The Su-47 Berkut: Russia’s Craziest Experimental Fighter Plane

Thank you Squarespace for sponsoring this video. Check out Squarespace: squarespace.com... for 10% off on your first purchase of a website/domain.
Got a beard? Good. I've got something for you: beardblaze.com
Simon's Social Media:
Twitter: / simonwhistler
Instagram: / simonwhistler
This video is #sponsored by Squarespace.
Love content? Check out Simon's other KZbin Channels:
Warographics: / @warographics643
SideProjects: / @sideprojects
Into The Shadows: / intotheshadows
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Brain Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Casual Criminalist: / thecasualcriminalist
Decoding the Unknown: / @decodingtheunknown2373
Places: / @places302
Astrographics: / @astrographics-ve4yq

[@megaprojects9649]

Thank you Squarespace for sponsoring this video. Check out Squarespace: squarespace.com/megaprojects for 10% off on your first purchase of a website/domain.

[@ghoustiq]

so, is there a episode for X-29 ?

[@doncalypso]

The Grumman X-29 was *_NOT_* an "unsuccessful fighter" but a technology demonstrator. It was never meant to directly be developed into a production model but to explore the capabilites of the forward-swept wing design.

[@petert3355]

Yeah, it showed that the materials available at the time were not up to the task of foward swept wings, even though foward swept wings are incredible. Would be interesting to see the X-29 revisited today with modern composites used to strengthen the wings.

[@doncalypso]

@@petert3355 even with improved carbon composites with increased structural strength the problem remains that the forward-swept wing design is so unstable that if a simultaneous failure of all the flight control computers happened the plane would break apart before the pilot even had a chance to reach for the ejection handle... or so they say.

[@snowness110]

In 2015, NASA was still flying the X-29 over Huston every day.

[@petert3355]

@@doncalypso Ok, so we agree that putting Intel 13/14th gen computers in it is a bad idea 🤪

[@vic5015]

Most of the "X-planes" are. Or so I've read.

[@googleisevil8958]

Ace Combat made me love this plane. Such a beautiful aircraft. It's a shame the Russians never figured out the SU-47's wings because honestly this thing is almost as beautiful as the F-22.

[@nicolascordobaprado3455]

The funny thing about this video is that the thumbnail uses one of the images from AC 7

[@kris8165]

F22 is NOT beautiful 😌

[@ihavewaited90daystochangem51]

​@@kris8165 stop smoking crack

[@Lyle-In-NO]

NASA had the same problem with their fwd swept wing concept (X-29). Lots of benefits sweeping wings fwd, however, the wings begin to flutter starting near transonic speeds. Their both interesting concepts With a lot of potential.

[@nicolascordobaprado3455]

@@Lyle-In-NO It's then a problem of structure of the wing itself perhaps?

[@MartinCHorowitz]

Why Did you call the x-29 a failure? it was a technology demonstrator, it collected the data NASA wanted.

[@patrickjordan2233]

There's a segment that don't understand "experiment"...(data collection...)

[@billmullins6833]

I saw that wee beastie in a hanger at NASA's Langley Research Center in 1983 while on temporary duty at Langley AFB, Virginia. I knew what it was when I saw it because I had read about it in "Popular Science Magazine. I was a devoted airplane and space buff and knew where its parts had been taken from (mostly F-5A with some F-16 parts). I was a Staff Sergeant and I walked from Langley AFB to the NASA research center in my blue service uniform. It was a very enjoyable day. Met an honest-to-goodness NASA test pilot and got to hear some really, REALLY cool war stories.

[@Michael-it6gb]

"F-22 is showing on the radar at a size of a bumble bee" A bumble bee flying at Mach 2 speed? 😂

[@LexlutherVII]

Yeah, what drug did the bee use? 😂

[@stanleylee5358]

@@LexlutherVII Compound V

[@Teatime4Tom]

So you think you can hit a bumblebee flying at mach 2 with a missile flying at mach 5.

[@Rob_F8F]

​@@Teatime4Tom I would have trouble hitting a bumblebee sized stationary target at 40 yards at the range.

[@macmcgee5116]

Yes... A bumblebee flying at Mach 2. Crazy as it sounds. The goal is to make it so tiny that a radar can't see it. But IF it can, it will be so small that it will be nearly impossible for a missile to lock onto it. The Iranians already know it's basically impossible to see on radar, after one snuck up on two of their planes without them having a clue and chasing them away. So far, no one, that I know of, has fired a missile at one yet to test if it can lock on.

