People do not understand that Russia was the first country to introduce flat nozzles in the VTOL Yak-38/41 program of the 1970s, they are mentioned only for the purpose of testing the thrust vector, I quote Yakovlev: "a flat biaxial nozzle was developed in the second half of the 1970s for the vertical take-off and landing fighter Yak-41 (VTOL). An original solution was used to rotate it - the nozzle was divided into three segments, which, rotating in opposite directions relative to each other, provided a deviation of the thrust vector in the vertical plane by an angle of 95 ° (in vertical takeoff and landing mode). For short takeoffs, the nozzle was installed at an angle of 62°. This solution made it possible to use the afterburner both in horizontal flight and in vertical mode.
The stealth technology was created by Russia, not the US. It is Russian technology! The helmet was also created by the Russians, they used such a helmet on the MiG-29. The vertical takeoff and landing technology used on the F-35 was also created by the Russians, Lockheed Martin contracted the Yakovlev Design Bureau to improve the Yak-141 design.
the guy on Millenium 7 - also pointed out that the flat nozzles aren't flat but have a slight v-shape and are hollow to allow cool air to flow through them ..... seems they had to master 3D printing of the parts to put this design into production .... not a "straight" copy of the F-22 after all .... but an evolution
@@ctmme, true, but supposedly that is part of their goal making these. They aim to make 90% of the nozzle assembly 3D -printable. That's something to aim for, I suppose, both figuratively AND literally.
@@ctmme you actually do, with all the intricate internal profile of the exhaust peatal for cool air flow it is only viable to use 3D printing for its production
The Russians do not copy anyone. They simply try to make everything better. In the annuls of history, they have been copied far often than they have copied
Russian military upgrades were behind because they had entire decades where there was no money investment in R&D due to the economic turmoil of the 1990s and early 2000s , they are playing catchup
Keep telling yourself that, if ww3 breaks without nukes, I would enjoy watching our front lines gets decimated over overconfidence bs, as if Germany in ww2 not only caught up in less than 5 years, but significantly had breakthroughs after breakthroughs. Half of Soviet Union used barter system after ww2, and yet we lost every step of the way in race to space until they stopped because flat out broke, we had to bring German scientists that worked with V2 to help. They were the first to make VTOL just to make their overweight mig able to take off, scrapped it when the vtol itself used too much fuel and added more weight. And they had hypersonic missiles before we do. And to make it worse, current proxy war, other than stock abrams, we have seen 59 Tomahawks rendered useless, ATACMS was granted to shoot inside Russia, ZERO made any impact, hits target but fails to destroy them, Bradleys also useless, Strykers, HIMARS, Stingers and Javelins, etc etc.. and we still have overconfident people thinking they will stay behind us after our greatest bs, F35. New Abrams came out, even more useless, more techs but the fact that rendered the stock abrams feature useless, still there and only manned by 3 crews which a buddy of mine said hell nawh, 4 crew already hard enough, 3 crew with that much delicate tech, that's just waiting for disaster. Never ever underestimate anyone, we lost 30% of our unit on DDay, let me remind you, Germany main army was gone in 1943 may after losing stalingrad, 30% casualties, highest and worst record than France had, and we didn't land alone on DDay, UK and Canada also joined.
@@phunkracy Russia has already announced a large-scale modernization of the Su-35, 30, 34 aircraft. They have started to modernize them to the 5th generation, it has been stated that all 5th generation systems from the Su-57 will be used. The engine was presented in China and this engine was not developed for the Su-57, but for the modernization of 4++ aircraft. Radars will also be replaced. Russia has announced the modernization of its 4++ generation aircraft
From what I've seen, the flat nozzles are angled at 45° viewed from behind . So, with only a single axis of movement, by mixing the 2 nozzles, it's possible to have pitch, yaw and roll control . Less than the former thrust vectoring nozles, but with the advantage of the lower radar signature of the flat nozzles .
On the video I actually saw the nozzles rotating and turning freely in all directions. It obviously was a 3D render but not impossible. I guess, time will tell.
Su-57 square nozzle is pseudo-3D TVC. And this is often confusing people when media, and not only them, show incorrect animations of it. This is similar to Su-30MKI TVC - practically 2D, but each engine is rotated so that when the nozzles point up, they also point outward and when they point down - they also point inward. Plus the nozzle can move individually. As opposed to F-22 which has the nozzles aligned and moving only together.
Nice breakdown, Mover. Nice using the historical documentary Topgun Maverick as reference. The SU57 does get a lot of hate, but I would be more than happy to try it out. Maybe in Topgun 3, Maverick steals the Felon.
@@glovemaker2 In the United States and that neoliberal monstrosity called EU maybe, but we in the rest of the world aren't rabid. And good on Mover to cite some credible, solid sources like the documentary "Top Gun: Maverick".
Since the mid-80s and 90s, most of the Russian developments in the field of electronics were curtailed or destroyed at the request of advisers from the United States (CIA), who at that time did everything to set the country's development back decades so that it would be easier to tear Russia to pieces. And for this reason, such developments as the optical electronic helmet of the pilot had to start almost from scratch in the 2000s. and this was also greatly hampered by problems in related fields and lost competencies and time in microelectronics. In fact, we have to catch up with a 15-year lag, and in these areas it is very difficult .
