F-35 Vs Su-57: Which fighter owns the skies?

Go to ground.news/Sandboxx to access data driven information. Subscribe through my link for less than $1/month or get 40% off unlimited access this month only.
The F-35 is the most prolific stealth fighter on the planet, with Lockheed Martin planning to finish the 1,000th F-35 airframe before the close of 2023. Russia's Su-57, on the other hand, has been plagued by technical setbacks and delays, leaving Russia with only a handful of production fighters in service.
But how do these two fighters really stack up? Not just in terms of stealth, but the onboard technology that really makes a difference in the fight?
Let's find out.
📱 Follow Sandboxx News on social
Twitter: / sandboxxnews
Instagram: / sandboxxnews
Facebook: / sandboxxnews
TikTok: / sandboxxnews
📱 Follow Alex Hollings on social
Twitter: / alexhollings52
Instagram: / alexhollings52
Facebook: / alexhollings. .
TikTok: www.tiktok.com/alexhollings52
Citations:
tass.com/defense/1705865?utm_...
www.ainonline.com/aviation-ne...
www.aviacionline.com/2021/08/...
www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/1...
www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone...
aresdifesa.it/su-57s-101ks-o-...
basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavi...
en.topwar.ru/173161-obnovlenn...
www.key.aero/article/rostec-p...
www.airforce-technology.com/p...
bulgarianmilitary.com/2023/06...
www.globaldefensecorp.com/202...
www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone...
fighterjetsworld.com/weekly-a...
www.microwavejournal.com/arti...
news.northropgrumman.com/news...
• F-35 Pilots Answer The...
www.l3harris.com/f-35
www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Shee...
www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/...
www.airforce-technology.com/p...
www.itea.org/wp-content/uploa...
www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/...
www.washingtonpost.com/sf/bran...

[@SandboxxApp]

Go to ground.news/Sandboxx to access data driven information. Subscribe through my link for less than $1/month or get 40% off unlimited access this month only!

[@markbrisec3972]

Whoaaaa. Is Sidekick system to augment the internal weapons capacity on the F-35 officially confirmed? There was a lot of talk about the Sidekick as a Lockheed's internal project, but the USAF never really committed. Although I can't imagine why given a tremendous capability uptick for the F-35..

[@memelephant]

I thought the AIM-9X couldnt be mounted internally in F-35? did that change recently?

[@christianlong-lo3jm]

​@@memelephantyes

[@jimmythomas3077]

F-35 win all day long!

[@butterwaffeln]

simulation shows, Ukraine has no chance to hit Kerch bridge with new F-16 against russian air--defence. So the question is, what should they strike instead? Sewastopol? And which weapons has US to provide?

[@Llyrin]

Also, the US tends to understate the specs on its defense products, while Russia almost ALWAYS overstates its abilities.

[@alexdunphy3716]

Not always the US over hypes stuff a lot just like everyone else.

[@sand226]

What incentive the US has to overstate its specs? Like, it doesn't really benefit them in anyway

[@fqeagles21]

​@@alexdunphy3716It doesn't,not anymore

[@Llyrin]

@@sand226 right. That would just telegraph your actual capabilities to your enemy. So, there’s always an ANNOUNCED albity, and then there’s the classified lability.

[@Thetequilashooter1]

@@alexdunphy3716Like what? You have examples? I didn’t think so. Pretty much everything in Russia’s arsenal has panned out in Ukraine to be an overhyped joke. The T-14 isn’t even present, and neither is the Su-57. If the Su-57 was a true stealth fighter, it would be making the Ukrainian Patriot batteries lives difficult, but that’s not the case. Look at Russia’s Pantsir and S-400, both destroyed by weapons that they were supposed to be able to defeat themselves. Look at the Kinzhal. It’s been shot down multiple times. And how about Russia’s Zircon, which is supposedly in full operation, yet to date has never been used. Look at Russia’s tank tanks and armored vehicles, easily getting destroyed in large numbers. How about the Moskva, whose design was for air defense, yet it was destroyed by subsonic missiles.

[@Amradar123]

964 F35 vs 11 SU-57 built. So by sheer number alone the F35 dominates the sky by almost 90:1 😊

[@user-dp4ok9ox5w]

That is 3 years old number and yet SU57 has actual air-to-air kills, meanwhile F35 does not.

[@TheAncientSnack.]

​@@user-dp4ok9ox5wshow me a video of that su-57 buddy. Want me to link the Isreal f35 that shot down a cruise missile 2 weeks ago?

[@user-dp4ok9ox5w]

@@TheAncientSnack. Air-to.air as in other hostile aircraft. Anyone can shoot down a drone, missile and everyone does exactly that during training (especially a slow flying subsonic cruise missile). You want to show you a video of SU57 shooting down a plane 100 miles away? Please, show me a video of ANY plane getting a BVR kill on a video where i can see both the attacker and defender in the same frame (and not just some lame cockpit video that can be faked).

[@simonwoess5679]

Maybe F-35 VS J-20 would have been a bit more fair

[@michaelfried3123]

@@dindrmindr626 this channel really draws out the Kremlin paid trollskies doesn't it? The dude you replied to is a known comrade.

[@tadzhiks]

One is a fighter that exists, the other one is a cartoon. Pretty easy question.

[@richardthomas598]

💯 This is a dumb question. The only place the Su-57 rules are internet comments sections plagued by 🇷🇺🧌

[@foracal5608]

One is actually real and produced enmass and trained with constantly and the other is a cardboard cut out with rivets

[@StrawHat83]

Pics or it didn’t happen 😂

[@Cody38Super]

One is an aircraft ...one has only been seen at interior airshow from a distance. They can't even produce their own Civil aircraft

[@ponz-]

With a pretty paint job😂 held together by wood screws

[@landonluebke7627]

As a general rule of thumb, I think the one that can actually fly “owns the skies”

[@twinkyoctopus]

the SU-57 can fly, they have 11 of them. it's still not enough, though

[@buildmotosykletist1987]

@@twinkyoctopus : 4 of them are proto-types, 1 of those has crashed. There's only 8 been manufactured. [EDIT: That's from memory but easily checked. ]

[@user-dp4ok9ox5w]

@@buildmotosykletist1987 That is 3 years old number and yet SU57 has actual air-to-air kills, meanwhile F35 does not.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

@@buildmotosykletist1987 "4 of them are proto-types, 1 of those has crashed. There's only 8 been manufactured. [EDIT: That's from memory but easily checked. ]" Uh, you almost didn't manage to get even a single number correct. Start of 2022, there were 4 operational Su-57 and 11 prototypes. That's 15. Right now, there's 10 or 12 operational, another 4 or 6 conducting acceptance trials and 7 prototypes, as they upgraded 4 of the prototypes to serial production standard during 2022 while they were ramping up the production line for massproduction. Meaning they built 8 new ones during 2h 2022 and 1H 2023. There may be another 2-6, as specifics are unknown due to how they moved the production to a new factory so they could use the old one completely to make Su-34s.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

"As a general rule of thumb, I think the one that can actually fly “owns the skies”" Well, i guess that rules out the F-35 then? Because a plane that needs over 20 groundhours per flighthour is not a functional plane in my book at least. Not to mention needing an obscenely large groundcrew.

