>Ankara is holding talks on purchasing Su-57 jets from Moscow, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said. But Turkey's foreign minister stressed his country is not giving up hopes on the US unfreezing the F-35 deal. >“Our ministries continue to have meetings with their counterparts [on this issue],” Erdogan told reporters on Friday, after being asked whether Turkey will purchase Su-57s.
>The president’s words came a few days after he personally inspected the fifth-generation plane during an air show outside Moscow, where its export model was unveiled for the first time.
>Will it be a better deal for them than F-35? Doubtful. Odds of them getting anywhere near the industrial participation they had before are low, it'll be more expensive, and they'll be dependent on Russian logistical support for them, despite using all NATO gear in the rest of their air force.
Brayden Sanders
Pursuing more business with the chief world terror state is not the path forward for a free Turkey. Rather than admitting their error and rejoining the free world after their destruction of the F35 deal, Turkey is now seeking to bolster business deals with sanctioned entities in violation of US law. The United States must reaffirm our strong support for freedom and open democracy for the people of Turkey.
Oliver Watson
Very happy with this development because this entire situation completely eliminates the already minuscule probability of Turkey joining the EU
The SU-57 is a failed weapon system created by a failed state, but still presents grave danger to civilians and US service members overseas and must be countered with a robust sanctions platform. Russia's chief means of aggression is terrorizing population centers, hospitals, places of worship, and vulnerable communities. They do not need precision weapons to do this. Turkey considering such indiscriminate weapon platforms is cause for concern.
Noah Torres
Good for them, such a great and beautiful aircraft.
Discussion about weapons used by Russia to terrorize innocent people should focus on amplifying the voices of victims and empowering the people under the shadow of aggression, not on percieved aesthetic value in the weapons. Any aesthetic value in Russian planes is not due to technology or function, but was placed there to encourage sales to other rogue states.
Xavier Thompson
I'm not a turk, but it's pretty obvious the EU is shit. It is a weird pointless organization of a bunch of small weak shitty countries.
England left cause they realized how stupid it is. What does the EU even accomplish, nothing really. Especially military wise, European militaries other than the UK are a joke rn
>Will it be a better deal for them than F-35? No. We offered Turkey Patriots, they went for the S-400. We told them what would happen. They did it anyway.
We aren't unfreezing the F-35. Enjoy your unfinished 4.5 generation boondoggle.
Logan Rivera
J20 uses canards and has round nozzles meaninig it can only be as stealthy as Super Hornet and likely not even that as ONLY US has experience in RAM tech
Luis Smith
>much more stealthier kek'd also, stealth isn't everything. there's such a thin as 'stealthy enough' to come in close range and then the dogfighting begins. and dogfighting is something that pieces of shit like F-35 cannot do.
Thank you for convincing me this sale's a good idea
Juan Ortiz
Even if they bought Su-35s right now, they couldn't see any meaningful increase in capabilities within the decade. Their entire inventory revolves around US/NATO aircraft. Opening a whole new logistics/training pathway for the few airframes they could afford is going to be disastrous for availabilty and sortie rates. Their capabilities are already a shadow of what they used to be pre-coup. Erdogan didn't trust his airforce and purged a lot of both top brass and pilots. They only have about two squadrons of F-16s operational at the moment. Despite the upgrades, their F-4s are aging and their F-16s are Block 50 at best, and it's doubtful the US will allow any upgrade now. TLDR : they fucked massively by not getting the F-35
Isaac Ortiz
The S-400 purchase shows they don't give a fuck about that and the Su-57 purchase seems more and more likely.
Benjamin Hughes
Yeah they just want Russian support now. And possibly whatever tech transfer Russia would give them
Jeremiah Gray
Yeah, it's clearly not stealthy...
Christian Fisher
Nominally, but having a murderous dictatorship which overtly supports Jihadist terrorists in Syria and Iraq, is kind of bad optics for NATO, you'd think....
>The SU-57 is "stealthy" like a Super Hornet. It's dead long before the merge. source: your stupid nigger ass
Carter Kelly
And this would be exactly how the US acquires Su-57s, just like it did with Su-27s.
Kevin Barnes
these threads should just get deleted
Noah Gray
... yet the US allowed them to buy S-400 without impunity.
Noah Gutierrez
DELET THIS!
Tyler Edwards
Running an AA network is cheaper and doesn't require the number of educated and trained personnel a working air force requires. Perfect for countries who don't trust their own air forces.
Elijah Rodriguez
>every single way Yeah according to the people selling it.
Christopher Garcia
>muh photonic radar >Time it's totally going to jump ahead of the west guys, I swear!! kek
>jack-of-all-trades, master of none >lets use the F-16 as an example of a great aircraft Dave is a fucking idiot.
Kayden Cook
>yet the US allowed them to buy S-400 without impunity. Where are the F-35s then ?
William Cruz
>Where are the F-35s then ? Trump, or whoever comes after him, will eventually let them buy it if they throw a sissy fit. Turkey's way too strategically placed for the US to let them go.
Camden Evans
that counts as can't triforce
Chase Gomez
You should get deleted.
