total of losses per air frame per year
It is. It really is. As much as you can appreciate the design of Russian planes, comparing their modern counterparts to the F-35 is a losing game. @@ImBigFloppa
Good analysis, as always. Thank you.
The Russians only have eight SU-57 working, and they’re going to build a new SU-75 lol.
Argentina finance ? You have a promising future in stand up comedy.
Oh this is a great video, lots of good details, so much better than the average "military news" slop you see on youtube everywhere, well done! The Checkmate looks like a very serious, very fearsome plane; it's definitely going to be a scary opponent for anyone who has to face it no matter which currently existing flying airplane they're on. I also can't wait to see the engine/nozzle developments, i expect we're going to see flat nozzles on the next versions of the 57 and 75; maybe it's development was difficult or it was too expensive, but i wouldn't be surprised if we see the next Su-57 and 75 versions with F-22 style nozzles.
Especially interested to see how the optionally manned fighters are going to be used and evolved, drones are the future of air warfare and they're going to change things in ways we can't imagine yet.
The Russians gave up trying to copy the F-22's engine paddle nozzles because it's designed shape was too complicated, it was prohibitively costly, and they didn't have the manufacturing and material science to create them. They couldn't do it back then and they still will not be able to in the near future.
@@BagoPorkRinds the "near future" goes by a lot faster than you think, they'll figure it out eventually, they're not cavemen. The F-22 is like 30 years old.
@@belliduradespicio8009 The technology materials is even older at over 30 years AND YET neither Russia or China still have not come close to fully emulating what the Americans have created from the ATF program (YF-22 & YF-23). By the time they do, the U.S. has already moved on to even more sophisticated, complex, and expensive technologies and materials. Russia will never catch up because they do not have the industries, the economy, and importantly unlike in the U.S. with thousands of sub-contractors building highly sophisticated parts and electronics to sustain even modest manufacturing numbers.
@@belliduradespicio8009 30+ years later and the F-22 is still far more sophisticated and capable than either Su-57 or China's J-20. Checkmate would not make a dent. Neither will China's J-31.
@@BagoPorkRinds you must be joking cause this is hilarious american industry
A flat nozzle is being developed for an export version; a 3D nozzle will be installed for the Russian Air Force.