Su-57 at the exhibition in China: the headliner of the "vanity fair"?

155
Su-57 at the exhibition in China: the headliner of the "vanity fair"?


One of the largest military exhibitions on the planet will take place in the Chinese city of Zhuhai from November 12 to 17. In the West, this event is dismissively called a "Third World Vanity Fair," but more than 1000 participants from 47 countries is quite a decent number.



Yes, and it is the largest in the world. weapons a forum that is held outside the influence of NATO countries and their minions, and within the framework of this forum one can sometimes see developments that cannot be seen anywhere else except in Zhuhai.

So it is quite natural for gentlemen from various NATO structures to attend the forum, primarily to be aware of what they are working on in China or in Russia, which is not allowed anywhere due to sanctions.

And to what extent the countries exhibiting in Zhuhai are "third world" is a very difficult question. At least, the representatives of China, as organizers and participants, and Russia can simply look with a grin at all this dog barking, of which, we admit, there is a lot. However, more on that below, and for now we can happily state that the headliner of this forum was the Russian Su-57.


And then this started happening around our plane...

"The Chinese freely filmed the Su-57 at unprecedented close range"


It all started with the first Su-57 flying to Zhuhai under its own power. This immediately hinted that ours would not be limited to statics, but would fly. And when the second plane was brought in by a transport plane, everything became clear: there would be flights.


Well, when the Russian Knights arrived in full force, everything became completely clear.

However, when ours allowed us to approach the aircraft at minimum distances, everyone became worried. How is it that the Chinese military does not allow us to approach the J-20 very close, but the Russians do? What is wrong here?

With a feeling of undisguised pleasure I read the Ukrainian… stream of consciousness published in Defence Express. I recognized it right from the handwriting, mainly the frequently repeated words “Russia” and “humiliation”.

The Russian side, you see, was unable to ensure the access zone was restricted, and therefore everyone, absolutely everyone who wanted to could inspect the plane from all sides! Yes, it was an interesting maneuver! The Ukrainians who started screaming on the air, of course, were not present in Zhuhai, they were content with the videos made by Chinese visitors on their mobile phones.

Let me quote from this now completely unrespected publication:

"The very first participation of the Su-57 at the international air show Airshow China marked the final destruction of the myth that this aircraft is in any way related to the fifth generation. And it also became proof that all Russian aircraft manufacturing technologies remained in the 57th century. The only thing was that the Russians were unable to provide a no-access zone for spectators and the Chinese freely filmed the Su-XNUMX at unprecedentedly close range."

Yeah, so if you have the best plane in the world, you have to hide it very well from everything: prying eyes, prying cameras, prying radars... Well, like what happened with the F-22. The plane is truly invisible, because no one has seen it in action.

So what was it about what they saw that excited the Ukro-Americans or American-Ukrainians so much that they raised such a piercing howl?

His screws are of the wrong system.


First of all, the large number of screws on the body panels attracted attention. This is generally not very useful for aerodynamics, and is also a little at odds with the postulates of stealth. Experienced experts thought about the topic "what kind of heresy is this?", but critics and especially critics simply gushed with emotion, saying that all of Russia's achievements in aviation remained in the 20th century and the Su-57 is not an airplane, but a disgrace, and this whole circus is a huge humiliation for Russia as a whole and for the aircraft manufacturing industry in particular.

Yes, many people still didn't like the cleanliness of the joints of some units. But these are just trifles, compared to the screws. Especially since - oh horror!!! - the Su-57 screws had DIFFERENT types! That is, with a straight slot, with a Phillips slot, and even a hexagonal one!

Many happily rushed to speak out on the topic that here it is, the culture of production in Russia, or rather, its complete lack of culture, based on the clumsiness and feeblemindedness of everyone who crosses the checkpoint of the plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur.

In general, the build quality does not stand up to any criticism.

In general, the storm raged for two days, and some segments of the Russian-language Internet (of those that always promise us the grave) gradually began to join in, in general, it was fun and full of fire.

And the Chinese remained silent.

I specifically monitored Renmin Bao (not to be confused with Renmin Ribao, the mouthpiece of the Communist Party of China) or, as it is also called, PLA Daily, the equivalent of our Red Star. If they had said something, all of China would have repeated it.

Yes, materials started appearing there. But, what is remarkable is that there was no hysteria. The Chinese preferred to first figure out in detail what the joke of such a turn of events was, and then speak out.

Prototype


So, the general tone of the statements is a kind of mild disappointment. The neighbors quickly realized that it was not production aircraft that had come to visit them, but prototypes. Actually, it was not even a Su-57, but a T-50. The one that arrived was a T-50-4, a first-stage prototype that made its first flight back in 2012. The second one that was brought was a T-50-6, also a prototype, but a second-stage one. In flight operations since 2016.


You don’t have to be an expert to understand that the 2012 prototype differs from the 2024 production aircraft as… As the Yellow River differs from the Volga.

In general, our guys cheated a little. They brought planes that they wouldn't mind showing off and flying. Does it look like a Su-57? It does. Does at least one of the two fly? It does. The other one can be touched and photographed without any problem. There's nothing special about these planes.

I repeat: there is nothing in these planes that could excite the interest of Chinese technical intelligence, which no longer needs to shove planes into a Xerox machine, and they already look like prototypes (this is a hint at the J-35, which is also a forum participant, and the F-35), which is frightening.

Observers from the Chinese publication Sohu noted that for Russia, participation in the air show is an excellent opportunity to advertise its technology and, perhaps, even find foreign buyers for it. Incidentally, it was they who dug up that we sent not a combat aircraft, but a prototype that is 12 years old.

According to Chinese journalists, our guys decided to cheat a little.

"The Su-57 participating in the Zhuhai Air Show is unusual. It seems that Russia wants to use it not only to attract buyers, but also to prevent its secrets from leaking to China... The Russians just resorted to a little trick," Sohu analysts believe.

So, in general, it is clear to everyone (except for the crazy people in Ukraine and their "quoters" overseas) that the Russian delegation does not want to put our most modern fighter on public display. Especially considering the fact that there will be so many different experts and just spies from NATO countries there. Well, that would be completely stupid, wouldn't it?

Naturally, the T-50-4 will lack all the solutions that were used in the second-stage aircraft and, even more so, in combat vehicles. But what is in the prototype is more than enough for real experts to draw the appropriate conclusions. And the rest can be explained behind the scenes, in private conversations over a pot of fancy Chinese tea, for example.

In general, it is a surprisingly original move. Russia solves two problems at once: it shows the whole world (or the part of it present at the forum) its best aircraft and keeps its secrets from those who are not supposed to know them. And here we do not mean China, with whom our relations are at the best level in stories, but from those who are from NATO (and they are there in decent quantities) the preservation of advanced technologies is a matter of national importance for both Moscow and Beijing.

India and Su-57


So some disappointment with the propellers is understandable. But I think that the flights of the Su-57, excuse me, T-50-4 will not leave the Chinese indifferent. Yes, by the way, the Americans, who are smarter and calmer, also say that such flights will be more than useful.

American magazine "Air and Space Forces":

"With or without the new Izdeliye 30 engine, the Su-57 can put on a very impressive aerial show, better than any other fighter in the world. The Zhuhai flight demonstrations will have a definite impact on both spectators and potential buyers from Asia, Africa, South America and the Middle East. One of the main destinations for this show could be India, where there has been a renewed need for an affordable fifth-generation aircraft in recent times, while their own HAL AMCA project remains just a concept."