[@afdrell477]

F-35: You are superior in only one respect Su-57: What is that? F-35: You are better at dying

[@nomercyinc6783]

america and her airforce dont even deal with air superiority. we deal in supremacy and other nations who are decades behind cant compete.

[@jloiben12]

SU57: What is that? F-35: You are better at being turned into debris

[@simonwoess5679]

Overused joke

[@lscorpiusl605]

Su-57: Ha! Jokes on you. Can't shoot down what doesn't fly.

[@R6-D2]

@@lscorpiusl605

[@bluemarlin8138]

Fun fact: The Su-57 can’t carry any radar-guided missiles in its weapons bays. Russia claims to have an R-77 variant adapted for internal carriage in development, but it’s still nowhere near ready to deploy. This means that in order to carry medium and long-range missiles, the Su-57 must sacrifice what little stealth it has.

[@fl1tz4r]

That really is damning. I didn’t know that

[@Skiesaremine]

How about R-37M though?

[@WildmanTrading]

Okay what? Now that's a bit much. The PAK-FA was certainly exploited to fill corrup officials budget, but they still had to make A prototype. So it not having Fox 1 or 3 in the internal weapons bays seems like a stretch.

[@zbeasty]

@@emirkaraoglan4195 he said radar guided. Do you have confirmation that the missiles in the videos you mention are radar guided? Short range air to air are normally heat seeking and most air to ground cruise missles are gps or laser guided. Radar guided stand off weapons are a much better option for a stealth platform so as not to give away their position. If you have to carry them externally that gives away some of that advantage and may allow the opposition to get off the first shot.

[@aronjames5039]

He said is it radar guided, you basically ignored the question. You haven’t said or shown proof that it’s able to carry radar guided Missiles internally.

[@777Outrigger]

"I asked one of the Air Force pilots, Lt. Col. Scott “Cap” Gunn, here whether the F-35 would win when fighting close-up with an enemy fighter. His answer was simple: “Without a doubt.” Gunn told reporters at a briefing here that he had gone up against a friend in an F-16 a few months ago. Though the F-35 “performed very well,” he made clear that it hadn’t been dominant. They flew again recently and the F-16 pilot was amazed by the improvement in the F-35’s performance. “What have they done to your jet?” the pilot said, according to Gunn. “The difference is we have learned how to fly the jet… and better understand where its advantages are.” ---->Gunn went on to say that he “either never got it within visual range, or, if I’m going to be inside visual range, then it’s because I’m going to choose to be there.” That seems to make clear the aircraft’s vaunted fusion engine and advanced sensors - all tied into the pilot’s helmet - provides the pilot with enough warning and data to allow him to decide the terms of combat." ~Breaking Defense

[@user-po1mu1sy7g]

“ f-35 experienced problems with its stealth coating, sustained supersonic flight, helmet-mounted display, excessive vibration from its cannon, and even vulnerability to being hit by lightning“

[@antonferreira483]

Hooray!

[@alexwalker2582]

@@user-po1mu1sy7g How old is that source? 2012?

[@camerongooch9606]

​@@user-po1mu1sy7gwell they don't call it the f35 lightning for nothing

[@777Outrigger]

@@user-po1mu1sy7g A catalog of minor and exaggerated problems.

[@qZbGmYjS4QusYqv5]

Su-57 is like Armata tanks - nobody ever seen them in real action

[@AKlover]

They've been seen over Ukraine several times, turns out the SU-57 flying low makes A peculiar noise. HIT! HINT! You may have to leave YT since they censor anything "Not NARRATIVE Approved" to see the videos.

[@prodigalsoniv48]

@@AKlover prove it lol, link a single video here for us

[@sonneh86]

​@@AKlover They have only been used by firing missiles dozens from the safety of kilometres from the frontline

[@colbunkmust]

@@AKlover Su-57 has likely seem "action" in the Russo-Ukrainian conflict, but lobbing R-37s from a hundred plus kilometers away in Russian airspace against legacy UA airframes isn't exactly leveraging the advantages of stealth or using cutting edge air-superiority weapons. The claim that Su-57 is operating within UA airspace is very very unlikely.

[@RangerKs0adandchess]

Incredibly stealthy!

[@Utubesuperstar]

The 57 fanboys and 35 naysayers in general don’t realize just how much of a game changer and dominant force the 35’s das and sensor fusion is. No other aircraft can shoot a target that’s 180 degrees behind it

[@ferrous3262]

rafale has done this

[@Utubesuperstar]

@@ferrous3262 proof? Because the f35’s das is completely one of a kind

[@ramonpunsalang3397]

With it's superior sensors suite, the F-35 should never find any opponent in it's Six. The opposite would be more likely if the fight ever degraded to WVR

[@Vexas345]

​@ramonpunsalang3397 If something pops up while they egress, they don't have to waste time/fuel turning around. Pretty useful.

[@Typexviiib]

@@ferrous3262id love a source for this claim.

[@scottpoole2182]

Might be better to compare the Su-57 vs a F15EX. Except there are still more of the F15EX than the Su-57.

[@atomf9143]

ATM there are 3 F-15EX models in service, so not quite yet. Give it two years though.

[@daltonv5206]

F15ex is getting an even better radar than the current f35's

[@northwards2218]

lol, the sample graphic for the news aggregator listed Financial Times as leaning right and MSNBC is “center”. Hilarious

[@BigDaddyCruz]

@@atomf9143 Oregon ANG units just got some. I believe your numbers are from March.

[@davidg3944]

@@northwards2218 Who do you get your news from? Rudy Giuliani? THAT"S "hilarious"...

[@michaelfried3123]

The real question is: Does Russia even have any competent enough pilots to make the SU57 come even marginally close to being competitive? I doubt it.

[@ashleygoggs5679]

Russias pilots arnt even the competant. Their flight hours are significantly lower then most nato pilots. Russia can spend the money on buying all this big fancy new toys but they seem to always lack funds in keeping them operational and keeping their soldiers/pilots trained on par to nato.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

@@MikeJones50911 Riiight. So, was it the Ghost of Kiev who flew the Russian average of 250 strike missions per day during the entire war? Up to 500 in a day at most. Never less than 100. And they did that WITHOUT reducing their regular amount of training new pilots. In fact, they INCREASED their yearly number of new pilots. "They're a shadow army that relies on their Soviet inheritance and they can't maintain what they have." Because US News upgrading the Russian military to the strongest in the world a couple months ago tells you nothing about just how much garbage propanda you've been guzzling to believe such stupid crap? Nato generals are openly saying that if Nato got into a direct fight with Russia, they would lose decisively in a few weeks.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

"The real question is: Does Russia even have any competent enough pilots to make the SU57 come even marginally close to being competitive? I doubt it." Of the current 12 Su-57 pilots that are KNOWN, 11 of them have made ace. One of them have made double ace.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

@@ashleygoggs5679 "Russias pilots arnt even the competant. Their flight hours are significantly lower then most nato pilots. Russia can spend the money on buying all this big fancy new toys but they seem to always lack funds in keeping them operational and keeping their soldiers/pilots trained on par to nato." 20 years that claim would have had at least some relation to reality. TODAY? Not even remotely. And Russia today is also the ONLY NATION in the world that have a functional and experienced airforce that have survived combat against a peer enemy. USA&Co have not had that since the 1940s.

