"Su-75 spotted undergoing testing": West discusses fighter jet's prospects

New images of Russia's advanced Su-75 "Checkmate" stealth fighter have surfaced online, alongside its heavier counterpart, the Su-57. Western observers who spotted the footage drew far-reaching conclusions:

This photograph may indicate testing, or at least preparations for it. It's possible that tactics for operating this aircraft alongside the Su-57 will be tested. In any case, procurement of the Su-75 is expected—either by the Russian military or by an importer.

As noted, nothing official was announced about the Su-75 program for a long time. Against this backdrop, the new footage is significant, indicating continued development. The West is now awaiting images confirming the fighter's taxiing or even its maiden flight.

The Su-75 is designed as a single-engine, stealthy, fifth-generation multirole fighter, designed to be less expensive to purchase and maintain than twin-engine aircraft. Open sources indicate a maximum speed of approximately Mach 1,8–2,0, a combat load of 7400 kg, and a range of approximately 3000 km.

These performance characteristics place this aircraft on par with such export-oriented competitors as the F-35 and the Chinese FC-31.

- said in the Western press.

Its key advantage will be its powerplant. The Checkmate is expected to be equipped with the AL-51F1 engine, a next-generation product that is approximately 30% lighter and 18% more efficient than the AL-41F1, allowing for increased thrust-to-weight ratio and reduced lifecycle costs. The new engine will play a key role in providing extended range and increased payload.

Comments

[multi-category]

At one time, the F-16 was called the fighter that achieved superiority in the industry.
I think the Su-75 is simply an attempt to create a fighter based on the PAK FA project technologies, but in the most popular and best-selling single-engine segment of the market.

[Victor Masyuk]

It seems that the creators of the SU-75 justified its appearance in this way...

[topol717]

A single engine not only lowers the cost of the aircraft itself, but also dramatically reduces maintenance costs, and the flight time will be much cheaper. I hope it will be similar in size to the Swedish Gripin.
Of course, you don't need to use it to drop FABs, but it would be useful for suppressing air defenses. Or, alternatively, flying an interception/escort mission would be a bit cheaper than sending out an SU-35S.

[Alex777]

Quote from: topol717

1 engine not only lowers the cost of the aircraft itself, but also significantly reduces the cost of maintenance

Everything is true, only the F-35 engine is the most powerful in the States.
They even sell it separately, and not as part of the plane.
If there is no right engine, there will be no fighter.
Thank God, our guys finally finished making the right engine.

[topol717]

Quote: Alex777

Everything is true, only the F-35 engine is the most powerful in the States.

Is it really necessary to have such power?
Take the Swedish Gripen, for example. Its engine is weaker than our AL-41. By a significant margin. So if we weren't making a general-purpose aircraft, but rather a small fighter, even existing engines would be more than powerful enough.

[Alex777]

Everyone is interested in payload and combat radius.
That's why you need a reserve of fuel, etc., etc. So no.
Any engine won't do. Indians with Tejas know that.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: Alex777

Everyone is interested in payload and combat radius.
That's why you need a reserve of fuel, etc., etc. So no.
Any engine won't do. Indians with Tejas know that.

Let's stop talking nonsense about "payload".
The whole world has long forgotten about "maximum suspension".
For a long time now, the principle throughout the world has been: "one sortie - one target."
Nobody has 2-3 goals now.
Nobody does carpet bombing.

Even Su-34s fly combat missions with 3 FAB-250s, or 2 (3rd edge) FAB-500s...
And it doesn’t drag a possible 10 tons on itself.

And now no one will ever need maximum suspension.

The concept of application has changed.

[Alex777]

Quote: SovAr238A

Let's stop talking nonsense about "payload".

You are not telling this to me, to the one who praises the F-16 and its mythical 9+ tons of BN.
If you've understood our correspondence at least a little, you can see that I consider the Su-75 project a full-fledged single-engine fighter.
No more, no less.

[osp]

Aircraft such as the Su-33 and Su-27SM3 had a calculated combat load of up to 8 tons.
On 12 suspension points.
But in practice (their main tasks are air-to-air) they have never lifted more than 2-2.5 tons.
On 10 suspension points.
Typically, these are six R-73 missiles and four R-27ER missiles. Later, these could be R-77s.
That is, no more than 2 tons.

