How Su-57 was criticized abroad: a selection of statements about the Russian fighter

How Su-57 was criticized abroad: a selection of statements about the Russian fighter

In this article, Military Review decided to collect fragments of foreign publications about the fifth-generation Russian fighter Su-57. From the moment this combat vehicle first flew into the air (at that time it was still PAK FA, T-50), hundreds of opinions, statements and opinions about the Sukhoi production aircraft were published.


If we talk about the statements of experts and readers from abroad, then they are largely negative. Partly for the reason that there is a "sacred cow" in the form of the American F-35, which does not need an extra competitor either in the sky or on the world arms market. Partly due to the natural negativity of individual representatives of foreign countries to everything Russian: what is called, from a needle to a fighter.

American edition of The National Interest (2020):

The Russian Su-57 fighter is not ready for warfare against a high-tech enemy.

The material indicates that the Su-57 is “Not even a fighter, but a prototype of a fighter”.

The Aviationist (Italy) (2019):

It is said that the next generation of aircraft engines for the Su-57 will be more efficient. But while on these aircraft engines belonging to the 4th generation of fighters are operated. Also, experts pointed out many features that can worsen stealth parameters: these are rivets, sashes of internal compartments for weapons, engine nacelles and the shape of the air intakes.

Sohu (China) (2019):

Su-57 can not be attributed to the fifth generation aircraft. Rather, this is another step that does not allow the Russian aircraft industry to go beyond the limits of 4 generations. The number one problem that removes him from the list of new generation fighters is the lack of stealth technology.

The Diplomat (2019):

In 2018, India withdrew from a joint program with Russia to create a 5th generation fighter. The Indian Air Force was not satisfied with what the Russians were trying to imagine. The aircraft did not satisfy for a number of requirements: lack of stealth, weak engines for such a machine, and numerous delays in terms of program implementation. It is unlikely that Russia will correct all the flaws so that India can return to the project.

Business Insider (2020):

"While the Russian media called the Su-57 an" air ghost, "a scientist working on an invisible plane for the United States called it a" dirty airplane ", bearing in mind many of the obvious flaws that could be detected by radars scanning the aircraft."

There were enough critical comments in the Polish, German, Turkish and, of course, the Ukrainian press. A real flurry of criticism on the Su-57 and its creators crashed after an airplane crash during testing late last year.

In this regard, the aircraft and its developers would like to wish one thing: the speedy adoption of the Su-57 into the arsenal of the Russian Air Force while eliminating all identified shortcomings and errors. The mere fact that the latest “Drying” arouses such high interest in itself suggests that the fighter has a great future.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

121 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sky strike fighter 13 May 2020 18: 51 New
    • 34
    • 10
    +24
    What is the article about? It is clear that everyone will be lousy if not laziness, if not out of envy, then for money for black PR for the Su-57. The dog barks the caravan is on. Something like this.
    1. Andrey Mikhaylov 13 May 2020 18: 55 New
      • 15
      • 13
      +2
      The dog barks, the caravan goes, let them bark. Russia already has an airplane that meets modern requirements.
      1. Grandfather 13 May 2020 18: 57 New
        • 16
        • 4
        +12
        How Su-57 was criticized abroad: a selection of statements about the Russian fighter
        why do we need? we respond symmetrically to fu-35 ....
        1. The leader of the Redskins 13 May 2020 19: 30 New
          • 20
          • 9
          +11
          What do you mean why? So that the rating does not fall.
          I honestly don’t understand how it is possible to put on the same scales a flying (albeit controversial) serial "penguin" and a long-term hope of the Air Force ?!
        2. opus 13 May 2020 20: 42 New
          • 10
          • 22
          -12
          Quote: Dead Day
          why do we need? we respond symmetrically to fu-35 ....

          noooo.
          on our part the threshing floor is bigger, much bigger
          1. Gray brother 13 May 2020 22: 28 New
            • 5
            • 10
            -5
            Quote: opus
            on our part the threshing floor is bigger, much bigger

            In Russia, everything is the same, only worse! laughing
        3. Yngvar 14 May 2020 06: 16 New
          • 5
          • 3
          +2
          Yes, let them consider the Su-57 Rusfaner! That "nicer" for them will be a surprise ...
      2. Sky strike fighter 13 May 2020 19: 33 New
        • 9
        • 4
        +5
        I wonder what kind of prodigy this hypersonic will be located inside the Su-57 compartment? And not only the Su-57.
        IA REGNUM recently reported on tests from the Tu-22M3 new hypersonic missile. According to plans, tests of the Tu-22M3M bomber and a new hypersonic missile should be completed simultaneously.

        Sources in the military-industrial complex noted that in this case we are not talking about the X-47M2 Dagger hypersonic missile system. This new hypersonic missile is also planned for inclusion in the armament nomenclature of the fifth-generation fighter Su-57. It will be located in the internal compartment of weapons.



        Details: https://regnum.ru/news/it/2947055.html
        Any use of materials is allowed only if there is a hyperlink to REGNUM.
        1. ugol2 13 May 2020 20: 50 New
          • 14
          • 3
          +11
          I don’t understand, why should I hammer nails with a microscope?
          The Dagger has targets for 2000 km from the carrier. Why should the ultramodern Su be turned into a platform for a single missile, for the launch of which it will not require either stealth, ultra-maneuverability, or smart radars.
          MiG-25 from the storage bases uncovered - enough for the eyes.
          1. Sky strike fighter 13 May 2020 21: 02 New
            • 6
            • 2
            +4
            Quote: ugol2
            I don’t understand, why should I hammer nails with a microscope?
            The Dagger has targets for 2000 km from the carrier. Why should the ultramodern Su be turned into a platform for a single missile, for the launch of which it will not require either stealth, ultra-maneuverability, or smart radars.
            MiG-25 from the storage bases uncovered - enough for the eyes.