[@michaelfried3123]

@@DIREWOLFx75 whoa, a whole dozen? LOL. Now I'm terrified... NOT.

[@Cody38Super]

Essentially, Russia is still 40 years behind us and sliding.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

"Essentially, Russia is still 40 years behind us and sliding." Since when? Maybe you should go look up the report on Soviet technology made after the German reunification? You know, the one that resulted in the rushed development of the -9X version of the Sidewinder because it was found that the previous model was embarassingly inferior to the Soviet equivalent? The report whose most common phrase amounted to "superior to western equivalent in every way except ergonomics". The report which found that Soviet armor was better, Soviet electronics(!!!) was better, Soviet missiles was MUCH better etc etc etc... That was when EVERYOBODY KNEW that the west had superior EVERYTHING. The only one 40 years behind, is the west in regards to airdefences. The Ukraine S-300s from the 1980s are more effective than the most up to date Patriot, that SHOULD tell you something, considering that Russia regards the S-300 as entirely obsolete. And they're in the process of starting to put the S-500 into service, which is effectively a generational upgrade against the S-400 already. Oh, and then there's hypersonics, the west is at least 40 years behind Russia there as well. Why do you think Russian Krasnopol guided artillery shells have a vastly better track record in Ukraine than the wester equivalent? Why do you think the Tornado S outperforms the HIMARS as much as they do? Guess they the Javelin is performing so laughably pisspoor. While the Russian Kornet is one shot one kill even against Challenger 2 and Strv-122, the by far the most heavily protected western tanks in Ukraine. Why is the Igla performing so much better than the Stinger? Only a gullible idiot would still believe Russia is behind in military tech, when all the field experience shows the absolute opposite.

[@alexalbrecht5768]

@@DIREWOLFx75 pretty much everything you said here is wrong lmao. That piss poor western equipment has devastated Russian military assets despite the comparatively small number of units supplied.

[@ChrisZukowski88]

​@@DIREWOLFx75imagine arguing about Russian tech using Soviet propaganda.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

@@alexalbrecht5768 "That piss poor western equipment has devastated Russian military assets despite the comparatively small number of units supplied." When? Where? The majority of Russian losses has come from ex-Soviet equipment. The majority of Ukraine success has come from employing soldiers with Soviet military training. The biggest disasters have come when relying on CIA, like the absurdly horrible slaughter that the Kherson offensive was, almost 50% of the 55 thousand killed and noone left uninjured, against less than 8 thousand Russian troops, whose losses were minimal. Or when trying to attack "western style". Like down at Bradley square. Where Ukraine's casualties were so horribly heavy that Ukraine was forced to use TWO whole trains just to deliver corpses to other parts of the country because they ran out of cold storage due to the extreme levels of casualties in the first month of offensive. Nato training and equipment is the laughingstock of the world right now. Ask yourself why Russia is getting more and more requests for both equipment and instructors. Ask yourself why only USAs minions are still big on buying yankee equipment. 38 thousand Russian KIAs. Over 750 thousand Ukraine KIAs. Do the math.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

@@ChrisZukowski88 "imagine arguing about Russian tech using Soviet propaganda." So, you're saying that a joint Nato evaluation of Soviet tech is now Russian propaganda? How braindead are you really?

[@benjaminlynch9958]

That 900 mile IR detection range on that ballistic missile is very impressive, even if it was under ideal conditions. For perspective, the distance from New York to Chicago is around 715 miles. It’s also approximately 715 miles from Warsaw - within NATO’s borders - to Moscow. Being able to identify and track from that distance without radar is huge and would no doubt play a significant role in attack vector in any future (hypothetical) conflict.

[@kameronjones7139]

Yeah that will play huge role against the j20

[@mrbigberd]

It's an apples and bananas. ICBMs have a massive heat signature you can pick up from almost anywhere because they are so large, fire for so long, and go so high that there's nothing to interfere with them. That said, IR should be scaring the pants off of pilots. CMOS tech advances has made IR sensors dirt cheap and physics limitations mean there is a definite fidelity limit for optics without making such massive apertures that you wind up with a giant radar reflector. We may have better software, but I'd bet a lot that we don't have meaningfully better hardware than Russia. This massive gap in stealth is why we're messing around with stuff like chrome paint. Russia knows they can detect our stealth fighters on low-frequency radar way before they get close. At that point, they know the general vicinity and can launch interceptors which then lock onto the incoming IR signals and fire. Unfortunately, our only IR-blocking fighter design that ever had a shot at being produced was the YF-23 which was rejected because it didn't have thrust vectors (which are literally the reason the F-22 has IR issues in the first place). The scariest bit is Russia's work on Lancet drone AI. AI inferencing on a missile isn't very expensive (it could likely be done on a cellphone chip and even more cheaply on a dedicated chips with lots of tensor units (like China is currently pumping out). At that point, you don't even have to get close enough for any kind of lock. Just verify there are no friendlies and fire an AI-powered missile to shoot down the fast-moving IR signature. Just one more symptom of our new WW1-like status quo where cheap defenses are outstripping offensive capabilities.

[@kameronjones7139]

@@mrbigberd what are basing the whole " we don't have meaningfully better hardware" on exactly because last I checked the su 57 wasn't anywhere near close to f35 or even j20 as far as stealth or design is concerned. The fact you think you think the new stealth coating is " chrome paint " shows you limited understanding of this. This is not a tactic used by anyone to defeat stealth because it doesn't work because low frequency radar lack enough accuracy at range to do even be able to do what you described The whole unrelated AI drone paragraph you just did sounds like you just copied and pasted from RT

[@georgemcbride7857]

@@kameronjones7139thanks your comment over that bot BS.

[@mrbigberd]

​@@kameronjones7139 Your objection is orthogonal. Our planes are FAR better at deflecting/absorbing high-frequency radar. Both our fighters (but not the B-2/21) and Su-57 are very visible to low-frequency radar. The real issue is Infrared detection. The YF-23 had a shielded exhaust that protected the worst part of the IR signature, but F-22 (and Su-57) opted for highly-visible thrust vectors and F-35 opted for very little IR shielding too. It doesn't matter one bit if Su-57 can't get an active radar lock if they can get the much better IR lock that our planes can't even detect because it's passive. At the same time, CMOS sensors are dirt cheap and readily available from China. Because there are physical limits to optics, our optics aren't any better than Russia's (this has been a solved issue for decades if you are willing to pay the price).

[@texasranger24]

The US Army just chose General Dynamics and Rheinmetall as finalists for the 4000 Bradley replacement IFVs. Could you do a Firepower series video about this program, the two finalists and the other three that dropped out. Or more generally the current state of IFVs (Bradley, CV90, Puma, Lynx) and their most likely future. Maybe even including anti air IFVs like some CV90 variants and SkyRanger.

[@cylentone]

I love your quote "nobody has ever won a dogfight by doing cartwheels"

[@njgrplr2007]

I will take stealth, situational awareness, and better missiles over agility any day. Throw in helmet weapon slaving with high off boresight missiles and it is an absolute no brainer.

[@aidanwilliams9452]

Yep even if it came to a close dogfight it would just be whoever can launch first, and the F-35 has the massive DAS advantage for that

[@dgthe3]

Yeah, the whole thing is a bit unfair. It's a bit like playing hide & seek, but one player has night vision goggles while the other is blindfolded. Losing such a game requires atrocious luck and/or incompetence.