[Sky strike fighter]

A light multirole fighter is the most promising niche on the market, as it's suitable for everyone and affordable. However, it's too early to talk about the Su-75's arrival as a fact. The photo is a bit murky. It could have been generated by a neural network. So, it's not clear yet. Here's the source. The only photos are of unknown quality, which raises questions. The Su-75's first flight was promised for late 2025.

. Oops. The first working Su-75?

https://t.me/ZOV_Voevoda/36381

[Sky strike fighter]

In continuation of the post.

Today, a number of channels related to our aviation showed a photograph that many had been waiting for, fearing would never arrive. It shows the first flying prototype of Russia's second fifth-generation fighter, the Su-75. We announced earlier this year that the final obstacle to its implementation had been cleared with the commissioning of the so-called "second-stage engine," also known as the AL-51F1. Subsequently, there were no further problems with the construction of the lightweight stealth fighter, especially given its compatibility with the Su-57 in a number of components and parameters.

Most of the technologies, all avionics, and materials were developed on the "fifty-seventh." This spring, after a hiatus, the first positive news emerged about cooperation with Belarus on serial production of the Su-75, along with reports from Western intelligence that construction of the first two prototypes was nearing completion in Komsomolsk-on-Amur. Russian Industry and Trade Minister Denis Manturov also announced the completion of work on the flying prototype of the "Checkmate." Now, according to a report from the well-known and well-informed channel "Voevoda Broadcasts," the first prototype of the mysterious "Checkmate" has been spotted at the factory airfield in Komsomolsk-on-Amur.

https://cont.ws/@AdskyiSatana/3130568

[Trapp1st]

What a blurry photo.

There is a clearer photo

[Sky strike fighter]

What did they do to the fox? Is she high?

[MrFox]

This is Stoned Fox. A character quite famous in his time.

[kig]

Quote: Trapp1st

There is a clearer photo

Is there anything more beautiful, longer or higher?

[Leon68]

Looking at this photo, I can tell this is a military airfield, or at least a joint one, and the plane is on a military apron. The apron markings are not civilian. Only the military uses those markings.

[quolta]

What do you mean, on the apron? The plane is on a military apron.

[figwam]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

A light multirole fighter is the most promising niche on the market, as it's suitable for everyone and affordable. However, it's too early to talk about the Su-75's arrival as a fact. The photo is a bit murky. It could have been generated by a neural network. So, it's not clear yet. Here's the source. The only photos are of unknown quality, which raises questions. The Su-75's first flight was promised for late 2025.

. Oops. The first working Su-75?

https://t.me/ZOV_Voevoda/36381

Judging by the camouflage spots, this is the same model that was shown earlier.

[Victor Masyuk]

It's possible they're testing them before the first flight. If so, they're on schedule.

[P]

Can the Gripen perform real-world missions at real ranges without a PTSB?

[topol717]

Quote: Pandemic

Can the Gripen perform real-world missions at real ranges without a PTSB?

It all depends on the mission and range. With the Su-57, you need a small, cheap fighter. A simple interception over the Baltic or Black Sea, or hunting for those same unmanned aerial vehicles.

[P]

Low cost and small size don't solve the range issue. Plus, the drop tanks will inevitably consume the payload, and without tankers, there's no escape from the drop tanks.

[topol717]

What's the range of the MiG-29? 600-700 km? Is that enough? Why shouldn't it be enough? The F-35, I think, is also around 800 km.

[P]

This is the radius of an empty aircraft, so comparing them makes absolutely no sense. Actual range is calculated only with the combat load during takeoff from a typical real runway and when flying at real operational altitudes with a real probability of encountering an enemy (this includes maneuvers in combat, searching for an enemy, and gaining speed afterward), which requires a LOT of fuel.

[kig]

There are three types and the radius is different. 800 km is, in my opinion, option B, the others are more than 1100

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Alex777

Everything is true, only the F-35 engine

That's true, but a penguin is by no means a light fighter

[Alex777]

The Su-75 isn't all that light either. It's single-engine.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Alex777

So the Su-75 is not that light either.

But that's precisely what's unknown. The UAC doesn't provide any data, and all estimates of its weight are tentative.

[Alex777]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

But this is precisely what is unknown.

The Cheсkmate's maximum combat load is 7400 kilograms, and its range without external fuel tanks is 2900 kilometers at a speed of up to Mach 1,8.

