Video Sponsored by Ridge. Check them out here: ridge.com/TASKANDPURPOSE. Use my code “TASKANDPURPOSE” for 10% off your order and for an entry to win a Hennessey Ford Bronco or $75K through September 30th! US Only
I came here looking for this comment. Thank you for calling out "mok" vs "mach" because that was driving me crazy. :) I also almost stopped watching after the "mach 12" thing because that's so far outside any semblance of possibility, but you make a great point that it was probably a misread of 1.2. Your observation made me stay to watch the rest. :)
The super Hornet was designed to lower signatures it apparently has a frontal radar cross section an order of magnitude less than the legacy f18. That doesn't happen by accident
@@smokescreen100 Typhoon and Rafale have similar features to hide the front of the engines and reduce RCS significantly compared to comparable previous generation aircraft. They're a long way off the radar signature of a "stealth" aircraft like F-22 or F-35 but it's a worthwhile improvement nonetheless, especially when combined with a good ECM system.
@@JohnFrumFromAmericaAll modern aircraft designs are going to take RCS into account because it's just good practice. Non-stealth aircraft just won't trade cost and functionality for it.
@@somedudethatripsplanetinha4221 that was the AI inside that one f-35 gained sentience but it was immature and thought it was a unicorn. It flew until it fell down.
The S-37 became the Su-47. The Su-37 was a Thrust vectoring technology demonstrator that paved the way for the Su-30SM and later the Su-35BM which became the Su-35S.
I always laugh at this. How can thrust vectoring help you when your RWR can't even tell you where a missile is about to hit you. I guess they just instinctively do cobra maneuvers when the little russian computer starts panicking.
The MiG-29 and Su-27 were not in operational use until 1983 and 1985 respectively. Both were only flying as prototype/development aircraft since 1977 until their initial introductions, and were reactive designs to the 4th Gen American F-16 and F-15 fighters.
@@user-oy6zr5do9c The Su-75 Checkmate doesn't really exist, even in prototype form. It is only a mockup. India has already rejected the Su-57 as it lacked true stealth, and did not have the capabilities Russia promised.
@@PlugInRides су 75 конечно еще не существует как и самолета 6 поколения) су 75 это однодвигательный су 57 ) он специально изготовлен для продажи) скоро и ф35 не будут существовать) их слишком часто теряют как сша так и страны которые приобрели самолеты у сша)
@@user-oy6zr5do9c Just like the F-14 and F-16 didn't last very long? Both fighters had higher accident rates when they were new. Actually, the F-35A has a lower Class A Mishap rate than either the F-22 or the F-16, at least in USAF service. Every F-35 crash gets more attention than older fighters, especially since the program is still politically controversial. Israel likes their F-35s so well, they increased their orders from 50 to 75 aircraft.
A little error: The S-37 prototype that became the Su-47 was developed much earlier than the Su-27M (later known as Su-37) and even it has shared components, they're not on the same branch of plane development
In an interview, Lieutenant Colonel David Berk, who has flown the F-18 and F-16 and F-22, and F-35, said that you can not turn a nonstealthy aircraft into a stealthy one. You can not take an F-15 and turn it into a stealth aircraft. You can make it better but not make it stealthy. To do that, you have to redesign it from the ground up which would be a totally new aircraft. The Su-57 is designed with 4th-generation engines and 4th-generation technology. It looks great and performs well but it is not 5th gen. To do that, you have to have every aspect of the aircraft be designed for stealth from the ground up. The Su-57 is designed to be super advanced but to cut corners where possible, like using an old engine design. Is it advanced? Sure. But it is not stealthy on the same level as the F-35 or F-22.
From your statement only American fighter jets are stealthy, your superiority complex has misled you in believing improbable truths, you're no longer on top of things but Russia is
It’s because good looking planes usually fly well. Russian fighters lacked behind the west in avionics even during the USSR period, so Soviet designers had to compensate for that with their strong trait - aerodynamics. Soviets were actually ahead of the West in lifting body and wing body fusion designs, and Russians today still are in some aspects. Su-27 was given a small leading edge extension and relaxed instability, just like the contemporary F-16, but it also had a wing body fusion design that was only implementing on the F-22. F-22 had to implement that to save its aerodynamics because stealth shape isn’t aerodynamic friendly, but Su-27 totally didn’t need to do it but its designers went that extra mile to make its shape perfect for 4th gen fighters. Flanker family probably has the best conventional layout of any 4th gen fighter, and only canard deltas can even begin to compare.
Thanks a lot @Taskandpurpose for making this video about one of my favourite planes. Believe it or not, my son and I found out about this plane while visiting the local model shop, as an Airfix model. Attracted primarily because of its looks, it's interesting to find out its delays in production, how ambitious it is but also its potential failings. You have a knack of creating vids that are light-hearted, and translating a lot of the serious stuff for easy understanding. Keep up the great work! Any chance of teaching us a bit about another Airfix beauty, the Russian Kamov Ka-58 Stealth helicopter??
The Kamov Ka-58 is completely imaginary, invented as a "what if" scenario to make toys and models. It's kind of based off the Ka-52, which is in turn a 2 seater based off the 1 seat Ka-50. Ka-52s and Ka-50s are both quite common in the real world.
At least it doesn't have the inherent design flaws of the F-35... which are permanently baked in... another 20 year, obsolete by the time they made it, underpowered, flying brick of a stealth fighter...
@sigma_six Who are you talking to? Lol why did you just randomly bring up the f35? And if we're fighting Russia we could use a rc plane and win I wouldn't worry about the f 35 Russians are incompetent at everything
@@sigma_sixEasy to never be obsolete when you never go into production, but I'll take an obsolete design that exists in quantity over a one-off technology demonstrator.
I do love his motto/catchphrase of boiling stuff down to be understandable for "the average infantryman" since that also makes it understandable for the average civilian most of the time too. I dont know how often they do it IRL but i know in the past at least they used to teach soldiers some basic theory on the enemy and why the US is fighting a conflict and things like the theory behind different designs on equipment.
As Sun Tzu wrote in “The art of war:” If a you can’t spot a Russian plane, it’s because it doesn’t exist or they aren’t using it, not because it is stealth.
This is basically the Russian version of the F-22 Raptor: an extremely ambitious aircraft that took a long time to develop and struggles to be produced at scale. ...only that it's less capable, not produced at scale at all, and all of that 20 years later when the US already phase it out again.
The F-22 didn’t struggle to be produced at scale. Obama and Robert Gates just killed the program prematurely because they stupidly thought we’d only be fighting terrorists until the end of time.
@@cesaravegah3787he’s saying the SU-57 isn’t capable while the raptor actually is. The raptor is just slightly similar in terms of lengthy development and difficulty producing at scale, but the US still made it happen on some scale
10:09 F-35 is a stealthy brick. No one has ever claimed it being maneuverable. You must have meant F-22, which is a pure beast when it comes to maneuverability
@@goose2088 in the first turn, maybe. However, the design coupled with a single engine makes it bleed speed and energy very quickly and makes it nearly unsurvivable in a dogfight. Fortunately or not, it was not designed for within visual range fights. If it does find itself in one, many things have gone very very wrong.
The Su-37 is a Flanker like the Su-27 and the Su-35. The Su-47 was a completely different aircraft that was first designated the S-37, NOT Su-37. These are two different aircraft. Just saying...
Same. Especially since the SU-37 was only ever meant to be a technology demonstrator for upgrading the existing SU-27 family of aircraft. The SU-47 is an almost completely new design to explore both Low-Observable technologies, as well as the potential benefits of forward swept wings.
Always thought that an AIM-9X with its super infrared detectors would light up those high-infrared profile engine outlets. Those things probably glow like the sun on afterburners.
