NATO air defense system in Europe will not become an obstacle for the Russian Su-57


Around the Russian multi-purpose fighter Su-57 experts tirelessly debate. Some believe that it absolutely does not correspond to the 5th generation, since it has insufficient stealth. For example, such statements have repeatedly appeared in the Indian and Chinese press. Others, on the contrary, pay attention to the possibility of using the Su-57 in unmanned mode, which is one of the signs of a sixth generation combat aircraft.


But let's discuss how well-grounded are the fears of our Western partners about the Su-57. Is this aircraft capable of overcoming NATO's air defense in Europe?

In fact, it is very difficult to come to unambiguous conclusions, because in fact, the Su-57 is not yet in service with the Russian Air Force.

Aircraft that are not in service


If we take the fifth-generation Chinese fighter J-20 as an example, then comparing it with the Su-57 is incorrect. And the point is not even the technical characteristics of these two aircraft. Although they both began to be created at about the same time, today the PLA is armed with almost 30 J-20 units, and the Russian Su-57 has not yet been transferred to the troops.

It will be fair to consider the Su-57 to be really functioning domestic military equipment only after at least 10-15 of these aircraft begin to operate our VKS. Moreover, machines equipped not with the 4th generation engine, which is on the first samples, but with the so-called “product 30” - the second stage engine.

But although the Russian aircraft is still quite “raw” and is still being finalized, nevertheless some of its capabilities are already known.

Not invisible enough?


Most often, the Su-57 is criticized for the lack of stealth. Of course, the criticism is fair. It is quite obvious that an aircraft invisible to radars is more adapted to overcome enemy air defense systems.

Yes, the Su-57 has direct air intake channels, unlike the American F-22 and S-35, where these elements are S-shaped. Of course, because of this, it is more noticeable for radars. On the other hand, the thrust of the engines of American aircraft due to this design of air intakes is somewhat lost. The design of the Su-57 nozzle also makes the Russian aircraft more visible in the infrared (thermal) range.

Most likely, domestic designers tried to find a reasonable compromise between the stealth of the aircraft and its tactical and technical characteristics, for example, maneuverability, fuel efficiency and so on. Indeed, overcoming enemy radars is not a determining component, it is a stage on the road to completing a combat mission.

Pack leader


It is possible that in Russia no one planned to create a perfect stealth system, since this is not necessary. I will even express a completely seditious thought: it is possible that the task of the new Russian fighter to overcome perfect and high-tech air defense systems of the North Atlantic bloc is not included at all. More precisely, this is the task, but it does not rest with the Su-57.

This may be indirectly indicated by the creation in Russia of the S-70 Okhotnik unmanned aerial vehicle and the development of its interaction with the Su-57. This drone is a shock drone reaching a ceiling height of 18 kilometers. He is able to act independently, along with other same drones or with a fighter.

Thus, the Su-57 can play the role of “leader of the pack,” controlling several such UAVs. Drones are able to penetrate the air defense system, conduct reconnaissance, and even suppress ground-based air defense systems, "clearing" the Su-57 road. The payload of 6 tons and the high speed of the Hunter contribute to these tasks.

Do you need a pilot?


The recent Su-57 tests in unmanned mode could not go unnoticed. Of course, there was a man in the cockpit, but he only watched the flight and was ready to intervene in control if something went wrong.

As mentioned earlier, the possibility of unmanned control is one of the hallmarks of the sixth generation fighter.

Man is not iron. Therefore, his physical capabilities, in particular, his ability to withstand overloads, are limited. This is a deterrent to the development of technology. And if you use an airplane without a pilot, then it can be subjected even to those overloads that a person is not able to withstand.


During testing, the Su-57 performed the simplest actions, and the pilot at that time was in the cockpit as an observer. It is not difficult to assume that the ultimate goal will be the operation of an aircraft in the cockpit of which there will be no person at all. Such a combat vehicle will be able to carry out such elements that no manned vehicle is capable of without risking harm to the health and life of the pilot.

Armed and very dangerous


Russian aviation already uses hypersonic missiles X-47M2 "Dagger". They have a range of almost two thousand kilometers and are practically unattainable for modern air defense systems of NATO countries.

They will not equip the Su-57 with “daggers,” but the state armament program for 2018–2027 provides for equipping these aircraft with hypersonic missiles.

It is known that they will be smaller in size than the "Daggers" to be located inside the fighter. Moreover, their characteristics will be similar to those of the X-47M2. So, they will be able to hit targets, including in Europe, without trying to break through air defense systems.

Su-57 vs NATO air defense: from theory to practice


All that was mentioned above are assumptions that, without practical confirmation, remain a pure theory. And if the Su-57 has not yet entered service, then we can only speculate on its capabilities to overcome the NATO air defense systems, without knowing anything for sure.

True, the Vietnamese edition of Soha claims that the Su-57 has already encountered air defense of American "partners."

The core of NATO, as you know, are the US armed forces. It can be assumed that US air defense systems and NATO air defense systems are almost the same thing. And now, with the American air defense, the Su-57 may have already encountered in practice.

It is known that as early as 2018, new models of Russian fighters were sent to the “run-in” in Syria and even inflicted attacks on militants, while remaining unnoticed by the US and Israel air defense systems. And this despite the fact that the fifth-generation American fighter F-22 and F-35 freely recognize and accompany Russian air defense systems.