That sounds like russian excuses. Russia blames every problem they have on the west. There are several problems with this claim. 1. How do you suppose the cia simply requested domestic russian labs and companies destroy their own work on behalf of the americans and why would they listen? 2. When did russia present any advanced electronics? I dont see any evidence of russia initially coming out with an advanced electronics platform and then suddenly going backwards and having to re develop. Their electronics have ALWAYS been inferior. The usa developed solid state electronics in the 1970s in the f111 and the russians were still using tubes. I dont believe this silly claim in the slightest.
The Cosmopolitans, the Capitalists, the Jews, the CIA. Always somebody else. Howbout lookin in the mirror? How many times you need to step on the rakes to get the clue...
If u mean the Iranian ones then sadly no, Iran is Reportedly planning to retire both their Tomcats and Phantoms once they get a sufficient number of Flankers. Welp, at least the Old Lady can finally rest peacefully.
I believe you are correct, the complexity referred to in the article i think is referring to the structure of the nozzle itself, being 3d printed to have bypass air to cool the exhaust.
But heavier and less efficient, although looking at how many actuators Russian 3D-vectoring nozzles seem to have the overall weight might actually be similar.
@@RichelieuUnlimited Yeah, hard to tell from the info available atm, I'm sure the serrated version intended for the new engine performs a lot better overall, but this design is obviously a much better stealth profile. I'm guessing it will come down to how well the new engine performs has to what they eventually use.
Mover, if you watch a channel called Millennium7 he explains how the IR cameras work in the Su57. I'm not sure if it's integrated into the helmet but he said that the SU-57 can see through the plane with IR cameras the same way as the F-35 just not 360 degrees something like 270. I'd be really surprised if that's not integrated into the new helmet.
The thrust vectoring appears to be angled but moves up or down. While previous engines moved up,down,left,right. Or do the angled move all four directions?
Three thing's the Russian's have across all aircraft is : 1.Good looking 2. Air superiority 3. Cost effective They've always focused more on real methods of war which is artillery. Now that they may have to defend against Nato they have become more focused on air combat.
1. MIG21 is the ugliest plane ever made. MIG25 and MIG27 are just boxshaped ugly things. And their more modern planes have an ugly pin at their back. 2. They usually have a piss poor kill ratio. Like MIG21 for example with 3 planes lost for every enemy aircraft shot down. Also MIG29 have a negative kill ratio. 3. Planes are not cost effective if they get shot down before they can deal damage to the enemy. 4. I havn't noticed that russias military being more focused at fighting real wars than other militaries. Looks more like its industry is creating prestige projects for its politicians - like building aircraft carriers and cruisers instead of small coastal ships more suited for russias actual military needs and gaining the maximum amount of bang for the buck. And russian artillery compared to Nato artillery shows us guns with less range, less precision, longer reload time, longer time for it to be made ready for action, more time to prepare to move the artillery piece after it have fired. And artillery consumtion is higher on average for scoring a hit - which cause a logistical burden as many more tons of ammuntion needs to be transported. And gun barrels worns down faster when they need to fire more often before they can score a hit. So my conclusion is that all the worlds 4 best artillery pieces are found in the western world: Panzerhaubitze 2000, Archer, Caesar and K9 Thunder.
Looks are subjective. Never measure of effectiveness. They have no air superiority in their current conflict. And most of that has been achieved through surface-to-air missiles. And costs? You don't see anyone lining up to buy Russian aircraft....
@@nattygsbord 1. Looks are subjective this entire argument is flawed 2. The mig 21 is a second generation jet that was able to during the Vietnam War consistently compete with the F4 phantom 2 a third generation jet that was much more advanced and consistently out competed every other US aircraft from that conflict it also during the 1971 India Pakistan war massively outcompeted the F104 a second generation jet that was the US counterpart to the mig 21 it performed so well in these early wars then it became the most exported fighter jet of all time by far but this led to the mig 21 to be used long past when it should have been retired it is still being in the air forces of some nations to this day this meant that the mig 21 later on had to compete with aircraft generations ahead of them in terms of technology such as in Iran Iraq war Israeli arab wars or the first Gulf War but even then you'd only come to the conclusion of a 3 to 1 loss ratio if you uncritically accepted the kill to loss ratios from Iran, Israel and America during all of these conflicts this is problematic because nations routinely lie about air to kill ratios even Western nations so accepting these numbers without question is very problematic specially for Iran which is a nation that is frequently stated as being untrustworthy today and yet you are willing to accept their numbers just because it makes the F-14 look good As for the mig 29 the only reason its kill ratio is poor is because it got outcompeted by the SU27 in the Eritrean Ethiopian wars another Russian jet and poor performance in the first Gulf War which can be explained by the fact that they were exported downgraded Mig 29 unable to use the most modern missiles. 3. My second point answers this 4. You accuse them Of making prestige projects instead of useful projects and yet one of your two examples is making aircraft carriers something Russia hasn't done since the 1980s cruisers are useful for coastal defence and as for making small ships they are doing that. Your point about artillery is also completely wrong if we compare Russia's most modern artillery 2S43 Malva which has a range of 70 kilometres versus 54 kilometres for the Panzerhaubitze 2000 50 for the Archer 55 for the CAESAR and 60 for the K9 Thunder in terms of reloaded speed the2s43 Malva can fire 7 shells in one minute compared to the Panzerhaubitze 2000 10 the archer 7 the CAESAR 6 and K9 Thunders 7 what we can see is that the 2S43 Malva is pretty compatible to these systems in terms of fire rate not the best not the worst accuracy isn't something that could be properly measured considering all of these systems can fire programmable munitions probably compatible. modern systems like this do not make up the majority of Russia's artillery arsenal which is mostly made-up of older systems but this is largely because of the sheer number of older systems rather than Russia's inability to produce modern ones. the one area of artillery commitment that you did not consider is that Russia has way more artillery The US has 2862 artillery pieces Russia has 14564 artillery pieces how could you say Russia is not committed to artillery when they have over five times the artillery pieces as the US.