Mama Russia has some IR defensive systems, though. From soviet times, but still. And - if you can get 2km behind a Raptor with a Mig21 and modern optical sensors+missiles, chances are the F22 is dead, too. Lots of hot exhaust, too.
RCS of F35 is approx. .05 m² The F22 is approx. .001 m² The SU57 is approx .5 m² The Felon is actually very maneuverable, it is quick as well. But it is not stealth. It is classed as low observable. The cantered, hyper thrust vector cones/nozzles makes the Felon impressive to fly and a worthy opponent to raid against. It is not really a dog fighter, but can do it well and win. It is one of those things that do a lot of things well but nothing really great. The Soviet mentality of quantity is still there. The Felon sacrifices stealth for quantity of weapons.
@@doublehelix7880 Still vastly better than any of the garbage Russia will produce for the next 30 years at least. Try making a decent plane and then you can diss other combat jets.
Sir, you are far from average. Your humility alone is top of the line. You say a lot, giving us something to think about instead of telling us what to think. You do good work, I hope your people are proud of you.
It is now the best supersonic plane. Was never intended to sacrifice maneuravilty and radar capabilities over stealth as for that purpose has the su70 flying ahead. Don't need to produce big quantities still because already has air superiority. Preferable to continue improvement
The aircraft is actually manufactured at 1/20 of the cost of what Russian defence stated. The other 19/20 of cost went to line the pockets of the defence ministers and manufacturers
Concerning stealth: according to Sukhois own papers, the Su57 has the same radar cross section as any 4th gen fighter, like the JAS 39 Gripen... which ISN'T a stealth fighter.
Questionable papers. Russia wouldn't reveal a plane capability especially its RCS that still is in mainly testing phase. Interested in the source tho may u send me a link to them would be very interested to have a read through.
@@julianpetkov8320it's kind of hard for the f22 to see use when the enemy they were intended to fight... Imploded from spending too much money on their army. Also, how was the weather balloon mission a failure? They popped it, without blowing it up, and whatever remained of their fancy spy balloon sensors after it fell down was promptly picked up and looked over by... Whoever's job that is.
You want it to sound dangerous if you're the Pentagon so you can pump up your R&D requests from Congress. If it was the SU-57 Flounder it wouldn't get much press. You think they sit at a table drinking beer and shouting out names or does a computer just spit a codename out? Good question.
Deployed to Syria in 2018 and 2019, Tested weapon systems, hot-dry weather performance, US and Israely radar detection, performed same tasks of Israely F-35A deployment in 2018 and US F-22 and F35 deployments to Syria this year.
One thing that must be noticed about the Mig 1.44 is that it was not stealthy in any aspect whatsoever. One simple look at the airframe's design can show that there are no serpentine-shaped air intakes for example.
Yeah, kinda similarly to the Horton flying wing from the Germans; being even slightly stealthy is more of a side effect than an intention. The MiG 1.44 could’ve been a good plane, but it would be more like a 4+ Generation aircraft
Why avoid using their 4th gen, maybe 4.5 gen, figuter when they are claiming it is a 5th gen fighter that will be able to be upgraded to 6th gen? Ego and hubris
Russia is amazing at building military parade floats like the Armata. But can't afford to actually build an army out of them. Just a paper bear blowing hot air.
Well, Russia wanted to showcase what it was capable of researching and designing. Russia needed foreign investment to tool up and actually build anything. Then they went and showed the world that Russia sucks at war and not only did orders evaporate, but Russia's ability to produce anything other than misery has dropped off a cliff. When you see videos of Russian tankers using T-55's as main battle tanks on the front line vs. the reported indirect fire stopgap it really makes you wonder just how desperate they really are. A modern military industrial complex they have not.
@@tomk3732 Failing to take and hold a single major Ukrainian city while incurring 261k KIA and losing over 4k tanks (half your entire inventory) isn't what I'd call winning. The ruble is in free fall, oil and gas sales remain steady but with the currency problem their profits have dropped by 40% SO FAR and revenue continues to drop. They've lost an entire generation of young, productive workers and infrastructure is crumbling. The central bank is out of gold/cash reserves and has resorted to bumping interest rates to over 12% (yay double digit interest rates!!!) so consumers and businesses will feel the pinch. Russian GDP should shrink by another 3% this year which is catostrophic. Putin is running out of reserves at the front but is hesitant to order another round of conscription as bridges, cranes, ports, refineries, electrical grids and fresh water supplies start to go offline. Russia is suffering through day 552 of their lightning three day war. Ukraine is suffering mightily with terrible losses but Russia? If that's your idea of winning I'm not sure what losing would look like. You MUST be Russian if you think that's not losing a war on every possible front. Time will tell, but the next two years are going to be brutal for Russia. She won't bounce back economically for 20-30 years. By the time the Russians turn on the gas and oil spigots again, the west will have moved on and backwards Russia will be 50 years behind the times yet again. China should make the leap, but you wouldn't want their problems either. Until these asshats figure out we're all in this together, it's going to continue to get worse.
What I've noted is if these things are as good as claimed, once they are on the ground, drones and missiles can kill them anyway. That can put an air force out of business in a hurry. The cost of taking these planes out is only a fraction of the cost of building and maintaining one. I think the U.S. needs to think real hard about that observation.
@@aesma2522 Future air superiority will need to take lightweight (around a few pounds gross weight) drones into account. Besides Atacms or the Chinese interdiction umbrella pushing USN Carriers out of range of the planes on board, you can always smuggle in a small drone with a few pounds of explosives or even none at all and let it be swallowed by a turbine. The way this is shaping up, WW3 will be fought without planes, since neither side can take out the other side's GBAD and missiles and drones are just cheaper and more common than manned planes.
"Russia claims their Su-57 (...) is 5th generation stealth aircraft. But wait a second - have we ever observed Su-57 (...)?" Exactly. Its stealth is superior
I hope you’re joking because otherwise, that guy is right and you didn’t watch the video. Or you just have horrible comprehension skills, as it’s clearly stated that there are very few Su-57s in active service and any operations they’ve performed have been done within Russian airspace at beyond visual range.
That plane didn't crash. It was a field test of the ejection seat! 😂 Oh, and mok is MACH. Sorry to be pedantic. I truly truly enjoy your Channel. Keep up the good work.
As a military aviation fan it's is kinda sad that we don't get to see much of the Russian next gen jet ie. MIG141 SU47 and SU57 But the chronic lack of RnD money seem to be a running theme for them since the 90s
True for MiG-1.44 Su-47 on the other hand was always a tech demonstrator. There were never any plans to put combat systems into it despite all the media speculation. As for Su-57, at the moment it's in low-rate initial production and all the birds are going to Lipetsk Combat Application and Aircrew Conversion Centre where they are making tactics and procedures for it. And occasionally some of the later-model prototypes that are property of UAC would fly a demo.
Here are, obviously, two grown up people, that comment seriously on this subject. Not kids, like in the rest of comments, fighting around stupid jokes... Also, I will add one comment - Actually , Russians "invented" stealth, and Idea around it... if they didn't produce it, that Is another reason (maybe lack of funds, maybe they think that stealth Is unneeded, or history...). But for sure they know how..!
@@ivicamilosavljevic4706 they came up with some of the theory, but only some, and there's a handful of different bits of tech that goes into stealth from the design to the materials and the Soviets only theorized about some of the design portion. The Germans were already making radar absorbing materials in the 40s with the U-480 and the US was independently developing stealth technologies. There was radar absorbing paint being developed during WW2 and the US was developing their own radar absorbing materials for the U2 along with other technology like printed circuit board materials that absorbed radar. Those Soviet theories didnt leave the USSR until the 70s but that was decades after the German and American developments of the 40s and 50s.