We can draw conclusions from this data. The 7,4 t BN is not a light one.
I would even say that it is a very full-fledged fighter.

[topol717]

We can draw conclusions from this data. The 7,4 t BN is not a light one.

MIG-29, it seems, is about the same, it seems to be considered light.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Alex777

We can draw conclusions from this data. The 7,4 t BN is not a light one.

Oh come on :))) The F-16 weighs up to 9.2 tons, but it doesn't reach 10 tons empty and is definitely light

[Alex777]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

The F-16 has up to 9.2 tons.

This is the external load. The suspended tanks are included there.
Look at the combat load of the Su-35 (8000 kg) and Su-57.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Alex777

This is the external load. The suspended tanks are included there.

No, it's combat grade. Up to 9276 kg.
It's just that this figure is very arbitrary, and determining an aircraft's performance characteristics based on it alone is a daunting task. The F-16, for example, can lift 9 tons, but that would be a circus act. The Su-75's 7,4 tons is also clearly not a typical payload.

[Alex777]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

No, it's combat grade. Up to 9276 kg.

So the F-16 is better than the Su-35 in this part.
Exactly 1276 kg. But our choice: Su-35.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Alex777

So the F-16 is better than the Su-35 in this part.

Definitely not better

[Alex777]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Definitely not better

Well, at least we agree on something.

[Evil eye]

That's why the Americans wrote off the Intruders early.

I'm sorry, I didn't manage to finish Napoleon in half an hour...

[SovAr238A]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Quote: Alex777

So the Su-75 is not that light either.

But that's precisely what's unknown. The UAC doesn't provide any data, and all estimates of its weight are tentative.

Based on the dimensions of the aircraft, the dimensions of the landing gear and the wheels used, it is possible to give a practically 100% guaranteed figure for the weight of the machine (plus or minus 5%).

[Alex777]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Quote: Alex777

Everything is true, only the F-35 engine

That's true, but a penguin is by no means a light fighter

By the way, it turned out funny:
Combat load: F-35 - 8160 kg, Su-75 - 7400 kg,
Flight range: F-35 - 2220 km, Su-75 - 2900 km.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

What's so interesting about this? The numbers are different and unrelated. The F-16 even manages to show a range of 4000 km.

[Alex777]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

The F-16 even manages to show a range of 4000 km.

To whom and where are they showing 4000 km?

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Alex777

To whom and where are they showing 4000 km?

For you and me. And where? Where is the data on the F-35 and Su-75 ranges? In open sources.
Once again, the numbers you cite are completely incomparable. For example, the F-35 has a range of 2220 km without external fuel tanks, while the F-16 has a range of 4000 km with external fuel tanks. Therefore, and for a million other reasons, comparing them head-on without understanding what you're comparing (meaning we both don't understand why the Su-75 was given a 2900 km loadout) is a pretty poor exercise.

[sgrabik]

For the Su-75, these are still preliminary data; for production aircraft, they may ultimately be somewhat different.

[Alex777]

This is understandable, but it is difficult to estimate the plane as
potentially a normal fighter?

[multi-category]

The Penguin has a sad history with its range, because external fuel tanks put an end to any kind of "stealth" and the very meaning of the aircraft's design is lost.
The F-16 doesn't have such systems, and they can be loaded with tanks up to their ears. Just don't fall for the advertising, where the range of an empty plane with a bunch of tanks appears next to the maximum load with which the plane can take off just above the runway and then it's time to land.
For example, F-18s flying at air shows fully loaded with weapons. Sure, it looks cool, but 20 minutes later, they're already landing. That's not practical in combat.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: multicaat

The Penguin has a sad history with its range, because external fuel tanks put an end to any kind of "stealth" and the very meaning of the aircraft's design is lost.
The F-16 doesn't have such systems, and they can be loaded with tanks up to their ears. Just don't fall for the advertising, where the range of an empty plane with a bunch of tanks appears next to the maximum load with which the plane can take off just above the runway and then it's time to land.
For example, F-18s flying at air shows fully loaded with weapons. Sure, it looks cool, but 20 minutes later, they're already landing. That's not practical in combat.

In your universe, planes go into battle with PTBs?

In the universe of normal people, the PTB is dropped before entering the detection zone...

[multi-category]

Quote: SovAr238A

In the universe of normal people, the PTB is dropped before entering the detection zone...