@@nattygsbord The MiG-21 is meh, the MiG-27 is not at ALL boxshaped. What pin are you talking about? They don't? Very few aircraft there have a kill ratio to begin with, as the last air to air engagement before the ongoing series of wars was in the '80s.
Just learned this week (from the Not A Pound for Air to Ground channel) that a HMCS was proposed for the F-106, of all things. It would have been based off the tech that was to be used in the still-born AH-56 Cheyenne attack helicopter (and which presumably made it's way into the AH-64).
@@jordancourse5102 from what I understand, it was only for pointing the radar, and thus aiming the radar missiles, I'm not sure if the sidewinders could also be aimed with radar slaving
Why do people talk about the Su-57 like it's a real production aircraft? Haven't we learned to stop giving the Russians the benefit of doubt on their claims yet?
Do you know if su57 is used as an awacs? At least temporary. I've seen couple of things that suggest that su27/30/35 are provided with intelligence from airborne platform possibly using SU-57, after A-50 incidents early 2024.
This flat nozzle design by the Russian is actual simpler by far, that the one with round nozzles. The reason is that each element in the round nozzle has its own hydro-mechanical actuator, where as in in the flat nozzle you have actuators above and below the nozzles, and another pair outside the horizontal planes. The mechanism is easier, more durable and much lighter
I feel like some kind of 3D thrust vectoring like this is going to be included in NGAD. All the concepts we've seen so far lack vertical stabilizers, and they're going to need some way to control yaw.
They're gonna have ports that divert thrust through the body to move the plane, like the space shuttle reactor thrusters. This will enable better stealth and manuverability in ultrahigh altitudes. A space fighter essentially that can handle LEO satellites and rain hypersonic missiles from high above any other fighter. Top attack worked so well with tanks in Ukraine we figured why not apply that to air combat. Its not "thurst" per se but redirected bleed air.
@@RedTail1-1 That will work if the engines are far apart, but if they're close together like a Hornet differential thrust won't have as much leverage to impact yaw. You also only get half the thrust because you have to reduce the power of one engine. If 2D thrust vectoring will be adopted from the 22 for high AOA pitch control, they might as well go 3D.
1. There is a pic of a F-22 pilpt wearing the Scorpion helmet. Any news in this regard? 2. According to the first USN F-35C SQN commander, the F-35 is good detectable from behind with IR.
From promo video i've seen idk if their 3 axis is real tbh i think 2 axis is possible but the third one that move sideway is a bit questionable but i could wait untill their show it during airshow.
They talk about next gen in terms of the engines and it being capable of operating unmanned drones directly from the plane itself. That's what they mean by the 6th gen capabilities.
It could never be a prosperous country when it is seen as an adversary to US interests. Look how the US is trying to slow down Chinese chip development. NATO Admiral Rob Bauer said that Ukraine is of strategic importance. Not that hard to figure out why Russia has the same view.
@@Holztransistor Russias ruling elite just have to scapegoat Johnny foreigner, because how else can they justify stealing all their country's wealth an putting it all in their own pockets? So they hide behind a fake patriotism. How else will they justify making themselves rich while the rest of russian people getting nothing? In what ways would the average russian get a better life under Putin and his corrupt cronies than if they had foreign multinational oil companies plundering all oil and gas from russia? The answer is of course that they havn't got anything better at all by having their corrupt elite taking all their money to build yachts, buy apartments in London and build luxury palaces. And to keep Putin safely in power of his country have an oversized security apparatus been created to waste even more money. Other oil rich countries can prosper - Like Norway. However russia does not perhaps have enough oil to lift 144 million people out of poverty, but if the money was well used then it could go a long way. And the Dutch disease is not inevitable. But the corrupt elite do not wanna see people getting rich from other sources of wealth that could challange their power base, so russia is what it is. Its fossile fuel riches has become more of a curse than a blessing. And the dictatorship breeds corruption, which breeds ineffiecency. And the country is afraid of all forms of change. Putin is basically waging a war against modernism. Putinists think that best thing is to drive the car backwards into the future.
Mig-31k, Mig-31BM are the best interceptor fighter jets on the planet. They exceed 3000km/h. The modernization of these jets is to make an almost new jet.