[@Prizz419]

The best plane in Ace Combat 04

[@Crewger16]

Hi

[@davidhouzvicka2834]

Best in 7 as well

[@apauloh]

Do you see that the thumbnail has Osean markings on it?😂

[@Ssgt02]

You guys are awesome for this

[@vonkug]

Agreed

[@thedungeondelver]

One point, the X29 wasn't a fighter prototype: it was a prototype aircraft made from fighter plane parts. But there was no plan to make it into a production line fighter. It was meant to test various technologies that could be used on other projects, like the supercritical wing, a thrust vectoring engine, advanced computers, and so on.

[@livingreverie5951]

What a flashbang of sight seeing the Ace Combat 7 rendition of the Berkut

[@jougal5028]

Basically the face off of a Berkut and an F-22 would be akin to a Ballerina with a sword vs a ninja with a bow.

[@muhtasimmunir1830]

Aptly put

[@bzilla-d4i]

P Diddy with a lubed baseball bat

[@Jdne199311]

I know a Ace Combat Thumbnail when i see it :D

[@googleisevil8958]

"Yo buddy... you still alive?"

[@gabrieloceano]

@@googleisevil8958

[@Ysflight2R2w]

.......,,'......-!....._.*.**..1010010011001110.......'-....*'..

[@TheHipsterGamer]

And I’m guessing the Osean insignia didn’t immediately give it away lmao?

[@Ysflight2R2w]

@@TheHipsterGamer I do love the z.o.e in Ace combat because of the learning ai

[@eriktempelman2097]

Structures and materials expert here. Forward swept wings have tendency to twist under loading, increasing the angle of attack, which increases lift and hence, loading = a positive feedback loop that quickly destroys the wing. In the X29 this problem was solved by simply making the wing very strong, at the expense of weight. With composite materials, you can theoretically solve the problem by means of bend-twist coupling: under load, the wing now twists to reduce the angle of attack. Interesting to see if this was used in the Berkut.

[@cujbaion1]

Not enough, I’ve seen the frame. 🙅🏻‍♂️ At supersonic speed it’s shaking. They aren’t worth it. 🤷🏻‍♂️ We can visit planets but haven’t done our homework here on earth. We need not more land to shit on it but harmony here. 🤗

[@eriktempelman2097]

​@@cujbaion1agree. On both counts

[@TooLateForIeago]

And the rub is, using advanced composites yields the same benefits to conventional delta-shape wings, which already have drag and speed advantages over fsw wings.

[@geodkyt]

The X-29 also "addressed the issue" by not having control surfaces large enough to really demonstrate the supermanueverability the FSW design seemed to promise- thus they *couldn't* stress the wings as easily, because it was far less responsive than it could have been. Long story short - a fighter based on the X-29 layout would end up being *inferior* when in an actual fight to a stock F-16 of the same vintage, and there were better ways to gain supermanueverability without the downsides of FSW. 😂

[@glike2]

Russian Radar Absorbant Material RAM and low observable build quality is far behind, hence why Russia has effectively know stealth capability

[@moshunit96]

X29 was a technology demonstrator and the program was very successful. They used a bunch of parts from existing planes to keep costs down and speed up the program. Lessons learned from it have been incorporated into multiple planes.

[@JETWTF]

The X-29 was not a failure. the X designation is for test platforms that are not meant for mass production and have F or B designation, they are for testing and even if they crash in a test flight it is still a test result and that makes it a success. No jet with the X designation was a failure because there is no fail state.

[@andyaskew1543]

The US may have done it just to get the USSR to spend a bunch of money to see what this backward wing thing was all about.

[@Liveandletlive86]

F, b, or a for attack like the warthog

[@GlimmerOG]

One could say that since their were 2 X-29s it was twice as successful as the Su-47. Regarding nomenclature, don't forget the F/A designation. Honestly, the F-16, F-15e and ex, and the F-35 should all carry the F/A, and the F-117 should be a B-117.

[@Alt.ZER0]

The Su-47 not making it to production, is like the yf-23 not making it to production. Two marvels of aviation scrapped.

