Do you think sukhoi is embarrassed?

No reason to be embarrassed.

>tfw your planes kill more airshow spectators than opponents

Attached: fail.jpg (480x360, 30K)

i dont really think su 57 is a 5th gen but whatever
it seems more like a bridge to me than an actual full next gen plane

i mean the only thing for sure we have confirmed about its avionics is the aesa radar the ecm suite and the fact that it will have the su 35s cockpit basicly
we know jack shit about the mcm on board and its speed

The max is a fantastic aircraft, it isn't our fault Africans and east Asians are retarded

Is that a real photo?

1) YF-22 prototype would still shit all over the T-50 prototype.
2) No one cares about who had it first, as of today the F-22 has it and the SU-50 does not.
3) The East can't stealth lmao.
4) Even the old avionics in the F-22 are still better than current day R*ssian avionics.
I used to be on board with the "Russian planes are better because x" meme, until I actually looked further into said Russian planes.
Cope harder Sergei.

Attached: 1509823861874.png (1067x600, 629K)

lol

>b-but it's better because lockshills said me so!!!! and MURRICA
cope harder

I'm not American, in fact I actually want to go to Russia when I leave the Air Force. But with an internet connection I'm easily able to find out my original thoughts on Russian planes were incorrect and that the F-22 is simply a better aircraft than the SU-50.

Attached: 1542008733371.jpg (262x206, 9K)

Yes
youtu.be/qvaqHY6KCXY

Muscovites are incapable to feel shame or embarrassment. That's an evolutionary advantage, given they always used to be someone's bitch: Mongols, Vikings, Britons, Poles, Georgians, Americans and currently Chinese.

>REEE LMshills, listen to me, im a kremlin shill
your program is so shit that even the poo in loos pulled out of it and youre desperate for another international partner

Forgot my pic

Attached: 1552401771310m.jpg (1024x683, 72K)

The thing to remember Vladim, is that the best hardware is not always what's on your side.
The T80 was (somewhat) better than the original Abrams.
The T-14 is better than the base M1A2.
The Eurocopter Tiger is better than an AH-64.
But unfortunately for you, the F-22 is better than the SU-50.

Attached: 1455672704393.jpg (1680x943, 191K)

>Eurocopter Tiger is better than AH-64

Attached: 1550641722652.jpg (482x413, 98K)

Why does this thread feel that the Americans are the ones embarrassed and not Sukhoi?

I ain't no Russian shill and all. I tend to size with burgers more often than not
But when a 4 month old plane crash, *TWICE* it's not about maintenance or skilled pilot, it's about the plane.
I ain't saying people at Boeing are not very competent at making an airplane. I'm just saying someone made a mistake (knowingly or not) at that there is a big fuckup that is being addressed.
There's a damn good reason it's been banned for flight pretty much everywhere in the world, even in the us

What was the name of the drone that it is meant to be attached to Su-57 squadrons?

>stealth is overrated because everyone's jamming anyway

That makes stealth very important, Dmitri. Also the F-35 has an AESA radar the same size of that of the Su-57, while having better stealth. The F-22 has a much larger radar and better stealth too. In conditions where everyone is jamming each other, the Su-57 isn't going to do that well.

>Why does this thread feel that the Americans are the ones embarrassed and not Sukhoi?
Because you're on krokodil.

Still less than Lockheed-Martin. I love how burgers shit on the Su-57 for spending 8 years being developed when the F-35 was vaporware for 20 years and started beign a decent, operational plane only in the second half of the 2010s.

>USA build ~180 5th generation air superiority aircraft
>stop production and move on to replacing the rest of the fleet with another 5th generation aircraft
>by the time they have 500+ of them, Russia is planning to build a whopping 2 of their own
>Lockheed Martin should be embarrassed
Okay.

It is tailored to Russia's more austere, less networked, air-battle doctrine. Considering how Russia's armed forces are organized and the battle doctrine behind that organization, being able to pierce deep into the most sophisticated integrated air defense networks during some sort of expeditionary operation, stealth isn't the top priority. It isn't an F-22 and it isnt meant to be. The problem is that it seems Russian officials and the Russian press constantly make claims otherwise.

>It isn't an F-22 and it isnt meant to be. >The problem is that it seems Russian officials and the Russian press constantly make claims otherwise
That's some Sun Tzu next level thinking.

the Su-what?
oh that wood model they built that sits on the ground

My statement for everything else still stands.