Had top speed been most important, then I doubt that the US Navy would have replaced the F-4 Phantom with slower planes, as it is still the fastest plane to have flown in the US Navy til this day. And likewise do I doubt that Sweden would have let Gripen replace the much faster Viggen which was so fast that it was capable of hunting down a SR-71 Blackbird and gain a missile lock on it. Flying super fast is just dumb, and cause stress on the airframe and it also dramatically increase the fuel consumtion and thereby decrease range and flying time. And nearly all air combats happens in speeds near Mach 1, and air combats at Mach 2 are as rare as unicorns. So flying 3000km/h is a worthless skill. It just shows that the designers of the aircraft have prioritized the wrong things, and therefore are incompetent. A fast flying plane is just about bragging rights, and not about effiency on a battlefield.
@@nattygsbordyeah that's why US builds entire fleet of fast F-15EXs to support slow F-35s, as well as wanting NGAD to be hypersonic, yeah, speed totally doesn't matter
@@Янус_Ырт Speed is only important up to a point, say Mach 2. Beyond that it doesn't matter that much. And the reason why USA keeps the F15EX probably has to do more with its ability to have more hardpoints than just the 4 sitting on F35. Plus that F-15EX will be able to carry much larger long range missiles that are too big to fit inside the weapons box of F22 and F35. So it is mostly just a missile truck, using F15s powerful performance and big cargo carrying capacity. Mach2 dogfight capabilities are not a priority. Only people who knows nothing about aircrafts and air combat believes such things are important. Planes do not normally fly at those speeds. To reach those speeds you normally need to use an afterburner which dramatically increase the fuel consumption. And normally will the plane run out of fuel after between 3 and 15 minutes. And training an aircraft in peace time to fly at those speeds would probably not be welcome, as it puts the aircraft under enormous stress and pressure - which shorten the life of an extremely expensive aircraft.
Naw, what they did was add a gear shifter to the pilots pedal/propulsion system. This allows the pilot to adjust their pedaling intensity to the situation. They added larger pedals to prevent the notorious issue of pilots feet slipping off at high pedaling speeds and they removed the horn.
As the su35 is already quite excellent, if the russians can keep enough mystery around the felon then western countries will always be cautious around russias ability. It has to be better than thier navy and army anyway
As someone who mocked Russians on podcast for air defence friendly fire incidents (like it never happens in US) What's your thoughts about F18 getting shot down and another jet narrowly scape getting shot down by friendly fire in less than a week ??? 🤡
It is more about the plane movements that the nozzle can control: - F-22 is considered having "2D" because its nozzle can control pitch (moving up or down together) and roll (moving each one separately in opposed directions - one up and the other down - so creating a movement on the roll axis) - a plane with "3D nozzle", aside the above, can also move "left-right", so acting also in the "yaw" axis of the plane. The common used russian planes with such (Su-35 and actual SU-57) have "round nozzles" that can vector themselves in all directions, so they have a "pure" 3D nozzle capabilities... the "new SU-57" discussed here has similar nozzles to those of the F-22 (rectangular, and capable to move only up or down) but as it was shown, they are mounted at an agle, rather than horizontally alike in the F-22: they will loose some degree of freedom rather than a "pure round 3D nozzle", but still capable to influence all the 3 movement axis (pitch, roll and yaw), even if in a slightly diminished capability... The diminished return in manouverability could be considered a good trade-off, when "flat nozzles" have better performance in anti-radar performance (a round surface will have ALWAYS a face that could rebound radar waves to its receptor... that is why modern "stealth planes" try to avoid much as possible a perfect round shape - they are all flat-angular surfaces - F-22/F-35 alike, or the old F-117 - or very squashed - alike the B-2 and future deployed B-21)
@@CapitanoAraym Actual Su-57? Even the T-50 had it, as it and the Su-35S have the same engine. Current Su-57Ms still build on this design. They are pure 3D nozzles? They have 20dg of movement in their primary axis with 16dg of supplemental movement left/right. The F-35 features a round nozzle, unlike the F-22.
@@chrismaggio7879 Elon thinks the F-35 is a waste of resources because it has a pilot in it; he's not going to do anything to help update anything that has a pilot in it and also isn't as good.
lol do you realise the main reason the program was delayed and low production output was due to waiting on the Al-51fs, the Russian mod was not accepting orders from sukhoi because of that , a whole new production line has been made for the su-57 in Kazan
@@noir1923 F-35 is in serial production, deployed around the world and has been combat tested (Iran's air defense went bye bye, lmao). All the Su-57 has done is shot its own wingman.
@@Edcreviewer I mean the F-35 program was delayed and overbudgeted but look where it is now. Successful and over 1000 built. Pak-Fa program is doing better compared to it.
The US attacks more than they defend. That makes multirole and attackers are lot more valuable than fighters. They could pump out more Raptors but all they'd do mostly is intercept civilian aircraft lol
@@WALTERBROADDUS but our fighters aren't the undisputed ass kickers that they once were. In air combat, you WANT the unfair advantage! We no longer have that. Yes, the F-22 is good, but thanks to Commie Obama, we don't have enough of them. The F-35 is good in BVR, but in WVR, it's perhaps F-16 level; it's not at Su-27 level, let alone Su-57 level.
B-21 can do most of what NGAD would have, and the Navy F/A-XX is still in development. If that's falling behind, I'd sure like to fall behind a bit more
@@BreandanAnraoi I suppose the USAF could use the Navy's F/A-XX; it wouldn't be the first time the USAF used USN aircraft. Remember the F-4 Phantom II? That started life as a Navy fighter. I'd like to see us return to the days of the Century Series fighters, the F-8 Crusader, etc., where we designed and built new, cutting edge fighters every couple of years.