[@underworldguardian704]

The SU-57 is so stealthy, no one has seen it outside Russia 😂

[@ianlowery6014]

😄You get 10 points for that one!

[@davidmcgann9111]

And they probably never will

[@PasleyAviationPhotography]

Hmmm there are around 10 Su-57, to close to 1K F-35's. Yes, that would be an interesting albeit short fight.

[@dgthe3]

To make it fair, perhaps make it a gauntlet fight. Only ever 10 F35s in a single fight, so it would potentially go 98 or whatever rounds. Russia only gets their 10 Su57s to start with & the next round is whatever they have left from the previous. The question becomes: would there even be a 3rd round? No way there'd be a 4th, but there's a good chance that at least 1 Su57 could survive the 1st round. But in that 2nd round? However many Russian jets there are, there'll be more F35s ... and I don't think anyone survives that engagement.

[@davidcrane372]

There are 22 su 57 produced

[@N1njaSnake]

The flying T-14 Armata

[@alexv3357]

Given that there are a little over 10 Su-57s in existence, it literally wouldn't matter if it was the best fighter even made; outnumbered nearly a hundred to one against the ~1000 and counting F-35s, they stand little chance. And, to be clear, the Su-57 stands no chance of getting close enough to the F-35 for manoeuvring advantages to matter, nor of even seeing one until it's far too late.

[@juzoli]

Those 10 are not ready. They don’t have their intended engines, weapons, fill stealth cover, and I can only imagine the readiness of the electronic. So it is more like zero. What they currently have is a su-35 with a body kit at best.

[@dennisleighton2812]

F-35 number 1 000 is already flying! Starting on the second 1 000!

[@trentvlak]

I'm just impressed that they got four to fly at the same time for a photo shoot. Right now the USA is desperate for some competition.

[@nomercyinc6783]

nobody is ever desperate for competition when it comes to the lives of people

[@trentvlak]

@@nomercyinc6783 false. Life is boring. War is awesome.

[@markpukey8]

You just imagine some DOD contractor "accidentally" slipping the plans for some high tech wonder tool to the Chinese and saying "For the love of god, can you build a few hundred of these RIGHT AWAY?! We gave these to the Russians 10 years ago and they STILL don't have them in production! If you can't give us some competition, they're going to cut our budgets!"

[@user-np2up7we4s]

China will rival our air superiority in 10-15 years.

[@seandunn8035]

Well since there are only 3 or 4 operational felons I’d say the 35

[@billyccall5774]

The F-22 dominates the sky, the su-57 dominates the hanger...

[@justinpaul3110]

come on, be nice. It dominates air shows too!

[@harrishromero6447]

You mean 35

[@justinpaul3110]

@@harrishromero6447 or both

[@DDDSSDDDSSDDDSS]

F22 is retired 😅

[@dennisleighton2812]

@@DDDSSDDDSSDDDSS You wish! They are right now spending $billions on massive upgrades to the F-22! They'll be around for a decade or even more, so don't get your hopes up!

[@DallasCowboyFan95]

Su-57 can barely get to the sky, let alone dominate it.

[@SCH292]

T72 turret can fly higher.

[@cursdtoeatpsywheneverimaskedto]

​@@SCH292 Tankie Space Program

[@andreimoutchkine5163]

Why?

[@DIREWOLFx75]

"Su-57 can barely get to the sky, let alone dominate it." Last update i got, of the 4 Su-57 pilots that started 2022, and the additional 8 that have since been added, all of them have made ace, and one of them have made double ace. While western AWACS have shown themselves to be completely incapable of finding them, even when they KNOW they're in the region, even when they're at shorter distance than the S-400 has tracked the F-22 and F-35s.

[@robbabcock_]

In which video game?😂 @@DIREWOLFx75

[@shadow_spark8788]

If you compare the Su-57 and the AH-64, Apache wins because it's a great air-to-ground platform.

[@DefaultProphet]

That’s really funny 😂

[@gatling216]

I realize this is a joke, but they did testing on helicopters versus fighters back in the day and the results were embarrassing. In any sort of BVR engagement, the fighters obviously cleaned house, but at close ranges, the helicopters had an alarming habit of hiding behind trees and popping out long enough to score gun kills as the fighters flew past.

[@DefaultProphet]

@@gatling216 huh. IR missile kills I fully believe but gun kills? Seems tougher

[@gatling216]

@@DefaultProphet Considering the amount of firepower they were cramming onto helicopters in the post Vietnam era, I wouldn't put it past them. Worth looking up yourself if you're interested. I don't remember the name of the test. I uh, might've been a wee bit intoxicated when I found it and fell out of my chair cackling.

[@nerobernardino88]

@@gatling216 And we saw choppers being shot down with ATGMs too. War is weird.

[@jocopowell]

In Russia's present state, producing any current-gen aircraft at a significant rate is virtually impossible.

[@ashleygoggs5679]

Thats why they only have 10 in serial production if that. There is always rumours there is more but never any proof. Russia says alot and never delivers.

[@ChrisZukowski88]

​@@ashleygoggs5679Like me in the bedroom. Wait a minute....

[@patrickweaver1105]

They're hand building the SU-57 because stealth doesn't work at all if you have panel gaps.

[@Dluger123]

Stop making things up

[@ashleygoggs5679]

@@Dluger123 how is it making things up, its been around 10 years since the SU57 was shown for the first time at a russian parade and russia hasnt even hit 20 serial productions according to all western sources.

[@IsfetSolaris]

Very impressed at the neutrality of this video. A lot of people like to claim one is objectively better than the other, but you properly acknowledge that there are engagement scenarios where both win. Granted, the SU-57's only winning scenario is "sneak up on sauron", but I like that you acknowledge it can still be done, no matter how unlikely.

[@akimbo.1887]

I think Ezio was a good deal more stealthy than the 57 lol

[@Administrator_O-5]

An elephant 🐘 is more stealthy than an Su-57...

[@rgbforever4561]

​@@Administrator_O-5quite literally

[@Milksong93]

Doesn't matter how good the SU-57 is if there's only like 10

[@jessebauer7372]

Remember, an F-14 bagged two SU-57s back in 2022.

[@beayn]

When you have plot armor you can do anything!

[@TheOneWhoMightBe]

Pretty embarrassing for Russia to lose three of its ten flightworthy airframes in a single encounter.

[@freakshowkena]

Source??

[@BattleshipMan_]

One is the current stealth backbone of 17 nations, comes as 3 variants and can be a A-10 is a hint of stealth if it wants to be. The other did a funny maneuver in a movie and won't cross a border.

[@Galomortalbr]

one has air to air kills, the other don't

[@Innerspace100]

@@Galomortalbr Yes. So does the Fokker Dr1 triplane from the First World War. Doesn't make it a better fighter aircraft than the F-35, though, does it...

[@Galomortalbr]

@@Innerspace100 it pretty much does, what the hell is the use of a ferrari if you never use it? nothing it is useless more useless than some cheap fiat that actually does something

[@Innerspace100]

@@Galomortalbr Rubbish comparison, and you know it. Please try again...