And there is nothing to add here. Indeed, India has once again started looking towards the Su-57, which, unlike the FGFA (a Russian-Indian joint project from which India withdrew back in 2018), flies and fights. Against the backdrop of the complete disgrace with the Rafales and their own parodies of combat aircraft, the Indian military can rectify the situation and purchase the Su-57. They really need it, because China has already begun supplying Pakistan with its aircraft, which is not at all in India’s favor.

Moreover, in India itself, where criminal cases and arrests continue due to the “super-successful” acquisition of Rafales, there are military personnel who continue to say that the future of the Indian Air Force is not with the French, but with Russia.

Armament Acquisition Consultant, Colonel Vijayinder K. Thakur:

"India continues to maintain the option of acquiring the Su-57 after the Izdeliye 30 engine is integrated into the aircraft. Russia's Rostec has announced that serial production of the Su-57 with the "second stage" engine will begin in 2024. The Su-57, no matter what shortcomings its competitors try to attribute to it, is the only stealth fighter that has undergone rigorous testing in particularly harsh combat conditions."

If the problem is only in the engines, it is not a problem. The Indians are generally famous for their excessive capriciousness in matters of purchasing equipment. And for some reason they have one huge problem: the Su-30MKI assembled in India is twice as expensive as the same aircraft assembled in Russia. In dollar equivalent. So perhaps for the Su-57 it is worth giving up "Made in India" and just buying in Russia. But this is a matter for the future, let them think about it.

Su-57 in the movies


And the Chinese are very interested in the plane, and this interest is out of nowhere: cinematography helped!


In the rather decent, in my opinion, blockbuster “The Wandering Earth 2”, which in its scenario is very similar to “Earth Flight” by Francis Carsac (although it was made based on the book “The Wandering Earth” by Liu Cixin), there a Russian Su-57 (very well drawn, by the way) fought together with a Chinese J-20 against a flock of drones, launched by the enemies of humanity.


The film was a hit with the Chinese, grossing over $600 million at the box office.

Well, the second film, which was also shown in China: “Top Gun: Maverick,” where the Su-57 is the main enemy of the brave American aces.


Well, it is clear that if the enemy is an adversary, then almost a friend. In general, in the mass of the Chinese public, the Su-57 is "ours" down to the last Allen screw.

It is clear that there is huge interest in the “almost our” Su-57 in China, but the main decisions will be made not by those who go to the cinemas, but by those who sit in the relevant offices.

Conclusions


So, having analyzed the situation down to the last detail, the Chinese press wrote (with a slight nod to us) that the Russians had specially brought in a machine that, in a number of respects, was worse than those that are currently participating in the SVO.

This is very logical, because world practice is that export aircraft have always been inferior in some way to aircraft produced for their own Air Forces.

So the T-50-4 prototype may correspond to the export versions that were included in the project. Of course, the propellers on the export machines will be the same, and most likely, they will receive some camouflage, but the export aircraft will not be better than those in service with the VKS.

By the way, judging by the publications in the same Chinese newspaper "China-Arms", the main prospective client for the Su-57 is still India. The Chinese have something to work on in the form of the J-20 and J-35, but the Indian Air Force has nothing even close. So, according to Chinese experts, India "is one step away from acquiring Russian fifth-generation fighters."

Well, of course, especially after the pragmatic Chinese supplied Pakistan with their FC-31. Whether you like it or not, you have to respond. The question of whether India and Pakistan will meet again is purely a question of "when."

***


The arms forum in Zhuhai has not yet begun, but passions are already running high. There will certainly be many more interesting moments, especially from those who are sick of the successes of Russian and Chinese aviation. Alas, but we will have to accept it.


The trio of headliners at the forum looks more than respectable: the Su-57, the Chinese naval stealth J-35A, and the Chinese strategic combat drone Wing Loong-X, capable of transoceanic flights.

The company is more than worthy. Will there be such a "vanity fair" in China as the gentlemen who are still tinkering with their new generation fighters want to show?
155 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +23
    7 November 2024 05: 45
    You have to be a clinical idiot to find fault with the screws! They put in whatever the designer thought was necessary. And it would be fine if they could produce something themselves, and not just stick flags on things made in the USSR. Idiots...
    1. +29
      7 November 2024 06: 55
      The psychos from Ukraine will even find fault with the paint. They will say that it was bought in a store)))

      Let me remind all the ill-wishers from Ukraine: the wreckage of Mriya, which was made in the USSR, lies near Kiev, in Gostomel.
      That's all your Bandera achievement is - blood, dirt and debris!
      1. 0
        7 November 2024 18: 13
        As my friend, an eyewitness, told me - together with their sniper good
    2. -4
      7 November 2024 08: 36
      Quote from Voronezh
      You have to be a clinical idiot to get to the bottom of the screws.

      The one they allow access to is actually a model of an airplane, it doesn't fly, there's nothing in it that can be copied or stolen.
    3. -25
      7 November 2024 08: 39
      Hmm, another article designed to present what is happening as another "cunning plan". Well, well. But the truth is that Russia has nothing more to present to China, due to the backwardness of technology and the wretchedness of R&D.
      1. +9
        7 November 2024 15: 14
        Quote: Monster_Fat
        The truth is that Russia has nothing more to offer China due to its backward technologies and poor R&D.

        And we supply equipment to China. Quite high-tech. They buy it, and are not embarrassed. And I see you are an expert in R&D in aviation?
        1. 0
          7 November 2024 18: 18
          And everyone here, except Monster_Fat, is an expert?
          1. 0
            14 November 2024 12: 21
            No, he is the only expert here. A narrow specialist with a broad profile. laughing
      2. +2
        7 November 2024 22: 54
        Monster_Fat, if you listen to such pathetic rams as you, then in your opinion Russia is just some kind of "banana republic", however, this is not surprising, there are still enough brainless jerks in this world.
      3. -2
        8 November 2024 16: 47
        And how did you guess, poor thing?
    4. +2
      7 November 2024 10: 09
      They install whatever the designer deemed necessary.
      It's strange that no one remembered about foolproofing; different screws can be installed so that mechanics don't get confused about which ones to screw in where.
      1. -6
        7 November 2024 10: 43
        It's strange that no one remembered about foolproofing; different screws can be installed so that mechanics don't get confused about which ones to screw in where.

        They'll just get confused about different ones. Yes Most likely, it's a rush, as usual. Run-run to the car show....
        1. +6
          7 November 2024 11: 58
          Quote: Arzt
          It's strange that no one remembered about foolproofing; different screws can be installed so that mechanics don't get confused about which ones to screw in where.

          They'll just get confused about different ones. Yes Most likely, it's a rush, as usual. Run-run to the car show....

          Rather, the discrepancy in the fasteners is due to the fact that the aircraft is experimental - they selected the appropriate ones from serial screws. For individual prototypes, this is not critical.
          For serial aircraft, I am sure that the fasteners have already been standardized according to the type of fastening tool.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. +1
            8 November 2024 15: 38
            It is even more likely that such a diverse and massive use of screws instead of rivets is due to the specifics of the prototype. It is necessary to have access to internal compartments for quick and repeated assembly and disassembly of equipment and control of power elements. This is not necessary on a serial one.
        2. +5
          7 November 2024 13: 02
          Are you completely stupid? How old is this prototype, how many flight hours has it spent in the air? "Autosalon"... there is no word for "aviasalon" in the language?
        3. +22
          7 November 2024 16: 51
          With a "straight slot" - these are not screws. These are locks for quick and easy access to equipment. They are opened/closed with a slotted screwdriver by turning 90 degrees until a characteristic click is heard.
          By "cross" - it is clear that screws are for a regular or mechanical cross-head screwdriver. They are used to attach hatches where you don't have to climb after each flight.
          But I don't know about the "hexagon". We didn't have one. I'll have to look.
          1. +3
            7 November 2024 17: 46
            Quote: kit88
            With "straight slot" - these are not screws. These are locks for quick and easy access to equipment. They are opened/closed with a slotted screwdriver by turning 90 degrees until a characteristic click is heard.
            If you mean screw dzus, then it is unlikely that he will stand on such a fast car...
      2. 0
        14 November 2024 12: 22
        So that those who are not supposed to, do not climb where they have no business.
    5. -4
      7 November 2024 10: 25
      Quote from Voronezh
      You have to be a clinical idiot to find fault with the screws! They put in whatever the designer thought was necessary. And it would be fine if they could produce something themselves, and not just stick flags on things made in the USSR. Idiots...