If you take yourself as the norm, that's the height of arrogance.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: multicaat

Quote: SovAr238A

In the universe of normal people, the PTB is dropped before entering the detection zone...

If you take yourself as the norm, that's the height of arrogance.

This is not arrogance.

It is extremely puzzling that a person who has absolutely no understanding of how PTBs are used in modern combat aviation is starting to talk about PTBs.

[multi-category]

Quote: SovAr238A

who has absolutely no understanding of how PTBs are used in modern combat aviation.

why do you think so?
Finally, you've essentially humiliated thousands of people in the Ministry of Defense, because we produce hundreds of Su-27s with large internal fuel tanks to avoid the use of drop tanks, as you say, "in modern combat aviation." They apparently still don't know that drop tanks are possible. And in the new Su-75, they're not counting on drop tanks again. Tell them how wrong they are. Don't attack me—tell them. That's why I'm saying you're arrogantly spouting complete nonsense here, without even a clue what I know or don't know.

[multi-category]

Quote: Alex777

Thank God, our guys finally finished making the right engine.

which is assembled as a prototype.
No, unfortunately, it's not finished yet. Until normal mass production begins with stable performance characteristics reflected in documentation and instructions, it's not finished yet.
The situation with product 30 is exactly like this for now - at the "almost ready" level, but this state has been going on for 7 years already and it's still not finished, which is an extremely bad indicator.
We don't know how to quickly implement new things.

[multi-category]

Quote from: topol717

Of course, you don't need to throw FABs from it

Why is that? Look at what a two-seater F-16 can throw.

[topol717]

Quote: multicaat

Why is that? Look at what a two-seater F-16 can throw.

So what? Why? Another attempt to create a universal aircraft will ruin all the bright ideas. Although, with a 7-ton payload, you can throw in FABs.

[Alex777]

Quote: multicaat

two-seater F-16

This modification (F-16I) was made for Israel and has a more powerful engine.

[multi-category]

+- close. Instead of a second pilot, you can load a FAB-100.

[Alex777]

Andrey and I discussed this same situation above.

[Zaurbek]

This is a correct attempt to unify the 75th with the 57th...how it will turn out is still unknown.

[Tailpipe]

I hope they don't rush to sell it to various "friendly countries" with technology transfers (as is usual). Otherwise, good luck!

[Lt. Air Force stock]

Quote: Tail pipe

I hope they don't rush to sell it to various "friendly countries" with technology transfers (as is usual). Otherwise, good luck!

So it was originally created for export, which is why they made it single-engine.

[Calm_type]

One engine - light fighter.

[bayard]

Quote: Tail pipe

I hope they don't rush to feverishly push it onto various "friendly countries" with the transfer of technology.

Don't even hope, Modi already talked about him in the VVP in Kazan - the Indians are already waiting.
Technology transfer is a relative matter. Licensed assembly involves the supply and installation of an assembly line and assembly kits. The combined price of the license, line, and assembly kits is the same for us (per kit) as selling a finished aircraft for export at the export price. It's even more profitable for us. And without our assembly kits, assembly is impossible.
A contract for licensed assembly allows for a faster recoupment of the development and launch of such an aircraft. The profits can then be used to supply such aircraft to the Aerospace Forces.

[iommy]

Yes, yes, I understand you, your orders are to bang away on the keyboard in the hopes that your lines will lead to a decrease in exports from Russia. I understand.

[rocket757]

Okay, we have 57 flying... let's see when 75 start flying...

[Alex777]

Quote: rocket757

Okay, we have 57 flying... let's see when 75 start flying...

I have high hopes for the Su-75.

[rocket757]

Quite a few people have described this as impossible, a hoax, cartoons... we'll see!

[Alex777]

Quote: rocket757

Quite a few people have described this as impossible, a hoax, cartoons... we'll see!

That's why I took the photos that were mentioned in the article,
and posted it. I knew what your reaction would be.

[rocket757]

The main thing is the ACTION, and words, empty chatter... the wind will carry away and everyone will forget!

[Montezuma]

Quote: rocket757

Okay, we have 57 flying... let's see when 75 start flying

We'll see, of course, but for now I'm curious: why are "Western observers," as they write in the article, already actively discussing a certain photograph, while we haven't seen it anywhere yet? I'm not at all opposed to this plane appearing; on the contrary, it would be interesting to see confirmation, but isn't the author getting ahead of himself?