            In the quote above, it is clearly stated by me that the new hypersonic missile is NOT a Dagger. We read more carefully. The dagger will not fit into the internal compartment of the Su-57, but the new rocket breaks.
            A dagger weighs about 3-4 tons, and by its weight and dimensions it cannot fit inside the Su-57 compartment. And if you want to hang the dagger on the Su-57, as it was hung on the MiG-31K, then goodbye stealth and maneuverability noticeably worsen. Well, that is in any way.
          2. peter rusin_2 13 May 2020 21: 12 New
            • 4
            • 1
            +3
            The 25th will not have enough distance to bomb the decision centers! Only Geyropa))
            1. Herman 4223 14 May 2020 06: 46 New
              • 2
              • 3
              -1
              Our military doctrine speaks of a retaliatory strike on the territory from where the aggression was committed. In the center of decision-making is impossible, this doctrine was rejected last year.
              1. TatarinSSSR 14 May 2020 20: 14 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                that is, if the United States launches a missile in Moscow from a deserted atoll in the ocean, then nothing, forgive?
                1. Herman 4223 14 May 2020 22: 04 New
                  • 3
                  • 1
                  +2
                  No, not forgive, bomb this atoll.
              2. Cyril G ... 14 May 2020 21: 41 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Nothing of the sort. A nuclear missile strike at decision centers. Putin quite voiced himself.
                1. Herman 4223 14 May 2020 22: 03 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  Attentiveness had to follow events, he voiced it, but this doctrine was not accepted. A retaliatory strike will follow the territory from where the strike was struck. That is, if rockets fly from the territory of Poland, then the blow will be on Poland, and not the USA which made this decision.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. Herman 4223 14 May 2020 23: 13 New
                      • 2
                      • 1
                      +1
                      Well, at least you looked. There is an official doctrine and it says that the blow will be on the territory from where the blow was struck.
                      No missile missions.
                      1. Cyril G ... 14 May 2020 23: 14 New
                        • 0
                        • 1
                        -1
                        Of course, there are flight missions, well, you as a schoolboy have the right word.
                  2. Cyril G ... 14 May 2020 23: 23 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    And also you would have looked at the source, how do you find that a nuclear strike should be on the territory from where the rocket arrived, you say well? If a rocket from the ocean arrives we should boil it, or what?
                    But the primary source on the issue of the application of nuclear weapons is more than concrete.

                    27. The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies, as well as in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons, when the very existence of the state is threatened.

                    The decision on the use of nuclear weapons is made by the President of the Russian Federation.
                    1. Herman 4223 15 May 2020 11: 20 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Please note that the text you quoted is the text of an old military doctrine.
                      What Putin voiced about attacks on decision centers is impossible without changes in this doctrine itself.
                      Yes, Russia can use weapons. But how to determine the aggressor? So 50 missiles flew from Romania to our side. They were spotted and only at that moment during the flight of these missiles and a decision will be made on retaliation and where. Formally, in such a situation, the aggressor is Romania and the answer should be on it.
                      Another thing is if this is spelled out in a document for the military, then such a missile launch will not take place at all. Because the answer will certainly fly where you need it.
                      A decision center is another goal, and it should be spelled out.
                      1. Cyril G ... 15 May 2020 11: 29 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Again. I downloaded the current version from the Guarantor Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation
                        What new text are you talking about? This is the third time you’ve remembered him and without reference why ...

                        The guarantor does not know another version. I will repeat it for you personally

                        27. The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies, as well as in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation using conventional weapons, when the very existence is jeopardized state. The decision to use nuclear weapons is made by the President of the Russian Federation.


                        What is not clear here?
                        The choice of targets for a retaliatory strike is not regulated by the Military Doctrine, it is the prerogative of the Supreme High Command and the General Staff and no one else.

                        Formally, in such a situation, the aggressor is Romania and the answer should be on it.


                        Link will be? Or how?
                  3. Mwg
                    Mwg 15 May 2020 06: 09 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    Hegemon is inviolable
                2. Herman 4223 14 May 2020 22: 35 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Here is a video on this subject if you do not believe me.
                  https://youtu.be/uUNljntRHhU
          3. Comrade Michael 14 May 2020 08: 44 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            But I don’t understand why discuss the details that we do not know at all. And why discuss it here, if it is discussed by professionals at meetings in KB and GOSNII? What gives a crush of water in a mortar, if easier ...
        2. Voyager 13 May 2020 22: 35 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          Already have the first test pieces
        3. opus 13 May 2020 22: 38 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Quote: Sky Strike fighter
          I wonder what kind of prodigy this hypersonic will be

          Quote: IA REGNUM.
          the case is not about hypersonic aviation missile system X-47M2 "Dagger"

          of course.
          They just mixed up "47" and "74"

          and for the sake of a "printed" word, shove GZUR on TU-22
          shallow emelya
          According to reports, GZUR is a missile with a speed of M = 6 and with a flight range of 1500 km when flying along a high-altitude profile. The length of the rocket is 6 m, and the weight is about 1500 kg. As you can understand, the missile has mainly anti-ship assignment. The rocket will be equipped with a ramjet engine “Product 70” belay developed by PJSC TMKB Soyuz in Turaevo and is equipped with a combined active-passive radio

          "Product 70" = Tu-160

          and the 22nd, as expected
          Russian bombers will be armed with a new X-50 cruise missile ("product 715"), which is provided for by GPV-2027
          1. Sky strike fighter 14 May 2020 00: 07 New
            • 4
            • 1
            +3
            of course.
            They just mixed up "47" and "74"

            It’s quite possible. Only K-74M2 (and not X-74M2), it’s R-74M2 is the latest short-range air-to-air missile for the Su-57, and you point to the X-31AD anti-ship missile and say that it’s supposedly X-74M2 .
            and for the sake of a "printed" word, shove GZUR on TU-22
            shallow emelya

            But this is unlikely. There are X-50 and GZUR.
            1. opus 14 May 2020 00: 56 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: Sky Strike fighter
              Only here K-74M2 (and not X-74M2),

              they are (хzhurnalyugi) do not feel the difference.
              For X, this is x (x), not Kh
              Quote: Sky Strike fighter
              , and you point to the anti-ship missile system X-31AD and say that it is supposedly X-74M2.