[@Styphon]

Avro Arrow too

[@Ilyak1986]

The YF-23 was early and from a company that didn't have a good reputation at the time, and wasn't marketed as well. The Berkut, in contrast, would simply be smoked by the Raptor without contest.

[@l.b8896]

They should take a few Su-47s and do a Blue-Angels-esque show like every few years in Russia or something. Cuz they do look pretty cool. It’d be awesome to them fly in formation and do cool tricks n shit 😂

[@user-xp5id1kh4r]

@@l.b8896 The problem is that literally ONLY ONE single Su-47 was ever made... so they couldn't even if they wanted to, lol

[@foshizzlfizzl]

The S-37 also called Su-47 later, has actually helped Suhoi with the development of the Su-57. A lot of data and was collected back then. Especially the lighter construction and composite materials were tested.

[@fl00fydragon]

Yeeeeees, finally. It may be a dead project, but gods, the most beautiful jet fighter ever made.

[@doriangrigorie7345]

Weird taste

[@fqeagles21]

YF-23 for me

[@mikepatton8691]

​@@fqeagles21I second this motion. Motion carried.

[@kris8165]

Agreed 👍💯😊

[@mynameisntleo]

I swear this was a Cobra Force GI Joe toy when I was < 10 years old. purple leopard paint. So it was supposed to be scary, and bad. with purple leopard paint.

[@michaelcarr304]

When it comes to forward-swept wings, let's not forget Thunderbird 2 😃👍

[@KarlBunker]

The first aircraft I ever saw with forward-swept wings. Very cool. 😎

[@AtheistOrphan]

F.A.B

[@CedroLinkin]

I love this plane and the idea behind it, they flipped off the traditional designs, and went their own way, creating a magnificent specimen. Love it

[@Wargasm54]

Say what you will about the Ruskies. They make some truly badass looking jets.

[@martinstallard2742]

2:29 designing a chimera 9:43 specs and capabilities 15:07 death on the drawing board

[@72APTU72E]

I'm convinced the Star Wolf team from Star Fox 64 used the SU-47

[@Adroit1911]

"Roger Roger.." Do a barrel roll!!

[@stevemc6010]

the Wolfen has forward swept wings, it's a good analogue along the lines of "Star Fox 1990s where its F-14Ds vs Su-47s"

[@sergarlantyrell7847]

Seeing as it's the Berkut's USP, the reasoning for the forward-swept wings (which went completely unsaid in the video) is that with swept wings, there is a component of airflow that flows back/out along the wing, this tends to make the wing tips stall before the rest of the wing... The problem is, that's where the ailerons are, so you lose control before a fully-developed stall. The forward-swept wings try to reverse this, so it's the root that stalls before the wing tips and control is maintained. It has very little impact on things like RCS (stealth), but structurally, it's slightly more complicated.

[@falkenlaser]

“Oka Nieba to the Ghost of Razgriz, new enemy plans on radar! It’s a double Belkan formation, Ofnir and Grabacr.”

[@ouriel181]

Finally, I waited long for this episode!

[@savvidisaudio]

FINALLY. I was hoping the Berkut would make her debut on this channel for like over a year. :)

[@TheCluelessLucent]

Funny, think when I first heard of the su-47 was from command and conquer red alert 2, was the south korean unique unit "black eagle", was all the way back in 98. (And for some reason they were capable of vertical take off and landing, sci-fi fantasy game Gona scifi). Think Boris in Yuri's revenge had another experimental mig 1.44 as his airstrike. Found the su-47 really cool with the reverse wings, then ofc we got the movie stealth with those planes having varietable geometry wings swept forward. Crazy concepts.

[@jonthrelkeld2910]

The US tried the concept with the X-29 but the design had too many drawbacks in that there was too much torsional stress on the wings and it did not perform well at supersonic speeds.

[@geodkyt]

One quibble - the Grumman X-29 wasnt actually a "fighter prototype". It was a pure technology tester and demonstrator to explore the then current limits of current aerodynamic and aeronautical engineering. Even if the tests had been more successful, and a later fighter project resulted, the fighter woupd have had almost nothing in common with the X-29 (which was basically bodged together starting with a pair of F-5 airframes) other than the core concepts, just as so many of the NACA/NASA "X planes" of the late 1940s through the 1950s explored various new technology advances but *never* directly led to any operational fighters. A fighter based on the X-29 results likely would have been a clean sheet design, or using the F-16 or F-18 as the baseline if anything was a carryover development from another aircraft.