[@Galomortalbr]

@@Innerspace100 i will try harder once you have a president who don't knell to foreign powers

[@edmondsmith4259]

I admire and truly appreciate Mr. Hollings objectivity in every episode, this side by side being no different! (Very merciful, not including the training gap, and how many skilled veterans in the Russian Airforce equivalent would be still around to even see that possible scenario with an F-35 A/B/C.)

[@jasonbroughton533]

Thanks for the video Alex! Always look forward to them! Keep them coming!!

[@napobg6842]

One way I like to decide on a comparison like this is to see their history and their technological capacity. Since the mid 70s I think it would be hard for anyone to argue against America's dominance in the sky especially when we see the actual war scores. F-16 and F-15 had been a combo that was really hard to explain to the Soviet military command. The best example I can think of is the Operation Mole Cricket 19. Despite Israel having access to the latest and greatest jets from the US, going against numerically superior opponent that is also protected by 30 SAM systems and almost completely destroying all jets and SAMs for 0 losses is really hard to explain. The US has been developing stealth aircrafts since the 70s. So behind the development of F-35 stands decades upon decades of experience not only from an engineering standpoint but also real combat. Not to mention that there are first gen technologies on SU-57 like the AESA radar for Russia. And on the topic of technologies, the R&D budget of the US military is larger than Russia's entire pre-war military budget. On top of it the US spending on R&D in general is over $800 billion USD! People have to understand that technology nowadays, especially digital technologies, are developed in the private sector. As a matter of fact there are no government companies in the US military industrial complex or at least such that I have heard. having access to the most technologically sophisticated companies in the world, companies that literally push the digital and information age that we live in, is such advantage that can't be replicated by any other country in the world. The US tech sector is about $2 trillion in size. To give a perspective of how vast the US tech sector is, it is larger than all of Asia put together! The US accounts for about 35% of the global size while all of Asia is just about 32% which, to remind you, include nations like China, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, India and so on. I'm giving these 2 examples because we, as average people, can't really know all these stuff. Russia is a closed country where nothing is public while the US is public only for things that can be public and remember the US military is not obligated to say the truth. Anything we read might just be dust in the eyes for their enemies. All the problems might just be propaganda for their enemies to feel better. We simply don't know! But what we do know is the history (for the most part) and the thing that actually makes them - the technology sectors. We know that the US is a technological powerhouse! We talk about the digital age where the US has the largest digital economy in the world by veeery far, more than the next 10 nations combined, probably comparable to the rest of the world combined! So America wins in my eyes.

[@m.a3914]

Indeed, if we compare both nations' tech sectors, it would look very grim for Russia. The Russian R&D spending was only $15.82 billion in 2023 or about 1.09% of the budget

[@anxietygamingactual6554]

I would put forth that you have to have more than 10 operational air-frames at any given time to even come into the conversation of being able to compete against any mass produced aircraft, let alone the F-35. Russia does not seem to be able to meet this requirement at current. Maybe we should check back in another 2-3 years?

[@lordphullautosear]

With any luck, there won't be a rooZZian federation by then.

[@simisg2121]

Wait a min, the 35 is not sluggish, don’t know where you got that man…

[@velvet_bass]

The only thing the su57 has going for it (along with the 4th gen sukhoi lineup) is looks. Goddamn its a sexy machine…even if its a hanger queen.

[@afatcatfromsweden]

Damn, got all airworthy SU-57s in the same thumbnail.

[@chrislong3938]

When I first saw the Su-57, I was astounded by its engines being so exposed! The heat signature must be giant! They didn't even try to cover them with some lame shrouding to reduce the IR signature! If they manage to upgrade to those newer engines, it would be the same as fielding an entirely new jet! I'll say this about the plane, it sure is some amazing eye candy to look at!!! At least it'll look great while crashing!

[@sportsfreak33393]

"All the F-35s in the world couldnt shoot down a single squadron of SU-57s... amongst other reasons, because a squadron of SU-57s does not exist."

[@overanDownUnder]

Su-57 is like bringing finger guns to a gun fight.

[@I-02]

I like these tech breakdowns and showing how they compare to their competition.

[@scottlee7613]

As always brother you got the goods. Excellent presentation. We need more input

[@kennethng8346]

"Even the Osprey gives the SU57 the side eye" oh now your getting mean 🙂

[@SoloRenegade]

The Su-57 is a Su-35 in a Halloween costume pretending to be a 5th gen fighter.

[@Mr.Dodo-]

The Su-35 is a Su-27 in a Halloween costume pretending to be a 4.5 gen fighter.

[@SoloRenegade]

@@Mr.Dodo- yes. very few aircraft can claim to be 4.5gen in my opinion, and not one Russian design qualifies.

[@hellbent650]

One has entered mass production. The other is still a prototype.

[@lordphullautosear]

A few prototypes, and at least one "mock up" that couldn't fly if you pushed it off a tall cliff with real engines installed...

[@hellbent650]

@lordphullautosear if u wer an evil dictator wouldn't u choose a platform that exists in great numbers over a paper tiger that technically dosnt exist? That is assuming u agree that propaganda cannot be considered a form of existence... please read that in super fast ben Shapiro master debater voice. Thank u for ur service 💓

[@lordphullautosear]

@@hellbent650-- you're assuming that psychopathic dictators think logically...😮

[@hellbent650]

@lordphullautosear damiTT Jim I'm a gamer not a psychologist.

[@lordphullautosear]

@@hellbent650-- ++ for a McCoy paraphrase😆

[@martinoamello3017]

US: We'll build a fighter jet for around $100 million RU: We'll do it a bottle of vodka!

[@DeaconBlu]

This is the sort of epic videography that I come to this channel for. Great video Alex! Thanks cat! 😎👍

[@140theguy]

The Air Force has stated the f-35A model will do mach 1.3 without afterburner but they consider super cruise to be mach 1.5+.

[@mattfromwiisports4910]

Imagine a plane that just uses a laser to shoot down missiles that come near it rather than needing stealth. Oh wait we’ve made that. It’s just not public yet.

[@rodneynoble6046]

Imagine a bomber covered in lazers like a B17. If the lazers work it can't be touched

[@xivkya6882]

​@@rodneynoble6046only issue is the terrible bomb load of the b17

[@aidanwilliams9452]

BUFF will for sure get some lasers in its long lifetime

[@CptJistuce]

​@@rodneynoble6046Bombers with frickin' lasers!

[@dgthe3]

@@xivkya6882 Yeah, but the lasers would weigh a fraction of the 50 cals + mounts + ammo + crewmen that a B17 carries. Therefore, more bombs can get carried.

[@cat192]

Great topic!

[@nfuryboss]

Great video, Alex. Would you be able to delve into GE Aerospace's breakthrough in detonation engine next time and its possible deployment timeframe?

[@ponz-]

I wonder how long it will take when it actually gets its numbers up for one of these pilots to fly it to one of our bases and ask for an asylum😂

[@ChrisZukowski88]

quite a while. Russia banned the use of googlr maps so they'll never make it to a US base.

[@z_actual]

ask for asylum to Russia? wait till after the election ...

[@lgnfve]

su 57 can time travel and dematerialize, according to russian web site. I trust them. like I trust all the numbers and specs about the su 57.

[@PeterMuskrat6968]

Good Job Comrade!!! One Potato has been deposited into your account and your conscription notice has been “lost in the mail” for one more month! Remember, Glorious Leader Putin sees all!