[rocket757]

We have an eternal problem, even what exists, what is worth SHOWING, TELLING... that's just how it is.

[Montezuma]

Here, I finally found a photo on the Telegram channel "Military Observer":

[Asker]

Of course, there will be a lot of flak from the aviators, but shouldn't MiG be building light fighters, or is it already being buried?

[Krasnoyarsk]

Quote: Asker

Of course, there will be a lot of flak from the aviators, but shouldn't MiG be building light fighters, or is it already being buried?

There is talk about the MIG-41, but considering that our commanders have not abandoned the idea of ​​optimization, I would not be surprised if the MIG design bureau disappears into oblivion.
It's a shame and annoyance.

[Victor Masyuk]

If the MiG-41 is meant to replace the MiG-31, it shouldn't be expected so soon. It will, by definition, be a very expensive aircraft with a narrow range of combat missions.

[osp]

The main MiG plant in Moscow has already become a thing of the past, one might say.
The Nizhny Novgorod Sokol is also lying on its side - it has been operating as an aircraft repair facility for a long time.
The company hasn't released anything serious for a long time.
It is true that there was talk about resuming the MiG-AT training project with just one engine.
That's all.

[I_Kov]

Did the plant in Lukhovitsy also go under?

[Sky strike fighter]

Quote: I_Kov

Did the plant in Lukhovitsy also go under?

Works on civil projects.

[Sky strike fighter]

Quote: Krasnoyarsk

Quote: Asker

Of course, there will be a lot of flak from the aviators, but shouldn't MiG be building light fighters, or is it already being buried?

There is talk about the MIG-41, but considering that our commanders have not abandoned the idea of ​​optimization, I would not be surprised if the MIG design bureau disappears into oblivion.
It's a shame and annoyance.

The first flight of the MiG-41 fighter jet could take place in the coming years, said Honored Pilot of Russia Vladimir Popov.

The MiG-41 is undergoing refinement, and its final design has already been finalized. According to Popov, the designers are using accumulated previous experience.

I think we'll see the maiden flight of the new interceptor in the next few years. Our designers have a wealth of experience; we've taken on old projects and are turning them into metal. Nothing is wasted in this endeavor.
Vladimir Popov, Honored Pilot of the Russian Federation

https://www1.ru/news/2025/10/02/mig-41-pervyi-polet-sostoitsia-v-blizaisie-gody.html

[bayard]

Quote: Asker

Shouldn't MIG be building light fighters or is it already being buried?

That's why MiG was absorbed by UAC—so they could wrest the single-engine LFMI developed by the MiG design bureau from Sukhoi and launch it into production under their own brand. Essentially, the design was simply redesigned for a specific engine. But it was done quickly. That's why no one even heard about the LFMI development—it never happened. The MiG design was adapted to the engine, avionics, and production facilities of Sukhoi.
Now let's see how it flies. With the new engine, it should really shine. But I'm more interested in its radar or radar complex.

[Sky strike fighter]

According to rumors, the Zhuk-AME will be on the Su-75.

Su-57 crews will be able to use the Su-75 Checkmate's onboard radars, optronic modules, and other sensors for remote air combat, radar, optical, and electronic reconnaissance. Su-57s themselves will be able to control the Su-75's actions while staying within range of enemy anti-aircraft and air-to-air missiles.

As for airborne radar systems, a promising development by Fazatron-NIIR—the high-energy airborne AESA radar "Zhuk-AME"—could be considered. This device's active phased array (APAA) is based on transmit/receive modules with microwave transistors mounted on heat-resistant substrates manufactured using low-temperature co-fired ceramics (LTCC). These microwave transistors operate at higher temperatures, and therefore at higher energy levels, similar to those of gallium nitride microwave transistors used in the American and Western European AN/APG-81/85 and AN/APG-79 AESA radars. They are installed on the F-35A/B/C 5th-generation multirole fighters, as well as the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet carrier-based multirole fighters. Thanks to their increased energy potential, the Zhuk-AME airborne radars are capable of detecting targets with an effective reflective surface of 3 square meters at a distance of up to 260 km and locking them on at a distance of 175 km, while objects with an RCS of 0,1 square meters can be detected at a distance of 100 km and locked on for precise automatic tracking at a distance of 80 km. Moreover, thanks to high jamming immunity (due to the formation of gaps in the radiation pattern of enemy electronic warfare systems), even in a complex jamming environment, the target detection range of these radars will be reduced by no more than 10-20% (depending on the number of platforms producing electronic jamming and their radiation power).