      I don't agree with you here. The designers these days are so good that it makes your hair stand on end.
    6. +6
      7 November 2024 12: 07
      Moreover, the use of screws with different slots can also have its own meaning. Some may need to be delicately turned by hand, some with electric, pneumatic tools and stronger, some rarely at all, and only by specific specialists, and not ordinary aircraft technicians... But really, why pay attention to the barking of a dog?
      1. +2
        7 November 2024 12: 47
        ...I agree - in a regular car, all sorts of types and sizes of fasteners are used....
        1. 0
          7 November 2024 23: 05
          What is this whole conversation about, for some reason many here forget the main thing, this is an experimental (one of the very first) aircraft, on it they were only practicing the technologies of assembling units and assemblies, serial machines differ from it like heaven and earth, it is clear that the differences are huge and comparing them makes no sense.
    7. +1
      7 November 2024 12: 07
      Quote from Voronezh
      You have to be a clinical idiot to find fault with the screws! They put in whatever the designer thought was necessary.

      It's not about the constructor. I also had to install screws with different heads due to the lack of the necessary ones. The thing is that there are places where you can do this without damaging the equipment, and there are places where you can't do this under any circumstances.
      Probably this discrepancy was considered acceptable for a test aircraft. I don't see anything wrong with it.
    8. +7
      7 November 2024 13: 30
      Quote from Voronezh
      You have to be a clinical idiot to get to the bottom of the screws!...
      You know, pure déjà vu: at the end of the 90s, when the bourgeoisie was able to take a close look at the MiG-29 for the first time, articles appeared, I read it in Flight International, and you won’t believe it: the seams are uneven, every 8th bolt is poorly processed
      - the build quality does not stand up to any criticism
      . Conclusion: priority elements at the highest level of standards; and for the sake of secondary ones there is no point in resisting - this is financial efficiency: there is no point in resisting - a fighter is for combat, not beauty.
      P.S. Simonov considered the F-16 the most culturally produced aircraft in the world, said that the 16th is like a doll. I read the article and thought - you bourgeois haven't seen the Su-25 yet...
    9. +4
      7 November 2024 17: 31
      oh horror!!! – the Su-57 had DIFFERENT types of propellers! That is, with a straight slot, with a Phillips slot, and even a hexagonal one!

      Quote: voronezh
      They install whatever the designer deemed necessary.

      Firstly, most of the "cross-head screws" there are not screws at all, but screw rivets. A super thing! Any DIYer who has tried it will hardly return to "pull-out" rivets, and especially to a regular rivet, unless some exotic thing forces them to.
      Secondly, for different loads and tasks, one “screw” is not enough.
      Thirdly, fastening and adjustment elements are deliberately made for different tools, when “nuts and bolts” for different groups of technological operations are found nearby - well, like, so that an electrician does not unscrew something plumbing and vice versa.

      hi
  2. -23
    7 November 2024 05: 51
    What prevented them from bringing to China an already “polished” and mass-produced fighter, but not letting anyone near it?
    1. +8
      7 November 2024 06: 31
      Quote: Dutchman Michel
      just don't let anyone close to him?

      Should we "keep people with 50 years of copying experience" out? laughing laughing laughing
      It seems that we can soon expect another contract for the delivery of a batch of 2 to 24 vehicles to China. They need to move forward somehow...
      1. -20
        7 November 2024 09: 06
        And so that they copy the appearance, the electronics, in which they are ahead of us?
        1. +12
          7 November 2024 09: 56
          Quote from AdAstra
          in which they are ahead of us?

          They would have been ahead, they wouldn't have tried to buy a couple of Su-35s, and after the refusal, with a heavy heart, they still bought 24 aircraft. But why, if they are "ahead in everything"?
          1. -7
            7 November 2024 11: 27
            What is a creaking heart? Valve noises? Like a fox violin?)
            1. +3
              7 November 2024 15: 55
              Quote from Sumotori_380
              What does it mean when your heart creaks?

              It's expensive and I don't want to, but I have to.
              1. +2
                7 November 2024 15: 59
                This is skrepya. From the word "to fasten". When the heart is torn to pieces, but you hold it together with an effort of will)
                1. +5
                  7 November 2024 16: 00
                  The great and mighty Russian language!
                  hi
          2. +1
            8 November 2024 03: 04
            Quote: Doccor18
            They would have been ahead, they wouldn't have tried to buy a couple of Su-35s, and after the refusal, with a heavy heart, they still bought 24 aircraft. But why, if they are "ahead in everything"?

            They need the Su-35 solely because of the engines. That's the only problem for the Chinese. Forget about the superiority of Russian electronics, it's been gone for a long time.
            1. -1
              8 November 2024 17: 31
              If you don't know anything, there's no point in showing off your...well, you get the idea. Sometimes it's better to chew than to write.
              1. -1
                8 November 2024 19: 09
                I agree, you really should chew better.
                1. 0
                  11 November 2024 23: 00
                  Yes, you are a hysterical mother) everything is bad in your parallel class)
                  1. 0
                    12 November 2024 01: 50
                    Quote: Dart
                    in parallel it's bad)
                    You have no logic and basic knowledge of the subject of discussion, and you are still hysterical for no reason. Chew, don't interrupt the process of silence.
        2. +1
          7 November 2024 23: 13
          AdAstra, it is only in words that they are ahead of us in some types of weapons, in quantitative terms - yes, but in terms of quality, reliability and combat effectiveness of weapons - that is a big question.
      2. -3
        7 November 2024 12: 58
        Should we "keep people with 50 years of copying experience" out?
        so the plane was brought in to sell. It's like bringing a new car to an exhibition and not letting anyone near it. So how should the buyer understand that he needs it?
        1. 0
          7 November 2024 15: 49
          This also happens. Like, here's a car - look, read the specs on the stand. Sit in it, drive it - go to the showroom when it goes on sale. P.S. Do you really think that the buyer makes a decision by just sitting in the cockpit of the car?
          1. -3
            7 November 2024 16: 06
            Do you think that the buyer is satisfied with a booklet and looking from afar? And no showrooms, because here are the masters of copying! Why then do you think they even bring to China?
            1. -1
              7 November 2024 18: 15
              Excuse me, but what should the buyer see in your case? If this is not there, and this too, and you forgot to put this?
    2. +7
      7 November 2024 07: 14
      Why? Serial models are most likely all at the front. Experimental models won't be sent into battle anyway, but they can demonstrate the capabilities of the machine at an international exhibition. So here our guys applied the principle of reasonable sufficiency in their actions.
      1. +12
        7 November 2024 07: 51
        Well, experienced board No. 5 is fighting in full force.
        1. +2
          7 November 2024 19: 08
          It is possible that various experimental configuration options are being tested on it. A sort of laboratory machine in combat conditions.
        2. 0
          9 November 2024 19: 45
          Quote: Setavr
          Well, experienced board No. 5 is fighting in full force.