[@christopherchilders1049]

Make no mistake this was a direct copy of a great GI JOE jet! I used to watch it every evening after school it is a top notch jet! Was flown with out even needing a helmet or mask! Also if I my flex a little, I have one with slip stream to pilot it

[@elijah3807]

lol no

[@RookFox]

Ace Combat screenshot for thumbnail lol

[@theemissary1313]

Every time I hear stealthy planes described as "shows up on radar no bigger than a bumblebee" I wonder how often radar operators see bumblebees a couple miles high cruising at near supersonic speeds, that it doesn't raise any alarms.

[@pashapasovski5860]

As amps didn't exist 😅

[@damonburroughs5283]

They don't as all noise like that is filtered out otherwise you would have screen full of bees, birds, balloons, debris, insects, spurious returns so for all intense and purpose it isn't there as it is background noise

[@rojiii69420]

Radars filter out things smaller than a certain size....and the ground. Otherwise everything radar waves touched would show up and then it wuld be useless

[@atomicskull6405]

@@damonburroughs5283 AI signal processing will be a game changer for low observable aircraft. Signals that used to be hidden in the noise floor will no longer be hidden. The same way a dog can pick out a parts per billion scent or can hear a sound miles away those tiny signal returns will be able to be isolated and displayed. That is the power of neural networks that nature has been using for millions of years.

[@damonburroughs5283]

@@atomicskull6405 Yes and something will solve any development in time , but Russia does not have that ability at present. In WW2 they couldn't build a bomber that's wings didn't fall off. They copied the B29 that landed in their region when allied with the west, and even then they locked the crew up til the end of the war. Manufacturing of the aircraft (TU4) had to be altered as they did not have the technology to even create the sheet metal. They used German scientists to develop most things in later years such as the jet engine etc . The engine used in many aircraft was an American design that they purchased, I think a wright cyclone. They also purchased the rights to an entire prop aircraft to try and learn the manufacturing techniques and they were unable to duplicate it properly either. Russia has always lagged in that regard , and even now they use American Niles Simmons CNC machines to manufacture crankshafts at Uraltrak amongst other places. Think that says it all

[@ignitionfrn2223]

1:10 - Mid roll ads 2:35 - Chapter 1 - Designing a chimera 9:50 - Chapter 2 - Specs & capabilities 15:10 - Chapter 3 - Death on the drawing board

[@ackbarfan5556]

“Oka Nieba to the Ghosts of Razgriz, new enemy planes on radar. It’s a double Belkan formation - Ofnir and Grabacr.”

[@christopherstone2691]

Umm…How about NASA’s X-29?

[@RubiHammer]

Exactly what I was thinking. The two Grumman X-29 prototypes were tested starting at 1984, until the early 1990s.It is mentioned in the video shortly. There was also the Junkers Ju 287, a subsonic bomber tested towards the end of WW2.

[@blshouse]

That was what proved to the US that forward swept wings was a bad idea.

[@christopherstone2691]

@@RubiHammer Simon says the X-29 was a failure. He didn’t mention the criteria for such a judgement so that would require some research on NASA’s final evaluation of the plane. Sukhoi deserves kudos for truly thinking “outside the box” with multiple (at the time) radical technologies some great, some limiting but with a dazzling aesthetic that is characteristic of all their fighter designs. Damn they look good, imagine them with our flight technology (scary).

[@matthewdavies2057]

@@blshouse We built the X-29 first and after we saw the wings start to come off after normal use we ended the tests. No need to waste more money when the basic idea was a failure. Of course the Russians thought they could do better. They couldn't. Nine Gee's my ass.

[@moogle68]

@@christopherstone2691 Near the end of the video he describes the many flaws of the SU-47s design that are inherent of all forward swept wing designs, so he didn't elaborate when he mentions the X-29 because he was saving that info for later in a more appropriate section of the video. @OP, what _about_ the X-29? He mentioned it very early on in the video... did you miss that or something? I just don't get your comment. He mentioned it early on, and later in the video described the problems that plague all forward swept wing designs, which obviously apply to why they only made the one X-29.

[@kaioberg2617]

Mach 2 Bumblebee aka "The Kid". Damn you HLC! This comes to my mind when ever the F-22 is mention. "Would you intercept me? I intercept me!"