Around the beginning of May, according to the Vietnamese edition of Soha, these Russian Su-57s flew three times over the US military bases in Iraq to test American air defense.

Since there was no indignation on the part of the Americans, it can be assumed that our aircraft went unnoticed. Although the US air defense could detect our fighters, but in order to deceive the Russian military, the US military decided to remain silent.

Exclude the option that all this история it was simply invented by Vietnamese journalists, it is also impossible.

We built, built ...


It is hard to argue that the Su-57 is already an excellent fighting vehicle. And she continues to improve. These fighters will receive new engines, new hypersonic missiles. In addition, it is planned to replace the hydraulic power drives with electric ones, which will reduce the weight of the aircraft. And this, in turn, means lower fuel consumption, increased flight ranges and other benefits.

But these innovations have a downside. We will get the perfect combat vehicle, but not now, and not earlier than the middle of the current decade. Meanwhile, military aircraft and air defense systems are being improved in other countries. Therefore, there is a risk of delaying the time to bring the Su-57 to the "final" characteristics.

But the fact remains: the Su-57s are already able to bypass modern NATO air defense systems, including in Europe. This may well manifest itself in the sky over the Baltic.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. rocket757 8 June 2020 07: 04 New
    • 9
    • 2
    +7
    In short garbage.
    NATO air defense system in Europe will not become an obstacle for the Russian Su-57

    Any air defense can be defeated if the enemy is simply MORE, he has MORE forces and means! Of course, we are talking about a comparable technological level, but the geyropa and Russia are at that level.
    But the fact remains: the Su-57 is now able to bypass modern systems

    To go around, it means to be located, to lay a route outside the enemy’s air defense area ... it means that this is an empty place for him there is no need to defend ... the question is, why do ours fly there?
    1. Lech from Android. 8 June 2020 07: 22 New
      • 10
      • 3
      +7
      Well, the Americans failed to defeat the Vietnamese air defense despite the superiority of US aircraft in the skies of Vietnam during the war.
      1. rocket757 8 June 2020 07: 40 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        Well, the Vietnamese air defense, the Americans failed to defeat

        Suppose the equipment supplied to Vietnam was at a good technological level ... but, they could not effectively counteract the Yankee raids very quickly, when the amount allowed to cover a lot and immediately. It became possible to cover the whole territory very soon ....
        Then, in fact, PEOPLE won ... victory came on earth.
        In the sky, the Yankees clearly lost out on financial costs.
        1. nickname7 8 June 2020 15: 32 New
          • 5
          • 5
          0
          The skin of a dead bear is not to be shared; the occupation is extremely stupid. How can you talk about what is not?
          I remind you that the Su-57 squadron is not on duty, they are not in operation, therefore its parameters are unknown. Paper specifications do not offer, paper will endure. 2,5 test samples of a glider, mass-scale model and cartoon, this is not an airplane in operation.
          For example, they released the fret cross, a lot of reviews were written and shot on it, all its pros and cons were revealed, the fret can be viewed in the cabin. That is the difference between serial and test samples. Su-57 does not exist in nature. Discussing non-existent is stupid.
      2. Boris55 8 June 2020 09: 44 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        Well, the Vietnamese air defense, the Americans failed to defeat

        It was the case and they smashed. Progress does not stand still. First, we them, then they are on the beam of guidance of our radars us. After the launch, I had to turn off the station and run to cover ... Well, then again we got them. This is where the war ended.
      3. EvilLion 8 June 2020 09: 52 New
        • 0
        • 3
        -3
        In fact, it was possible, simply because of the number, only a little sense was found.
      4. iouris 8 June 2020 12: 54 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        It was not possible to defeat the air defense, but the bombing was not stopped either. In addition, the technology of defeating air defense was only in its infancy. Now is another time.
      5. kutuz 14 June 2020 14: 51 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        The Turks elegantly defeated Russian air defense in Syria. Of course, you can object and say "they are not there," but the fact remains. Yes, and Israel does not particularly interfere with air defense.
    2. Civil 8 June 2020 07: 25 New
      • 9
      • 5
      +4
      Su-57s are already able to bypass modern NATO air defense systems, including in Europe. This may well manifest itself in the sky over the Baltic.

      In the event of a war with NATO, the war will be nuclear missile, because all these whistles are deeply useless. And yes, there will be no winners in such a war. And what's the point in capturing the Baltic states?
      1. Mitroha 8 June 2020 08: 06 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Quote: Civil
        And what's the point in capturing the Baltic states?

        There are 103 variants of the reasons for this question in the Baltic States, and another 50 in stock. They are sure that we before each meal, and twice before bedtime we pray for the seizure of their territories, but we are very afraid of their sun
      2. Herman 4223 8 June 2020 09: 19 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        And how many kilometers are from Latvia to Moscow and from Estonia to St. Petersburg?
        This is the point.
        1. rocket757 8 June 2020 09: 38 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          And how much flight time to Washington, for example? That also makes sense.
        2. Boris55 8 June 2020 09: 54 New
          • 1
          • 11
          -10
          Quote: Herman 4223
          And how many kilometers are from Latvia to Moscow and from Estonia to St. Petersburg?