          Stop spreading fake news here...
          And the people who gave you pluses are not the smartest either.
          This photo was taken back in 2018.
          The FighterBamber channel then trashed this photo, very badly.
          And on this resource, in the fall of 2018, a note was published about lying stars....
      2. +4
        7 November 2024 11: 39
        Quote: Victor Masyuk
        You can't send experimental models into battle anyway

        In 1941, they wanted to write off the experimental TB-7 (Pe-8) model, but since there was a shortage of serial models, they decided to leave it in service. During the war, this model made 125 combat sorties, more than any other Pe-8.
        1. -1
          7 November 2024 14: 13
          The Pe-8 is a "swan" song of stupidity and narrow-mindedness. A unique aircraft with a fifth engine in the fuselage, which was used as a compressor for others, could climb to a safe altitude where no one could get it, was turned into an ordinary run-of-the-mill bomber. The fifth engine was removed, and they tried to simplify the main engines and even replace them with diesel ones...
          1. +3
            8 November 2024 07: 14
            The Americans somehow got by without an extra engine when creating the B-17. And they built over 5000. And here you call an unsuccessful and forced technical solution "unique". For an airplane that was built in less than 100 copies. The fifth engine consumed fuel and reduced the weight of the combat load. "A unique airplane", damn it...
            1. -3
              8 November 2024 11: 51
              What a deep analysis of the "boot". Doesn't know history, has no idea about aviation and... such deep conclusions about an airplane that he doesn't even have an idea about!
              1. +2
                8 November 2024 11: 52
                You don't know history. And what you do know, you get from fiction. Even without analyzing it.
                1. -1
                  8 November 2024 11: 57
                  In what year was the Pe-8 created? When did it arrive in the US, where was the B-17? Why didn't they make the Pe-8 and who determined the government's policy then? Change your handkerchiefs...
        2. +3
          7 November 2024 19: 05
          This example does not refute common sense, when experimental models are sent to exhibitions instead of serial ones, and serial ones to the front. The situation of 1941, I hope, will never be repeated in Russian history.
    3. +6
      7 November 2024 07: 31
      Quote: Dutchman Michel
      What prevented them from bringing to China an already “polished” and mass-produced fighter?

      What for?
      Quote: Dutchman Michel
      just don't let anyone close to him?

      And what's the point of bringing it? You can just show it in a picture. But here, with a prototype, you can do a lot, come up to it, touch it, maybe even sit in the cabin and everything.
      1. 0
        7 November 2024 10: 37
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        What for?
        And then, to demonstrate the new fighter and the technological capabilities of the Russian aviation industry without any screws or mismatches of units (by the way, I very much doubt this). And to attract potential buyers too
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        You can just show it in the picture
        For you, what would be better, to touch a real woman or to admire her picture? It's the same with technology wink
        1. +3
          7 November 2024 13: 36
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          And then, to demonstrate the new fighter and technological the capabilities of the Russian aviation industry without any screws or mismatches of units (by the way, I very much doubt this).
          As an example of high technology, the American F-35. Almost without screws. In the second photo, the F-35 with its stealth coating on the nose and again, almost without screws
          1. 0
            9 November 2024 08: 21
            Quote: Bad_gr
            The second photo shows the F-35 with its stealth coating on the nose and again, almost no screws.

            On the second one is an F-22 on which a tree fell... a long time ago.
            Well, and the propellers... well, they are "high-tech propellers", while the Su-57 has those bought at the market. For a Sumerian, everything that is the master's is great.
            1. +1
              9 November 2024 12: 02
              Quote: bayard
              On the second one is an F-22 on which a tree fell... a long time ago
              Yes, I was wrong, it's an F-22. Photo from here https://www.twz.com/29218/these-images-of-an-f-22-raptors-crumbling-radar-absorbent-skin-are-fascinating, but the article doesn't say a word about trees falling on the plane.
              The F-35 had a different coating problem.
              1. 0
                9 November 2024 12: 28
                Quote: Bad_gr
                but the article doesn't say a word about trees falling on the plane.

                A tree actually fell on that F-22, maybe during a storm/hurricane, I don't remember. And it damaged not only the coating, but also left a dent, and since they couldn't fix the dent for a long time, the plane continued to fly with a dent and limitations. Over time, the ferrite content of the coating caused rust in the cracks. There was even an article about this on VO.
        2. +4
          7 November 2024 18: 28
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          And then, to demonstrate the new fighter and the technological capabilities of the Russian aviation industry without any screws or misalignments of components

          So no one will show it:)))))) They will keep everyone at a distance, where it can't be seen. And what's the point?
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          For you, what would be better, to touch a real woman or to admire her picture? It's the same with technology

          This is why sending a prototype is the right decision.
      2. -3
        7 November 2024 15: 51
        And what difference will sitting in the cockpit make? The purchasing decisions are not made by those sitting in the cockpits. And even the characteristics of the weapons are not the main selection criterion
        1. 0
          9 November 2024 19: 49
          Quote from Sumotori_380
          And what difference will sitting in the cockpit make? The purchasing decisions are not made by those sitting in the cockpits. And even the characteristics of the weapons are not the main selection criterion

          It is those who are in the offices and make decisions about purchases.
          And in most of these decisions, it is economics and finances, and not the opinion of the pilots.
    4. +2
      7 November 2024 12: 46
      Quote: Dutchman Michel
      What prevented them from bringing to China an already "polished" and mass-produced fighter, but not letting anyone near it?

      The best way to trust is to have nothing to trust. China is not our ally.
    5. +3
      7 November 2024 13: 57
      The Chinese will crawl through the sewer at night to bite off, gnaw off, disassemble, see how it works. They have been doing this at exhibitions for over 20 years. And ours know that a pre-production model is better than a company of special forces guards without weapons...
    6. +2
      7 November 2024 15: 21
      All serial ones are already in the troops and are used for their intended purpose. Read "Red Star".
    7. The comment was deleted.
  3. +5
    7 November 2024 05: 51
    In general, "their screws are not of the right system" laughing
    1. +5
      7 November 2024 06: 33
      In the minds of the Ukrainians...
      there are not enough videos....
      1. +7
        7 November 2024 07: 29
        And screws, under the Allen key
        Vasya hi
        1. +6
          7 November 2024 07: 32
          Just hammer in the nail already! Yes
          Novel, hi
  4. 0
    7 November 2024 06: 28
    I would suggest that the screws are installed to cover the holes for various radar radiation detection sensors. bully
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. -1
    7 November 2024 06: 41
    Well, that's not bad, we brought the planes, we'll fly them, and we don't seem to be revealing any secrets. We seem to be advertising the exhibition to China, but they could have just brought a wooden model of the Su-75 and talked about how good it is.
    1. -1
      9 November 2024 08: 27
      Quote from turembo
      but they could have just brought a wooden model of the Su-75 and talked about how good it was.

      The Su-75 is already flying - it has begun flight tests. Almost a year earlier than planned. And even earlier than they promised this year - they promised to lift it off in December, but it took off in early November.
      The AL-51F-1 has also entered production and is already being installed on serial Su-57s. According to previous plans, deliveries of the second stage of Su-57s were to begin in 2027.
      The Su-75 is no longer made of wood.
      There are still some interesting things in the works, but I think they will mature towards the end of the decade.
      1. 0
        9 November 2024 19: 54
        Quote: bayard
        Quote from turembo
        but they could have just brought a wooden model of the Su-75 and talked about how good it was.

        The Su-75 is already flying - it has begun flight tests. Almost a year earlier than planned. And even earlier than they promised this year - they promised to lift it off in December, but it took off in early November.
        The AL-51F-1 has also entered production and is already being installed on serial Su-57s. According to previous plans, deliveries of the second stage of Su-57s were to begin in 2027.
        The Su-75 is no longer made of wood.
        There are still some interesting things in the works, but I think they will mature towards the end of the decade.