@@arthas640 - What is Your PERSONAL comment on that idea that "Russians didn't developed further stealth technology, because they tough it's obsolete and unneeded.." !? Reagrds from Serbia (IvicaM)
No weapon system, no matter how advanced, can make a difference in a warzone if you can´t have all too many of them. Both NATO and Russia are learning that more important than how deadly a system is, is how fast can you build/replace them. I wouldn´t be surprised at all if Russia drops the Su-57 completely. "Too expensive to lose" is not a desirable trait in a war asset.
Their 'fleet' of 10 prototypes... which will never see combat.. are for propaganda, recruitment, air shows, and if they can ever 'deep fake' an Su-57 engagement with a western F-35, F-22, etc., and show it shooting down a Western fighter, then maybe foreign sales.. after Ukraine War, as Russia currently has not capacity to fulfill foreign purchases.
@@sithassassinstl7864 changing the goal post? Russia has aloe plan to modernise their flert but now with war at Hand they have pushed harder and producing pretty fast. You do know that there is no Rush in peace ? So no.. my Point is still solid . And Save US virtually one can affor f22 or f35 but countries have to buy due to the US pressure . P.S. US can't afford them either . Look how US fleet is getting smaller
@@5tre55full Russia's budget had nothing to do with them being "at peace". Russia has been fighting as much as the US has since the cold war. Let's not play like they have been nice for the last 40 years. When the SU57 went into it's concept phase Russia was selling off it's military because it had no money. They are only now doing it at a massive deficit to their GDP. The US is down sizing the entire military because the technology (which caused the DOD budget to increase) makes the need for a massively fleet of aircraft obsolete. I don't think you understand how technology works. The better the tech the less you need to be effective. That has been they way of things for hundreds of years. By your argument the fact that we don't maintain millions of active duty soldier is due to budget issues. We don't do it because technology eliminated most of their jobs.
Kinda like they used the T-14s in Syria but not a single one was ever seen on film even though it was one of the most recorded wars in modern history to that point lol
They never used T-14 anywhere as it has not been accepted for service. So they could not use them in Syria. Besides why would they use them in Syria - they maybe have a dozen tanks there ;)
@@tomk3732 i mean, the whole tank exists simply as an export offering, so you'd think they'd want to actually use it somewhere to show that it can do more then break down in the middle of a parade....
@@petriew2018 Tank is not offered for export AFAIK and it never broke down on a parade - or the break down was strange as it continued to drive after it had broken ;) So there is not much pressure to introduce it.
Fun fact about the su57: The 3d thrust vectoring of the su57 isn´t like the 3d thrust vectoring from experimental US planes and the nozzles of the su57 have a 2d range of motion, however the nozzles are canted at 32 degrees allowing to simulate 3d thrust vectoring but reducing the efficiency for every axis and requiring the help of control surfaces to separate roll from yaw which induces additional trim drag
Isn't it kind of hilarious that they designed such a maneuverable dogfighting aircraft at the same time the US is deploying aircraft designed to kill them from over the horizon? I
Exactly. Only the US developed a true 360° thrust vectoring nozzle on the F-15 ACTIVE (and I believe on an experimental F-16 as well). But what’s hilarious is that, while the F-15 ACTIVE was phenomenally maneuverable, the USAF considers supermaneuverability to be a detriment in most realistic combat scenarios because it tempts pilots to get into slow turning fights where they are incredibly vulnerable to follow-up shots or an unseen wingman. Therefore, it did not ask for these nozzles on future F-15s and F-16s.
Hey Cappy. I'm guessin' you meant the F22 and not the F35 (10:11) and a Mach 12 speed (10:21) is certainly not possible (unless the Russians have alien tech we don't know about???). BTW, what does the sign behind your left shoulder say. Something about Saturday... I've been trying to read it for weeks. ☺
F-35 is very manoeuvrable, especially compared to legacy fighters in real-world combat configurations where it can fly clean with a useful weapons loadout, while they're carrying multiple tanks, targeting and ECM pods, plus weapons that massively increase drag. The test that saw an F-35 outperformed by an F-16 was an early airframe during testing and software development that was artificially limited in its turning performance and allowable g-forces. Once these restrictions were removed for production airframes it was as good as an F-16 in clean configuration. Flying clean is something you'll never see an operational F-16 do - it's useless outside of test flights and airshows and represents a theoretical upper limit of aircraft performance that's never reached in combat.
Ruskies always claim amazing stats. Then we build things that can defeat them. Then we find out their tech was garbage barely better than WWII all along.
@@myplane150 With the helmet mounted targeting system it shouldn't need to even if it did find itself in a WVR fight. That said, Sukhoi have made some incredible aircraft and have talented engineers but they can only work with the resources available. I doubt the designers of the Su-57 think it's a match for F-35 or F-22 even if it is a big improvement over older Soviet and Russian jets.
FYI, if the SU57 is in fact capable of carrying nuclear weapons, Russia is required to notify either NATO or the US (i'm unclear on the specifics) of that fact. Not doing so would be a pretty substantial treaty violation
I imagine the truth is something similar to the T-14 Armata where they have this forward thinking list of features but messed up on the basic engine design and probably lack the manufacturing capacity needed to produce all the various components.
I'm guessing it's maybe also that Putin is being very Hitlerian in having arbitrary preferences for certain approaches and units. Plus, Putin's generally more interested in his domestic appearance than in making anything that actually works. He's promised to make Russia a perceived superpower like the USSR once was, and showing that Russia, under his leadership, can lead the world in weapons design is a big part of that. But when you're trying to convince your domestic base of your technological superiority, as opposed to convincing your enemy of the fact on the battlefield, you tend to get flashy hunks of junk. That Russia appears terrified to try their flagship units in real combat suggests exactly that situation, as people who have designed a weapon they're convinced in good-faith will work want to see it exposed to scrutiny, especially in these exceedingly-rare near-peer conditions. The West is getting a ton of good data out of this conflict, and Putin seems to be actively avoiding getting any of it. That's not a great strategy, as you can hide from reality for a while, but it always finds you. Also, given the general level of corruption in Putin's fascist regime, guessing that every ounce of cash that could be stripped from either project ended-up in some Putin crony's Swiss bank account.
The announcer said it could fly supersonic without afterburner. Super cruise engines require extremely tight tolerances that the Russians most likely can't even come close to. With the embargos, even if they could build the aircraft, they don't have access to the components they would need.
Or they have enough cheaper and still effective T-72s, T-80s, and T-90s that they don't need to deploy the Armata tanks because they wouldn't be a game changer and would only bolster Ukrainian propaganda if one did get taken out. AND it would get taken out eventually like all tanks if deployed in a war like THIS. The T-90s will do just fine. You Americans just can't understand this simple reason. It baffles me. Why would they deploy expensive Armatas and test them in a REAL war when they have plenty of T-90s? A tank isn't ever gonna be a game changer in modern warfare. Also they don't have an unlimited and printed budget like the US does.
@@michaelccozens i think thats why Ukraine was the target in the first place - he thought itd be an easy win - hes been using Ukraine for hacking practice since the 2000's and then took Crimea in '14, hes been setting this up for over a decade so it probably shouldve been an easy W but Western suport and russias mismanagement and corruption were things that never made it into comrade putins equation, likely because anyone who told him the truth wouldve been shot on sight and knew it...anyways, grand scheme and all, yea it was all a show of force with little real interests or gains otherwise...control of the Black Sea Exclusive Economic Zone sure, that would've hurt the motherland if Ukraine had exploited it but '14 put the kaybash on that anyway...this was a "see NATO i really AM tough just like my mom says" move that backfired spectacularly when putin punched himself in his freshly botox'ed face
@@HuseinB58 The US Air Force deployed its expensive F-117 Nighthawks to Iraq in the first Gulf War despite having very few of them and knowing that a loss would be a massive propaganda victory for Iraq and the USSR. They went ahead and used them because they were a game-changer and force multiplier that made the entire coalition air forces far more powerful. If the T-14 was actually good then Russia would follow the American example and deploy it - losing one or two wouldn't matter if they'd destroyed loads of Ukrainian armour in return because unlike aircraft, people expect tanks to get destroyed or knocked out. It's not in Ukraine because it's junk like the rest of Russia's tanks. You say that T-90s and the rest are doing just fine but they're not, they're getting slaughtered and Russia has lost over 4000 armed vehicles to date and it's still in retreat. Russia needs something to turn the war around and its existing tanks aren't nearly good enough to make it happen.