          As the practice of all recent conflicts (08.08.08) has shown, first of all, the controls are destroyed. Millionaires bomb cities for the sake of intimidation, but are we scared? How many people in Russia will be upset if they bomb Moscow? laughing

          To set the mood:

          1. Ramzes iv 8 June 2020 10: 00 New
            • 1
            • 9
            -8
            Quote: Boris55
            Millionaires bomb cities for the sake of intimidation, but are we scared? How many people in Russia will be upset if they bomb Moscow?

            Not many think .. On the Internet, silence will immediately begin, bloggers will disappear somewhere, etc. Money and resources in the regions immediately surplus will appear ..))))
          2. iouris 8 June 2020 12: 56 New
            • 6
            • 0
            +6
            While only conditional Voronezh is being bombed ...
        3. Boa kaa 8 June 2020 21: 22 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          Quote: Herman 4223
          And how many kilometers are from Latvia to Moscow and from Estonia to St. Petersburg?
          This is the point.

          The meaning of the presence of the Tribalts in NAT is their territory, as a springboard for the landing of the US expeditionary forces, the installation of the INF, the deployment of AB, espionage and other crap of an unfriendly nature.
          And most importantly - like a bellie incident! And so they fuck nobody needs with their depopulation! and the complete collapse of the economy.
    3. siberalt 8 June 2020 09: 36 New
      • 6
      • 11
      -5
      I probably live for many years, so I am convinced that NATO is ZERO. We now come to Ukraine or the Baltic states - except for a squeal from the West will be the same - ZERO. Russia needs money and the will of the Tsar. And that’s it. Our people and local suspensions will only support.
      1. Grading 9 June 2020 10: 41 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        It was exactly the same on December 31.12.1994, XNUMX. g.
  2. Ros 56 8 June 2020 07: 22 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    I agree. In addition to the Su-57, we still have a lot of things flying and not necessarily airplanes.
  3. Carnifexx 8 June 2020 07: 31 New
    • 10
    • 10
    0
    1. Su-57 has fewer measures to reduce visibility than the F35 and F-22, significantly.
    2. Modern radars see F-35/22 perfectly, making them useless
    3. Su-57 is invulnerable to NATO air defense in the opinion of the yellow (not racism !!! not racism !!!) press

    Of course, all this is logical and internally consistent, do not go to a fortuneteller.
    1. KCA
      KCA 8 June 2020 08: 46 New
      • 7
      • 4
      +3
      It is debatable that the SU-57's visibility is significantly higher than that of the F-22/35, in all the data, possibly truthful, or maybe not, the minimum reflectance value is indicated for strictly frontal irradiation, but unless the radars are always at the same height and strictly on a straight line with a stealth plane, as if it weren’t flying? In any case, the profile of the body will be irradiated, and here S-shaped air intakes and a rectangular nozzle will not help, especially since the thermal radiation can be detected by an order of magnitude, or even two, less than the radio emission of the aircraft itself, S. Lavrov, and I tend to trust him, not looks like a man who says something without being completely sure, said that Russian radio control immediately spotted the F-35, taking off after an attack on a US military base
      1. Herman 4223 8 June 2020 09: 38 New
        • 6
        • 3
        +3
        The engines on the su-57 are installed at an angle and detecting the blades will be a problem, even if the plane flies directly to the radiation source, they will simply look away from the radar. According to other indicators, for example, a glider, the Su-57 is clearly all right, and it is the glider that gives the main illumination, and not the engine blades.
      2. Here the whole article is controversial. Phrases from the advertising booklet are taken, something is added from Wikipedia and on this kvash there are arguments to be or not to be?
        How can one assume the same noticeability without even conducting training battles against a probable opponent using natural equipment?
        As far as I know, F117 at one time was a shock to our intelligence and air defense. And before that, they also believed that the border was locked!
        1. KCA
          KCA 8 June 2020 11: 26 New
          • 5
          • 6
          -1
          Long-wave ZGRS see everything that more than a tennis ball flies at a distance of more than 2000 km, they can’t direct a missile, but they can send a fighter into the zone of even visual contact, although it makes sense? 1-2 aircraft, even the B-52N, will not be able to do anything, but there will be one answer to the departure of hundreds of aircraft
          1. opus 8 June 2020 13: 13 New
            • 10
            • 1
            +9
            Quote: KCA
            Long-wave ZGRS see everything that more than a tennis ball flies at a distance of more than 2000km, they will not be able to direct a rocket,

            if they "see." Why don’t they “induce” something?
            Tennis ball .. damn it for 2000km.
            substitute the EPR of the ball and 2000 km here (do not forget to translate them into meters)

            get the transmitter power and get a little stunned
        2. nickname7 8 June 2020 17: 03 New
          • 6
          • 1
          +5
          . reasoning to be or not to be

          Then the naive people believe everything, they believed Mavrodi, they gave him the last money.
      3. opus 8 June 2020 13: 19 New
        • 10
        • 9
        +1
        Quote: KCA
        . Lavrov, and I am inclined to trust him, does not look like a man who says something without being completely sure, said that Russian radio-technical control tools immediately spotted the F-35s that took off after an attack on a US military base

        1. It has long been diplomats, Sergei Lavrov’s foreign colleagues call him - “Mr. False”
        / We had Mr. NO, and Mr. Yes, Foreign Ministers
        2. Sergey Lavrov will not distinguish the F-35, from the F-53 (15)
        3. that the RTK’s means would "detect" F-35s over Iraq / Iran, it is necessary that they DISLOCATE there, somewhere closer.
        And they (F-35) are NOT there
        Is that in Israel, but it's not American.
        1 + 2 + 3 = "Mr. False" again lied ...
    2. Winnie76 8 June 2020 09: 35 New
      • 7
      • 5
      +2
      Quote: Carnifexx
      Of course, all this is logical and internally consistent, do not go to a fortuneteller.