        Stop fantasizing.
        If even one prototype had been rolled out onto the runway, there would have been satellite photos of it by now.
        As they say about every Chinese prototype that came out of the hangar.
        There is no secrecy at airfields now.
        Reconnaissance satellites monitor us totally and around the clock.
        1. 0
          9 November 2024 21: 45
          Quote: SovAr238A
          If even one prototype had been rolled out onto the runway, there would have been photographs of it by now.

          Already. There is a photo of the Su-75 in the air. According to plans and the announcement, it was supposed to take off in December. Before that - "in 2025".
          Quote: SovAr238A
          Stop fantasizing.

          Stop being hysterical.
          For its production, workshops have already been built and are being equipped with everything necessary.
          And the AL-51F-1 engine is already in serial production and is being installed on serial Su-57s, although this was expected to happen in 2027.
          The R-579V-300 engine is successfully undergoing tests and will have several modifications.
          PD-35 - the first one is assembled and begins testing.
          Why didn't the press blow this out of proportion?
          Who knows, maybe it's the fog of war, maybe they decided to time it to coincide with some upcoming event, maybe so as not to interrupt the news agenda because events are already dense. In the end, it seems like we're returning to the Soviet rule - first make it, make sure it works and that it works, and only then put it on display. There were already too many antics about this plane, as well as too much pomp during the presentation. And they came up with a stupid name for it. Now the Ministry of Industry and Trade has a different leader. As does the Ministry of Defense. There is much less empty PR with empty promises.
          By the way, the afterburning thrust of the AL-51F-1 turned out to be slightly higher than the leaks were a little earlier - 17 kgf. (according to the leaks, the thrust was called 500 - 16 kgf.) And it is this engine that will be installed on the Su-500, or has already been installed. Not only on the Su-17.
          Quote: SovAr238A
          There is no secrecy at airfields now.
          Reconnaissance satellites monitor us totally and around the clock.

          Now imagine how this news would have sounded against the backdrop of Trump's victory and the universal turmoil in the Western elites? Maybe ours didn't consciously throw them any pepper.
          Did you know that Modi talked to Putin about wanting to order a large batch of Su-75s? And apparently even with a license for assembly. If the deal goes through, it will be a large batch. I think 200-300 units. If they agree on a license for assembly, it will replace the MiG-21, MiG-29 and Mirages. At the same time, they will come to a more homogeneous fleet.
  7. -5
    7 November 2024 07: 11
    The prospects for the Su-57M are very high, perhaps they will replace the MiG-31BM...
    1. +5
      7 November 2024 07: 33
      How come? Fundamentally different planes
      1. +1
        7 November 2024 12: 20
        The Su-57 has potential for modernization, perhaps the engines are different and the coating and canopy can be heat-resistant, but a stealth aircraft is really needed for air defense hi
        1. +2
          9 November 2024 08: 40
          Quote: air wolf
          maybe the engines are different and the coating and canopy are heat-resistant, but a stealth plane is really needed for air defense

          The engine thrust is just enough for it - the AL-51F-1 has a thrust of 17 kgf in afterburner (the MiG-500, which is heavier, has an engine thrust of 31 kgf). The tasks are different. An interceptor does not necessarily need to be stealthy, but speed, acceleration characteristics, altitude, ammunition (the number of air defense missiles in the BC) and the presence of air defense missiles in the BD are mandatory. As an interceptor, the MiG-15 and Su-500S\SM are quite good, and if they are going to replace the MiG-31 (high-altitude, super-fast), then they should make a specialized interceptor, not a universal one - it will be faster, cheaper and without compromises due to its multifunctionality.
          The Su-57 is a MFI, which is good both as a strike aircraft and as a fighter for combat from a distance of its own invisibility. They are now excellent at taking out air defense systems. Moreover, the most modern air defense systems.
  8. +6
    7 November 2024 07: 22
    The Chinese show is a vanity show, and the Western shows are, therefore, exhibitions of advanced technology!
  9. -16
    7 November 2024 07: 27
    At these exhibitions they look for potential buyers, and don't measure their swagger. Such exhibitions are not a foreign VDNKh - they are exhibitions of the achievements of our party and government.

    Bringing experimental, old samples, especially 12 years old ones, is disrespectful to the exhibition organizers.
    Moreover, bringing an old model in disassembled form.
    It's like bringing a VAZ 2110 to a car show and promising all the buyers, but we have something even better!

    The reality is that any country that buys our equipment will also receive a package of sanctions from the US. Who would dare to do that?
    1. +16
      7 November 2024 07: 35
      Quote: Stardock
      Bringing experimental, old samples, especially 12 years old ones, is disrespectful to the exhibition organizers.

      A strange statement. So, bringing the newest aircraft but not letting anyone near it is cool, but bringing a prototype in which you can at least sit in the cockpit, at least look at the main solutions/units up close is disrespectful?
      1. -5
        7 November 2024 10: 00
        Sorry, but to present an airplane that is positioned as one of the most high-tech products in the world as a cheap, crookedly rolled Chinese consumer product of their local semi-basement production is to fundamentally undermine the whole point of showing it at the exhibition. Any Chinese person would have a question - if they brought something like this for the exhibition, then what will happen during mass production? And Roman, instead of raising the question of who allowed such an "exhibit" to be shown at the exhibition, simply puts on a good face when things are going badly :(( Not to mention that the Chinese have paid great attention to this, and Roman is trying to dissuade them from doing the opposite.
        1. +6
          7 November 2024 11: 57
          Quote from solar
          Any Chinese person will have a question

          You see, the exhibition is not for all Chinese, but for aviation experts who actually make decisions. Believe me, they understand the difference between a prototype and a series.
          1. +1
            7 November 2024 13: 34
            And they clearly see the technological level of production :((
            1. +3
              7 November 2024 18: 25
              Quote from solar
              And they clearly see the technological level of production :((

              They are not girls who came to choose cosmetics, and they understand perfectly well what they see. There are professionals there after all.
              1. 0
                10 November 2024 11: 32
                And what do they see? Low technological level of production?
          2. -2
            7 November 2024 18: 39
            That is, the photo was taken
            and the notes on social networks were left by aviation experts?
            1. +4
              7 November 2024 18: 41
              Quote from Sumotori_380
              That is, the photo was taken
              and the notes on social networks were left by aviation experts?

              The photos and notes were taken by people who were in no way connected with the acquisition of these aircraft.
      2. -7
        7 November 2024 10: 50
        An exhibition is not a museum.
        This is the counter where they choose the goods - military equipment.
        1. +3
          7 November 2024 11: 59
          That's exactly it. And before selling, it's worth trying the product on the tooth, which can be done on a prototype. Selling an airplane by showing it from afar and not letting you get closer is a pretty bad job
          1. +6
            7 November 2024 14: 06
            Those who really want to figure out whether it is necessary or not, and will have the opportunity to buy, will fly to Russia, to the factory or the testing ground. And already at the factory/test ground they will feel the seats, try on the helmets, kick the wheels, click the switches. And even fly on a training one.
            1. +3
              7 November 2024 18: 26
              Quote: Carib
              Those who really want to figure out whether it is necessary or not, and will have the opportunity to buy, will fly to Russia, to the factory or testing ground.

              And they will see serial cars there, which do not have all this multi-colored propellers.
          2. -3
            7 November 2024 18: 25
            What can you try on a prototype with missing main systems? Sit in the cockpit, imitating the sound of the engine with your lips?)
            1. +4
              7 November 2024 18: 36
              Quote from Sumotori_380
              What can be tried on a prototype with missing main systems?