Video Sponsored by Ridge. Check them out here: ridge.com/TASKANDPURPOSE. Use my code “TASKANDPURPOSE” for 10% off your order and for an entry to win a Hennessey Ford Bronco or $75K through September 30th! US Only
He is stealthy, so u can't see him
To be honest we need congratulate Russia creating fighter as stealthy as F/A-18 (minus Gravler).
😂😂
The first video you have made in a long time where you really focused on the facts and reality not just the propaganda. I really appreciate it.
Wait... Anti-Air and Anti-Ship? Like? Didn't A-6 Intruder already could do that 🤨
If we haven't observed it, it's clearly the best stealth fighter ever!
Amerikkka will never be able to destroy even a single Su-57 squadron!
……because there isn’t one.
That must be why they are only used outside air defense range...
How can u shoot it down if it doesn't exist
Does that mean my dad is using stealth technology?
@@trolleriffic xD
There is a running joke: US's F-35s are incapable of destroying a squadron of SU-57 because Russia doesn't even have a squadron of them.
notfunny didntlaugh
lol
I cackled.
Lol
It's not so much a joke... as it's just a statement of fact
The SU57 is performing a recon mission in Monaco disguised as a Yacht.
The F22 is being used to either shoot spy baloons, or against bare handed desert people in the middle-east. lol
Lol, not sure if “Mok 12” (instead of what I’m guessing would be Mach 1.2) was an “average infantry man” error or a dig at Russia’s speed claims😂
I came here looking for this comment. Thank you for calling out "mok" vs "mach" because that was driving me crazy. :) I also almost stopped watching after the "mach 12" thing because that's so far outside any semblance of possibility, but you make a great point that it was probably a misread of 1.2. Your observation made me stay to watch the rest. :)
I give your comment Mach 10 of out 10 possible Mok points. I'm not mocking you.
Mokery 12 Speed ?
Mok 12 seems like a funny jab at the silly propaganda claims. I too, was like "eh?"
that's the supercruise speed of the SU-57 with stage 1 engines.
Not only is the Su-57 the stealthiest aircraft ever, it also protects against dragons.
And Griffins; you forgot Griffins.
But there are no dragons around
Apperently it can sumon stalin from his grave to purge the russian army
@@amn0940 because it protected against them
Theyre that stealthy no one has seen them.😅
For reference, the MoD quoted 0.1-1m RCS is comparable to the F/A 18. A plane that wasn’t designed for stealth.
The super Hornet was designed to lower signatures it apparently has a frontal radar cross section an order of magnitude less than the legacy f18. That doesn't happen by accident
@JohnFrumFromAmerica I believe the f18 super hornet is considered low visibility
@@smokescreen100 I know that is what I am saying
@@smokescreen100 Typhoon and Rafale have similar features to hide the front of the engines and reduce RCS significantly compared to comparable previous generation aircraft. They're a long way off the radar signature of a "stealth" aircraft like F-22 or F-35 but it's a worthwhile improvement nonetheless, especially when combined with a good ECM system.
@@JohnFrumFromAmericaAll modern aircraft designs are going to take RCS into account because it's just good practice. Non-stealth aircraft just won't trade cost and functionality for it.
An aircraft so stealthy not even it’s own military can find it…
Worse yet, it is so stealhy Russia cant find the parts to build it! Even the American's don't have parts that stealthy!
Like that F-35 that got lost a while ago
@@somedudethatripsplanetinha4221 that was the AI inside that one f-35 gained sentience but it was immature and thought it was a unicorn. It flew until it fell down.
Sukhoi Su-57 is like John Cena, you simply cannot see it.
That is how stealthy it is.
So stealthy that the Pilots haven’t even seen it yet
It is all Ivan's fault he left the stealth system on, and now they can't find it.
It’s been used to the pilots have probably seen it although with your pro I can’t blame you.
LOL, yet 5 are parked just outside on the tarmac - now that is stealth!
@@tomk3732then why won't it fight my f22😠
@@winterinvicta name and english skills make sense
Like most things Russian, there’s a sprinkle of truth covering over a metric ton of BS
Absolutely true, I am russian myself, I confirm!
Thank you for using the metric system ❤
I mean. Russia reach level of F/A-18. That is something.
Is potato...
They're learning from their wumao masters
As far as I've heard, SU-5 is on a vacation trip to it's best buddy, the T-14 Armata tank.
Well, They made them so stealthy that now they can't find them.
If it’s “missing” then it must be the best stealth jet ever
So stealthy even the Ruskies themselves don’t know where it is
Aha!
It's so good, it can't be used for fear of revealing how good it is.
It’s been used more than any F-22 has in its 20 years of service
@@omnadrener1 In your dreams Kremlinbot.
The S-37 became the Su-47. The Su-37 was a Thrust vectoring technology demonstrator that paved the way for the Su-30SM and later the Su-35BM which became the Su-35S.
Exactly right!
Why the fact has always get few likes
I always laugh at this. How can thrust vectoring help you when your RWR can't even tell you where a missile is about to hit you. I guess they just instinctively do cobra maneuvers when the little russian computer starts panicking.
That's a common and enduring myth.
@@ShinobubuI would suggest you to read my comment to get educated then comment. Till then.🤫🤐
T-14, BMPT, Su-57.
When your toys are so precious that you put them on a shelf instead of using them.
The MiG-29 and Su-27 were not in operational use until 1983 and 1985 respectively. Both were only flying as prototype/development aircraft since 1977 until their initial introductions, and were reactive designs to the 4th Gen American F-16 and F-15 fighters.
ну и продаваться су 57 не планируется) для индии есть су 75)
@@user-oy6zr5do9c The Su-75 Checkmate doesn't really exist, even in prototype form. It is only a mockup. India has already rejected the Su-57 as it lacked true stealth, and did not have the capabilities Russia promised.
@@PlugInRides су 75 конечно еще не существует как и самолета 6 поколения) су 75 это однодвигательный су 57 ) он специально изготовлен для продажи) скоро и ф35 не будут существовать) их слишком часто теряют как сша так и страны которые приобрели самолеты у сша)
@@user-oy6zr5do9c Just like the F-14 and F-16 didn't last very long? Both fighters had higher accident rates when they were new. Actually, the F-35A has a lower Class A Mishap rate than either the F-22 or the F-16, at least in USAF service. Every F-35 crash gets more attention than older fighters, especially since the program is still politically controversial. Israel likes their F-35s so well, they increased their orders from 50 to 75 aircraft.
ну и 75 из 75 не проживут и 10 лет) лол @@PlugInRides
The actual truth is that the Russians recently lost their entire SU-57 fleet in Iran when an F-14 and Super Hornet took them down.
Hey now! That’s top secret info!
Thank God that we have other media apart from western MSM. If someone read your comment they will think that what you are saying is true.
@@zach11241 He must have heard it from an Admiral's daughter.
@@limitlesscash2771- thank God we have RUclips fact checkers
Tomcats are now Super Hornets?