      Of course, consistent. Radars are different, they work in different ranges. At one frequency, the F-35 is '' invisible '' '', at another frequency
    3. opus 8 June 2020 13: 11 New
      • 7
      • 2
      +5
      Quote: Carnifexx

      Of course, all this is logical and internally consistent, do not go to a fortuneteller.

      good
      not everyone is zombied
  4. rotkiv04 8 June 2020 07: 58 New
    • 7
    • 10
    -3
    Some - if, yes, if only talk, in the USSR they did at first, and then said, if at all, and now the main thing is to crow from the rostrum for their other partners
    1. URAL72 8 June 2020 08: 25 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      That seems to have said everything correctly, but reading such comments 200 times a day, it becomes sickening.
    2. KCA
      KCA 8 June 2020 09: 46 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Now is the media time, before that, they opened Pravda or Izvestia, you read everything, and before the Vremya program, you do business, and now you have news on the Internet around the clock, you need to write something, even if there’s nothing special, well also need
    3. nickname7 8 June 2020 17: 48 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      So the article writes, in the future tense, that they say when will SU57, then it will be so cool that European air defense will cease to exist for him, this method was used by Khoja Nasreddin, he promised the shah that he would teach the donkey to speak. And when will this SU57 be? When will we end our mortal existence?
      The author should take the pseudonym Hodge.
      Also, the arguments about SU57, if only for serial production aircraft that do not exist in operation, are reminiscent of the forums of schoolchildren who talk about who will be the winner in the battle between spider-man and batman, these are fictional characters and reasoning about them is fantasy.
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. The comment was deleted.
    1. KCA
      KCA 8 June 2020 08: 51 New
      • 3
      • 4
      -1
      Even according to open data on TV, they say that the samples are already being tested, and maybe the process has advanced much more, and therefore they don’t want us to use very complicated radar for all aircraft, and even with water-cooled AFAR?
    2. nickname7 8 June 2020 20: 10 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      In general, to accelerate the creation of at least an existing demonstrator of radio-photon radar

      What is trifling, let's speed up the creation of the warp engine and begin to explore new planets.
  7. Rhino 8 June 2020 08: 14 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    If so, then the Chinese J-20 can also not be called a real fifth-generation aircraft, the engines do not correspond to this.
  8. Mavrikiy 8 June 2020 08: 29 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    It is not difficult to assume that the ultimate goal will be the operation of an aircraft in the cockpit of which there will be no person at all. Such a combat vehicle will be able to carry out such elements that no manned vehicle is capable of without risking harm to the health and life of the pilot.
    fool There is also a “Hunter", so let it be overloaded, that for nonsense, the SU-57 is several times more expensive than it, definitely. request
  9. Doccor18 8 June 2020 08: 39 New
    • 11
    • 2
    +9
    I will even express a completely seditious thought: it is possible that the task of the new Russian fighter to overcome perfect and high-tech air defense systems of the North Atlantic bloc is not included at all ..

    I can’t imagine now that the Russian air forces decide to gain air supremacy on the territory of Germany and France .... If there is a war with NATO, it will be defensive on our part. Where will NATO aircraft overcome Russian air defense, and SU-57 will also decisively sweep away the aggressor from heaven. Which of the SU-57 is air
    fighter? A great! For this he is created. Not for breaking through THAAD or Patriot. And for the destruction of Rafaley and Eurofighter, F35 and F22. But for this, in my opinion, it fits perfectly.
    1. really 8 June 2020 09: 07 New
      • 5
      • 8
      -3
      You can sleep peacefully, NATO will not fly to Russia to fight
      1. Doccor18 8 June 2020 09: 40 New
        • 8
        • 4
        +4
        You can sleep well

        From 1721 until 1853, Russia won three wars with Persia, two with Sweden, five with Turkey, four with Poland, one with Prussia, and one with France in 1812. Another war with France, which ended in the Tilsit world in 1807, can be considered as a draw, as there was no winner.
        And in the 19th and in the 20th century, the Europoids more than once rushed to our country. List all the wars for a very long time, and there is no need. Who cares, read.
        1. really 8 June 2020 10: 04 New
          • 6
          • 5
          +1
          Do not forget that Russia was an expanding empire at this time, so the reasons, in contrast to the result, are ambiguous
          1. Doccor18 8 June 2020 11: 43 New
            • 10
            • 4
            +6
            Where did the USSR expand in 1941? Where did China expand in the 19th and early 20th centuries when all European countries tore and strangled it in a cage with the Japanese? Not an extension matter. The fact is that the very existence of European masters implies a huge number of colonies and slaves. But there are fewer colonies, slaves do not want to work for free, and requests from gentlemen are growing from century to century. They solve these inconsistencies by war.
            1. really 8 June 2020 12: 05 New
              • 3
              • 3
              0
              You did not understand correctly, by the way, RI also took part in the division of China. You do not know where the USSR expanded in the year 39? 41 Corollary 39, which of the allies will destroy whom.
      2. Boa kaa 8 June 2020 20: 31 New
        • 1
        • 3
        -2
        Quote: really
        NATO will not fly to Russia to fight