Modernize the A-10 (angry Hog) maybe with mild burners 😬-Skid can be chief of program. Modernize the F-14 (Tomcat six-9). Mover chief pilot and Gonky buckled in the backseat. TG-Mav was zero CGI (therefore factual) and proved the 54 year old Tomcat can whoop the 57. 🫡
The current single test example of an LO thrust vectoring exhaust nozzle on an Su-57 is 2D only and is angled off of 90degrees to try and get more angle performance.
@@ГеоргийМурзич The Su57 doesn't have this design as evidenced by the fact that its only just now testing one... The Su-35 also does not have 2D nozzles of any kind.
You know, since we need modern, capable, and affordable fighters (something we can't do anymore), why not license build the Korean KF-21 Bromae? It's the F-22's Mini Me. We could afford 1,000 of them!
@@WALTERBROADDUS as I've said elsewhere, the best fighter in the world means nothing if you don't have enough of them. Look at Germany's Me262 at the end of WWII; it was the F-22 of its day, yet it made no difference. Why? Germany never had more than 70 in service; that was a drop in the bucket compared to the thousands of inferior prop driven fighters of the Allies. It's better to have a large number of good fighters vs. having a few elite fighters.
Looks like they made the exhaust nozzle more stealthy. Yes, they are finally getting around to streamlining the RCS ... somewhat. The Russian design concept is to have low hour "things" like engines that break and you just replace them completely vs having a complex repair chain. Also, notice how Russian airfields are only now getting more aircraft hangars, for decades everything just sat in the open, winter or summer. HMS, yep, the first in the 80s. Cool. How much did we train against the HMS and ARCHER? :) Its a step up but not quite playing ball with F-22.
Can we at least agree that because they only have 20 (approximately) aircraft operational, it really doesn’t matter what they do to this aircraft and given the fact that we have nine times that amount in F 22s.
A little over 30, with the recent delivery. Who cares about how many F-22s there are in comparison to the Su-57? Does the F-22 carry 4 cruise missiles along with air to air munitions?
SU-57 Upgrade? From what I've seen of the SU-57s falling out of the skies of Ukraine, they need it. Maybe some upgrades to their potbellied pilots too?
The SU-57 is for sale, so these upgrades are probably at least to some degree for marketing. And even if you can't compete with the US and China, what can they do? Shut down their flight industry completly? Freeze it? They have engineers on their payroll and why shouldn't they implant new stuff? Like I said, the alternative would be to completly axe their aircraft-industry. But that wouldn't look good for the population, would it?
China made it with stolen technology from Russia and US made f35 with 15 other countries and it still took 20 years to make it, Russia made su57 alone. They are competing pretty good.
@@noir1923 Su-57 issues aren't the design itself, its the production and procurement. F35 took a long time yes, but there are over 1,000 in service right now, whereas Su-57 barely has a squadron.
Su-57 has a new engine, izdelie30. The top speed of this jet will be over 2500km/h. This engine will also be installed in the steath drone s-70 okhotnik, the wing brother of su-57.
@@WALTERBROADDUS But being able to super cruiser mark 2 is impressive which is what the engines will allow the su-57 to do the plane could already reach mark 2
@@madnow1 I doubt any fighter can supercruise at those speeds. Especially not a flying brick. And no flying 2500km/h is a worthless capability that only impress politicians and other clueless people. No air combats takes place at Mach 2. And flying at such speeds is just dumb, as it will make the plane instantly run out of fuel, and the airframe will take a severe beating and cutting deeply down the lifetime of the plane as a result.
Most forget Russia cant print money like America can,sometimes they got to pick and choose what to accommodate in their budget(they can still do better especially regarding corruption)
@@sujitbala1492nobody is worrying about an aircraft with a total of 76 orders by the VKS, the export market is dominated by F-35 and for non US friendly countries it'll be the J-35, countries like India won't be buying Su-57E if they are smart and not panic buy due to Pakistani J-35 procurement, they are better off continuing AMCA program.
@@kermittoad India is looking for the Su-57M if they can. And even if it is the Su-57E it is the best aircraft that can deter the pakistani J-35s as a stop gap before the AMCAs come in service. It will take at least 10 more years for it to be developed.
There is at least an operational squadron of Su57s and the only reason there aren't more is the VVS didn't want any more until the proper engines, the AL51 was ready... This has now received its certification status and so more of these birds will enter service. Besides, you don't have stop modernization or development just because you've not built many yet. There would have been trade offs made that can now be overcome and overall there's always a modernization plan.
In short: they CAN produce it, but they don't want to produce it. They are waiting for the new engine to be fully developed and compatible for the Su-57, then they will go on to production. Why buy an aircraft when you can buy a superior version of it later next year, it saves costs.
We don't really know for certain. The Russians might have sent a version without the main stealth features I.e. coatings, clean surfaces as China is a strategic competitor even if partners of convenience at current. The plane would be certain to be scanned by radar and possibly scanned by other sensors on the way so makes sense to send the agile version but not the full one.