A little error: The S-37 prototype that became the Su-47 was developed much earlier than the Su-27M (later known as Su-37) and even it has shared components, they're not on the same branch of plane development
also while talking about the Su-47, not a frame of this aircraft is shown
The mighty Berkut
Plus isn't the Su-47 used as a technology demonstrator now? Also, I'm pretty sure there is only one Su-47.
@@darkspine1052there were a few but they're so unstable that they crashed a few getting it to fly properly.
@@gravyd316 figures
Loved the video. Keep up the awesome work
Gotta love the rivets
In an interview, Lieutenant Colonel David Berk, who has flown the F-18 and F-16 and F-22, and F-35, said that you can not turn a nonstealthy aircraft into a stealthy one. You can not take an F-15 and turn it into a stealth aircraft. You can make it better but not make it stealthy. To do that, you have to redesign it from the ground up which would be a totally new aircraft. The Su-57 is designed with 4th-generation engines and 4th-generation technology. It looks great and performs well but it is not 5th gen. To do that, you have to have every aspect of the aircraft be designed for stealth from the ground up. The Su-57 is designed to be super advanced but to cut corners where possible, like using an old engine design. Is it advanced? Sure. But it is not stealthy on the same level as the F-35 or F-22.
This guy gets it. No other country comes remotely close to the U.S. in air superiority.
Even the skin of the Su-57 is lacking in stealth characteristics from what I hear. The rivets allegedly protrude enough to reflect radar.
@@picolascage5270the fact that you could see them in the first place on a stealth aircraft is a problem in itself.
Did I hear that young man say they claim mach 12 ????
From your statement only American fighter jets are stealthy, your superiority complex has misled you in believing improbable truths, you're no longer on top of things but Russia is
Giving credit where its due .. the Russians do make some gorgeous fighter jets
Though, where national security is generally concerned, most buyers are looking for functionality.
@@CakeofWisdom Or buy cope
It’s because good looking planes usually fly well. Russian fighters lacked behind the west in avionics even during the USSR period, so Soviet designers had to compensate for that with their strong trait - aerodynamics. Soviets were actually ahead of the West in lifting body and wing body fusion designs, and Russians today still are in some aspects.
Su-27 was given a small leading edge extension and relaxed instability, just like the contemporary F-16, but it also had a wing body fusion design that was only implementing on the F-22. F-22 had to implement that to save its aerodynamics because stealth shape isn’t aerodynamic friendly, but Su-27 totally didn’t need to do it but its designers went that extra mile to make its shape perfect for 4th gen fighters.
Flanker family probably has the best conventional layout of any 4th gen fighter, and only canard deltas can even begin to compare.
Was about to say that as well, Russia has some of the most beautiful and some of the most wacky planes every produced.
Hard disagree, they all look very badly made when you get close up, and extremely dated.
Thanks a lot @Taskandpurpose for making this video about one of my favourite planes. Believe it or not, my son and I found out about this plane while visiting the local model shop, as an Airfix model. Attracted primarily because of its looks, it's interesting to find out its delays in production, how ambitious it is but also its potential failings. You have a knack of creating vids that are light-hearted, and translating a lot of the serious stuff for easy understanding. Keep up the great work! Any chance of teaching us a bit about another Airfix beauty, the Russian Kamov Ka-58 Stealth helicopter??
The Kamov Ka-58 is completely imaginary, invented as a "what if" scenario to make toys and models.
It's kind of based off the Ka-52, which is in turn a 2 seater based off the 1 seat Ka-50. Ka-52s and Ka-50s are both quite common in the real world.
At least it doesn't have the inherent design flaws of the F-35... which are permanently baked in... another 20 year, obsolete by the time they made it, underpowered, flying brick of a stealth fighter...
@sigma_six Who are you talking to? Lol why did you just randomly bring up the f35? And if we're fighting Russia we could use a rc plane and win I wouldn't worry about the f 35 Russians are incompetent at everything
@@sigma_sixEasy to never be obsolete when you never go into production, but I'll take an obsolete design that exists in quantity over a one-off technology demonstrator.
I do love his motto/catchphrase of boiling stuff down to be understandable for "the average infantryman" since that also makes it understandable for the average civilian most of the time too. I dont know how often they do it IRL but i know in the past at least they used to teach soldiers some basic theory on the enemy and why the US is fighting a conflict and things like the theory behind different designs on equipment.
Russia made a jet so stealthy we haven't even seen it in action yet. 💀
As Sun Tzu wrote in “The art of war:” If a you can’t spot a Russian plane, it’s because it doesn’t exist or they aren’t using it, not because it is stealth.
Well, yeah, even the Russians aren't claiming the plane is invisible. 😂
@@CedarHuntand Serbia was never told the F-117 is invisible. Shows u that we need to better our communication skills.
@@nemiw4429The F117 isn't even in service anymore. Where is your "cutting edge" fighter, vatnik? 😂
@@CedarHunt we sadly also got ur useless f35. But people are working to overturn it and buy rafale 4. F35 is useless. Murricans are useless.ä
I didn't realize Sun Tzu was Italian:
"if a you..."
Jk jk
This is basically the Russian version of the F-22 Raptor: an extremely ambitious aircraft that took a long time to develop and struggles to be produced at scale.
...only that it's less capable, not produced at scale at all, and all of that 20 years later when the US already phase it out again.
The F22 is extremly capable
The F-22 didn’t struggle to be produced at scale. Obama and Robert Gates just killed the program prematurely because they stupidly thought we’d only be fighting terrorists until the end of time.
@@cesaravegah3787he’s saying the SU-57 isn’t capable while the raptor actually is. The raptor is just slightly similar in terms of lengthy development and difficulty producing at scale, but the US still made it happen on some scale
It's being produced at a homeopatic scale. XD
A poor copy
HEADLINE: Russia makes F-22 20 years later, then... doesn't
10:09 F-35 is a stealthy brick. No one has ever claimed it being maneuverable. You must have meant F-22, which is a pure beast when it comes to maneuverability
The F-35 has roughly has the same maneuverability as the F-15
@@goose2088 in the first turn, maybe. However, the design coupled with a single engine makes it bleed speed and energy very quickly and makes it nearly unsurvivable in a dogfight. Fortunately or not, it was not designed for within visual range fights. If it does find itself in one, many things have gone very very wrong.
"Pilot !! I didn't see your stealth jet flying any sorties."
"Thank you, sir."
The Su-37 is a Flanker like the Su-27 and the Su-35. The Su-47 was a completely different aircraft that was first designated the S-37, NOT Su-37. These are two different aircraft. Just saying...
Yeah I caught that too and it irked me
Same. Especially since the SU-37 was only ever meant to be a technology demonstrator for upgrading the existing SU-27 family of aircraft.
The SU-47 is an almost completely new design to explore both Low-Observable technologies, as well as the potential benefits of forward swept wings.
this is a channel for war-is-like-call-of-duty kiddies, don't expect a serious analysis
@@ApacheVR-4the s/su-47 is basically a copy of X-29.
@@BoraHorzaGobuchul absolutely not, similar aerodynamic configuration, nothing else
Always thought that an AIM-9X with its super infrared detectors would light up those high-infrared profile engine outlets. Those things probably glow like the sun on afterburners.
Mama Russia has some IR defensive systems, though. From soviet times, but still. And - if you can get 2km behind a Raptor with a Mig21 and modern optical sensors+missiles, chances are the F22 is dead, too. Lots of hot exhaust, too.
RCS of F35 is approx. .05 m²
The F22 is approx. .001 m²
The SU57 is approx .5 m²
The Felon is actually very maneuverable, it is quick as well. But it is not stealth. It is classed as low observable. The cantered, hyper thrust vector cones/nozzles makes the Felon impressive to fly and a worthy opponent to raid against. It is not really a dog fighter, but can do it well and win.
It is one of those things that do a lot of things well but nothing really great.
The Soviet mentality of quantity is still there.