              1.Not me.
              2. The Kh-31 is given for comparison on AKU, which would show how much the Kh-74M2 is smaller (gabbarite)
              it is installed on AKU -58? (?), of which there are none on SU-57

              3. About the X-74M2, specifically about it, like the air-to-air missile “X-74M2”, which will be created for the PAK FA and said Obnosov (KTRV), still chewed that it would be a GPZ rocket, so in his opinion GPZ, everything above 4,5M. And he promised 6M
            2. Interlocutor 14 May 2020 11: 09 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Skye You pulled up already cling to this question. You do not say that he is so bothering you? As soon as another chatterbox throws you here his next factory number, product number and rolls off, you again repeat it in a different perspective.
      3. Ross xnumx 14 May 2020 04: 24 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        Quote: Andrey Mikhaylov
        The dog barks the caravan goes, let them bark

        It seems that your caravan stands still, and the dogs run around it.
        Quote: Andrey Mikhaylov
        Russia already has an airplane that meets modern requirements.

        The naive user. With all the wealth and diversity of its “friends and partners” surrounding it, Russia needs not only an airplane that meets modern requirements, but also hundreds of planes, as well as (!!!) and hundreds of pilots, whose training and skill would not raise any doubts. But in reality, it’s an unattractive picture: we spend hours discussing the difficulties of mass production of the Su-57 and 50 shades of gray matter, which has been moldy in the skull boxes of various managers from military departments for years.
        1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Valery Valery 13 May 2020 20: 46 New
      • 4
      • 14
      -10
      I don’t know anything about the SU-57, maybe it has some drawbacks. But we compensate them by Kozhedubov and Pokryshkina !!
    3. avg
      avg 13 May 2020 20: 53 New
      • 7
      • 2
      +5
      There were enough critical comments in the Polish, German, Turkish and, of course, the Ukrainian press.

      And also in other, no less advanced aviation powers.
      1. Comrade Michael 14 May 2020 08: 48 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        They correctly noticed many things, proceeding from simple common sense ... and some discussions which specially provoked, to see circles on the water ...
    4. major147 13 May 2020 21: 19 New
      • 14
      • 4
      +10
      Quote: Sky Strike fighter
      The dog barks the caravan goes. Something like that.

      They called our new rocket development "cartoons", and now they demand to abandon them!
  2. Victor_B 13 May 2020 18: 57 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    speedy adoption of the Su-57 into service with the Russian Air Force

    And yet she spinning flies!
    (Galileo Galilei)
  3. Pessimist22 13 May 2020 18: 59 New
    • 8
    • 7
    +1
    Engine nacelles are really not like 5 generations, do not disperse the exhaust.
    1. Grandfather 13 May 2020 19: 43 New
      • 13
      • 6
      +7
      Quote: Pessimist22
      Engine nacelles are really not like 5 generations, do not disperse the exhaust.

      the vague stealth laurels keep you awake? so there are no "stealth" ...
      1. ROSS_51 13 May 2020 20: 42 New
        • 6
        • 4
        +2
        Yeah .. and the earth is flat ..
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Nikolay Ivanov_5 13 May 2020 21: 53 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          Quote: ROSS_51
          Yeah .. and the earth is flat ..


          You're lying, she was always square.
      2. Comrade Michael 14 May 2020 08: 50 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        There are design solutions that make it difficult to detect an airplane ... These solutions were found in the early 80's ... And whether or not there is stealth is a question for suckers.
    2. fruit_cake 13 May 2020 22: 58 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      and round the f-35 apparently scatters?
  4. really 13 May 2020 19: 00 New
    • 14
    • 6
    +8
    So VO also write all sorts of nonsense about f-35 for example, and Chinese, Swedish, French planes are so-so. Apparently, all such resources suffer from bias.
    1. Sky strike fighter 13 May 2020 19: 08 New
      • 21
      • 4
      +17
      Bias affects those who think that somewhere there are really flawless airplanes without a hitch. Such flawless airplanes are trying to present only in PR videos of manufacturers. At VO, they are really trying to figure out what and how. In a dispute, truth is born.
      1. really 13 May 2020 19: 17 New
        • 13
        • 4
        +9
        Unfortunately, five minutes of hatred are frequent. And few people really want to know how to really understand
        1. Sky strike fighter 13 May 2020 19: 23 New
          • 5
          • 5
          0
          Give an example. I do not understand what you mean.
          1. really 13 May 2020 19: 41 New
            • 7
            • 6
            +1
            Read the comments of articles of almost any orientation, especially written on the principle, but they said
            1. Voyager 13 May 2020 22: 39 New
              • 6
              • 3
              +3
              Are you looking for objectivity in articles or in comments to them? These are still different things. In addition, most of the shortcomings of the same F-35 mentioned on VO almost always operate on the primary sources from the statements of the Pentagon and American officials. That is, this is official data given to the readers for trial.
              1. really 13 May 2020 22: 49 New
                • 5
                • 2
                +3
                The articles are written so that the comments are a continuation of the article, and the meaning of both of them is "Ihnensky" sucks, they are fools, but our super-duper. There are usually no links.
                1. Voyager 13 May 2020 23: 02 New
                  • 5
                  • 3
                  +2
                  How is it not? Almost any statement in the article on the VO is supported by the source, saying that he then said so. Even if the links themselves are not there, you can always take and search for the source.