The Zhuk-AME onboard radars are capable of operating in synthetic aperture (SAR) and inverted synthetic aperture (ISAR) modes, providing classification of ground targets with radio contrast in any type of terrain and relief, as well as in ground tracking mode for moving objects (GMTI), making the Su-75 an excellent airborne platform for tactical radar reconnaissance. The radar's target data channel capacity reaches eight simultaneously intercepted targets.

https://m.vk.com/wall-50377583_2531290

[bayard]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

we may be talking about the promising development of "Fazatron-NIIR"

So Phazotron is alive, but how many times have we buried him?

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

The Zhuk-AME radar is capable of detecting targets with an effective reflective surface of 3 square meters at a distance of up to 260 km and locking them on at a distance of 175 km, while objects with an RCS of 0,1 square meters can be detected at a distance of 100 km and locked on for precise automatic tracking at a distance of 80 km.

Good performance for an AESA radar of this size. Apparently, they didn't want to install it on the MiG-35. And that's a shame – it's high time to put it into production. MiG's production line is idle, and while the Su-75 is being finalized (which will take at least five years), they can build the MiG-35S for both export and domestic production. But Sukhoi will now be holding tight and not allowing the MiG-35 into production – it's currently a direct competitor to their new product.

[Vasily I]

They don’t bury him, but he died, and not now, but in the year, say, 2005.

[Sky strike fighter]

Quote: Asker

Of course, there will be a lot of flak from the aviators, but shouldn't MiG be building light fighters, or is it already being buried?

The current Su-75 is the project borrowed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau during its merger with the MiG Design Bureau. Previously, the Su-75 project was called the MiG-59.

At the Army military-technical forum, a representative of the state corporation MiG announced that its design bureau had begun developing a new light fifth-generation fighter, which was then designated the MiG-59. However, the MiG-59 will never be produced. After the final takeover of the famous design bureau by UAC, the MiG-59 was renamed the T-75, and its current tentative designation is the Su-75. Its estimated cost is no more than that of the Su-35 and Su-30SM ($50 million), so it could eventually become a mass-produced fighter for the Russian Aerospace Forces.

https://overclockers.ru/blog/Hardware_inc/show/104090/chto-izvestno-o-su-75-checkmate-samom-perspektivnom-legkom-istrebitele-vks-rf

The history of the new fighter began with the takeover of the MiG company by the Sukhoi Design Bureau; the MiG-59 light fighter project was renamed first to the T-75, and then to the Su-75.

https://dzen.ru/a/Zh_o2iawsHhZ-EM8

[mark1]

Well, thank God!
"The comment text is too short and does not provide useful information."
There is no information, only emotions)))

[Mountain shooter]

Unexpected. The main thing is, they kept it a secret; no one let anything slip... And they continued developing the engine. Which is no easy feat in today's world.

[Svetlana]

It seems they couldn't hold back, if: "Su-75 spotted undergoing testing": The West is talking about the fighter's prospects

[bayard]

This is an orchestrated leak through trusted aviation bloggers. There's no need to hide anything anymore, as it's scheduled to make its maiden flight by the end of this year. So we'll see footage of the run and taxi soon.

[Sky strike fighter]

I wonder what they did with the engine to reduce its visibility.

UEC specialists took first place at the Novoye Vremya Invention Salon. They presented a modified exhaust system for a bypass turbojet engine used in advanced military aircraft.

The invention is aimed at reducing the level of infrared radiation from the engine into the rear hemisphere of the aircraft.
- UEC. The corporation also presented a new method for cooling engine turbine blades and a device for implementing it. This development optimizes the unit's operation, ensuring high efficiency and effectiveness of its thermodynamic cycle.

https://www1.ru/news/2025/10/03/razrabotka-rostexa-snizit-zametnost-istrebitelei-su-57-i-su-75-v-infrakrasnom-diapazone.html

[bayard]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

I wonder what they did with the engine to reduce its visibility.