The Felon sacrifices stealth for quantity of weapons.
Top Gun Maverick made this jet *far cooler than what it is.*
Yeah that scene where it dodged that missile was insane
Top Gun Maverick with F-35: „Wait…is that a F-3…“
@@Scultura400 BOOM
Top Gun: Maverick made them _look_ cool, and then proceeded to show two of them get clapped by an unupgraded F-14 from the 1970s in a gunfight
@@alexv3357🇮🇷👏👏👏
As a Belkan War vet and pilot for Osea, I can attest to the greatness of the SU-57. I have downed many Erusean aircraft with this fighter.
Thnak you for your servise 🙏🏻
Hi buddy still alive
The X-02 Wyvern is actually real. More real than the fictional Su-57
Hello there fellow ACE o7
😂 Hello fellow Ace Pilots
Remember. "Whoever comes to us with a sword will perish by the sword." Russia. "Whoever comes to us with a sword will die by the sword!". Russia.
SU-57 is so good as a stealth fighter. No one has seen it since the beginning of the Russo-Ukraine war.
No F35 seen protecting Ukraine airspace either.
@@DreamyCheshire-up9rf Yea, and nobody has claimed to have deployed F35s so whats your point.
@@SmithenJW04k My point ? For USA and Russia point of view, no need to deploy F35 to help, and SU57 against Ukraine.
Aerobatic fighter is such an archaic concept, a missile fired from 50 miles away doesn't care how many flips you make....
Meanwhile the U.S. completes one F35 every 2 days the worlds most advanced fighter jet
The most advanced regarding the count of known and not yet fixed problems? The last time I checked, the official number was 800+.
@@doublehelix7880 Still vastly better than any of the garbage Russia will produce for the next 30 years at least. Try making a decent plane and then you can diss other combat jets.
Brilliant outro, love it!
I'm really unsure as to how an IRST system increases detection by RADAR?? Are you talking about the physical shape of the sensor itself?
"its got the best avionics"
it upgraded from a tom tom to a garmin
Sir, you are far from average. Your humility alone is top of the line.
You say a lot, giving us something to think about instead of telling us what to think.
You do good work, I hope your people are proud of you.
Maybe he’ll send you a shirtless photo of himself.
@@bebo4374 Maybe holding one of those goat guns. hot
It is now the best supersonic plane. Was never intended to sacrifice maneuravilty and radar capabilities over stealth as for that purpose has the su70 flying ahead. Don't need to produce big quantities still because already has air superiority. Preferable to continue improvement
The aircraft is actually manufactured at 1/20 of the cost of what Russian defence stated. The other 19/20 of cost went to line the pockets of the defence ministers and manufacturers
5:45 Fyre Festival was depicted, though I agree Firefly needed at least 56 more seasons.
Concerning stealth: according to Sukhois own papers, the Su57 has the same radar cross section as any 4th gen fighter, like the JAS 39 Gripen... which ISN'T a stealth fighter.
According to an old early patent, not sukhoi papers lol
RCS are NEVER public
Questionable papers. Russia wouldn't reveal a plane capability especially its RCS that still is in mainly testing phase. Interested in the source tho may u send me a link to them would be very interested to have a read through.
@@julianpetkov8320it's kind of hard for the f22 to see use when the enemy they were intended to fight... Imploded from spending too much money on their army.
Also, how was the weather balloon mission a failure? They popped it, without blowing it up, and whatever remained of their fancy spy balloon sensors after it fell down was promptly picked up and looked over by... Whoever's job that is.
@@julianpetkov8320would love to hear a vatnik's explanation of how that was a failure lol delusional
@@julianpetkov8320 shouldn't you be on the front lines getting shot at for your leader?
It work's so good they cant even keep track of it
The only time we saw the SU-57 in "real" combat was Top Gun 2.0
5:51 Uhh Firefly Cappy? It was Fyre Festival lol 😂
Kudos to whomever decided "Felon" should be the codename.
You want it to sound dangerous if you're the Pentagon so you can pump up your R&D requests from Congress. If it was the SU-57 Flounder it wouldn't get much press. You think they sit at a table drinking beer and shouting out names or does a computer just spit a codename out? Good question.
You're going to love the Su-75 "Femboy" then 😂
@@StephanieKFaust LOL
They come in and kill going unnoticed they are doing a perfect job
Love your videos Cappy. The more serious and longer form videos are great, love when you keep the humor in too! 0:30 made me laugh lol.
There is usually no s after aircraft, it is plural Also, it is spelled Mach after Dr. Ernst Waldfried Josef Wenzel Mach
The best counter for the Su-57 is an old Iranian F-14A Tomcat. Facts. I've seen it on TV.
Deployed to Syria in 2018 and 2019, Tested weapon systems, hot-dry weather performance, US and Israely radar detection, performed same tasks of Israely F-35A deployment in 2018 and US F-22 and F35 deployments to Syria this year.
One thing that must be noticed about the Mig 1.44 is that it was not stealthy in any aspect whatsoever. One simple look at the airframe's design can show that there are no serpentine-shaped air intakes for example.
Yeah, kinda similarly to the Horton flying wing from the Germans; being even slightly stealthy is more of a side effect than an intention. The MiG 1.44 could’ve been a good plane, but it would be more like a 4+ Generation aircraft
For the record the SU-57 doesn't have those either.
That plane was all about supersonic flight. Whole fuselage is area-ruled and aerodynamics are heavily skewed for supersonic efficiency.
It used plasma stealth
@@Ag3nt0fCha0s No it didn't. And that's assuming plasma stealth actually works in the first place.
Thank you for this video. You work hard and I see and appreciate that
A fighter program’s most deadly opponent is always money. So many cool planes never make it to full production due to lack of funding.
Damn, Mach 12? That's some alien Mass Effect tech going on.
A Cappy video right when I wake up? It's going to be a good day. Hurricane be damned.
Hope you stay safe.
I do enjoy your channel. Excellent content and research, great presentation,.keep up the good work.
legend has it that the SU 57 is so stealthy, no one has ever seen it. lol
The legend is real😝
So stealthy, it makes Wonder Woman's invisible jet look like a joke.
Why avoid using their 4th gen, maybe 4.5 gen, figuter when they are claiming it is a 5th gen fighter that will be able to be upgraded to 6th gen?
Ego and hubris
Russia is amazing at building military parade floats like the Armata. But can't afford to actually build an army out of them. Just a paper bear blowing hot air.
Yet they are winning biggest war since WWII. I bet everyone would want to be a paper bear with or without hot air.
@@tomk3732losing territory and being isolated more than the US before WW2 isn't winning
@@tomk3732 Russia just set itself back too pre WW2 is what they did.
Well, Russia wanted to showcase what it was capable of researching and designing. Russia needed foreign investment to tool up and actually build anything. Then they went and showed the world that Russia sucks at war and not only did orders evaporate, but Russia's ability to produce anything other than misery has dropped off a cliff. When you see videos of Russian tankers using T-55's as main battle tanks on the front line vs. the reported indirect fire stopgap it really makes you wonder just how desperate they really are. A modern military industrial complex they have not.