I may be looking at this the wrong way but to me this comes across as the Russians modernizing a jet that should already be modernized. That is if we are looking at this like it is to contend with other designs that are categorized as 5th generation aircraft. Thanks for the coverage Mover!
You are looking at it wrong. The Russians don't have the money to throw at it like the US does nor do they even have the same missions sets or doctrine. They made many compromises to get this built and only now as they get involved in a really hot war, are they prioritizing other aspects of the program development. They understand their limitations which is why they haven't used their Su57s for deep strikes in very contested air spaces yet... More for quarterbacking their other air ops and assets.
They prefer to get some suckers to buy them and fund the upgrades and provide some of the engineering work, then they build the improved version for themselves. Russia has done this several times before with their customers. They only want to fund enough to get a lucrative foreign contract that then funds and develops the product more fully.
Why should it have already been modernized? It's been in production for a little under 3 years and saw development during one of the largest technological inclines in aviation technology. This is literally nothing more than a nozzle retrofit for an engine that is ALREADY PRESENT on a modernized variant that's ALREADY IN PRODUCTION.
@@TheArcticFoxxo Alright, no need to overreact, I was mainly making a light hearted joke and poking fun at the perceived technological gab between Russian fighters and other modern aircraft designs in the 5th generation category, not an actual question of intent. What I do find interesting is that the Su-57 did not already have the new nozzles prior to the first production aircraft entering service sooner despite their complexity.
"The Documentary Top Gun Maverick"
I almost spat my coffee out in laughter there
Same here
You'll enjoy "Mover ruins movies" on Iron Eagle then :)
@@steveman1982 Looks like I have not seen that. Thanks for the recommendation.
-From another Steve
It's a recurring joke on this channel.
Classic Mover :)
People do not understand that Russia was the first country to introduce flat nozzles in the VTOL Yak-38/41 program of the 1970s, they are mentioned only for the purpose of testing the thrust vector, I quote Yakovlev: "a flat biaxial nozzle was developed in the second half of the 1970s for the vertical take-off and landing fighter Yak-41 (VTOL). An original solution was used to rotate it - the nozzle was divided into three segments, which, rotating in opposite directions relative to each other, provided a deviation of the thrust vector in the vertical plane by an angle of 95 ° (in vertical takeoff and landing mode). For short takeoffs, the nozzle was installed at an angle of 62°. This solution made it possible to use the afterburner both in horizontal flight and in vertical mode.
The stealth technology was created by Russia, not the US. It is Russian technology! The helmet was also created by the Russians, they used such a helmet on the MiG-29. The vertical takeoff and landing technology used on the F-35 was also created by the Russians, Lockheed Martin contracted the Yakovlev Design Bureau to improve the Yak-141 design.
the guy on Millenium 7 - also pointed out that the flat nozzles aren't flat but have a slight v-shape and are hollow to allow cool air to flow through them .....
seems they had to master 3D printing of the parts to put this design into production ....
not a "straight" copy of the F-22 after all .... but an evolution
Yep
You don't need 3D printing for that.
@@ctmme, true, but supposedly that is part of their goal making these.
They aim to make 90% of the nozzle assembly 3D -printable. That's something to aim for, I suppose, both figuratively AND literally.
@@ctmme you actually do, with all the intricate internal profile of the exhaust peatal for cool air flow it is only viable to use 3D printing for its production
The Russians do not copy anyone. They simply try to make everything better. In the annuls of history, they have been copied far often than they have copied
Russian military upgrades were behind because they had entire decades where there was no money investment in R&D due to the economic turmoil of the 1990s and early 2000s , they are playing catchup
Still have catching up to do with AESA and avionics
Keep telling yourself that, if ww3 breaks without nukes, I would enjoy watching our front lines gets decimated over overconfidence bs, as if Germany in ww2 not only caught up in less than 5 years, but significantly had breakthroughs after breakthroughs. Half of Soviet Union used barter system after ww2, and yet we lost every step of the way in race to space until they stopped because flat out broke, we had to bring German scientists that worked with V2 to help. They were the first to make VTOL just to make their overweight mig able to take off, scrapped it when the vtol itself used too much fuel and added more weight. And they had hypersonic missiles before we do. And to make it worse, current proxy war, other than stock abrams, we have seen 59 Tomahawks rendered useless, ATACMS was granted to shoot inside Russia, ZERO made any impact, hits target but fails to destroy them, Bradleys also useless, Strykers, HIMARS, Stingers and Javelins, etc etc.. and we still have overconfident people thinking they will stay behind us after our greatest bs, F35. New Abrams came out, even more useless, more techs but the fact that rendered the stock abrams feature useless, still there and only manned by 3 crews which a buddy of mine said hell nawh, 4 crew already hard enough, 3 crew with that much delicate tech, that's just waiting for disaster. Never ever underestimate anyone, we lost 30% of our unit on DDay, let me remind you, Germany main army was gone in 1943 may after losing stalingrad, 30% casualties, highest and worst record than France had, and we didn't land alone on DDay, UK and Canada also joined.
@@phunkracy s-400 radars are aesa...