        The USA is a member of NATO. Are states also not going to rake the heat with their own hands?
        Or are they "ready" to fight with us until the last European?
        Then what do their B-1 and B-2 do at British bases?
    2. Slon1978 8 June 2020 09: 24 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      This is probably the correct answer to some questions regarding the Su-57. I don’t think it’s structurally difficult for our designers to handle the S-shaped air intakes and the flat nozzle. There is a compromise in favor of maintaining better thrust-weight ratio and super-maneuverability.
      1. ultra 8 June 2020 15: 12 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0

        Quote: Slon1978
        I don’t think it’s structurally difficult for our designers to overpower the S-shaped air intakes and the flat nozzle.
  10. stalki 8 June 2020 08: 43 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    In fact, it is very difficult to come to unambiguous conclusions, because in fact, the Su-57 is not yet in service with the Russian Air Force.

    Then it made sense to write all this? Well, perhaps experienced specialists would join the analysis. But the plane is new, everything is secret, the pros will definitely not even draw from a distant prospect. So what to discuss when the plane is not even accepted?
  11. Mikhail Ya2 8 June 2020 08: 43 New
    • 8
    • 3
    +5
    But the fact remains: the Su-57s are already able to bypass modern NATO air defense systems, including in Europe. This may well manifest itself in the sky over the Baltic.

    The only fact that there is no serial SU-57, everything else is fiction and tolerances.
    1. Insurgent 8 June 2020 10: 22 New
      • 5
      • 4
      +1
      Quote: Michael Ya2
      The only fact that there is no serial SU-57, everything else is fiction and tolerances.

      Somehow - and YES и NO... If we assume that there was more than one aircraft on the stocks of the plant, then apparently there is still serial (e) yes

      The first production Su-57 crashed right before delivery to the troops

      December 24, 2019 / TASS

      VKS plans for the purchase of the latest fifth-generation fighter Su-57 are frustrated. On Tuesday in the Khabarovsk Territory the first production model of the aircraft crashed. The cause of the accident, according to preliminary data, was a failure in the tail control. The first production Su-57 was to be transferred to the troops before the end of 2019

      https://vz-ru.turbopages.org/s/vz.ru/incidents/2019/12/24/1015275.html
  12. Viktor Sergeev 8 June 2020 08: 47 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Why stealth, if the same can be achieved electronic warfare?
    There is no insuperable air defense. The strength of air defense in separation, in the use of aircraft and the actual ground means. Air defense is needed to destroy part of the enemy’s aircraft and prevent the aircraft from flying with impunity. NATO air defense is based on airplanes, ours is on land.
    1. Boa kaa 8 June 2020 20: 53 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      Quote: Victor Sergeev
      Why stealth, if the same can be achieved electronic warfare?