@@tomk3732 Failing to take and hold a single major Ukrainian city while incurring 261k KIA and losing over 4k tanks (half your entire inventory) isn't what I'd call winning. The ruble is in free fall, oil and gas sales remain steady but with the currency problem their profits have dropped by 40% SO FAR and revenue continues to drop. They've lost an entire generation of young, productive workers and infrastructure is crumbling. The central bank is out of gold/cash reserves and has resorted to bumping interest rates to over 12% (yay double digit interest rates!!!) so consumers and businesses will feel the pinch. Russian GDP should shrink by another 3% this year which is catostrophic. Putin is running out of reserves at the front but is hesitant to order another round of conscription as bridges, cranes, ports, refineries, electrical grids and fresh water supplies start to go offline. Russia is suffering through day 552 of their lightning three day war. Ukraine is suffering mightily with terrible losses but Russia? If that's your idea of winning I'm not sure what losing would look like. You MUST be Russian if you think that's not losing a war on every possible front. Time will tell, but the next two years are going to be brutal for Russia. She won't bounce back economically for 20-30 years. By the time the Russians turn on the gas and oil spigots again, the west will have moved on and backwards Russia will be 50 years behind the times yet again. China should make the leap, but you wouldn't want their problems either. Until these asshats figure out we're all in this together, it's going to continue to get worse.
The 57 is so stealthy I can even see it. What kind of invisibility did they use?
Only Russia could name one of it's weapons, "Killjoy".
When you're doing captions with imperial units, can you please add metric in brackets?
What an absolutely beautiful aircraft, the most graceful craft to ever cruise the skies...!!!
In dreams, on the wings of butterflies!
I’m thinking of a scene from Archer….”How are you a superpower!?”
I've read that the Su-57's RCS is an average of all angles whereas the F-22's is from the front.
“The only stealth plane that everyone can pick up on radar”
GUARANTEED!!!
Big suka Sukoi scams!!
“IT’S BACK!”
“ALSO THE RETURN OF STUPID FUCK-FUCK GAMES!!!”
You might have confused the Su37 and Su47. Both planes are very different from each other.
Correct. The Su-47 was first designated S-37, that's probably where he got it mixed up.
Different sorts of crap
"Have we actually observed it?"
Seems like that would defeat the point of 'stealth'
Russia just announced that the missiles for the Su-57 are ready to rumble .
Yet another great video. Not sure if it's intentional or not but whoever did the on-screen text made quite a few spelling errors lol.
What I've noted is if these things are as good as claimed, once they are on the ground, drones and missiles can kill them anyway. That can put an air force out of business in a hurry. The cost of taking these planes out is only a fraction of the cost of building and maintaining one. I think the U.S. needs to think real hard about that observation.
Hence the concept of air superiority. You don't let anything into your airspace, and you take over the airspace of the enemy.
@@aesma2522 Future air superiority will need to take lightweight (around a few pounds gross weight) drones into account. Besides Atacms or the Chinese interdiction umbrella pushing USN Carriers out of range of the planes on board, you can always smuggle in a small drone with a few pounds of explosives or even none at all and let it be swallowed by a turbine.
The way this is shaping up, WW3 will be fought without planes, since neither side can take out the other side's GBAD and missiles and drones are just cheaper and more common than manned planes.
I think the Reichsmarschall GÖRING wants to have a word with you. He is still mystified about the inner working on these jammers...
Can't shoot down a squadron of SU-57s if there is no squad of SU-57s
If nobody has seen it that just shows how good it is 😊
"Russia claims their Su-57 (...) is 5th generation stealth aircraft. But wait a second - have we ever observed Su-57 (...)?" Exactly. Its stealth is superior
That's the same kind of sophistry the Bush administration used while looking for WMDs in Iraq. -We can't find them, so they hid them really well.-
Did you watch the video bud?
@@ohgeazyYou must be fun at parties.
"Is so stealthy, not even we can find them."
- Top Russian general, probably.
I hope you’re joking because otherwise, that guy is right and you didn’t watch the video. Or you just have horrible comprehension skills, as it’s clearly stated that there are very few Su-57s in active service and any operations they’ve performed have been done within Russian airspace at beyond visual range.
*And next Russia will try to land on the South-pole of the moon. EDIT: That one crushed too.*
That plane didn't crash. It was a field test of the ejection seat! 😂
Oh, and mok is MACH. Sorry to be pedantic. I truly truly enjoy your Channel. Keep up the good work.
As a military aviation fan it's is kinda sad that we don't get to see much of the Russian next gen jet ie. MIG141 SU47 and SU57
But the chronic lack of RnD money seem to be a running theme for them since the 90s
True for MiG-1.44 Su-47 on the other hand was always a tech demonstrator. There were never any plans to put combat systems into it despite all the media speculation. As for Su-57, at the moment it's in low-rate initial production and all the birds are going to Lipetsk Combat Application and Aircrew Conversion Centre where they are making tactics and procedures for it. And occasionally some of the later-model prototypes that are property of UAC would fly a demo.
Here are, obviously, two grown up people, that comment seriously on this subject. Not kids, like in the rest of comments, fighting around stupid jokes... Also, I will add one comment - Actually , Russians "invented" stealth, and Idea around it... if they didn't produce it, that Is another reason (maybe lack of funds, maybe they think that stealth Is unneeded, or history...). But for sure they know how..!
@@ivicamilosavljevic4706 they came up with some of the theory, but only some, and there's a handful of different bits of tech that goes into stealth from the design to the materials and the Soviets only theorized about some of the design portion. The Germans were already making radar absorbing materials in the 40s with the U-480 and the US was independently developing stealth technologies. There was radar absorbing paint being developed during WW2 and the US was developing their own radar absorbing materials for the U2 along with other technology like printed circuit board materials that absorbed radar. Those Soviet theories didnt leave the USSR until the 70s but that was decades after the German and American developments of the 40s and 50s.
@@arthas640 - What is Your PERSONAL comment on that idea that "Russians didn't developed further stealth technology, because they tough it's obsolete and unneeded.." !? Reagrds from Serbia (IvicaM)
No weapon system, no matter how advanced, can make a difference in a warzone if you can´t have all too many of them. Both NATO and Russia are learning that more important than how deadly a system is, is how fast can you build/replace them. I wouldn´t be surprised at all if Russia drops the Su-57 completely. "Too expensive to lose" is not a desirable trait in a war asset.
Su57 Cost as F15. So no. It is not Holly grail Like f22 pr f35.
Their 'fleet' of 10 prototypes... which will never see combat.. are for propaganda, recruitment, air shows, and if they can ever 'deep fake' an Su-57 engagement with a western F-35, F-22, etc., and show it shooting down a Western fighter, then maybe foreign sales.. after Ukraine War, as Russia currently has not capacity to fulfill foreign purchases.
@@5tre55full and yet they still cannot afford to mass produce them. It's not about how much they cost, it's about how much you can afford to spend.
@@sithassassinstl7864 changing the goal post? Russia has aloe plan to modernise their flert but now with war at Hand they have pushed harder and producing pretty fast. You do know that there is no Rush in peace ? So no.. my Point is still solid . And Save US virtually one can affor f22 or f35 but countries have to buy due to the US pressure .
P.S. US can't afford them either . Look how US fleet is getting smaller
@@5tre55full Russia's budget had nothing to do with them being "at peace". Russia has been fighting as much as the US has since the cold war. Let's not play like they have been nice for the last 40 years. When the SU57 went into it's concept phase Russia was selling off it's military because it had no money. They are only now doing it at a massive deficit to their GDP. The US is down sizing the entire military because the technology (which caused the DOD budget to increase) makes the need for a massively fleet of aircraft obsolete. I don't think you understand how technology works. The better the tech the less you need to be effective. That has been they way of things for hundreds of years. By your argument the fact that we don't maintain millions of active duty soldier is due to budget issues. We don't do it because technology eliminated most of their jobs.
Kinda like they used the T-14s in Syria but not a single one was ever seen on film even though it was one of the most recorded wars in modern history to that point lol
They never used T-14 anywhere as it has not been accepted for service. So they could not use them in Syria. Besides why would they use them in Syria - they maybe have a dozen tanks there ;)
@@tomk3732 i mean, the whole tank exists simply as an export offering, so you'd think they'd want to actually use it somewhere to show that it can do more then break down in the middle of a parade....