Nolan Fisher
>Trump, or whoever comes after him, will eventually let them buy it if they throw a sissy fit. Doubtful. Turkey was very important during the Cold War, but storing free-fall nukes at Incirlik isn't nearly as important as it was in the past.
Levi Bell
Round nozzle only affect rear stealth. Saying that nozzles somehow limit it to super hornet RCS from any other angle is supremely retarded
Samuel Carter
You don't know the RCS of the super hornet and definitely don't know the RCS of the SU-57
Gavin Allen
Turkey and the US airbases in Turkey are both critical for maintaining a foothold in the Middle-East and containing Russia. Turkey is obviously not going to leave NATO, but they will continue acting like a cheap slut who wants every guy on the bar to fight for her attention.
Hudson Allen
They have a huge base in Jordan that was just done upgrading in 2017, and they're not leaving their airfields in Syria anytime soon
Landon Diaz
It’s no coincidence that the US is upgrading their bases in Jordan, improving relations with Greece, and showing off ground launched Tomahawks.
Luis Baker
Is this the American version of 50 cent army?
Parker Martinez
LOL
Hudson Baker
>Trump, or whoever comes after him, will eventually let them buy it lol no
>yet the US allowed them to buy S-400 without impunity. the US responded by kicking them out of the JSF Program retard
Christian Torres
kek
Jordan Bell
Kek, mutts might have a chance to seriously train against this thing assuming relations heal.
Jordan Collins
>can we not talk about the topic and make this thread about China and some completely unrelated Chinese planes that make me butthurt? >did I mention the J-20 has round nozzles much unlike the Su-57 And thats why India needs to be rangebanned from Jow Forums
Cameron Rodriguez
No point in training against it when the much superior J-31 exists.
Hunter Allen
>Kek, mutts might have a chance to seriously train against this thing oh yeah, all 10 prototypes
David Garcia
> T R A N S F O R M E R S
Alexander Lopez
S-ducts reduce fuel range.
Ayden Foster
Citation needed
Angel Garcia
>>muh photonic radar>Time it's totally going to jump ahead of the west guys, I swear!!kek
daily reminder that PHODIR project was a failure by the west.
Lincoln Nguyen
Russia's own numbers, prone to overstatement, put the RCS at 0.5m2. That's Typhoon territory in 2019. And not "stealth". Maybe if they build more than 10 they could actually exhaust the missile complement of a single F-22 flight.
Chase Jones
They managed big bays but placed them one after the other along the longitudinal axis of the plane and in the shadow of the unavoidable, drag-generating nose & cockpit sections, so pretty much got that volume for free. Fuel capacity is granted by the extremely developed blended wing-body design. The rear fuselage usually holds not much fuel in almost any plane, with maybe the F-35 holding a bit more than normal. The problem with the fuel in the F-22 is that it has a very short middle fuselage section, together with volume-eating S-shaped air ducts and outright huge side weapon bays. Together with the low BPR engines, this creates a certain lack of range which poses a challenge if the plane has to operate in a contested airspace of a certain depth, a good reason why PCA is being fast tracked instead of modernizing the F-22.
Aaron Hill
Pretty sure some Russian engineer mentioned 0.1 RCS and that's it, on the same level as the F-117. Officially nothing has been mentioned and the Su-57's RCS is confidential information.
It only needs enough frontal stealth to catch up with an F-35 penetrating Russian air defenses. The only situation in which the Su-57 will be able to challenge US 5th gen is at home, with extensive GCI support.
Alexander Garcia
If you believe the frontal RCS of Su-57 to be in the same class (0,1-1m^2) as clean Rafale and Eurofighter. You have to logically explain how PAK FA receives no benefit from using basically all the known and observable RCS reduction measures as seen on other stealth fighters like F-22 and F-35, but which Rafale and Eurofighter miss. 1. Faceting. (Just like other stealth fighter, PAK FA's form is broken into facets. Eurofighter and Rafale are conventionally round.) 2. Slanting of the intake lips. (Su-57, F-35, F-22 and J-20 all have slanted lips, but Eurofighter's and Rafale's lips are conventionally straight just like old generation) 3. Planform alignment. (For example PAK FA's LEVCON's, wings and horizontal stablizers have the same angles, both from front and back.) 4. Door shaping. (All the doors of PAK FA (weapon's bays, landing gear, refueling probe) are zigzag shaped. Rafale and Eurofighter have conventional non-shaped doors. Rafale doesn't even hide its refueling probe inside the fuselage) 5. Radar tilting. (PAK FA's radar is tilted 15 degrees from vertical plane. Rafale's radar is conventionally vertical. Eurofighter has a mechanically rotating radar, something all stealth aircraft avoid. Including Su-57, whereas previous Sukhoi product, Su-35S, has wildly rotating radar). 6. Blending of the canopy. (Su-57 like all stealth aircraft has canopy that smoothly blends with the fuselage, avoiding conflicting angles. Rafale and Eurofighter again have the non-stealthy conventional solution.)
Landon Hernandez
IMPRESSIVE!