A new "flat nozzle" with minimal thrust loss (2x less than the F-22). And finally, the new AL-51-F1 engine with the highest specific thrust to date.
The announcement makes it clear that the Su-75 will also be equipped with an engine with this nozzle. Therefore, the engine is fully ready and has entered production. Its thrust is 17,500 kgf, slightly lower than originally stated, but apparently the reduction was made to achieve a better/longer service life.
Now all that remains is to see the first flight of the Su-75 and then flight tests and refinements will begin.
Another interesting mention in the report is the Yak-130M "fighter." Apparently, they did build it, with new, more powerful engines and radar. As promised. Details remain to be seen. Such a fighter would be very useful for countering UAVs in the country's interior.

[silverwolf88]

What makes me happy is that the development of new types of weapons (Oreshnik is a prime example) is being carried out without publicity and with good results... I hope this is exactly the case.

[Lemon]

I completely agree with you! The time will come when those who need it—the exporters—will find out.

[Scharnhorst]

I wouldn't be surprised if total silence about the aircraft was one of Comrade Kim's conditions. We'll probably fulfill one of the conditions of the intergovernmental agreement with the DPRK by producing and supplying the Su-75.

[Shelest2000]

Well, God grant that this plane will appear!

[KVU-NSVD]

Perhaps the Indians' desire to renew their fleet has given impetus to speeding up the project? If a twin-engine aircraft appears, then they will definitely

[Alex777]

Quote: KVU-NSVD

Perhaps the Indians' desire to renew their fleet has given impetus to speeding up the project? If a twin-engine aircraft appears, then they will definitely

The Indians, as I understand them, want a single-engine
single-seater, and twin-engine - two-seater.

[matsur]

I wish there was a drone fighter that could reach speeds that humans couldn't handle. It would fly in, disturb the air defenses, detect the launch sites, disable the defenses, evade the missiles, and fly away.

Okay, okay. It's no use even dreaming.

[Monster_Fat]

One photo doesn't qualify as a "test." A mockup can be placed next to a flying "57" to add intrigue. We're good at "mockups" and "presentations."

[Pavel57]

At one time, the MiG-29 cost 60 percent of the Su-27, which was high for a mixed fleet. However, they were produced at different factories. If the cost ratio of the Su-57 to the Su-75 reaches 1:0,6, it makes sense to revisit the idea of ​​a mixed fleet, especially if they are produced at a single facility.

[osp]

Yes, almost exactly. It was even a bit more expensive, about 65% of the price of a heavy fighter.
And modern modifications such as the MiG-29KUB or MiG-35 have become comparable in price to Sukhoi’s heavy fighters.
It’s just that the basic version of the 9-12 was not a very successful concept with a pair of engines and an avionics composition close to that of heavy fighters, because there was no other option.
The customer required unification of the radar, radar and fire control system units in production.
What came out of this is clear - nothing came of it.
The MiG-29's career in the Russian Air Force was short-lived.

[Alexandra]

It makes sense to have an unmanned version of the Su-75 as a "faithful wingman" for the Su-57.

[Vlad2012]

And someone named Fightbomber is perplexed by what the UAC wanted to say by posting this the old photo of the Su-75

[Kravets Vyacheslav]

New images of Russia's advanced Su-75 stealth fighter jet have been posted online.

Of course, attaching them to the article is optional. Readers should probably find them themselves.

[Setavr]

I agree. If you don't look at old photos from 2021 of the mockup next to the Su-57, there's only one photo that can be found on Google.

[osp]

The designers of this aircraft will have to do everything from scratch, since neither Sukhoi nor Mikoyan had any experience in creating single-engine fourth-generation fighters up to the stage of flying prototypes.
Although both companies were working on such projects, everything died down with the collapse of the USSR.
It is not so easy to make electronic equipment for a light single-engine 5th generation aircraft if you have no experience.
If the proper technological sequence is not followed, the proper technological evolution occurs.

[savage3000]

What specific experience should there be in a single-engine?

What is the relationship between the number of engines and electronic equipment?

[osp]

I wrote above that when the MiG-29 was being developed, they installed the same electronic equipment that went into the Su-27. That was largely true. That's what the customer wanted. It was heavy and large for heavy fighters.
But here, for a light single-engine aircraft, we need to create a new, lightweight and small one.
Take the L-150 "Pastel" SPO station. It weighs almost 50 kilograms and was designed for heavy Sukhoi fighters, including the Su-34 and Su-35.
They also installed it on the MiG-29SMT and MiG-29K, because there was no other lightweight option.