      Amy and the Chinese understand stealth as “passive” stealth, this is when the airframe materials absorb the radar EMP, or the airframe design scatters it into space (like the lame Goblin, F-117).
      Our school went a different way. On the way to create r / e systems "closing" the object. Much has been written about cold plasma and its generators that can make an object "invisible." But technology is advancing, and photon radars are already on the agenda ... So, it is difficult to correctly judge an object without knowing the totality of facts ...
      The Hindus sang the same thing, but then they were transparently hinted that we could not give them all the know-how, so they jumped out of the joint program for the creation of the 5th generation aircraft. Now the poor fellows are tormented with their FGFA. But it is unlikely that they will succeed: the problem is too serious.
  13. Esaul 8 June 2020 09: 06 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    In principle, I agree that a breakthrough in air defense should be made by the unmanned and most inconspicuous Hunter. After all, an air defense breakthrough is a big risk, so it’s better to save the most valuable thing on the plane - the pilot, let the pieces of iron fight!
    And the SU-57s behind them will fly and shoot down enemy fighters after the destruction of the air defense by the "Hunters".
    1. nickname7 8 June 2020 18: 03 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      You can give out your expert opinion, who will win the battle, a wolverine with an adamantium skeleton and super regeneration, or a predator, a wolverine at close range can use blades, and the predator has a plasma gun, which of them will win?
      1. Esaul 8 June 2020 18: 53 New
        • 1
        • 4
        -3
        Have you heard anything about strategy, tactics? I advise you to read about it, and not watch cartoons shot on comics!
  14. Gust 8 June 2020 09: 30 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Everything is cool, except for the passage about flying over US bases. Maybe they weren’t covered by a suitable air defense or the air defense was turned off .. In any case, it is very reminiscent of stories like the F-35 that no one has seen fly over Khmeimim on a regular basis;)))
  15. bars1 8 June 2020 10: 28 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Yes, the Su-57 does not have S-shaped airborne engines that reduce the characteristics of engine thrust. But there are radar blockers.
    A flat nozzle does not reduce thermal signature. It reduces radar signature. And at the same time engine thrust. The F-35, by the way, has an axisymmetric nozzle
    The engine of the first stage provides a supersonic cruising flight.
  16. Maks1995 8 June 2020 10: 32 New
    • 11
    • 2
    +9
    Again a fable about a fox and grapes. Already not just once a week, but once every 2-3 days, similar materials.
    Saulet is not armed, the data is secret - no one knows anything, the Indians refused because of their visibility, but now they will tear Europe’s air defense.
    "It may well manifest itself in the sky ...". Or maybe not. It depends on which author will spread the thought on the tree ....
  17. Sergey Valov 8 June 2020 10: 47 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    A pointless article. What does it mean to “overcome air defense in Europe”? 60 - 70 machines that ordered a priori air defense will not be overcome, and 700 - 800 will be overcome with the highest degree of probability. Regarding radio obscurity, it is also written with a pitchfork on the water. Similarly, about the drone. A cruise missile is essentially a drone, so what? Have they replaced manned aircraft? Radio-controlled aircraft appeared at the dawn of jet aircraft, and more ...
    A dead end is a branch, (of course, not without exceptions) for real artificial intelligence in the foreseeable raging is unattainable, and what they call it now is simply more and more complex programs written by a person who is not a priori able to foresee all possible situations. In the limit of idiocy with terminology, both a bullet, and a projectile, and a torpedo and a missile are drones, fired them and wait for what happens as a result - whether they hit the target, or not, and it’s not clear where they will hit.
  18. Zaurbek 8 June 2020 10: 48 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The bottleneck of the whole concept (suppose that the specified characteristics of the Su57 and Hunter are achieved) is their number in service. Air defense systems are now pretty good, and the western one is based more on avax and fighters and is complemented by air defense. And for its breakthrough, a certain amount of equipment will still be spent. How many such equipment can the Russian Federation make and what is our strategy? The West has already announced how it will fight us in the attack: F35 + shock reactive UAVs. After a massive strike of the Kyrgyz Republic.
  19. Dmitry V. 8 June 2020 11: 05 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    As mentioned earlier, the possibility of unmanned control is one of the hallmarks of the sixth generation fighter.


    Why did it happen?

    Similar developments were in the Great Patriotic War - they were tested on the TB-3 unmanned take-off, flight along the route and return to base, control from another plane.
    Ktati Pusep Endel Karlovich took part - this is what he writes:
    - We are preparing one interesting experiment - radio control of the aircraft.
    Curiosity immediately swept over me.
    - One test designer has developed a pilot machine that allows you to control the aircraft on the radio. what do you think about it?
    - On which aircraft is it installed?
    - On TB-3. This type of aircraft you probably still remember? - said Shevelev smiling.


    It was an interesting thing. There was a separate toggle switch for each aircraft control operation. With its help, radio equipment was turned on, which propelled the corresponding mechanisms on the plane. But since the operator had only two hands and could only manipulate two toggle switches, and on the plane it was necessary to set in motion three and even more mechanisms, then, of course, the operator was late and in the air there were situations with the plane that contradicted the pilot's ideas about piloting technique and sometimes created a real danger to the aircraft. The operator and his assistants theoretically did everything right, but alas! - only theoretically. But in practice it turned out as described above. For example, in order to quickly gain the necessary speed during take-off, the pilot, using the elevators, raises the tail of the aircraft and puts its fuselage in a horizontal position. In this position, air resistance is significantly reduced. When the operator of the radio remote control system does the same and the corresponding toggle switch remains on for longer (even for a split second) than it is required, the aircraft will pull its tail too high, and look, screws will break off on concrete.

    U-turns even harder. The operator must simultaneously create an airplane roll and turn, withstand speed and altitude, for which increase the speed of all motors. In those distant times now, the pioneers of automation were far from easy to deal with. Today, all this is no longer a problem. Modern electronics, semiconductor radio engineering and automation make it possible to land (and not only land, but also take off and return to the ground) aircraft even on other planets. But in those distant years, we, figuratively speaking, just learned to read from warehouses.

    Soon a longer flight was coming. This time, along with the old TB-3 (and me, of course, on her board), all the remote control radio equipment, together with the operators, went on a flight with another aircraft, since its radius of operation did not allow the radio-controlled aircraft to go beyond a certain limit.