@@petriew2018 Tank is not offered for export AFAIK and it never broke down on a parade - or the break down was strange as it continued to drive after it had broken ;) So there is not much pressure to introduce it.
The United States has more Super Carriers than Russia has SU-57's.
That is how slowly Russia is building them.
Serial production of SU-57 has begun with first batch already being delivered.
Fun fact about the su57:
The 3d thrust vectoring of the su57 isn´t like the 3d thrust vectoring from experimental US planes and the nozzles of the su57 have a 2d range of motion, however the nozzles are canted at 32 degrees allowing to simulate 3d thrust vectoring but reducing the efficiency for every axis and requiring the help of control surfaces to separate roll from yaw which induces additional trim drag
Isn't it kind of hilarious that they designed such a maneuverable dogfighting aircraft at the same time the US is deploying aircraft designed to kill them from over the horizon? I
Exactly. Only the US developed a true 360° thrust vectoring nozzle on the F-15 ACTIVE (and I believe on an experimental F-16 as well). But what’s hilarious is that, while the F-15 ACTIVE was phenomenally maneuverable, the USAF considers supermaneuverability to be a detriment in most realistic combat scenarios because it tempts pilots to get into slow turning fights where they are incredibly vulnerable to follow-up shots or an unseen wingman. Therefore, it did not ask for these nozzles on future F-15s and F-16s.
@@bluemarlin8138that's false. Russia has build more 3d thrust vectoring aircraft than the us
would it make it light up like a Christmas tree on radar with all the control surfaces moving too?
@@tomfurstyfield It would be detected anyways because the oxide coating isn't nearly as effective a ram
Hey Cappy. I'm guessin' you meant the F22 and not the F35 (10:11) and a Mach 12 speed (10:21) is certainly not possible (unless the Russians have alien tech we don't know about???).
BTW, what does the sign behind your left shoulder say. Something about Saturday... I've been trying to read it for weeks. ☺
mach 12 LOL dame
F-35 is very manoeuvrable, especially compared to legacy fighters in real-world combat configurations where it can fly clean with a useful weapons loadout, while they're carrying multiple tanks, targeting and ECM pods, plus weapons that massively increase drag. The test that saw an F-35 outperformed by an F-16 was an early airframe during testing and software development that was artificially limited in its turning performance and allowable g-forces. Once these restrictions were removed for production airframes it was as good as an F-16 in clean configuration. Flying clean is something you'll never see an operational F-16 do - it's useless outside of test flights and airshows and represents a theoretical upper limit of aircraft performance that's never reached in combat.
@@trolleriffic Yep, but it would never outmaneuver a Felon. That's really the only thing the SU57 has going for it.
Ruskies always claim amazing stats. Then we build things that can defeat them. Then we find out their tech was garbage barely better than WWII all along.
@@myplane150 With the helmet mounted targeting system it shouldn't need to even if it did find itself in a WVR fight. That said, Sukhoi have made some incredible aircraft and have talented engineers but they can only work with the resources available. I doubt the designers of the Su-57 think it's a match for F-35 or F-22 even if it is a big improvement over older Soviet and Russian jets.
FYI, if the SU57 is in fact capable of carrying nuclear weapons, Russia is required to notify either NATO or the US (i'm unclear on the specifics) of that fact. Not doing so would be a pretty substantial treaty violation
Oh Really ? They threaten to end the world weekly. So I guess they "notified" us.
The Go-Pro video of a pilot ejecting was from an Su-25; over Ukraine. Not the Su-57.
The SU57 is so stealthy it's rarely ever seen
It has an SEP field. Hitchhiker's Guide...
I've never seen F22. I think this is all hoax.
That's the secret to their stealth. They're so stealthy that they don't even exist.
@@incubus_the_manF22 stealthy shooting chinese baloon
Sure bro!
Dude! The footage at 7:02 is from a SU-25, a ground-attack aircraft.
It’s just filler footage
Always funny when fear of losing their best equipment leads to not using it, which asks what's its point.
It just means the Su57 is not very stealthy at all and would be blown out of the sky by S300, IRIS T, PATRIOT.
That is what this means.
The F-22 " SU-57 Come out and PLAAAAYYYYYY"
Impressive plane. And nice video, as expected 😁
I imagine the truth is something similar to the T-14 Armata where they have this forward thinking list of features but messed up on the basic engine design and probably lack the manufacturing capacity needed to produce all the various components.
I'm guessing it's maybe also that Putin is being very Hitlerian in having arbitrary preferences for certain approaches and units. Plus, Putin's generally more interested in his domestic appearance than in making anything that actually works. He's promised to make Russia a perceived superpower like the USSR once was, and showing that Russia, under his leadership, can lead the world in weapons design is a big part of that. But when you're trying to convince your domestic base of your technological superiority, as opposed to convincing your enemy of the fact on the battlefield, you tend to get flashy hunks of junk. That Russia appears terrified to try their flagship units in real combat suggests exactly that situation, as people who have designed a weapon they're convinced in good-faith will work want to see it exposed to scrutiny, especially in these exceedingly-rare near-peer conditions. The West is getting a ton of good data out of this conflict, and Putin seems to be actively avoiding getting any of it. That's not a great strategy, as you can hide from reality for a while, but it always finds you.
Also, given the general level of corruption in Putin's fascist regime, guessing that every ounce of cash that could be stripped from either project ended-up in some Putin crony's Swiss bank account.
The announcer said it could fly supersonic without afterburner. Super cruise engines require extremely tight tolerances that the Russians most likely can't even come close to.
With the embargos, even if they could build the aircraft, they don't have access to the components they would need.
Or they have enough cheaper and still effective T-72s, T-80s, and T-90s that they don't need to deploy the Armata tanks because they wouldn't be a game changer and would only bolster Ukrainian propaganda if one did get taken out. AND it would get taken out eventually like all tanks if deployed in a war like THIS. The T-90s will do just fine. You Americans just can't understand this simple reason. It baffles me.
Why would they deploy expensive Armatas and test them in a REAL war when they have plenty of T-90s? A tank isn't ever gonna be a game changer in modern warfare. Also they don't have an unlimited and printed budget like the US does.
@@michaelccozens i think thats why Ukraine was the target in the first place - he thought itd be an easy win - hes been using Ukraine for hacking practice since the 2000's and then took Crimea in '14, hes been setting this up for over a decade so it probably shouldve been an easy W but Western suport and russias mismanagement and corruption were things that never made it into comrade putins equation, likely because anyone who told him the truth wouldve been shot on sight and knew it...anyways, grand scheme and all, yea it was all a show of force with little real interests or gains otherwise...control of the Black Sea Exclusive Economic Zone sure, that would've hurt the motherland if Ukraine had exploited it but '14 put the kaybash on that anyway...this was a "see NATO i really AM tough just like my mom says" move that backfired spectacularly when putin punched himself in his freshly botox'ed face
@@HuseinB58 The US Air Force deployed its expensive F-117 Nighthawks to Iraq in the first Gulf War despite having very few of them and knowing that a loss would be a massive propaganda victory for Iraq and the USSR. They went ahead and used them because they were a game-changer and force multiplier that made the entire coalition air forces far more powerful. If the T-14 was actually good then Russia would follow the American example and deploy it - losing one or two wouldn't matter if they'd destroyed loads of Ukrainian armour in return because unlike aircraft, people expect tanks to get destroyed or knocked out. It's not in Ukraine because it's junk like the rest of Russia's tanks.
You say that T-90s and the rest are doing just fine but they're not, they're getting slaughtered and Russia has lost over 4000 armed vehicles to date and it's still in retreat. Russia needs something to turn the war around and its existing tanks aren't nearly good enough to make it happen.
must be some really good stealth tech if its "missing"
Wow 1979 I was still in high school. No heart attack, no knee surgeries....