And when the F-16 was being designed, various companies in the US created equipment for it that was smaller and lighter than for the F-15.
But we have all switched to unification with the Sukhoi heavy fighter.
And the domestic element base in those years could not provide what was needed.
It was not because life was good that French, Israeli and other foreign avionics appeared on the export MiG-29SMT.

[savage3000]

Complete nonsense. There is an OLS. It has characteristics, including weight. You can't make anything lighter. And if you could, you'd put it everywhere. Every gram is important for any aircraft.

[osp]

The characteristics and tasks of a light/heavy fighter may be different.
As was the case with the MiG-29 9-12 and the Su-27P, which completely lost the ability to use air-to-ground weapons.
What was the MiG-31's targeting system designed for? Everything there is large and heavy, designed to see as far as possible.
A light fighter does not need this to such an extent, so the equipment characteristics may be sacrificed if the issue is reducing the weight/size of the racks with it.

[savage3000]

A light fighter needs to see as far as the others. Otherwise, it's useless. Especially the OLS... it needs to operate at maximum range.

The MiG-31's targeting system was designed 40 years ago. Now the Su-35 can see farther and better.

[Eug]

I don't like its "bucket-nosed" design because of its demands on a clean runway. However, the designers certainly know this... Commercial success without direct combat!

[Ilgizl]

It's a shame they don't develop others. MiGs, for example. And whoever's more skilled should contribute. The lack of funds isn't because there isn't any. It's because...

[gridasov]

The air intake is definitely located in a zone of low relative pressure and a non-pressurized frontal flow, especially after the supersonic threshold. I thought everyone should know this, because the forward section of the fuselage changes the radial disturbance vector of the external continuous medium. The engine is completely out of the question, as it's a traditional architecture at the limit of modernization.

[savage3000]

Is this not a generated image?

[gridasov]

By the way, this thought also occurred to me.

[Bayun]

It seems we're heading toward the end of manned combat aviation... UAVs are potential "kamikazes." In terms of G-forces, UAVs are stronger than any human ace. The same trend applies to ground units. It's a shame about the driver, but not so much about the robot.

P.S.: Anyone who watched the video of the UAV swarm in the form of a dragon show in Singapore can easily imagine the combat capabilities of such a "beast."

[sergant682]

If you watch the video of the Su-57's maiden flight, you'll see a long PVD boom with vanes. It's understandable—it was used to better capture flight data. This boom was later removed. It's missing from the Su-75 photo in question, although it certainly should have been there for a prototype. This suggests that the prototype either already flew or is a fake. It's also possible that this prototype is a third one—it's for static testing (then why paint it?)

[Yuri L]

The sixth generation of the J-50 is already in full swing around the world, and here we're all learning how to cut out tonsils... with a blowtorch... through the ass. We're a whole generation behind. Although we're used to it.

[gridasov]

You can listen to many commentators, but at the current level, no one offers sound solutions for a real breakthrough in aviation engine design. Breaking free from entrenched thinking is extremely difficult, but someone always emerges who can see more effective, rational, and, most importantly, sound solutions that will shape a breakthrough into the future.

[konst]

Everything in Russia works against Russia, according to the Russian constitution, written by the US and approved by the people, everything for sale to potential enemies. How long will this stupidity continue?

[501 Legion]

Where are the new images? This is imbecile news.

[AC130 Gunship]

Quote: Alex777

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Quote: Alex777

Everything is true, only the F-35 engine

That's true, but a penguin is by no means a light fighter

By the way, it turned out funny:
Combat load: F-35 - 8160 kg, Su-75 - 7400 kg,
Flight range: F-35 - 2220 km, Su-75 - 2900 km.

How did you get the flight range if no one has ever seen the plane live? And, therefore, it hasn't even taken off yet.

[sergant682]

I just read a recent opus on the Su-75: https://www1.ru/news/2025/10/17/sax-i-mat-v-nebe-rossiia-nacala-sborku-pervogo-su-75-checkmate.amp.html
Which means assembly of the first aircraft has only just begun, with the maiden flight expected in 2027, with production launch sometime around 2035. So what was all that about the photo and the puffed-up cheeks? Or is this another clumsy attempt to confuse the enemy and us about the real state of affairs? So, an airplane isn't a needle; if it exists, it'll be spotted instantly, so what's the point of this publication? He'd be better off keeping his mouth shut.