                  Well, to make claims to the articles because of the comments is somehow illogical. Does the F-35 have a problem? There is. A lot of? A lot of. NTs so look how the foreign press writes. Their conclusions are often often without any reasoning or mention of sources.
                  1. really 13 May 2020 23: 13 New
                    • 3
                    • 2
                    +1
                    So I don’t mind, but for discussing problems, the problem is often the transition to sucks, and that’s it, and this article was written on the principle that, re-listing, they called us a big earthworm so many times.
      2. 1976AG 13 May 2020 19: 26 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Objectivity only in battle
      3. Comrade Michael 14 May 2020 08: 52 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Before the series you will not know anything. Yes, and not all in the series. What is the point of discussing rumors of rumors? AND?
    2. Gray brother 13 May 2020 22: 37 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: really
      they write all sorts of rubbish about f-35 for example

      And they don’t write about the F-22, for example.
      1. really 13 May 2020 22: 50 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        They also write.
        1. Gray brother 13 May 2020 23: 30 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Quote: really
          They also write.

          Do not read.
          1. Grigory_78 14 May 2020 02: 27 New
            • 4
            • 3
            +1
            In vain. I liked the demonstration performance in Hawaii in 2010-2012 (I didn’t save it, now I can’t find it). At F-22, the tail (or a significant portion of the tail) fell off when it landed. When the press asked a question about this to the representative of the Air Force, he replied that he did not see any problem - the tail fell off after landing, the aircraft would be restored very quickly with minimal cost.
            Americans quickly remove such things from the press. As well as photos and videos of the crashed or destroyed Abrams from Facebook and YouTube. Censorship.
  5. Zaurbek 13 May 2020 19: 06 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And you would answer to each quote ..... otherwise these are so far questions without special answers.
    1. Sky strike fighter 13 May 2020 19: 12 New
      • 8
      • 5
      +3
      To argue in absentia with professional PR specialists, in fact with paid liars from around the world, is a useless pastime.
  6. A. Privalov 13 May 2020 19: 08 New
    • 13
    • 4
    +9
    As soon as you see the assembly line at the aircraft factory from the gate of which neatly dressed fighters roll out new fighters and dozens of Su-57s go into the army, videos will appear on the network where happy pilots get new combat vehicles, how they train on the ground and in the air, how fifth-generation fighters strike at various targets at firing ranges or carry out other missions, from that moment they will only praise him abroad. We will hear exceptionally positive feedback. All the critics will dry up, and yesterday the detractors and scoffers will either die of envy, or by making a figure eight in the air, they will excusably apologize for their unbelief and join the slender ranks of Su-57 fans.
    1. Grandfather 13 May 2020 19: 46 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Quote: A. Privalov
      As soon as you see the assembly line at the aircraft factory from the gate of which neatly dressed fighters roll out new fighters and dozens of Su-57s go into the army, videos will appear on the network where happy pilots get new combat vehicles, how they train on the ground and in the air, how fifth-generation fighters strike at various targets at firing ranges or carry out other missions, from that moment they will only praise him abroad. We will hear exceptionally positive feedback. All the critics will dry up, and yesterday the detractors and scoffers will either die of envy, or by making a figure eight in the air, they will excusably apologize for their unbelief and join the slender ranks of Su-57 fans.

      but it will not be soon, so the "scoffers" have somewhere to wallow ...
    2. Aag
      Aag 13 May 2020 19: 50 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Your message is clear ... I think it should be a little different here.
    3. Grigory_78 14 May 2020 02: 35 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      I beg you ... This will not happen. They will continue to drive a wave about the 4+ generation engines, rivets that no one buys it, and so on. That it is not all domestic, that the technology for its manufacture was stolen from the United States, and much, much more. And they will always be reminded that the Su-57 is at least an order of magnitude less than the Fu-35 released.
  7. Andrea 13 May 2020 19: 28 New
    • 12
    • 5
    +7
    A log in your eye is never visible.
    I’m not sure that it was worth doing such a review, however, I’m unequivocally sure that our design school is no worse than the American and, certainly, Chinese and Indian combined.
    And yet ... my slippers die of laughter when they hear that the fifth-generation super-duper can fly supersonic from 80 to 40 seconds, after which stealth is blown away. laughing(F22-80 seconds, F35-40 seconds)
    1. Sky strike fighter 13 May 2020 19: 44 New
      • 7
      • 3
      +4
      As a matter of fact, subsonic planes. And if their stealth, as evil tongues say, is just a myth, it is better to fly on F-16 / F-15 - there will be goals. But in terms of PR F-35 ahead of the rest. No wonder so much effort was spent on the F-35. Although in some ways he was the first.
      1. Andrea 13 May 2020 19: 50 New
        • 5
        • 2
        +3
        We have a huge breakthrough in technology, but still it seems to me that stealth is a dead end because detection tools and techniques are developing faster than disguise.
        1. Sky strike fighter 13 May 2020 20: 01 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          All technologies eventually become obsolete sooner or later, and others come to replace them. Such is life. So far nothing has come up with the best. In my opinion, the dead-end branch of development is modernization and saving on new technologies. So you can be left behind.
        2. Grigory_78 14 May 2020 02: 52 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Stealth is a useful thing in fact - it allows you to get closer to an enemy unnoticed, easier to get away from a missile attack, and so on. Just rely only on stealth - this, frankly, is not smart. The Americans, by the way, still rely on network-centric technologies, “smart” anti-radar, stealth missiles and gliding bombs. It’s good that our people don’t ignore it. In addition, the old glider can be sheathed with composites, but you can’t make it especially inconspicuous
      2. 5-9
        5-9 14 May 2020 09: 50 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Their stealth is not a myth. The myth is rather the reducible values ​​of the EPR themselves and the advantages that this stealth provides.
    2. Avior 13 May 2020 19: 56 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      the fifth generation superfood can fly on supersonic from 80 to 40 seconds, after which stealth is blown away. laughing (F22-80 seconds, F35-40 seconds)