@@keslerjenkins9683 is S-400 a fighter jet? Su-57 by all reports is not great and Su-35 still use PESA
@@phunkracy Russia has already announced a large-scale modernization of the Su-35, 30, 34 aircraft. They have started to modernize them to the 5th generation, it has been stated that all 5th generation systems from the Su-57 will be used. The engine was presented in China and this engine was not developed for the Su-57, but for the modernization of 4++ aircraft. Radars will also be replaced. Russia has announced the modernization of its 4++ generation aircraft
Millennium 7 * History Tech
did an interesting video on the SU-57M
that dude is a joke with his super duper game-changing ultrasonic stealth intergalactic ballistic peanut missiles
@@issadraco532 , Nope, Millenium*7 is the most professional channel on YT about aviation and less biased.
@@issadraco532why so salty lol. You really think that missile can by intercepted? 😂
@@maksimluzin1121 Russian propagandist Millenium*7 are is the most professional channel on YT just like the su-57 is the best plane in the world 🤣
@@amunra5330 Already intercepted multiple times in Ukraine
The Su-57 nozzles are air-cooled. Raptor doesn't have anything like that. The Raptor will have more infrared radiation than the Su-57.
What are you rambling about?
@@WALTERBROADDUS Is it not clear to you?
@@TheArcticFoxxo Nope. The exhaust is not being cooled.
@@WALTERBROADDUSSu57's nozzles ARE air cooled lol, look at the nozzles closely, it has vents right underneath the external panel
@super-maneuverability592 you expect your are going to chill your beer on it?🍺 Your not fooling a heat-seeking missile very much.
"In the documentary, 'Top Gun: Maverick'." Classic!!!
From what I've seen, the flat nozzles are angled at 45° viewed from behind . So, with only a single axis of movement, by mixing the 2 nozzles, it's possible to have pitch, yaw and roll control . Less than the former thrust vectoring nozles, but with the advantage of the lower radar signature of the flat nozzles .
On the video I actually saw the nozzles rotating and turning freely in all directions. It obviously was a 3D render but not impossible. I guess, time will tell.
@@pajownik No need time. There are already real photo and video of the plane with that nozzle.
@@kondor-n1d But I didn't see it rotating and turning freely in all directions.
@@pajownik Because it didn't turning freely in all directions. It works the same way as all previous nozzles Su 30, 35C, 57.
Transformers: Dark of the Moon is my favorite documentary.
According to that documentary, there is no F-22 better than the Starscream variant. Nobody got anything on that.
@FirestormX9 we found alien robots on the moon, and the government is lying to us. Also, the F-22 is capable of space flight.
@@FirestormX9 agree
Nothing beats Hot Shots, especially for realism.
Su-57 square nozzle is pseudo-3D TVC. And this is often confusing people when media, and not only them, show incorrect animations of it. This is similar to Su-30MKI TVC - practically 2D, but each engine is rotated so that when the nozzles point up, they also point outward and when they point down - they also point inward. Plus the nozzle can move individually. As opposed to F-22 which has the nozzles aligned and moving only together.
Nice breakdown, Mover. Nice using the historical documentary Topgun Maverick as reference. The SU57 does get a lot of hate, but I would be more than happy to try it out.
Maybe in Topgun 3, Maverick steals the Felon.
With the help of Major Gant obviously...
@Trig0r now that would be cool
Su57 does get a lot of hate😂😂😂
Everything Russian does get a lot of hate
Bias is extremely wild sadly@@glovemaker2
@@glovemaker2 In the United States and that neoliberal monstrosity called EU maybe, but we in the rest of the world aren't rabid. And good on Mover to cite some credible, solid sources like the documentary "Top Gun: Maverick".
Since the mid-80s and 90s, most of the Russian developments in the field of electronics were curtailed or destroyed at the request of advisers from the United States (CIA), who at that time did everything to set the country's development back decades so that it would be easier to tear Russia to pieces. And for this reason, such developments as the optical electronic helmet of the pilot had to start almost from scratch in the 2000s. and this was also greatly hampered by problems in related fields and lost competencies and time in microelectronics. In fact, we have to catch up with a 15-year lag, and in these areas it is very difficult .
That sounds like russian excuses. Russia blames every problem they have on the west. There are several problems with this claim.
1. How do you suppose the cia simply requested domestic russian labs and companies destroy their own work on behalf of the americans and why would they listen?
2. When did russia present any advanced electronics? I dont see any evidence of russia initially coming out with an advanced electronics platform and then suddenly going backwards and having to re develop. Their electronics have ALWAYS been inferior. The usa developed solid state electronics in the 1970s in the f111 and the russians were still using tubes.
I dont believe this silly claim in the slightest.
The Cosmopolitans, the Capitalists, the Jews, the CIA. Always somebody else. Howbout lookin in the mirror? How many times you need to step on the rakes to get the clue...
Does this mean we'll "modernize" the TOMCATS?!
Yeah it’s called the F35
@@CNSTAdventures F-35 has nothing on the tomcat. It's like 30% slower with less range.
If u mean the Iranian ones then sadly no, Iran is Reportedly planning to retire both their Tomcats and Phantoms once they get a sufficient number of Flankers. Welp, at least the Old Lady can finally rest peacefully.
@@pandasonic1294 They should sell to private American contractors/Grumman.
@mikeyplayzwrld lol, good luck.
Flat nozzle should be less complex. Fewer actuators and stuff.