[@justinspriggs2979]

Glad to see one of my favorite jets get a deep dive. Its a shame but also good that over all it was a day late and a dollar short in design.

[@TacticalBeard]

I imagine this thing had an exceptionally short airframe hour life

[@YouCaughtCzars]

I always loved how this plane looked when I was a kid. I hadn't seen anything about it for quite a few years and I was starting to wonder if I had false memories of it existing.

[@colettemccoy2921]

Going into a manoeuvre and having the wings disintegrate doesn’t sound like a air combat winner 😂

[@oldtimefarmboy617]

One thing they discovered is that the more unstable a fighter is the more maneuverable it can be, but a human was incapable of making all the adjustments necessary micro-adjustments to keep those fighters flying straight. Only with the use of computer controlled avionics that could read the inputs from the pilot and make all the constant micro-adjustments to maintain the fighter flying in a straight line was it possible to keep them in the air. With computer controlled avionics those fighters can do maneuvers that would be impossible without them. If the computers go out the fighter will crash. The reliability of the computers and the mechanisms it controls is a big part of the cost of those fighters.

[@JosepCover]

As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them.

[@velvetine74]

I love Sukhoi, always thought they were the Lockheed equivalent and Mikoyan were the Boeing equivalent. But you can't deny that historically when listing "Capabilities" especially in Aircraft there has been a bit of a gap between "Stated" and "Proven" capability from the USSR/Russia.

[@FrancisFjordCupola]

"Outdated predecessor"... that is one way to describe a plane all set for dogfighting in the era of beyond-visual-range missiles.

[@PrimericanIdol]

Idk about that. Maneuverability is still quite relevant. Did you see Millennium7's video about this Su-34 pilot who dodged multiple patriot missiles?

[@bestcyborg889]

"Aircraft will never need guns, we are in the age of missiles!" - the people who made F-4s.

[@opieg7333]

@@PrimericanIdol We are rapidly approaching the point of questioning why would there even be a pilot on board? Kudos to the pilot, but, that plane would be even more maneuverable without a squishy operator inside. (And, dodging mach 3+ darts like missiles and dog-fighting are really quite different exercises, although the general "rules to stay alive" are similar). You can count all the dogfights, worldwide, over the last 45 years on one hand. (To my knowledge, the last one was 1982 in the Falklands). Missile tech, stand off munitions, drone alternatives to achieve air superiority, MANPADS proliferation, and the high cost of air superiority aircraft just make the classic show of machismo dogfight worthless in modern combat. No different than the naval gun battle and mounted cavalry charge, its time has passed.

[@rashidaman2675]

​@@opieg7333Last dog fight happened in 2019 between India and Pakistan

[@opieg7333]

@@rashidaman2675 So 2 in 45 years? Seems like a rare occurrence one would not want to design specifically for..... But hey, maybe we should also go back to teaching swordsmanship, just in case all the infantry run out of ammo. And that defining that engagement - or at least the stories about it - as a dogfight is a generous use of the term. IF there was a dog fight - which I do not believe occurred. Missile strike, yes, dog fight no. Either way - point remains - dogfights do not happen in the real world. And certainly are not happening with top front line AS aircraft.

[@EAcapuccino]

YES!!!!!! 👏 👏 I have waited 2 years for this plane Simon ever since i first requested it! AT LONG LAST! 😊

[@Viljoen]

Please do an episode on CBU-87, Really interested to know more about this controversial munitions.

[@wyaldkingdom]

When I was a kid I had one of these as a micro-machine toy. I thought it was the most bad ass plane to have ever existed. When I would have imaginary dog fights, this was the one that would always win. 😂

[@richardbrewis436]

Super well presented documentary. I love aircrafts and these are very interesting. Thanks for the video Megaprojects!

[@TheWrightChoice_]

I love how the thumbnail is a still from Ace Combat 7

[@ColbertHorace]

The beauty of the sunset was obscured by the industrial cranes.

[@miletello1]

The SU-47 was initially designated S-37 not SU-37. The SU-37 was a flanker variant technology demonstrator dubbed the Terminator.

[@ropeburn6684]

Plane: has literal forward wings KZbinr: "backwards wings" 😂

[@swisstestpilot]

A less known feature of the Su-47 , who was just a prototype and not a serial production fighterjet, is that the Su-4 has manual folding wings.. this because Sukhoi planed a carrier based version of it as successor of the Su-33 (Su-27K).