              The plane flew to China a little bit by itself, apparently imitating an engine with its lips...
              1. -1
                7 November 2024 18: 45
                So far, the author of the article and a number of commentators are portraying a split personality. Because it was impossible to send a serial sample, because greedy and cunning Chinese partners would copy the main technological solutions in a flash. But a prototype without secret systems must be sent, because otherwise how will potential buyers get acquainted with the main technological solutions. Which are not presented, because they are secret. Am I the only one, apparently, who has a state of cognitive dissonance on the threshold?
                1. +2
                  7 November 2024 19: 57
                  Quote from Sumotori_380
                  Am I the only one who seems to have a state of cognitive dissonance on the threshold?

                  I think so. After all, if a person wants to be screwed by cognitive dissonance, he will achieve it.
                  For the rest, it is obvious that, according to the article, “military secrets” in this case will only be measures that ensure low visibility.
                  1. +2
                    8 November 2024 01: 14
                    For the rest (okay, most of the commentators) one thing is obvious: the article says that they sent a prototype and that's right - so that's right. If it had said that they sent a production model with all the trimmings and let the Chinese pick it all over and that's right - then the commentators would have been shaking their manes too, saying that's the only way it should be. K - conformism. Grandfathers are used to believing the printed word.
                    1. +1
                      8 November 2024 07: 31
                      Quote from Sumotori_380
                      For the rest (okay, most of the commentators) one thing is obvious: the article says that they sent a prototype and that is correct - that means it is correct.

                      Whether this is right or not - I personally do not know, but the author has substantiated his position quite logically. You have no position on the issue under discussion and only diligently transfer the conversation from the topic under discussion to the personalities of the commentators...
                    2. 0
                      8 November 2024 12: 36
                      Grandfathers were used to believing the printed word
                      So it turns out that grandfathers at least read, and all sorts of boys can't even do that, but they write. For example, I immediately came across a source that claims that the T-50-4 was used to test the weapons control system, and if it still flies under this program, then it is not just an ancient prototype, but may also be the most advanced in terms of combat due to the latest changes in the control system, which will only appear on serial aircraft in the future. But they will definitely not say this in the public domain, and that is correct.
      3. -4
        7 November 2024 15: 54
        For the 117th and B-2 it was cool at the time. Because there were only rumors about them and now they are alive, albeit under guard! And for the 27th and 29th by the way too
    2. +1
      7 November 2024 10: 29
      Quote: Stardock
      At these exhibitions they look for potential buyers, and don't measure their swagger. Such exhibitions are not a foreign VDNKh - they are exhibitions of the achievements of our party and government.

      Bringing experimental, old samples, especially 12 years old ones, is disrespectful to the exhibition organizers.
      Moreover, bringing an old model in disassembled form.
      It's like bringing a VAZ 2110 to a car show and promising all the buyers, but we have something even better!

      The reality is that any country that buys our equipment will also receive a package of sanctions from the US. Who would dare to do that?

      India and China for example.
      1. -2
        7 November 2024 10: 57
        I don’t believe that these countries will want to spoil relations with the USA, the EU and NATO.
        1. 0
          9 November 2024 09: 17
          Quote: Stardock
          I don’t believe that these countries will want to spoil relations with the USA, the EU and NATO.

          1) The US itself is arguing with them.
          2) The US will never sell them anything like that.
          3) In order to protect themselves from the troubles of the new era, including damage from the USA, many of those with such financial means would benefit from purchasing the Su-57 and Su-75, which have already taken off and are beginning flight tests.
          5) No other fighter in the world has anything like the AL-51F-1 engine in terms of specific thrust and efficiency. This is essentially a 6th generation engine or at least 5++. And this engine is already being installed on serial Su-57s.

          Fear is overcome by practice.
          1. +1
            9 November 2024 09: 38
            The Chinese already have their own 5th generation fighter, of which more than a hundred have already been produced.
            Why does he need 2 similar, identical planes?
            India had previously abandoned the joint development of the Su 57.
            Although, we had high hopes for Indian investments.
            The US stopped the flow of payments from India to us for the oil we supplied with one move. Tankers with our oil are standing at the Indian roadstead. They are waiting for the banks' decision.
            US sanctions against any bank means a ban on working on the world market. And that is death for any bank.
            1. 0
              9 November 2024 14: 12
              Quote: Stardock
              The Chinese already have their own 5th generation fighter, of which more than a hundred have already been produced.

              It is seriously inferior to the Su-57 in many ways, but that is not the point.
              Quote: Stardock
              Why does he need 2 similar, identical planes?

              In this case, they are interested and will be interested in its engine. Although many other technical solutions are too. AL-51F-1 is the best engine that exists in the world today. Rolls-Royce is sculpting something for its prospective/collective, but we will be able to compare when it appears. Enormous specific thrust, efficiency, supersonic speed without afterburners, a significant increase in range compared to the already very considerable AL-41F-1S. China will definitely be interested and they will try to buy this engine at any price. And we will not sell less than two squadrons. It was the same with the Su-35S - they wanted to buy 2 units, were refused and bought two squadrons ... and with each aircraft two sets (4 units) of spare engines.
              Quote: Stardock
              India had previously abandoned the joint development of the Su 57.

              Under pressure and temptation from the USA. They convinced her that Russia is a dying breed, a "dying state" and will not survive long. The Indians believed them. In addition, they invested almost nothing in the project, only the first payment. In addition, they constantly demanded that they make an aircraft according to their technical specifications (two-seater). In short - the woman off the cart, the mare is happier. Now India wants to buy not only the Su-57, but also the Su-75. And by the way, they arrested and are putting in prison everyone involved in the adventure with the "Rafale". India really needs to urgently respond to the appearance of the J-35 in Pakistan. And they have no alternative. The US will not sell them the F-35, China even less, South Korea ... not quite the same. They themselves are not doing anything worthwhile, which is not surprising. So I am sure there will be orders.

              Quote: Stardock
              We had high hopes for Indian investment.

              They did not justify themselves even before the breakup - India was simply cheating and wanted to get the aircraft with practically no investment. But due to the reduction of the prospective order, the deadlines were really delayed. It is one thing to build only for yourself, another - having a prospective order for at least 200 units. That is why the workshop for the production of the Su-57 was not built at all, they were counting on building it together with the Su-35S. But three new workshops had to be built - many more aircraft were needed, because the idea of ​​the Little Army sank into oblivion.
              Quote: Stardock
              The US stopped the flow of payments from India to us for the oil we supplied with one move. Tankers with our oil are standing at the Indian roadstead. They are waiting for the banks' decision.

              Right now? Or is this a story from more than a year ago? We are not trading in dollars now, but in national currencies, outside the US settlement system. And in future settlements for what they so desire, it will be the Indian side's concern to find such forms of settlement so that payments reach them. But today India really has little to offer us in the form of counter deliveries.
              Quote: Stardock
              US sanctions against any bank means a ban on working on the world market. And that is death for any bank.

              This is what is killing the reputation of the US as a hegemon and a reliable business partner. The US has turned its financial system into a punitive organ... for everyone. Having no more carrots, they have begun to use the stick and this... is sobering up the previously fooled clients of their dollar system. And many countries are already looking for and finding an alternative. So, Russia now has 90% of all external settlements outside the dollar system. And we are not alone. Saudi Arabia now sells its oil for yuan, Venezuela generally conducts settlements through our banking system. And India, no matter how much it resists, is forced to look for alternative systems for settlements with us.
              The hegemon is no longer a cake and is increasingly losing out in global competition. And what the retinue of the insane Biden has done in 4 years... it's simply incomprehensible. They simply ruined everything and almost unleashed a global war. For this, their masters of money and the masters of the USA did not allow them to come to power \\ were removed from power. They did not allow them to cheat in the elections again and unleash a Civil War in the USA. Now Trump has to fix everything and he will have to negotiate a lot.
      2. 0
        7 November 2024 11: 32
        Is this the first time you've heard about China joining the sanctions? And India, which is gradually taking China's place in the world, has no business quarreling with the West
    3. +3
      7 November 2024 11: 48
      Quote: Stardock
      Bringing experimental, old samples, especially 12 years old ones, is disrespectful to the exhibition organizers.