Attached: bussy.png (323x335, 160K)

The only advantage the AH-64 has over the Eurocopter Tiger is more ordinance capacity, the trade off for that is as follows; almost half the operating range, almost twice the weight, higher fuel consumption, larger size, far worse maneuverability, much higher RCS, and worse crew survivability.

2

ch.hk/wm/src/3156793/15525598298790.webm

>Americans: do you think sukhoi is embarrassed?
>Sukhoi: No, the program is progressing within acceptable parameters.
>Americans: No U! Not stealth! Not pingpong size ball! Not 0.00000001m2 all aspect! Not this! Not that! Wahh wahhh! Look at me, I am Russian public now and I do not like Russian projects!

That's literally not what's happening. Here's what's actually happening.

>Americans: do you think Sukhoi is embarrassed?
>Sukhoi: No, why would we be? The Su-57 is the best plane ever due to it's [insert numerous completely made up claims relating to stealth and other things]. America BTFO, Russia stronk.
>Americans: oh bullshit!

its not our fault that we dont include the manuals on FCOM for the pilots to know about it in the first place

yes your radar is just white noise shit both of you cant see shit and you will rely on visual confirmation

i can see how stealth in that situation will help you surely stealth means invisible from naked eye too

>oh bullshit
and should we believe thae americans and their completely made up bullshit about THEIR plane why exactly?

its based on the 737 which is more ancient than your grandma and has successfully ran in all that time, its nothing to do with the airframe. not only that by the new version has been in use for a couple of years now

>The only advantage the AH-64 has over the Eurocopter Tiger is more ordinance capacity, the trade off for that is as follows; almost half the operating range, almost twice the weight, higher fuel consumption, larger size, far worse maneuverability, much higher RCS, and worse crew survivability.

The Tiger's gun is a lot more accurate, and the mast mounted optics are a nice advantage.

Because American planes actually have stealth features (like you know S ducts) and because Americans have a proven record at building stealth planes.

>people mistaking radar blockers for engine intakes once again

Now this is what I call embarrassing

Attached: 1540537281320m.jpg (1024x739, 105K)

I'm not even remotely a vatnik but those are not turbine blades. They are on completely the wrong axis to the engines and are too far forward to be part of the engine. You see the same thing on various other aircraft. There's an excellent photo of it on a US jet during in flight refueling but i'm having difficulty finding it now.

>well yes, the three other stories before that turned out to be total garbage, but this lastest one is totaly true, trust me

>I'm not even remotely a vatnik
>goes down the list of all vatnik exuses

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-57#Engines
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_AL-31#/media/File:117C_for_Su-35.jpg

Maybe russians and vatniks would not have this horrendously horrible reputation around here when they would not ride the exuses and false flag train all day and every day.

Attached: 1466535596001.png (604x493, 135K)

You've literally just demonstrated that we're not looking at the engine face. the compressor face of the AL-31 is on the same axis as the rest of the engine. which means it's physically impossible for the engine to be visible from that location.

It's a radar blocker, just like on X32 and Superbug

>proceeds to do the same exact vatnik arguements
Gee, i wonder were you "picked" those up, always funny seeing "random" people always coming to the same mindbending conclusions as the vantiks before them. So random, so much wow.

>You've literally just demonstrated that we're not looking at the engine face. the compressor face of the AL-31 is on the same axis as the rest of the engine. which means it's physically impossible for the engine to be visible from that location.
Not even remotely true, learn what foreshortening is also notice how the distance between the first and second blades is the same exact as the picture of the AL-41F1S. That is how vaniks make you their bitch, they sprincle the benefit of the doubt and then let you come up with exuses on your own, after you said what they wanted to say you and now are confronted with oppositon. People dont like to be wrong and vatniks make full use of that.

I give you a tip for life, dont pick up after vatniks, it is a hard lesson to learn specially since the love to pretend to be random neutral anons just asking questions and similar, but in the end it saves you from parroting and defending a ton of bullshit and feeling like an idiot afterwards. Been there done that and you can bet your ass that they will always have an exuse for everything, it isnt even the question if, it is just what it is this time.

Attached: 1541342245204.png (366x288, 91K)

you're so blinded by butt hurt you swallow all anti Russian facts regardless of legitimacy.

The blade spacing of the radar blocker is dictated by the spacing of the compressor face, thats' how air pressure works.

It's also physically impossible to have a compressor face be off axis to the rest of the engine as it's all driven by a straight shaft.