    My task, as before, was extremely simple: to sit and watch, <without touching anything until it became clear that there was nothing good to promise. Then I should tear off the red pen and start joking with my own hands and feet.
  20. akarfoxhound 8 June 2020 11: 18 New
    • 7
    • 2
    +5
    And if, yes, if only ... Rivet them 500 pieces at least. And then the figure on our open spaces is small. And taking into account the number of adversaries around - here, the Darth Vader fighter will not help with Darth himself - if he is in one, even if in a dupel, heroic instance. And tryndet in articles - do not toss bags!
    1. Zaurbek 8 June 2020 16: 26 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      And the second point - reduce the number of different types of fighters in service. What would the machines perform and shock functions and air defense.
  21. Knell wardenheart 8 June 2020 12: 41 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    I’ll give another seditious thought - why did you decide that the Su-57 is a serial aircraft?
    Stealth is not done from scratch - this is a hefty departure and compromises from the traditional school of aircraft construction, this is a huge mathematical work, experiments with engines, materials - just outside our military-industrial complex to give birth to a decent large-scale machine, taking into account those developments and R&D that arise from the beginning of the process of creating the current sample.
    Before the Su-57 we had serious powerful developments on the stealth theme (in the complex and not in parts) - then yes, we would have already created a certain serial product, and all these beautiful plans would be relevant - for the purpose of breaking through borders, etc.
    In fact, I think that the Su-57 is now considered by our military-industrial complex as a kind of intermediate low-mid-range model for the final formation of the concept of the domestic "stealth", in-depth testing of materials "in the metal", some episodes of a separate combat use.
    Analogue abroad - F-117. If you remember there was such an airplane, it seemed like they were doing something to them, and they built 60 pieces and they used it like a bugbear - say, be afraid! But he fulfilled his task - he showed the boundaries of the concept, where it can be relied on, where not - as a result, the Americans gave birth to the F-22 and they did not have to combine wide-spectrum experimentation with the delay of the series.

    If we talk about the Su-57 itself, then no, this is by no means a machine that breaks through EuroPro to punish someone there. Not nearly invisible for this task. In its current form, I think that it is seen as a kind of "front-line stealth" for the most part for defense tasks. The people involved in our defense industry, I think, understand that the times of wet fantasies about the European blitzkrieg to the English Channel have gone into oblivion, so you should not wait for the terminator to play with impunity across the rear of NATO.
    1. Boa kaa 8 June 2020 21: 14 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      I think that he is seen as a kind of "front-line stealth" for the most part for defense tasks.

      Most likely it will be a counterbalance to the American "stealth" on the CE of the theater of operations. 76 cars is terribly small, but it's better than nothing at all!
      And then, this is the same platform for improvement as the Su-27 at one time. But what the glider starts with is completely dependent on the level of our science, technology, technology, engineering and electronics with materials science.
      AHA.
      1. Knell wardenheart 8 June 2020 21: 32 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        I suspect that we have a bigger problem with modern composite coatings - in particular, this problem sounded in the context of Vanguard, and in the context of Argo, and in general, in principle, where you didn’t plan in our developments in recent years (especially those started before the sanctions) greater use of composites - then, by magic, they returned to titanium-aluminum alloys and other "having no analogues".
        And stealth this is, in general, the apogee of modern composite coating. All these colors and wander-waffle varnishes are a dead poultice - the main thing we do not use. It seems that some kind of progress in domestic composites is planned, but the Su-57 is already “in the metal” and the main news concerns the engine of the 2nd stage. That is - the coating will remain as it was. With bolts, in no way similar to other stealth foreign developments.

        All this in a complex makes me think about how Su-57 as a product meets the “long-term quality” parameter, from the point of view of the need to launch its large batch.
        So far, I come to the conclusion that this is a small series batch car. Perhaps the coating will be experimented after the engine 2 stages. But you understand, time does not play for us, and the pace of construction of 5-generation aircraft by the West and the PRC. If we refuse a full-fledged anti-radar composite coating, we run the risk of launching a car in a series that will be relevant for 10 years, now for us it is an unacceptable luxury ..
        1. Tuzik 9 June 2020 02: 52 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: Knell Wardenheart
          Perhaps with the coating they will experiment after the engine 2 stages

          Here's what a guy named rruvim answered me about coverage:
          “As far as I understand from conversations with“ developers ”, it makes no sense to work on a radio-absorbing coating. Any flying object is already determined not by the Doppler transition, but by the magnetic component, which computers can completely“ construct ”from data from cell towers. Up to a meter. Plus, coils buried in the ground with copper-nickel winding determine the object of movement within a radius of 2-3 km., Providing data to standard radars. However, STELS technologies do not work, because any stealth bomber (for example, SPIRIT) violates the magnetosphere of the earth. Plus, any a stealth or non-stealth object makes non-catheteric turbulences in the atmosphere, which are captured and systematized by passive sensors, even in HYDROMET.
          With the introduction of photonic locators (in metal), Stealth technologies will generally lose their relevance. "
          1. Knell wardenheart 9 June 2020 11: 12 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Well, I had suspicions that all these developments on "quantum radars" and the development of microsensory in general, along with neural networks - could in a not so distant future bury both the secrecy of our underwater component of the strategic nuclear forces and all these "stealth" toys.
            In general, two problems stand in the way of all this (well, I see three offhand) -
            1) This will require completely horse-drawn investments and the hardening of a huge amount of completely new equipment, its integration into the system with existing equipment, the creation of multiple more powerful information centers throughout the country, 24/7 working with a tremendous amount of information.
            Creation of AI algorithms for this system, finally.
            2) Given the volume of sensorics, it would be necessary to organize a completely different level of production (we are talking about very large batches) and solve the problem of energy supply and regular support for all this economy, scattered throughout the country - from marshes and tundra, to taiga and coastal areas .
            3) The information exchange between the array of small sensors and the analytical center will be a problem because it is directly related to the size / autonomy of the sensor.