      Is it okay that American B-52s flew into similar exhibitions until recently?
      Participating in exhibitions of prototypes or concepts is common practice.
      1. -2
        7 November 2024 15: 55
        But the 57th is neither one nor the other. P.S. Did you fly a B-52 as a mock-up? To avoid declassification?)))
        1. 0
          8 November 2024 03: 20
          I don't remember what year the B-52 flew to Max. I saw it personally.
      2. -1
        7 November 2024 17: 36
        The B52 has undergone countless upgrades. They may feature individual new weapon elements or aircraft designs.
        You can show prototypes of successfully mastered aircraft models, but what can't be said about 57. The number of aircraft produced is calculated by several squadrons. And this is for more than 20 years of development, mastering this aircraft. Whether a new engine has been built for it or not is still unclear. In 20 years, a generation of technology has changed.
        1. +1
          7 November 2024 20: 01
          Quote: Stardock
          You can show prototypes of successfully mastered aircraft models, but what can't be said about 57. The number of aircraft produced is calculated by several squadrons. And this is for more than 20 years of development, mastering this aircraft

          That is, we have it "bad". And how are "they"?
          Development of the F-35 (X-35) began in 1994.
          Tests in 2001.
          Serial production in 2011.
          As of mid-2016, 194 aircraft had been produced.
          This is 22 years after the start of development...
          But this is, of course, different...
  10. +8
    7 November 2024 07: 31
    The article contains many photos, but there are no photos of screws, joints or other problems. So that readers can see that they are insignificant. wassat
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. +4
    7 November 2024 08: 24
    Don't read the Ukrainian press and the Internet, it's harmful to your mental health!!
  13. +1
    7 November 2024 08: 32
    The article is interesting - the author has put together an intrigue, we will wait for our SU to fly solo in the sky - very interesting.
  14. -7
    7 November 2024 09: 05
    I wonder, why was it necessary to drag a prototype to China if serial production aircraft are already flying, so that they would once again throw mud at us or something? request
    1. +4
      7 November 2024 09: 19
      Why was it necessary to drag a prototype to China if serial production aircraft are already flying
      Do you think that earlier, when the Su-27 or MiG-29 were shown at air shows in Europe, the planes were pulled out of combat units? wink
      1. -2
        7 November 2024 09: 33
        Well, they certainly aren’t prototypes from some summer ago, I’ve read about that.
        1. +3
          7 November 2024 09: 45
          And how does the T-50-4 prototype differ from the production aircraft? First of all, purely externally? The combat characteristics that they deem necessary to announce will be written on a piece of paper and placed next to the aircraft, all the same, you will not be able to refute or confirm them by its appearance! Well, since it was this one that was sent, it means that it will be able to participate in demonstration flights no worse than a formation one, and maybe even better, but this is already part of the show that is present at any air show.
          1. -7
            7 November 2024 09: 48
            Well, well.""""""""
          2. 0
            7 November 2024 11: 35
            Then, excuse me, what's the point if there are no differences? Roman spends half the article describing what a clever trick this is.
            1. 0
              7 November 2024 11: 50
              To the point of the article, this is not for me. A combat aircraft is not sent to an exhibition to "drain" all its combat characteristics, so almost complete external similarity will be enough for it, and if this object also flies like a real one, then even better.
              1. -2
                7 November 2024 13: 55
                1) How can you leak specifications if the systems are not involved? 2) This is something new. As far as I can remember, we have always been proud of exhibiting finished products. Sometimes they exhibit mock-ups, but they clearly and unambiguously state that they are mock-ups. As a rule, mock-ups of future products that have not yet entered production. Exhibiting a mock-up in the presence of serial production and declaring this as an established practice is something new.
                1. +1
                  7 November 2024 14: 17
                  How to leak? It's very simple, by advertising a description of something that the enemy doesn't need to know, or by showing something that can't be shown. For example, why is the nose section covered with a transparent film in the photo where the second plane is being unloaded, through which the antenna can be seen? Was there no black opaque film? Even if there's nothing special there, why should everyone know about it? And with mock-ups, it's not that simple, because an airplane has arrived at an exhibition, it doesn't mean that it's a "full-fledged" fighter, it may only have a "navigation" part to ensure flight, and it doesn't have a radar, or electronic warfare, or much else. As an airplane, it's full-fledged, but as a fighter, it's essentially a mock-up! But at an exhibition, this missing equipment is essentially not needed, because there will be demonstration flights, and not flights to detect radars and launch missiles.
                  1. +1
                    7 November 2024 15: 42
                    1) I am a complete layman. But in my opinion, it is not so easy to painlessly remove a system from an airplane. 2) The States once exhibited both the 117th and the 2nd. Yes, with security and access restrictions.
      2. +2
        7 November 2024 11: 34
        Like, did you race the T-10?) The very first one?
        1. +1
          7 November 2024 11: 44
          The very first one?
          The very first ones had not flown for a long time by that time. You just need to understand that from a certain time onwards, experimental aircraft were manufactured by the serial plant, and then they were sent to the design bureau for testing. And changes were made to the documentation for the next batch of aircraft, and the size of this batch depended on the further purpose of the aircraft (serial for the unit, or experimental for the design bureau).
    2. +1
      7 November 2024 11: 05
      Only the Bandar-Lozhki are doused with slop, but it is stupid to pay attention to their slop, only to laugh at their wretchedness.
  15. -3
    7 November 2024 09: 33
    What is the difference between Huane and Volga? H2O is H2O even in Africa.
    Inspection of new avionics is important for new orders.
    BUT we need to go further and create a 6th generation fighter.
    1. +1
      7 November 2024 18: 02
      There is a yellow Ashdvao, and the Volga flows from far away for a long time. There is a difference.
  16. -4
    7 November 2024 09: 41
    It is not clear to me for what purpose they brought the Su-57 to China and allowed everyone to touch it. Now there are videos where the Chinese are walking around the plane and pointing at the plane, showing the "quality" of its assembly.
    Why am I writing all this? It turns out that we ourselves gave them a trump card that they will use when they sell Chinese planes.
    Next is the article from Forbes, for those interested there are many videos in we chat


    Russian fifth-generation fighter Su-57 mocked on Chinese social media - Forbes

    Russia's Su-57 fighter jet, which arrived at an air show in China, has become the subject of ridicule on Chinese social media, where users called it "raw" and compared it to China's Chengdu J-20, pointing out design flaws such as visible bolts and imperfections in the fuselage.

    There are also sarcastic comments about Russia sending a prototype to the exhibition, not a production model, which, according to users, indicates Russia's difficulties with mass production of modern fighters.