      can you give a reference? and even my slippers are bored ....
      1. Andrea 13 May 2020 20: 04 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        I’m sorry, sir, but somehow I didn’t bother to stock up on a link. Maybe you can find yourself on the Internet somehow, if you don’t be too lazy, what restrictions the Americans impose on the speed modes of their invisibility. I'm afraid that it will be the same for Drying. Stealth coating is destroyed by temperature and high-speed pressure.
        1. Avior 13 May 2020 20: 13 New
          • 5
          • 2
          +3
          I was looking for
          but I didn’t find people like you.
          therefore I ask the link.
          1. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. Avior 13 May 2020 20: 28 New
          • 5
          • 5
          0
          The fact that the deck versions of the F-35V and F-35S have problems with coating in the rear of the fuselage at very high altitudes during long-lasting afterburners is known. The land version of the F-35A does not have this problem.
          consider that this is an extremely rarely used flight mode - at very high altitudes, therefore, they simply limited the afterburner duration at these altitudes.
          but I asked another.
          laughing (F22-80 seconds, F35-40 seconds)

          I have never seen such a thing anywhere, so I asked about it.
          I was particularly interested in the case of the F-22, and I have never read such a thing anywhere.
          You for some reason gave a link, and even a distorted one, about another
          hi
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. Avior 13 May 2020 21: 26 New
              • 4
              • 3
              +1
              I already wrote it above actually
              and even what you threw out of the quote you copied
              The curator of the F-35 program at the US Department of Defense noted that such problems with the fighter supposedly can occur only in a small number of cases, and the fighter in charge at Lockheed Martin said that the problems are limited to the most extreme flight test conditions, which are unlikely to be reproduced under real operation.

              talks about the distortion of information in your quote from RIA Novosti
              But the new quote you cited is also distorted information.
              All these articles about this problem refer to one single source - this one
              https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/06/12/supersonic-speeds-could-cause-big-problems-for-the-f-35s-stealth-coating/
              if you go to it, you can find out what
              1. The problem arose only once in 2011 during special tests for extreme extreme modes - when flying at the highest altitude, and only for versions F-35B and F-35C, at the same time measures were taken to overcome the problem.
              2. The second time in trials failed to achieve the same effect.
              3. In the actual operation of aircraft, such a problem has never arisen, and the probability of their occurrence is even theoretically insignificant.
              4. At the same time, they introduced TEMPORARY restrictions on the number of seconds for FULL fast and furious, and they were complex.
              5. In the future, this problem was solved - in the update version of Lot 8 after that, a new, more heat-resistant coating was used, which allows the use of aircraft in missions that require high speed in real use. The Navy and the ILC then approved the measures taken.
              In the future, they expect to get even more heat-resistant coating.
              6. All the arguments that this could interfere with the use of these modifications of the F-35 are purely hypothetical in the article.
              Now compare with what you cited with reference to RIA Novosti.
              But the question with the F-22 remains open.
              hi
              1. strelokmira 14 May 2020 04: 07 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                At least someone thinks in VO with brains, and does not throw propaganda articles
          2. Andrea 13 May 2020 20: 37 New
            • 2
            • 4
            -2
            I can’t remove the link from the tablet, I can’t find where.
            So do not be lazy and type in the search engine Yandex-speed limits f22 and f35. The first will be an article from Zen there and read.
            1. Avior 13 May 2020 21: 43 New
              • 6
              • 2
              +4
              The first will be an article from Zen

              thanks, with zen this is just the source smile
        2. Crystal of Truth 13 May 2020 20: 30 New
          • 5
          • 6
          -1
          Link to RIA news..Rukalitsa
          1. Sky strike fighter 13 May 2020 20: 35 New
            • 3
            • 2
            +1
            Quote: Crystal of Truth
            Link to RIA news..Rukalitsa

            belay Explain about the hand. What are you talking about?
        3. opus 13 May 2020 21: 07 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Quote: Sky Strike fighter
          MOSCOW, April 28 - RIA Novosti, Nikolai Protopopov.

          and who is N. Protopopov and this is jaundice
          Quote: Sky Strike fighter
          https://ria.ru/20200428/1570648284.html

          not authority
          this
          Quote: Andrea
          The first will be an article from Zen there and read.

          even more so.

          Quote: Andrea
          And yet ... my slippers die of laughter when they hear that the fifth-generation super-duper can fly supersonic from 80 to 40 seconds, after which stealth is blown away. (F22-80 seconds, F35-40 seconds)

          wassat
          in the original it sounds like that
          Both flaws were first discovered at the end of 2011 year after testing on flutterWhen F-35B and F-35C both flew at Mach 1.3 and Mach 1.4. During a post-flight inspection in November 2011, it was discovered that the F-35B stealth coating steadily “bubbles [and] swells” on the right and left sides of the horizontal tail and tail boom.

          During similar tests with the F-35C in December 2011, the “thermal damage” that violated the structural integrity of the horizontal tail and tail boom was obvious.

          Vice Admiral Matt Winter, who leads the F-35 program on behalf of the Pentagon, said the department has taken steps to fix the problem with the improved spray coating, but added that the government will not completely eliminate the deficiency - and accepts additional risk.
          As a justification for this decision, Winter noted that the problem was documented when the plane flew to the LIMIT OF ITS. He also said that this phenomenon occurred. only one once and only for models B and C, despite numerous attempts to reproduce the conditions that caused the problem.

          Greg Ulmer, Lockheed Martin F-35 Program Manager, said thatthere was not a single case of this problem in the operational park and that incidents were limited "The highest extremes of flight test conditions, which are unlikely to be reproduced in everyday use."
          .
          According to the new document, the new coating that was introduced in lot 8, allows to withstand higher temperatures, caused by afterburner. Winter described the material as capable of withstanding "what we call a heatwave wave," but refused to indicate how the coating works or what protection it provides.