Liam Edwards
This is some of the most retarded shit I've read today. >1. Faceting Faceting was employed in the F-117 because its shape was generated by RCS calculator of the era, which were limited in computing power. The B-2, F-22 and F-35 all have smooth curves. >2. Slanting of the intake lips. Do you mean side intakes ? And in that case, the Rafale has angles intakes as well. >4. Door shaping. The Su-57 has straight doors. Also, neither the EF or the Rafale have weapon bays. And again, zigzag shaped doors were used on the F-117 and that's about it. >5. Radar tilting. What the fuck does that have to do with stealth ? AESA radar are better, but the angle isn't what make them Low Probability of Intercept. Also, the EF is getting an AESA, and not all Rafales are equipped with AESA.
Julian Cooper
>much superior J-31 exists Yep when it comes to stealth.
Thanks for input, usually we are stuck with armatard, commatard and mandik. You are above abyssmal, shitlord.
Jonathan Ward
Still no s-ducts just like rafale or typhoon Still no radar blockers just like rafale or typhoon Still no RAM just like rafale or typhoon Exposed fan blades are huge RCS amplifiers.
I also have my doubts about the SU-57s vertical stabilizers moving as one gigantic flight control surface and all the gaps they create when they move. Im also concerned about its framed canopy and exposed rivets everywhere.
The tard is mad for fucking up his estimates based off of model design patent that hold no RCS estimates values of the aircraft.
The B-2, F-22 and F-35 all have smooth curves
so does the SU-57 but not conventionally round as the other 2.
>And in that case, the Rafale has angles intakes as well.
conventionally straight
> Su-57 has straight doors
nope
zigzag shaped doors were used on the F-117 and that's about it
So no longer a stealth shape?
Rafale's radar is conventionally vertical. Eurofighter has a mechanically rotating radar, something all stealth aircraft avoid name me one stealth aircraft that has this design similar to F-22 or F-35.
Connor Lee
Why do people seem to think the Su57 cant use western inventory? The original program had it shared between two countries, its not impossible ffs...
That other country being India, which already operates a huge number of Russian-built aircraft, and thus has a large stockpile of Russian weapons. I highly doubt they built the Su-57 with MIL-STD-1553
Oliver Reyes
great arguement
Wyatt Martinez
Whatever argument you made, I cannot understand. Your spacing is not readable. At least quote properly.
William Bailey
The Su-57 uses a lot of the global stealth features, but it lacks a lot of others too.
Pic related shows serration where it's needed as a RCS reduction measure on the Rafale. If you look at the F-35, every single line where two parts meet is serrated or shaped as to avoid direct radar reflection. Meanwhile the Su-57 has a lot of straight lines perpendicular to the front. It's possible that this will be improved on the production models but we've yet to see that.
Another issue is that the Su-57 has a very wide array of colors, while aircraft with a lot of RCS reductions tend to be very limited in such paint. I mean it's possible that with their own research they found out that the paint made little difference with their specific RAM, but you know, it's a bit more suspicious considering the previous point.
>source claims stealth is about invisibility >F-35 has higher RCS than F-22 >Su-57 gotta go fast Not the best source to be honest.
There are also serious concerns with the SU-57s engines in terms of thermal management. The rear half of the engines are exposed and all the way down to the exhaust nozzle it shows no real thermal management optimization. For instance US stealth aircraft (F-22&F-35) from the sides, have their V tails cover the back of engines to help mask/hide its thermal signatures. The SU-57 does not, in fact the engines hang quite a ways back from its V tail exposing very hot engines.
>Meanwhile the Su-57 has a lot of straight lines perpendicular to the front.
wrong again. Similar to other stealth fighters such as the F-22, the airframe incorporates planform edge alignment to reduce its radar cross-section (RCS); the leading and trailing edges of the wings and control surfaces and the serrated edges of skin panels are carefully angled to reduce the number of directions the radar waves can be reflected.
> Another issue is that the Su-57 has a very wide array of colors, while aircraft with a lot of RCS reductions tend to be very limited in such paint
You go from no RAM and ahh too much paint is bad. don't worry the coating on that source does not seem to be too much.
Kayden Cox
>The tail is composite, it is transparent to radar. Laughably false.
>reduce fuel space. Look how short ranged the F-22 and these aircraft are. Such a design is flawed against certain missions. Moving the goalposts here. We are talking about stealth not fuel. SU-57 has no S-ducts and exposed fan blades. >pressreader.com/uk/how-it-works/20180322/281874413928961 Press reader? Really? It doesn't even list its author or sources its claims, just drawings lol. Your link that you posted also owns the shit out of yourself as it states that the SU-57s RCS is 0.3-0.5 LMAO. >tass.com/defense/1039482 State sponsored TASS is not a valid source on the SU-57 lol And yet again, all its talking about its a coating they used to put on the glass canopy, not for the air frame itself. The fact that its using a framed canopy is bad news. >With composites and radar blockers to take care of this what about the other 2 aircrafts? Isnt the SU-57 in production? Why isnt there any pictures of any of this?