[@timandsuzidickey9358]

Very Nice....Thanks. !!

[@NormanInAustralia]

Thanks!

[@markendicott6874]

The F35 will be deployed in Four-ships to maximise coverage and data-exchange so the idea that there will be single ship, close-range dogfights is just dumb - they pretty much qont happen. So if they can actually get some 57s up they are likely to get sniped from range before any kind of merge happens. I know all about the arguments for the missles involved, 5:15 but the sheer number of Amramm+ that will be in the air WILL be decisive. And thats if the Ruskies can even get to 150+ 57s to make it a 9:1 fight.

[@herptek]

War does not always go according to expectation, let alone according to plan, so it would be nice to be able to fight close range engagements as well. I would not panic much about the Russian advantage at dogfigths, however. Apparently the better ability of the F-35 to acquire a lock without pointing your nose at the enemy will ease the odds even at closer ranges, even if one is unable to outturn the opponent.

[@texasranger24]

Could you do a video about the future of Shorad? Will short range air defense provided by the laser stryker? Will the Bradley replacement IFV XM30 function as an anti air cannon? Should the US look at the SkyRanger / Skynex / millenium gun system? And will there be a Stinger replacement with a better battery, targeting, and most importantly more affordable? Or is this affordable future the APKWS guidance upgrade for the cheap and plentiful Hydra 70mm rocket? Should we slap that on Avenger Hummvees? Or IRIS-T?

[@texasranger24]

I think the US should really invest into a new shorad air defense system. Laser Stryker is cool, but i am talking anti air tank (or IFV, really). Team up with german Rheinmetall and get the Millenium gun/ SkyRanger. Slap a 35mm airbust cannon aka longrange shotgun onto Strykers and Bradleys (or their replacement) plus 2 or 4 Stinger misslies. Or the bigger IRIS-T. Hell, develop a new Stinger, and make it 5 times cheaper. The battery on the current ones suck and their age shows. Good shorad weapons need to be affordable and plentiful, not some rare and expensive thing nobody really can get.

[@watdeneuk]

This video has more minutes than Russia has SU-57's.

[@sjsomething4936]

It’s got more minutes than the average flight time of an Su-57.

[@jonathanryan9946]

I personally don't see any characters from Assassins Creed surviving snipers from CoD. Those snipers will just camp outside every spawn point...

[@dougwallis5078]

Great side by side, even with the unknown factors from Russia. Thanks Alex

[@mikeharvey9184]

Can the SU-57 take high off bore-sight shots? I get that in a dogfight with guns, the F-35 is probably toast. But a lot has to happen before you get close enough to dogfight with guns. If the F-35 can see the SU-57 long before the SU-57 can see the F-35, take missile shots at a much greater angles, has a better sensor suite, jam the Felon's radar more effectively, and also carries a decoy for defense... being a better dogfighter with guns seems a bit moot. And in a few years when the AIM-260 and Peregrine or CUDA come into service, who cares? An F-35 with a dozen advanced Peregrines or CUDAs kept in it's internal bays is going to be as lot more lethal outside of gun range than the more maneuverable SU-57.

[@bumpercarjoe6391]

Wow, your sponsor “ground news” sounds like it actually worthwhile resource

[@Bulletisred]

Thanks for the good info. You have a great narrator voice,. Keep up the great work 😎👍

[@z_actual]

the bobblehead is a distraction

[@texasranger24]

A video about the AAS / FARA (armed scout helicopter) program would be cool. Sikorsky has the S-97 Raider compete with the Bell+Textron 360 Invictus. The Raider has troop capacity while the Invictus does not, but that gives the Invictus better stealth properties, just like the Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche had. Not sure why Sikorsky abandoned that design, as they first came up with it. Just to push a common scout and transport design when they already lost the Blackhawk transport replacement to the Bell V280 Valor?

[@nomercyinc6783]

the s-97 raider is not being built. the military chose the second variant of the osprey and its a tilt rotor. the s-97 aint being manufactured by anyone. it was built to be tested by the airforce along with the tilt rotor. that program was canceled not even recently

[@stupidburp]

Invictus is better for a scout. The tragedy is that Defiant is better than Valor for front line utility but the decision makers went with the tilt rotor anyways.

[@Just_A_Random_Desk]

Didn't a Su-57 just catch fire on the runway recently?

[@RTSchramm]

No matter how advanced the jet is, it's the training, experience, and skill of the pilot and the tactics used that makes the difference in an Air-to-Air engagement.

[@Ionizap]

US pilots are well trained and engagements are going to take place at BVR. We're not talking dogfights anymore. It's also quite well known Russian pilots suffer from lack of training hours.

[@RTSchramm]

@@Ionizap You just repeated what I posted

[@dgthe3]

To an extent. The best pilot in the world flying a Sopwith Camel won't be able to shoot down a last-in-class rookie straight out of the academy strapped into an F22. Things get interesting when you pair a mediocre pilot with an excellent plane against an excellent pilot with a mediocre plane.

[@RTSchramm]

@@dgthe3 You are comparing apples and oranges. You do know that F-22 jets do get shot down during BVR training exercises by 4th generation fighters during Red Flag? From what I read, it's due to inexperienced pilots be overwhelmed with the amount of sensor data that the F-22 sensors display and learning how to prioritize targets, and sometimes overestimating the capabilities of the F-22. All fighter pilots know the phase " Lose Sight, Lose the Fight!". This applies to both BVR and BFM tactics. Note that the USA intelligence has commented on how the Chinese pilots flying the Chengdu J-20 fighter were terrible at BVR against their 3rd and 4th generation fighters during the numerous naval exercises around Tawain. Even with their more advanced radar in the J-20, some of these pilots failed to located threats at the BVR range. My point is that the human is the weakest and most unpredictable link in any weapon system.

[@Registered_Simp]

While this is still true to an extent, I feel like the notion of "The better pilot comes out on top" was put into question as far back as the Iran-Iraq war with Iranian F-14's abusing the insane relative systems capabilities of the Tomcat paired with the extreme range of the Aim-54 to slam pilots who never even knew they were being shot at. Iran at this point had axed allot of its Tomcat pilot core due to concerns over their loyalty to the new regime. Iraqi pilots were widely considered to be a match or even sometimes superior to their Iranian counterparts at the time, yet got their asses handed to them whenever the Tomcat showed up. Better pilots have a higher chance of survival, yes. But there is only so much training can do when you're fighting the metaphorical Eye of Sauron with yourself not even able to see your attacker.

[@willman65parish2]

Great analysis

[@777Outrigger]

Whoever sees first has the advantage, Big advantage! If you enter a dog fight in an equal position with you're opponent, you've messed up! Not even the top aces of WWII did dog fights. They saw dogfighting as a dangerous and low yielding endeavor. Instead they developed ambush tactics. From top German Ace Erich Hartmann; "I never cared much for dogfight. I would never dogfight with the Russians Get the highest altitude and if possible come out of the sun…. Ninety percent of my attacks were surprise attacks..... The pilot who sees the other first has already half of the victory." And from some fighter pilot; "If you enter into a dogfight in an equal position with your opponent,, your tactics suck" The F-35 will always enter into a dogfight in an advantageous position with it's opponent, and will ambush with it's stealth and superior sensor system, like Hartmann did with his tactics. And it will do it to the SU-57 ....... In Red Flag 17-1, the F-35 often entered into a visual fight, but despite being outnumbered, it still kicked derriere with it's ambushes. The F-35 will always see first. Incredible advantage.