          The Department of Defense also set time limits on the number of seconds that the F-35B and F-35C can fly at speeds in excess of Mach 1,2, with a full afterburner.

          F-35C can fly on Max 1.3 in afterburner mode only for 50 “cumulative” (probably meaning “only” without pauses less than 3 minutes) seconds, which means that the pilot cannot count 50 seconds at this speed, slow down for a couple of seconds and then pick up speed again. Nonetheless, time requirements are reset afterhow the pilot works at rated power - for three minutes.

          The F-35B can fly for 80 cumulative seconds at Max 1,2 or 40 seconds at Max 1,3 without risk of damage.

          But for both models C and models B, flights at Mach 1,3 during the specified time pose a risk of damage to the horizontal stabilizer structure of the aircraft.

          All
        4. Korax71 13 May 2020 21: 36 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          No, it will not work. Again it is pulled over by pieces, or simply difficulties with the translation.
          1. RIA gives a link to the Defense News article, which published the material. Only the source of this article, one grandmother said: they cite the opinions of some retired pilots without reference to any document.
          2. The same garbage can, but only in June, with reference to Vice Admiral Matt Winter, who heads the Fu 35 program on behalf of the Pentagon, states that for the entire time of operation there was only a single case of swelling of the coating on the tail boom on models B and C . during all subsequent tests this did not happen.
          3.Greg Welmer, program manager Lockheed Martin f. 35. He stated that there was not a single piece of equipment in combat units, and these incidents occurred only during flight tests under the most extreme conditions, which are unlikely to be repeated in operational scenarios .
          So you can breathe out and relax. Journalists also like to write articles for raising the rating of their garbage bins laughing
    3. Ross xnumx 14 May 2020 04: 45 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Andrea
      I’m not sure that it was worth doing a similar review, however, I’m definitely sure that Our design school is no worse than the American and certainly Chinese and Indian combined.

      Do we, who are going to the VO website, think for the most part differently? Or did the “American propaganda” blind us like the “Bush legs” of the Moscow “party”? Or do you assume that the problems of "supersonic" for the F-35 have bypassed our attention?
      So far, we see all the latest technology and weapons only in parades and in commercials (animated and “Military Acceptance”). And we know about the same air defense systems that they are capable ... Sometimes tedious stories about the “taste of French rolls” are preferred to ordinary bagels with tea. Here are the stories about the good weapons that Russian designers can invent (make), it is advisable to confirm not only the plans for their production in two thousand "shaggy" year, but real deliveries to the RF Armed Forces and the results of its combat use. And, believe me, not because of some kind of national “insult”, but by right of answer to the downed Su-24 and the same framed IL-20 ... For general public viewing of this rule: do not spoil where the Russian military is . Despite the courtesy and frequency of personal contacts.
  8. bald 13 May 2020 19: 46 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    “The fact that ... the fighter has a great future.” - and there is no doubt about that, given the time and scrupulousness of the tests.
  9. Maks1995 13 May 2020 19: 52 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    What did you think?
    We sang happily talk about the next 700 defects f35.
    But SU57 is secret what is there, what is not, is unknown.
    1. Piramidon 13 May 2020 20: 38 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Quote: Max1995
      And SU57 is secret what is there, what is not, is unknown

      The F-35 was also secret at the development and testing stage. As soon as the Su-57 goes into the army, the secrets end. With any technique like that.
      1. Maks1995 13 May 2020 22: 20 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        50/50.
        It is easier to find data on the operation of the latest Amerov aircraft than our old ones.
        Cost of operation, resource, etc.

        For example here: SU57 - accidentally chatted in the media that they forgot to make a stealth-coating of the cabin (supposedly 50% stealth), after half a year, as the Indians abandoned it ....

        And so: "superior to all available in the world." .....
    2. Voyager 13 May 2020 22: 46 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      We have other approaches to the adoption of equipment for service, and therefore there is such a difference in the number of available and well-known jambs. They first took f-35, now they are trying to finish it.