            Given all this, I would say that in the foreseeable 30 years of StealthTechnology they will still have their own niche, because we are still far from the desired level of information processing and airspace control in certain regions of the country. As far as I understand, the military also argues, making a certain line of rethinking the approach to military technology 2050.

            By the way, to determine that an object exists and to put air defense / missile defense means at it is somewhat different things, for example, Americans are developing means of kinetic interception, for them to miss a meter or two is a file, actually “Stealth” and gives this advantage - it’s not necessary it will not be visible at all, but it will definitely be more difficult to accompany it, and the detection distance will be less, as well as the time to intercept.

            Lastly, I would note that the Americans often develop a certain direction so carefully because they see the potential from these developments in related fields - for example, they are happy to use all these developments on coatings in their design missiles, planning ammunition, missiles of their types and UAVs . So, nevertheless, I would like our developments to be at this level. Just in case :-)
          2. Knell wardenheart 9 June 2020 11: 19 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Zy, by the way, forgot - all these calculations "by indirect factors" require transcendental computing power, and when it comes to the combat situation and many high-speed maneuvering targets - you can put candles and sing prayers))
            If my memory serves me, we don’t have a single supercomputer in the world "Top 100", at the moment this is a problem that we ourselves can not solve ..
            1. Tuzik 9 June 2020 11: 29 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              Quote: Knell Wardenheart
              This will require a completely equine investment.

              It seems that supercoating will also not take small expenses and time, but in their opinion it leads to a dead end. In this case, it is quite logical to send money and time in a different direction.
              1. Knell wardenheart 9 June 2020 11: 47 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                No, well, it’s clear that the development of radar absorbing coatings is a very voracious topic - the Germans in BB2 started these developments and still do not see the end and edge, and there are a lot of sophistication how to approach the coating - the degree of saturation with nanostructures, a compromise in terms of avionics, change parameters under the influence of the environment and time - all this is HEMORROI.
                Maybe it’s not worth it, maybe we don’t have money for this. I do not argue. However, as I have already noticed, this whole topic is, in principle, related to the industrial production of high-quality composites - until recently, we didn’t really scratch it on this topic, preferring to buy it between. market by hook or by crook. That is, to keep this topic "at a certain level" is still beneficial - consumables will partially cover R&D in materials science and the commercial load of capacities, because we have a large demand and cut sanctions ..
                And even if you are right about the foggy future of larger stealth products (and I agree with you in many respects), the appropriateness of using the coating in ammunition is beyond my doubt.
                The main thing is that we do not ignore this theme in the style of "ah this does not work, this does not exist" - we have such a sin, at times ..
                1. Tuzik 9 June 2020 11: 53 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Quote: Knell Wardenheart
                  the appropriateness of using the coating in ammunition is beyond my doubt.

                  Now hypersound began to steer. No coating can stand on it.
  22. iouris 8 June 2020 13: 02 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    And what is the military doctrine lists cases in which Russian aviation will overcome air defense in Europe? There is only one option: launching nuclear missiles at "decision centers." The remaining forces must protect the carriers and the Strategic Missile Forces basing points until a retaliatory strike takes place.
    1. Zaurbek 8 June 2020 16: 28 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      A defense doctrine based only on defense is a failure. At some theaters there will be attacking actions.
  23. opus 8 June 2020 13: 09 New
    • 7
    • 3
    +4
    Quote: Sergey Kuzmitsky
    But fact remains fact: Su-57s are already able to bypass modern NATO air defense systems, including in Europe. This may well manifest itself in the sky over the Baltic.

    belay
    Author... fool please prize facts to the studio. AND?
    1. The Su-57 did not fly in the NATO air defense zone at all (yet)
    2.C-70, the more so according to claim 1. .He didn’t fly yet count

    Quote: Sergey Kuzmitsky
    Around the beginning of May, according to the Vietnamese edition of Soha, these Russian Su-57s flew three times over the US military bases in Iraq to test American air defense.

    Madhouse .... unintelligible


    Quote: Sergey Kuzmitsky
    And this despite the fact that the fifth-generation American fighter F-22 and F-35 freely recognize and accompany Russian air defense systems.

    belay
    prize... pah fact in the studio, well, at least, something like an acre chatter.
    Threat. the author seems to have watched the Nadis movie Brother-1/2, so he poked it
  24. Operator 8 June 2020 17: 44 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    Why would this S-shaped air intakes suddenly become a stealth criterion: radar-blockers - no, not heard.
  25. Uncle Izya 8 June 2020 20: 09 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    This leader of the pack is still not in the troops, and 10 years have passed
  26. nalogoplatelschik 9 June 2020 13: 34 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    You first learn how to make Russian-made files. Files and hammers.
  27. Sancho_SP 9 June 2020 14: 56 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    Any European country in itself does not have a chance against today's army of the Russian Federation.

    The war with NATO as a whole will be waged immediately by tactical nuclear weapons at air defense nodes.
  28. Charik 9 June 2020 20: 59 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    insufficient stealth- laughing -This is like an expert-type cap invisible
  29. Charik 9 June 2020 21: 19 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    It is quite obvious that if the Russian Federation will overcome NATO air defense it will be the Iskanders and all that, so the nozzles are just what you need for greater power, but even if it puts the triangular on its letaki, it’s still visible in ground-based radars