How are the Su-27/30/33/34s failures?

>Not even remotely true, learn what foreshortening

Why don't you?

Attached: jqi2yb.jpg (1000x822, 64K)

Look up the picture in OP.
Measure the angle between the blades in a graphics program (best measure it between 3 blades at once to minimise the error) ->about 19° +-0.3°
How many frontal blades does that make? 19
How many frontal blades does the AL-41F1S has? 19
What a coincident.
Even the cone in the middle has the same diameter, despite it making sense to be smaller for better airfolw.
Then look at the black surface at the bottom of the "radar blocker". Notice how it gets thinner to the right? You know like with every tube that is angled to the right when you look into it?

Attached: mat_tien_ty_trung_quoc_van_chua_het_khat_dong_co_nga_1.jpg (500x373, 52K)

Russian low IW and weak faggots will never EVER be on par with American superiority.
Sit the fuck down and beat up your backwater neighbors fuckbois, youll never be able to face us in war and come out on top.

Attached: 1532792764874m.jpg (1024x614, 124K)

>yes your radar is just white noise shit both of you cant see shit and you will rely on visual confirmation

Good thing the F-35 has one of the most advanced electro-optical targeting systems in the world. What's the Su-57 packing? The same jank-ass 80s IRST sensor that all the shills were claiming would somehow magically negate the F-22's stealth here on Jow Forums back in 2009?

>But when a 4 month old plane crash, *TWICE* it's not about maintenance or skilled pilot, it's about the plane.

It's the autopilot. That was everyone's first guess, and the first rumblings of rumors have all but confirmed it. It's no mistake that the crashes both happened with third-world airlines; their pilots aren't nearly as well trained and they rely on the autopilot a lot more.

Autopilot and feedback issues have taken down a few Airbus aircraft as well. It's a known problem and its only going to get worse if pilot training isn't improved.

>That's some Sun Tzu next level thinking.

Well, he's right. Part of the reason for that, though, is that the Russians couldn't make an F-22 if they wanted to. So. The Su-57 would serve their needs... except they can't afford to mass-produce it and there's still plenty of bugs to work out. For all the shitting on the F-35 and F-22 people did for all their early teething problems, at least they're in service. Can't say the same for the Su-57.

>proven
proven to whom against whom?
>s-duct
literally every country that mastered trijet civilian plane designs have an s duct
literally every single one of them

there are many ways to hide the blades on the inlet intake ramps are as old as the concorde
the unknonw factor with the su 57 is how visible the blades will be from the REAR on the new engines

Jamming ability directly depends on your own RCS and the hardware to produce your own signal. Considering the F-35 has a radar the same size as the Su-57, except with much more experience in such designs behind it, as well as a lower radar signature, the F-35 would still have its advantage. Also, the F-22 has better stealth and a much larger radar than the Su-57, so the scenario is the same.

And what do you think is used to produce jamming signals to the point where only white noise can be detected? Nuclear powered 10 billion MW super arrays?

please show us again how the f35 was barely tracking a massive IR signature that the falcon 9 launch was and they use it as a promo tool like we are fucking idiots

nobody knows what the fuck the su will carry we only know about its radar and ecm so far the rest are unknown

>muh civilian s-ducts
I'm sure they have to deal with supersonic shockwaves, radar wave attenuation, high angle of attack flows and so on.

>hide the blades
The point is to reduce radar signature at a wide range of radar frequencies, not just "hide the blades".

Jow Forums should really stop jerking off to fighter planes. Sure they're cool, but the future of military aviation is in UAVs and autonomous vehicles.

You're forgetting that the Apache has a fire control radar, much higher service ceiling, link 16 datalink, and can even control uavs from the cockpit. Range difference also isn't as big with upgraded engines and composite rotor blades in the E, plus range for the Apache generally considers the added weight of the Longbow mast. The Apache also has better armament with APKWS and testing done for Brimstone. The Tiger's whole concept of operation is antiquated, it can't measure up to modern American/Russian/Chinese attack helicopters at all, which is probably why it's export history is pretty pathetic. Hell Australia is planning to replace them in the mid-2020s, which is pretty sad considering it didn't reach FOC until 2011.

yes how awfull imagine if nasa didnt had collaborated with the ruskies to built the tu 144

imagine if before that mig 25 existed

i mean come on if you want to shitpost just tell me but this is a low effort bait

the point is to hide the massive thing that reflects the waves back in this case the BLADES

Stealth s-ducts for combat aircraft are completely different to civilian s-ducts. You can bitch and moan all you want, you won't change this fact.