      We have the opposite. By the way, it was completely known about the same alteration of the Su-57 airframe, even though they did not speak in the news.
  10. Aag
    Aag 13 May 2020 20: 05 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Gentlemen, comrades, comrades-in-arms, compatriots, don’t you find that the articles on VO have started to have some manipulative character lately? on networks and on TV ...
    I wanted to say about something else: VO was self-sufficient, interesting, intellectual ... Nowadays, it was simply popular ...
    1. Petrol cutter 13 May 2020 20: 28 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      What to do? Time is right now.
      As you know, a new time, new songs ...
  11. Petrol cutter 13 May 2020 20: 26 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    And since when did the aviation industry, tank industry, and shipbuilding in Russia suddenly look like some statements in foreign literature?!.
    This is some kind of nonsense!
    People work, they do their job. And no worse than others however. And count on the knee (as always) sculpt.
    They need to erect a monument for this to be made by the hands, not the enemy's yellow press, to study. Where the authors of the articles are complete ignoramuses in the subject.
  12. Lord of the Sith 13 May 2020 20: 32 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    If our competitors scold something of ours, then we are doing everything right)
  13. APASUS 13 May 2020 20: 44 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    The most interesting thing in this situation is that the media attach importance to the words of people from countries that do not produce a damn ............. except criticism!
  14. Anchonsha 13 May 2020 21: 21 New
    • 6
    • 5
    +1
    The West cannot understand how Russia returned from oblivion and has already created such a fighter as the Su-57, surpassing all available in the world. Well, it offends them to hell, but because of such pressure on Putin and on everything that is involved in our country. In addition, the vaunted F-35 at hypersonic speed can be used for a short time, and therefore its entire American image was blown away
  15. orionvitt 13 May 2020 22: 14 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    lack of stealth technology
    Another "sacred cow" of the west. The USSR was the first, in the idea and theoretical justification of stealth technologies, and even then (50-60s), it was clear their inefficiency against a high-tech enemy. All these mantras about "invisibility" work only against Aboriginal people in Africa, or against Arabs. It is enough to recall the case in Yugoslavia and all the myths about "invisibility" and "stealth" immediately fly off into the pipe.
  16. Fmax 13 May 2020 22: 28 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Well, Italians and the Diplomat are fairly objective. called the real disadvantages of both the aircraft and the program.
  17. Pavlik K. 13 May 2020 22: 38 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    about the 57th question, I have only one (as it was) - what about the new engine? What is the job status? Everything is simple with aviation: if there is an engine, there will be an airplane.
  18. Muddy Seeing ORACLE 13 May 2020 22: 46 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Meanwhile, all the smirks and critics are in vain, somewhere in the secret laboratories of scientific centers of the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation, the “quantum masking system”, which has no analogues, is being developed yes 5 fighters of that series and other promising equipment .....
  19. Spiridonovich2 13 May 2020 23: 16 New
    • 2
    • 7
    -5
    Is the money cut? Sawed. The army received nothing? Nothing. You can continue to cut the budget. Our spaceport East, ordered to live long? And where is the Armata tank, the storm of all adversaries? Maybe we don’t know much and we got the destroyers Leader and aircraft carriers Storm? What can be created with a destroyed economy and destroyed Soviet industry?
    1. Cyril G ... 17 May 2020 09: 13 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      And on the other hand, it’s possible to approach in 10 years about 400 new multi-functional fighters, 5 nuclear submarines, 9 diesel-electric submarines, 5 frigates, 7 corvettes, 11 RTOs, etc. were purchased for the Moscow Region. etc. The list will be long. And to build Leaders This is for a moment a complete analogue of atomic cruisers like Kirov, I do not think is a reasonable solution. From the word in general. Not to mention aircraft carriers
  20. Vitaly gusin 14 May 2020 00: 03 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    What is the purpose of this article?
    Why, raise a wave of patriotism or state different opinions, but they always are, and even more so the F-35 has 500 units in operation that are constantly being improved and the S-57 is all to be done.
    On this, I decided to give other opinions.
    American edition of The National Interest
    The design priorities of the two planes give the two planes different advantages at different ranges. The priorities and armament of the Su-57 allow the detection and elimination of threats over long distances. The key to this strategy, the Su-57 radar must be able to detect invisible jets at large distances. The aircraft’s emphasis on speed allows it to react quickly or quickly retreat from fights that it cannot win. As soon as the two warring fighters approach their visibility range, the combination of maneuverability and infrared search of the Su-57 will make it a deadly enemy. Su-57 as a challenger may turn out to be differently a good and worthy adversary for a fighter of the first fifth generation.
    And here you can compare two aircraft.
    F-35 Lightning II vs Dry PAK FA
    Read more https://aviatia.net/f-35-lightning-ii-vs-sukhoi-pak-fa/
    1. 5-9
      5-9 14 May 2020 10: 23 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      more than F-35 in operation 500 units that are constantly being improved

      but this is just the main joint of Fy-35, all these 500 units (in different, by the way, mods) are not finished up to the mind to one degree or another (depending on the mod) and very limited (degree - depending on the mod) are combat-ready and all of them are not the final technical appearance .... how it will be achieved - so all these 500 (600 ... 700, etc.) units will need to be modernized or quietly transferred to the reserve (in order to upgrade later or thrown away) .... when This was called sabotage to Stalin, and for this it is necessary to shoot (or give the Star of the Hero of the Russian Federation to those Americans who arranged it) .

      So we do not need raw Su-57s in the ranks! Therefore, there is no need to lament about the lack of dozens of Su-57 ... and Su-35S, it is rather difficult to bring to mind, and here - a breakthrough plane.
      1. Vitaly gusin 14 May 2020 12: 14 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Quote: 5-9
        just the main jamb of Fy-35, all these 500 units (in different, by the way, mods) are not finished up to the mind in one degree or https://topwar.ru/opinions/victory/ (depending on the mod) and very limited

        There are desires, but there are facts.
        The first flight of the C-57 took place in 2010, since then all the time it will be improved all the time. This is the same thing that it was necessary to release the first Windows 1.0 in 1985, and upgrade to 10 or maybe continue on.
        For the first time, the F-35 took off in 2011.
        Three modifications were made.
        F-35A ground fighter for the Air Force;
        F-35B fighter with short take-off and vertical landing
        F-35C Navy carrier-based fighter
        Not one MODERN aircraft can not be brought up to 100% within the manufacturer.
        And in the process of use, comments always arise, critical and less critical.
        During the operation was TOTAL two F-35 crashes, one in 2018 the pilot is alive and the second in 2019 the pilot died, I will not make comparisons with other types of aircraft
        The last category 1A flaw that could put the pilots at risk was deemed corrected in mid-November 2018. Now Lockheed and the Pentagon are solving the eight remaining shortcomings of “category 1B,” which have a “critical impact on mission readiness.” Five of them are expected to be completed and verified by December 2018, the program’s office said. The program’s office said that three of the eight shortcomings were transferred to intensive combat trials that began at the end of 2018 (where and with whom, you know yourself) five appeared since then during a separate test Software. F-35 - it is a flying computer with over 8 million lines of code. The S-57 also passed combat tests, but 4 days were enough for this.
        The results of the combat tests are necessary for the Pentagon to make the decision, expected by the beginning of 2021, to allow Lockheed to increase full-time production. About 520 of the potential 3200 F-35 aircraft for the United States and its allies have already been delivered and need to be modified, since the flaws are eliminated.
        You must understand that the C-57 and F-35 are two aircraft with different combat mission systems.
        1. 5-9
          5-9 14 May 2020 13: 06 New
          • 1
          • 3
          -2
          What a blatant juggling and even a direct lie?
          The first flight of the prototype T-50 was in 2010, and
          The first flight of the X-35A took place 24 2000 October, the in Palmdale (California, USA).
          The difference is ten years. In 2010, the Penguin was in a linear state.