[@buckeyesfan4700]

Well let's also compare the 35c to the carrier version of the 57.... Oh wait there isn't one 🤔

[@user-qx8jo3ed9u]

No need fpr carrier version of a jet when you have only three carriers and one literally does nothing and burns.

[@carlosdasilva7444]

The one with garmin GPS attached with tape

[@NothingIsKnown00]

From the F-35 POV: "I have a bogey on the radar. Fox-3. Splash." For the Su-57 POV: "I have an alert here. Looks like - "

[@Moochewmoo]

I just want to take a moment and remind folks that the Su-57 was a response to F-22. The F-22 is just an absolute horror show of an opponent. However at this stage of its life, the most sophisticated air supremacy fighter in human existence, is now old nose and is potentially getting phased out. Jesus Christ American air power is straight up nightmare fuel.

[@terryfaugno9242]

>Jesus Christ American air power is straight up nightmare fuel. Would you intercept me? I'd intercept me! IYKYK

[@curtish2541]

And NGAD is going to be even more so. Imagine 6 drones and a master manned aircraft flying as a formation. If any aircraft did manage to close into a turning fight, one AI drone sicced on an opponent, the drone can pull G’s to the limit of the aircraft, three times higher than human endurance. Each drone capable of delivering 2 2,000 lb JDAMs or other payload, like stealth ship missiles, or AAMRAMS for sortie survivability. Anyone launching against the sortie would have to figure out which one was the master and which one was the drone, and when they did launch, hell was coming for them. The whole notion of AI drone wingmen in a package more stealthy than Gen 5 is unreal.

[@blueskiestrevor5200]

You mentioned that a typical air to air load would be 2x aim-9 and 2x aim-120 carried internally. However, I am 90% that the aim-9x does not fit inside the F-35 weapons bay. Unless there has been a massive upgrade I haven't heard about

[@trentnordhagen]

Aim 9x is smaller than the aim 120.

[@blueskiestrevor5200]

@trentnordhagen It is shorter yes but thanks to its large flight fins, it takes up a much larger internal space. If you don't believe me, do a quick Google search and try to find any evidence of one stored internally. The F-22 can store the aim-9x inside because it has side bays that were specifically designed for it.

[@matthewnovak3095]

@@blueskiestrevor5200I think the block 4 f35s will have the capability to hold Aim 9x’s, but those are a couple years away

[@GonzoTehGreat]

I believe you're correct, but I don't think this is a significant limitation, as the Sidewinder is primarily a WVR missile, while the F-35 benefits more from being able to carry the AMRAAM internally, because of it's BVR capabilities. The Block 4 upgrade includes the addition of the "Sidekick" missile rack for the A and C versions, which will allow them to carry 2 more AMRAAMs, in addition to the current 2, making a total of 4.

[@blueskiestrevor5200]

@GonzoTehGreat I agree that if the jets are employed correctly and kept BVR they shouldn't need the Aim-9. The F-35 can currently hold 4 AMRAAMS in its weapons bays. The sidekick upgrade would make it 6 today, but that is totally independent of the block 4 upgrade. I was just reading about this today, and it looks like there is not a timeline yet of when sidekick will be implemented.

[@ChrisSchryer81]

The Su-57 seems more like an assassin from Monty python's flying circus... It's pretty though

[@lubomirdoukov6975]

Purely virtual question, as one of these does not exist in any significant numbers!

[@jimmay1988]

The F-35 CAN supercruise, but that weakens the stealth coating with quicker wear. Su-57 has imaginary stealth coating.

[@My_initials_are_O.G.cuz_I_am]

It can't supercruise as it needs to dive or use afterburner to reach supersonic speeds. It can, however, *maintain* supersonic speeds at around Mach-1.2-1.3 in level flight without afterburner.

[@dgthe3]

@@My_initials_are_O.G.cuz_I_am Maintaining supersonic speeds without afterburner IS supercruise. WGAS how you get up to speed.

[@Spaceballz123]

As of 2023 10 SU-57 vs 1000 F-35 who wins? 😂

[@amazin7006]

I think the most we've seen in the air at once was 4, and none of them have the new engines (which means .97 thrust to weight instead of 1+ like F35)

[@Raumance]

Even if production numbers were the same su-57 just doesn't have comparable technology. It's not a real 5th gen like f35.

[@Galomortalbr]

@@amazin7006 the su 57 with the old engines is weight to trust is at 1.16, the new one is targeted at 1.36, and that at take off weight

[@amazin7006]

@@Galomortalbr Ah i was counting with 1 engine. With the current engines it produces 61,000 pounds of thrust maximum with afterburners while weighing 63,000 pounds at takeoff, this is takeoff weight with no gun or missiles at all, only fuel. So your 1.16 number makes no sense.

[@Galomortalbr]

@@amazin7006 takeoff weight is 25.000 KG is normal take off weight and each engine has 14.500 KG of trust

[@skvUSA]

Alex Hollings, Thank you, As usual, You provide tons of clear info compressed into 20 mins. This time you missed the one very important thing - F-35 is intended as an integral part of the complex battle network system that includes radars, drones and other aircrafts. It is not correct to assess F-35 outside of this network. All crews across this network are trained to work in cooperation. At the same time, while Su-57 has some networking capabilities, Russia lacks such network and there little cooperation even with-in Russian airforce.

[@christianlong-lo3jm]

The best weapon the f-35 has is it's data link with all other resources in the area to send off other missions that is appropriate for those systems

[@anthonyb5279]

This is simple. There are only 4 Su-57s left, it is not stealthier than a F-18. The F-35 is more maneuverable than people know. BUT that does not matter the the Su-57 can not see the F-35. The F-35s weapons and EW load out are going to give its the advantage beyond what people are aware of. Its not a fair fight at all. The F-35 is massively superior.

[@Galomortalbr]

only 4 left? implied they have been nearly all destroyed? i also I'm sure there is more than 4 even if it nos in mass production, any source i can find cites the su 57 being stealthier than a f-18 even if it's not saying much.

[@anthonyb5279]

@@Galomortalbr There were only 8 to start with. The rest have crashed in flight tests. There are 4 serving in Crimea. As far as the source for its stealth profile, me I say it is not stealthy. Otherwise go google it asshole every one knows its crap lot s of people talking about it.

[@matthewnovak3095]

⁠@@GalomortalbrThe RCS of a clean super hornet is about 1 meter squared and Sukhoi’s official patents put the felons RCS at I think 0.1-1 meter squared. So on a bad day the felon is the same as the f18

[@jeremygair4007]

It is also important to remember Su 57 is hopelessly outnumbered

[@neutchain7838]

at this point its hopelessly obsolete as well. It should have been mass produced around the time the 35 started production ( i beleive it was supposed to be their answer to the Raptor ) but India backed out so funds dried out, at this point its nothing more than an airshow spectacle. They should scrap the project take what they've learned and invest into a new one and lets not make the same mistakes again that has been hunting this one from the beginning...