No, there are many various effects going on when it comes to duct stealth. Visible fanblades is only an issue in a pile of others. Mainly, when radar waves start getting close to the size of the objects they encounter, they behave in completely different ways. S-ducts are a solution to a wide variety of situations, not just a direct x-band radar beam.

I agree it’s more of a 4+++ Gen Fighter that’s used by the Russian gov for propaganda to show that they can produce a “stealth” fighter. But I sincerely do want the Russians to get really into the stealth concepts and see what pushes out that isn’t based on the Flanker

Fox and the grapes

there isnt any term "Stealth s ducts"
the purpose of the s duct is to cover the blades and the intel tips to be shaped in such a way to provide enough bleed when it goes supersonic

if the engines of lets say f22 wasnt powerfull enough they would have already slapped a version of intake ramps too so that the engine wont starve of air during those seconds

this is literally a dumb down explanation of whats happens when you dont have an engine to accomodate the design not the other way around the russia is currently doing

Everything you just said is nullified by the fact that I was referring to the original AH-64 and not the longbow, and I was comparing it to an original Eurocopter, just like how I compared an original Abrams to the T-80 because we all know that an M1A2 SEPV3 would shit all over it.

What reason is there to compare the Tiger to the original Apache? The Tiger entered service nearly twenty years after the AH-64A. T-80 and Abrams are a better comparison since they entered service in the same time period.

Because of unit costs.

Obviously they are

It's a radar blocker.
It's objective as standoff strike might need it to get to 200 km of a target to release its missiles. So if its detected from 80 km by a plane 120 km away from the target then its okay since it can deploy the missiles and leave. It doesn't need VLO that can be detected from 20km away when it only needs to be 100km away.

Also its a part of an IADS when it comes to air superiority, I doubt it will patrol an area without a SAM umbrella.

Attached: images (1).jpg (640x479, 31K)

Russians don't have money right now for these giga-mega projects but they don't want to miss out on technological progress.
Instead they develop shit like that and buy it in small quantities, and wait for the better times.
Su-57 might be a failure in some ways, but it's far from some catastrophic failure like you imply. In their conditions, it's a progress.

A couple US pilots have come forward and said that the autopilot went nose-down, but they noticed and were able to disable and correct the issue before the auto-pilot flew the plane into the ground.

L-lewd

>The Su-57 is the best plane ever due to it's [insert numerous completely made up claims relating to stealth and other things]. America BTFO, Russia stronk.
Please point to the post which says that.

>F-22 is better than the SU-50
Lolwut? You do realise the digital architecture of the F-22 can be traced back to the fucking 80s? Its one of the only things that use Ada ffs. Software alone the Rafale beats the F-22 and dont get me starter on the Su-50...

They havent manage to gouge taxpayers in 300% profits.

>do you think sukhoi is embarrassed?
No, every single Russian defense company operates exclusively as a rent-seeking operation to acquire as much funding from Putin as possible. Look at the embarrassing CGI they put out every year for an example.
>The T-14 is better than the base M1A2.
>Comparing a tank 25 years older and coming to the shocking conclusion that the Armata is better
Brainlet hands typed this post.

still no crashes.

Attached: 1539861591083.jpg (642x844, 141K)

It is no radar blocker, it never was a radar blocker, it will never be a radar blocker.

I am going to tell you what happens: Someone will actually spend some time debunking that shit lie like so many times before since you idiots cant stop shuting up about it and that lie will end up on the pile of silent gone lies like so many other empty promises around russian equipment, like the lie that the Su-50 has S-ducts. And will vatniks and usegul idiots parroting that kond of stuff learn from it? Not at all, there will only come the next fabricated bullshit lie around that plane and the cyle will start anew.

it can act as a radar blocker with the proper geometry user
we certnely know the new engines are smaller and more powerfull so changes will be made regardless we just have and wait to see how exactly they are going to do it

plus whats an su 50?

>It is no radar blocker, it never was a radar blocker, it will never be a radar blocker.

Evidence was provided by the side that says it is a radar blocker, can you also provide evidence to support your side when you say it is not a radar blocker.

Source?

Attached: 5be.jpg (1333x1000, 135K)

>Evidence was provided by the side that says it is a radar blocker
kek

Good job.

the same source as he says usa has """"proven""" stealth tech