          Well, about the schools of Fy-35, read the reports of the local Kudrin GAO, every year, thousands of imperfections, in principle, dozens of critical ones. Did he even learn how to shoot in all versions of a gun?
          1. Vitaly gusin 14 May 2020 14: 15 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            [quote = 5-9] What a brazen juggling and even a direct lie? [/ quote
            Lockheed Martin spokeswoman Brett Ashworth said in a statement that “the GAO report has been showing information since 2019, and since then we delivered our 500th plane, trained our 1000th pilot and 9th escort, and eclipsed more 000 flight hours. ”
            Since 2017, “we have fulfilled our obligations by increasing the supply of aircraft by almost 200%, while the cost of driving is less than $ 80 million per aircraft,” Ashworth added. “We are also seeing significant progress in improving the reliability of the supply chain and increasing the sustainability of the fleet.”
            Out of 500, two fell.
            FROM ONE, ONE fell.
            That's when the S-57 reaches 50% of the indicators achieved by the F-35 program, then you will jump.
            In the meantime, this is arrogant juggling and even a direct lie
            1. 5-9
              5-9 14 May 2020 15: 44 New
              • 1
              • 3
              -2
              Clearly, the drain has been counted ... I congratulate you Mr. liar ....

              But the Su-57 has another 10 (TEN) years to achieve the “outstanding” Penguin performance ..


              Well, to squeeze LohMartin’s ridiculous excuses in response to the specific presentations of the American state regulatory authority in hundreds of eggs, for which there are multi-billion fines, this is the level of anecdote ...
              1. Vitaly gusin 14 May 2020 18: 57 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Quote: 5-9
                But the Su-57 has another 10 (TEN) years,

                Happy waiting and flying!
  21. lot
    lot 14 May 2020 01: 07 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Again a selection of gossip.
    In essence, what is there?
    1. 5-9
      5-9 14 May 2020 10: 27 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      So essentially they announced:
      1. He is not as stealth as Fy-22. Yes, by and large - not like that. Who argues. Another question is that twisting the stealth indicator, you lose in others.
      2. There is no new engine on production vehicles. Well, he flies better with the “old” one as well. And if they hadn’t mentioned the new one at all, if there isn’t it, then the “old” one is quite imaginable.
      1. lot
        lot 14 May 2020 13: 30 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        These are the author’s conclusions and would be valuable.
        Like, the rich they are, the happier they are.
  22. Alexey from Perm 14 May 2020 03: 17 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    There is a specific aircraft with its own advantages and disadvantages, and they will not increase or decrease from criticism in foreign media or from unrestrained praise in domestic. Only workers and engineers can fix them. And you need to work on the plane, its flaws are visible from my sofa))
  23. Aviationism 14 May 2020 04: 43 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    This is quite expected when the West eats to humiliate and despise the achievements and successes of Russia.
    But it is very sad when the Russians themselves unreasonably do the same in these and other forums.

    It is a pity that the article is too brief and did not touch the more deceitful statements of the media; including Russians.

    I look forward to product 30!
    1. Crystal of Truth 14 May 2020 08: 37 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      What success is that? Two and a half aircraft without the necessary engines, of which one crashed? Is this a success?
  24. Ros 56 14 May 2020 08: 35 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Hitler also counted on Barbarossa, as a result, Russian Vanya signed on the Reichstag. Let them bark.
  25. Comrade Michael 14 May 2020 08: 40 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    I do not particularly delve into the pink patriotic snot, nor the black poison of foreign competitors. In addition, at this stage, the full specifications are not known even to experts ... and even to local expert commentators. I have one question for this aircraft, as a military weapon, based on what I know .. 1. How much will it be developed? 2. What is the series and will there be a normal series of 500 pieces? After answering these questions, many others disappear automatically. They’re fighting not aircraft models, but regiments, divisions and armies ... It depends on these issues whether it’s just a toy for eternal PR or a really noticeable aircraft in our history. And who thinks that it has been fully developed over the past 20 years is simply poorly informed ...
  26. 5-9
    5-9 14 May 2020 09: 46 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Even the "benevolent" did not really find something to scold .... compare this with the Penguin's shortcomings, for example ...
  27. zwlad 14 May 2020 11: 16 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    I honestly don’t understand how it is possible to put on the same scales a flying (albeit controversial) serial "penguin" and a long-term hope of the Air Force ?!

    our military representatives will never be allowed to dry in a penguin state. therefore there is no series yet
  28. jaroff 14 May 2020 13: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    But in fact, no one is going to fight with the so-called. high-tech adversary. This is a big war that no one wants.
    But everyone wants to sell their goods in order not only to recapture costs, but also to make a profit.
    A better fight with a poorly armed enemy. True, one must also be able to fight against such an enemy.
  29. Andrey Krasnoyarsky 14 May 2020 16: 31 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Only those who used these weapons can judge the merits or demerits of any weapon skillfully. And preferably in battle. But you can go to the edge at the training ground. Again, this someone should be an expert in their field. Hence the question - which of the foreign experts personally experienced the Su-57 in the air? I suspect that all these critics are from the cohort of couch generals.
  30. certero 15 May 2020 02: 32 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Still, comparing the su-57 vs f-35 is absolutely wrong. Su-57 must be compared with f-22
    1. Cyril G ... 15 May 2020 08: 27 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Absolutely right.
  31. Yury Siritsky 15 May 2020 12: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    You might think that you will receive praise from them. The main thing is not to pay attention to these rabbits and show such an airplane so that they become numb.
  32. overlof 22 May 2020 17: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What is the counter strike? Children of our elite live abroad.