[@Lyle-In-NO]

A forward swept wing Mustang? Fascinating. Now, that is on aviation topic I've never heard of.

[@Mr_Beaubles]

Yah, we proved the concept successfully with the X plane, here in the US. It worked, but we didn't find the benefits were limited and not worth it. We found it could maneuver very quickly, but was so incredibly unstable, it could only stay in the air with SEVERE help from the fly-by-wire system, and was pretty inefficient and inhibited as to speed and supersonic flight. I'm not sure where the hell this show got it's performance numbers from, because I have serious doubts they have any basis in actual reality, especially if they were stated by Russia. At any rate, we found the same advantages the wings brought were minimal when compared to a more conventional design with thrust vectoring. It wasn't ground breaking, other than a little more nose authority, which was minimal compared to what the f-22 could do. Basically, we did it, made it work, and realized it wasn't worth it. You can find any videos of the X plane flying and manuevering.

[@JoyceConstance]

More powerful than the will to win is the courage to begin.

[@Dean_AZN]

This plane was probably my first childhood favourite plane.

[@samporter9729]

Matthew Reilly's book 'Scarecrow' has this as the personal plane of the 2nd best bounty hunter in the world, given to him by the Russian government for services rendered. They call it the 'Black Raven'.

[@Under-Kaoz]

I love when a non pilot tells me what a jet "should do"

[@tqrules01]

When watching X-Men the original cartoon is you're inspiration 😂🤣

[@NickSteffen]

I like how they named it the “golden eagle” given its known competition was the f15 eagle

[@rommellegaspi2986]

Please create a video all about the X-29 Forward Swept Wing Demonstrator 🥺

[@bobbydigital8056]

Love, love, love the Berkut!!! One of the coolest planes ever.

[@davidgamble6152]

Mach 2 Bumblebee... coming in Hot to that Flower !!!

[@janusz4156]

Star of Ace Combat series. 25 years of Su-47 in 2022.

[@billmullins6833]

The SU-47 was every bit as much a technology demonstrator as the X-29. Only one was ever built (versus 2 of the X-29) and while it had provision for weapons it was never actually armed. Also while it had provisions for advanced radar and avionics none were ever installed. If the X-29 was a "failed technology demonstrator" then that exact term equally applies to the SU-47. Whoever did the research on this segment truly dropped the ball biggly.

[@acceptablecasualty5319]

ACE COMBAT THUMBNAIL RAAAAAAAAAAAH

[@mrnickbig1]

The Su-47 simply continued research originated in Germany, then tested in the US with X-29. The Su-47 was NOT a fighter prototype, but a one of a kind unarmed experimental testbed, essentially a larger X-29. Anyone who thinks it is a fighter or some sort of original breakthrough is an ID10T.

[@kylelewis9163]

Such a sick looking plane as well

[@karenfay4545]

In 1976, DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) awarded funds to General Dynamics, Rockwell and Grumman under the Forward-Swept Wing Program. Forward-swept wings offer low drag and improved low-speed handling characteristics, but they are extremely difficult to manufacture using conventional techniques. The use of advanced composite materials makes the wing rigid enough to withstand the forces introduced by aerodynamic stress, while simultaneously avoiding a weight penalty.

[@valdemarsimonsen9612]

Currently reinstalling Ace Combat 7 because of the thumbnail. Always loved taking the Berkut out for a spin

[@daleadkison3349]

What a terrific airplane. Thank goodness they didn't decide to do a production run. I believe it would've been a major thorn in our side in the present.

[@asdasdasddgdgdfgdg]

SU-47 was not the first plane with such wings.

[@AtheistOrphan]

See 6:24

[@Exoreya]

so its design was good in a ground attack role? Well, i flew this plan enough in just cause 2 to confirm that. the game that made me fall in love with this plane

[@RinksRides]

SU-47, the best 6th Gen Russia missed out on.

[@jamesberdine8574]

Don’t forget the HFB 320 Hansa Jet. German made 10 passenger business jet.

[@Delphineas]

Ace Combat 04:Shattered Skies. This was my favorite plane to fly. Just looked so cool and futuristic.

[@georgekush8604]

I first learned of this plane when I was tooling around on Google earth looking for a buran space shuttle at Zhukovsky International Airport. South East of Moscow.