[@jeremygair4007]

@@neutchain7838 I think those mistakes would require the entire Russian Federation to be reformatted to be fixed.

[@neutchain7838]

@@jeremygair4007 Manufacturing a 5th gen plane requires really precise engineering and a whole lotta money. Their planes never been really sophisticated though they are really good I am not denying that for a moment but this is a whole different game and they're just not up to pair with Lockheed at this point.

[@jeremygair4007]

@neutchain7838 your 5 by 5 on that. Seen that new rotation detonation dual phase scramjet from GE?

[@neutchain7838]

@@jeremygair4007 yup, NASA has been experimenting with almost the same tech for a while now. It's a really groundbreaking tech and could be the key to jets that are orders of magnitude faster than what we have now and keeping the manufacturing/maintanance cost low enough to make it worthwhile.

[@flanker8724]

1) We don’t know how many Su-57s are currently in use with the Russian air force, but we can assaume there are some 20 of them available because before the Ukraine war Russia had around 10 of them and has recieved more since than… Either way, more are to come in the near future since the production is being boosted, including more Su-35s and modernized Su-30SMs… 2) There may be almost 1.000 F-35s built but that doesn’t mean they are ALL in the US inventory (indeed, they still have lots of them and much, much more than Russia has 57s, but there are already hundreds of Su-35s, Su-30SM/SM2s and MiG-31s to compensate and provide support…) 3) That ONE Su-57 crashed during a test flight, so I don’t see any problem with that… 4) The Su-27 that was involved in the incident with RAF spy plane probably launched those missiles without radar lock to warn the British, OR it could be that, since the 27 is an old platform carrying old missiles they weren’t properly maintained (which is bad ofcourse, but doesn’t have to do anything with the new Su-57, and there are many accounts from the Americans themselves of failed missile launches during both Gulf war 1991. and Kosovo war 1999.)

[@ai-aniverse]

The one that can field numbers in a fight. Thanks for coming to my TED talk 😅

[@Nathan-vt1jz]

Which fighter rules the sky the F35 or SU57? F22: has joined the chat. F35: ‘oh, hi Dad’ SU57: ‘crap…’ J20: is this the War Thunder chat forum? Asking for a friend…

[@Galomortalbr]

good one

[@bobbymclean1412]

😮 if Russia keeps the SU 57 well-maintained, it might be able to defeat some older us fighters. It probably is stealthier then a mig 21 or mig 23

[@PeterMuskrat6968]

It could probably defeat an F-16 Maybe if it found itself up against an old F-15C… But even then those aircraft would be mutually supported by a dozen or so more planes while the Su-57 is likely to remain barely produced… leaving it only possible for a flight of two or three to be available at any given time to fly. Three Su-57’s versus 12 F-15’s with another 20 F-16’s mulling about in the airspace.

[@duaneaikins4621]

⁠@@PeterMuskrat6968F-16 is a gunfighter. I give it even odds against a SU-57.

[@Jess_star123]

Just a note: The Aim-9X is currently not qualified for internal weapon bay deployment. In 2009 I talked to Lockheed on the issue, and the plan then was to integrate the Block II with LOAL (lock-on after launch) capability. In essence, the aircraft's computer, based on data from the DAS, would designate a sector for the missile to start looking in, based on the the target's anticipated heading. A one-way datalink would enable target updates along the way. But this capability has since been deferred. However, as Alex mentions, the RCS impact of carrying the Aim-9X on external pylons, while reducing stealth, is mitigated by the fact that the missile itself has stealth features, and the 'new' pylon ( SUU-96) and rail launchers (LAU-151 and LAU-152) are designed for stealth. One can easily see this change in design from the earlier non-stealthy LAU-148 and LAU-149 launchers. Fun fact: I asked Lockheed why the early F-35 design iterations had wing tip missiles - like the F-16 - and why the final F-35 design didn't. The answer was to the effect of: Stations 1 and 11 (wing tip) was moved inboard. As the design matured the wing chord at the tips was reduced enough to make wingtip rails impractical. In addition, the inboard movement improved flutter performance to allow employment of air-to-air missiles over the full flight envelope.

[@kinematics7092]

Internal AIM-9X is coming with Block IV

[@Jess_star123]

@@kinematics7092 Indeed. Just to clarify: It is the Aim-9X Block II being integrated in the F-35 Block IV program, which is a follow-up to the current Continuous Capability Development and Delivery (C2D2) program.

[@stephenmelton2532]

Pilots hrs in the aircraft is another important factor.

[@z_actual]

yes, so what is cheaper to operate?

[@PeterMuskrat6968]

So that puts the odds even farther against the Su-57… the average US pilot gets 3x as much flight hours and training exercises as the Russian counterpart.

[@Administrator_O-5]

Alex, seriously did you really need to even bother with this? Unless it's just a content filler. The only thing that would improve the Su-57 is to NOT be made by Russia. However according to Russian State Media the Su-57 is a high advanced 6th Generation Hypersonic Stealth Espresso powered fighter that cannot be matched by anything the West has. (Unless you count paper airplanes)...

[@foracal5608]

I think a real f-35 vs a barely functional air frame....

[@norad_clips]

Hopefully you’ll put something out about the GE hypersonic stuff

[@jloiben12]

An AWACS you can’t shoot at until you are debris or a 4th gen fighter that barely exists? Hmm…. 🤔

[@PhullyNo1]

Russia built the 57 in response to the F22, the F35 is a unique AirPower asset that is new take on a fighter jets roll.

[@miraphycs7377]

i mean the fact that they even named it 57 really shows how the american stealth fighters live rent free in their heads. 57=22+35

[@scottdickson9224]

Which is hilarious because it would get eaten alive by the 22, which came out a lifetime before it.

[@buildmotosykletist1987]

The SU-57 is not a match for the F22 in many areas and where it is a match it only matches, not exceeds. Basically the SU-57 can't see the F22 but the F22 can easily see the SU-57 so the SU57 is knocked down before it can even see the F22.

[@jona.scholt4362]

Gotta love the B Roll footage of the F-35 Elephant Walk. That footage alone shows the advantage the F-35 has against the SU-57.

[@BigDaddyCruz]

Just googled some F-35 elephant walks! Damn I am so hard right now I need to go wake the wife.

[@gutstompenrocker]

I glad I wasn't drinking my beer when you mentioned the Osprey giving the Felon the side eye.

[@JoaoFranciscoFigueiredo]

Informative as always ❤ that How much heat produce one ICBM at lunch? Or is that classified?

[@dgthe3]

It's calculable. To get a certain mass to a certain height, you need a certain amount of energy. The math isn't easy (its rocket science after all), but it is possible to figure out by anyone with enough knowledge and inclination. And the answer, roughly speaking, is 'a hell of a lot'.

[@xaderalert]

SU-57 vs F-15EX would be a much fairer comparison

[@Turf-yj9ei]

Or the Su-57 vs F-15 Silent Eagle

[@rick7424]

I am sure the Su-57 can just ignore all those F-35s it will encounter

[@gojuancamilo102]

Amazing video! Could you do a similar one on the f-35 Vs J-20? I'd imagine I'd be difficult because of the lack of info on the Chinese airplane but it would be very interesting

[@bigroxxor420]

the fight begining beyond visual range F-35: Fox-2 the end