    Some commentators suggested that Russia had made a mistake by not restricting public access to the plane, thereby allowing the general public to see it up close and capture flaws on video.
    1. -1
      7 November 2024 09: 49
      Well, what are you saying, according to many commentators there is nothing wrong with this and on the contrary it will promote sales. Yes
      1. +5
        7 November 2024 11: 24
        When people don't understand much, they look at rivets and screws. Just let them answer a simple question, how many sheets are on their fighters in the centimeter range, and what are the angles of radar coverage compared to this prototype with bad propellers? And do their fighters have a second radar complex in the long-wave range? And therefore, external beauty can be combined with a dull G after removing the wrapper.
  17. +1
    7 November 2024 10: 32
    Where is Checkmate? Why can't we see or hear it?
    1. +1
      7 November 2024 10: 43
      Quote from Kartograph
      Where is Checkmate?
      So far in the minds of developers wink
      1. 0
        7 November 2024 18: 14
        What else can you say? https://vk.com/wall-76456428_8032 and https://rg.ru/2024/11/07/reg-dfo/predpolozhitelno-istrebitel-su-75-zasniali-v-nebe-nad-dalnim-vostokom.html - this is "off the top of my head"
  18. -1
    7 November 2024 10: 46
    Dear author, it is very easy to stop the whole "scandal" and silence those laughing from the plane. Just go to a plane that has just left the factory and is not a prototype. And take pictures of the same objects. And everything will be beautifully smooth, without a single screw. It is worse when it turns out that they are not much different. lol
  19. -1
    7 November 2024 10: 55
    Bottom line, if two prototypes are presented and if both have protruding screws and poor quality joints, then it is unlikely that the serial ones are any different from them. Both prototypes and serial ones are manufactured by the same plant, and the "series" amounted to 6 cars in 2022, that is, this is the same piece production. Why would they be different? Another thing is that photos of both prototypes with the same problems are needed to establish some kind of system.
    1. +2
      7 November 2024 11: 07
      Quote: Engineer
      Both prototypes and serial production are manufactured by one plant.
      There is one plant, but different workshops. There is an experimental workshop, where engineers' ideas are tested in practice and prototypes are built. And there are workshops where serial machines are actually assembled, having passed pre-production tests.
      1. +2
        7 November 2024 11: 14
        Different workshops do not mean different production technology and culture. And we are talking about them. Moreover, from my experience, prototypes were assembled better and of higher quality - because of direct design supervision. And then the documentation with the letter A goes to the plant, the designers wash their hands of it, and for the failure of the state defense order the management faces criminal charges - do as you please.
  20. The comment was deleted.
  21. -3
    7 November 2024 12: 52
    I am increasingly getting the impression that the only meaning of life for Ukrainians is the desire to do harm to Russians. And malice gnaws at both the soul and the mind. Perhaps, in 20 years, they will be muzzled in neutral countries as a condition for being allowed to communicate.
  22. +1
    7 November 2024 15: 56
    Let them laugh at the shape of the golf ball. Fucking experts.
  23. -1
    7 November 2024 18: 53
    The Su-57 differs greatly from the Chinese and American in the most important way: it has combat experience. And it is not difficult to draw beautiful numbers, anyone can do it. But only the Russian one can boast of practice. This is priceless.
    1. 0
      8 November 2024 01: 16
      Jews use the 35th in operations quite well.
    2. +1
      8 November 2024 08: 58
      The Su-57 differs greatly from the Chinese and American in the most important way: it has combat experience.


      Judging by the objective control footage, the Su-57 has only shot down the S-70 Okhotnik UAV so far.

      This is quite an experience.

      The enemy also sometimes writes about missile launches on ground targets from the Su-57. But firstly, if this is true, then the enemy sees the Su-57, and secondly, there is no footage of objective control.
  24. +1
    8 November 2024 08: 51
    In general, it is a surprisingly original move. Russia solves two problems at once: it shows the whole world (or the part of it present at the forum) its best aircraft and keeps its secrets from those who are not supposed to know them



    Russia should show the whole world footage of objective control of the results of combat use of the Su-57; that would be the best advertisement.

    If there is something to show, of course.

    So far, in my personal opinion, the Orion UAV has made a greater contribution to our victory than the super-expensive Su-57 project.

    We need objectivity, not laudatory articles in the media, so that we ultimately spend our resources more efficiently and have a more effective army than we have now.
    1. 0
      8 November 2024 12: 43
      Are you sure that Russia "owes" something?
  25. 0
    8 November 2024 11: 04
    One thing I don't understand is why the Chinese dug up that this was one of the first flying prototypes. In my opinion, anyone interested in this topic would have determined this, as its tail number 054 indicates.
  26. -1
    9 November 2024 08: 30
    When the USSR started copying the B-29, renaming it the Tu-4, Soviet designers were amazed by the simply unattainable for us PRODUCTION CULTURE. Since then, nothing has changed. The Yankees and the West are not standing still either. All these screws, gaps and a complete lack of PRODUCTION CULTURE. This is not only true in aircraft manufacturing. If a country cannot make a normal, high-quality car, why do you think it will make a 5TH GENERATION AIRCRAFT!!! All these things are interconnected!!!
    1. 0
      9 November 2024 22: 13
      If you write about R&D, then write about a prototype. We don't have prototypes, it's a bad translation from English. As soon as the word prototype appears, it's immediately clear that the author doesn't understand the development of military and military equipment. As an example, the prototype for the Su-27 was the F-15 (with some stretch) or the Buran Shuttle. We have a problem with the production culture, that's true. The production culture essentially depends on the cultural level of citizens. If only in the 60s we became an urban culture. Airplanes are made by the grandchildren of peasants. You can't jump over your head. You can apply draconian measures, only a designer and a worker will defect to a neighboring enterprise, especially if they pay ten more there. In aviation, we don't have the letter "A" in principle, it would be good, but it's not realistic. Changes are constantly being made to the design, so the ultimate dream is "O1", received after GI. The letter "A" is cartridges, shells, Kalashnikov assault rifle. If the Su-57 has the letter "O", then that's good. Well, the Su-57 was made for one war, now another, tomorrow (literally) there will be a third. The speed of development of military and military equipment lags behind the technology of conducting combat operations.
      1. -1
        10 November 2024 06: 58
        I don't argue. Everything is to the point. I shudder to think - if the prototype looks like this, what do serial products look like? The prototypes are usually licked, made to the maximum in order to achieve the declared characteristics. Production models are always worse. I can imagine what those delivered to the Russian Aerospace Forces look like in real life. At the price of the state contract at the level of cost (in the best case!!!).
      2. 0
        14 November 2024 12: 25
        He didn’t serve as a prototype, but as a potential enemy, with all the consequences that entails.
  27. 0
    12 November 2024 09: 39
    Any achievements make it clear where to move next. Engines on completely new process algorithms will give a very powerful impetus for development in the future. Now this is a well-founded concept, but it is so simple that it is still not clear. But this is reality. The new operating principle fully corresponds to real physical processes and is waiting for its time to be mastered. We cannot stop at what has been achieved! And now this is the only real offer on the world market of new innovative breakthrough solutions.
  28. 0
    13 November 2024 07: 26
    The conclusion for me personally is the only one. With the engine, everything is moving to the right and the production of the semi-finished product will continue for an unknown amount of time.
  29. 0
    15 November 2024 10: 19
    And for some reason they have one huge problem: the Su-30MKI assembled in India is twice as expensive as the same aircraft assembled in Russia.

    Because everything there is adjusted to the foreign military standard MIL-STD and the avionics there are foreign (sometimes better than those made in Russia), the Indians are not accustomed to our GOSTs (standards) and are unlikely to switch, since there will be problems with maintenance and repair.
    As an example, in the book edited by S.V. Mikheev (K.B. Kamov), a process is described of how it is necessary to rewrite a ton of documentation to adjust everything to the MIL-STD standard in order to develop or deliver a helicopter manufactured in Russia to a foreign customer.
    We can recall another example, the WZ-10 helicopter developed by S.V. Mikheev (K.B. Kamov) for China. In the end, the Chinese bought the project and completed it themselves, adjusting everything to their standards.
    Based on this example, the Chinese can probably only buy the Su-57 airframe and engines.