[@TR4Ajim]

The JU-287 waves from the back of the room.

[@sbcee2220]

I guess enough people requested it in the comments of the last Mig video. Really cool!

[@hermiandroid3672]

Even in the video you can see the high stress for the forwards swapped wings 😵‍💫 I don't think the testpilots were very happy to fly mach 2 with this design 🤔

[@AtheistOrphan]

I don’t think the forward-swept wings were ever swapped for others.

[@Enonymouse_]

The su47 was a very cool concept as an airframe design.

[@genesssisss]

I’ve been waiting for this video for so long

[@ronmorrell9809]

I wonder if reverse wings would help drones evade destruction. Drones don't currently fly super sonic. It's unclear how many G-s the layout would allow. 9-G is exhausting for a human pilot. A drone making random or intentional 15-G turns (if design allows) would be very difficult to shoot down.

[@robinseibel7540]

The US' next generation of drones is made up, in large part, but stealth drones. Such a drone's tiny RCS would make it difficult to kill.

[@dingdongdirtbag]

Such a beautiful aircraft.

[@Phelixc]

The SU-47 is a sexy plane. My top three favorite planes are the B2, YF23 and the SU47. Such cool and weird designs eek out a victory over the F22, F117 and the A10 in my eyes.

[@user-xy6pd4yg5h]

You can see the paint vaporizing off the wingtips lol

[@TheMoonShepard]

One of the most beautiful fighters ever made

[@kernergades]

This fighter jet makes me think of cobra in the gi joe cartoons.

[@thijshagenbeek8853]

She is just such a phenomenal good looking fighter.

[@Khalrua]

its unique forward-swept wings were originally designed to improve missile evasion. The design allowed it to maintain control at extreme angles, giving it the ability to turn sharply without stalling-a crucial feature in dogfights where split-second maneuvers can determine success.

[@Mao_tse_tung]

what you do copy and paste the first google hit

[@genjii931]

Still the most *beautiful* fighter jet design in history, IMO.

[@vikingbraid7515]

Most beautiful jet ever

[@XDeminox]

My absolute favorite plane of all time

[@VioletSilence]

Su-47/YF-23: weird Su-57/F-22: beautiful Su-75/F-35: smol

[@TheLexeon]

I still say YF-23 > F-22, nothing can change my mind on that.

[@Ilyak1986]

In hindsight? Probably. But at the time, maneuverability was still highly prized.

[@radustana]

​@@Ilyak1986the YF-23 had very similar maneuverability to the F-22 due to its massive control surfaces with it being only a few degrees less maneuverable than the F-22

[@wmffmw1854]

We had an X-29 Wind Tunnel Test Model Grumman used in early development.

[@MercedesE63S-AMG]

Yes we had them over 25-30 years ago.

[@mahatmagandhiful]

The Su-47 never had a designation of "Su-37." Rather--you know what? It's probably easier to just go through the whole convoluted mess sequentially, starting from - Su-27 "Flanker" - mass-production fighter - Su-30 - two-seater variant - Su-32 - fighter-bomber variant, also designated Su-34 (eventually settled on Su-34) - Su-33 - naval variant - Su-34 - fighter-bomber variant, also designated Su-32 (eventually settled on Su-34) - Su-35 (first version) - modernized Su-27 (1980s), added front canards (but not thrust vectoring), originally designated Su-27M, 14 built - Su-35 (second version) - modernized Su-27 (2000s), added thrust vectoring (but not front canards) backported from Su-37, current mass-production variant flown by Russia - Su-37 - Su-35 (first version) + thrust vectoring, one built - Su-47 - technology demonstrator, originally designated S-32 (not to be confused with Su-32/Su-34), then S-37 (not to be confused with Su-37), then Su-47, one built It's no surprise they got some names wrong. S-32, Su-32, S-37, Su-37, Su-35, OTHER Su-35... And that's the _simplified_ version of things.

[@grgspunk]

The Berkut would've been better off being designed as an air-to-ground attacker aircraft, particularly in the close air support role a-la the Mig-27. That maneuverability allows it to repeatedly strafe/bomb targets over and over with very little time between attack runs.

[@anthonyigania8465]

That thing looks amazing

[@jimp8400]

Thank you

[@TomLeys]

I love your videos, but I found the fake film debris and the low saturation throughout quite distracting.