I believe you are correct, the complexity referred to in the article i think is referring to the structure of the nozzle itself, being 3d printed to have bypass air to cool the exhaust.
But heavier and less efficient, although looking at how many actuators Russian 3D-vectoring nozzles seem to have the overall weight might actually be similar.
@@RichelieuUnlimited Yeah, hard to tell from the info available atm, I'm sure the serrated version intended for the new engine performs a lot better overall, but this design is obviously a much better stealth profile. I'm guessing it will come down to how well the new engine performs has to what they eventually use.
Their traditional, 3-D nozzles are way more complicated than this one
Any video on the Weekend friendly Fire Mess?
Covered it on the podcast.
@@CWLemoine But does SU-57 break П-42 climbing records?
Probably translation of news on helmet upgrade is not correct - it was developed to be very close in features to F-35 helmet.
Mover, if you watch a channel called Millennium7 he explains how the IR cameras work in the Su57. I'm not sure if it's integrated into the helmet but he said that the SU-57 can see through the plane with IR cameras the same way as the F-35 just not 360 degrees something like 270. I'd be really surprised if that's not integrated into the new helmet.
The thrust vectoring appears to be angled but moves up or down. While previous engines moved up,down,left,right. Or do the angled move all four directions?
Three thing's the Russian's have across all aircraft is :
1.Good looking 2. Air superiority 3. Cost effective
They've always focused more on real methods of war which is artillery. Now that they may have to defend against Nato they have become more focused on air combat.
1. MIG21 is the ugliest plane ever made. MIG25 and MIG27 are just boxshaped ugly things. And their more modern planes have an ugly pin at their back.
2. They usually have a piss poor kill ratio. Like MIG21 for example with 3 planes lost for every enemy aircraft shot down. Also MIG29 have a negative kill ratio.
3. Planes are not cost effective if they get shot down before they can deal damage to the enemy.
4. I havn't noticed that russias military being more focused at fighting real wars than other militaries. Looks more like its industry is creating prestige projects for its politicians - like building aircraft carriers and cruisers instead of small coastal ships more suited for russias actual military needs and gaining the maximum amount of bang for the buck.
And russian artillery compared to Nato artillery shows us guns with less range, less precision, longer reload time, longer time for it to be made ready for action, more time to prepare to move the artillery piece after it have fired. And artillery consumtion is higher on average for scoring a hit - which cause a logistical burden as many more tons of ammuntion needs to be transported. And gun barrels worns down faster when they need to fire more often before they can score a hit.
So my conclusion is that all the worlds 4 best artillery pieces are found in the western world: Panzerhaubitze 2000, Archer, Caesar and K9 Thunder.
Looks are subjective. Never measure of effectiveness. They have no air superiority in their current conflict. And most of that has been achieved through surface-to-air missiles. And costs? You don't see anyone lining up to buy Russian aircraft....
@@nattygsbord 1. Looks are subjective this entire argument is flawed
2. The mig 21 is a second generation jet that was able to during the Vietnam War consistently compete with the F4 phantom 2 a third generation jet that was much more advanced and consistently out competed every other US aircraft from that conflict it also during the 1971 India Pakistan war massively outcompeted the F104 a second generation jet that was the US counterpart to the mig 21 it performed so well in these early wars then it became the most exported fighter jet of all time by far but this led to the mig 21 to be used long past when it should have been retired it is still being in the air forces of some nations to this day this meant that the mig 21 later on had to compete with aircraft generations ahead of them in terms of technology such as in Iran Iraq war Israeli arab wars or the first Gulf War but even then you'd only come to the conclusion of a 3 to 1 loss ratio if you uncritically accepted the kill to loss ratios from Iran, Israel and America during all of these conflicts this is problematic because nations routinely lie about air to kill ratios even Western nations so accepting these numbers without question is very problematic specially for Iran which is a nation that is frequently stated as being untrustworthy today and yet you are willing to accept their numbers just because it makes the F-14 look good As for the mig 29 the only reason its kill ratio is poor is because it got outcompeted by the SU27 in the Eritrean Ethiopian wars another Russian jet and poor performance in the first Gulf War which can be explained by the fact that they were exported downgraded Mig 29 unable to use the most modern missiles.
3. My second point answers this
4. You accuse them Of making prestige projects instead of useful projects and yet one of your two examples is making aircraft carriers something Russia hasn't done since the 1980s cruisers are useful for coastal defence and as for making small ships they are doing that.
Your point about artillery is also completely wrong if we compare Russia's most modern artillery 2S43 Malva which has a range of 70 kilometres versus 54 kilometres for the Panzerhaubitze 2000 50 for the Archer 55 for the CAESAR and 60 for the K9 Thunder in terms of reloaded speed the2s43 Malva can fire 7 shells in one minute compared to the Panzerhaubitze 2000 10 the archer 7 the CAESAR 6 and K9 Thunders 7 what we can see is that the 2S43 Malva is pretty compatible to these systems in terms of fire rate not the best not the worst accuracy isn't something that could be properly measured considering all of these systems can fire programmable munitions probably compatible. modern systems like this do not make up the majority of Russia's artillery arsenal which is mostly made-up of older systems but this is largely because of the sheer number of older systems rather than Russia's inability to produce modern ones. the one area of artillery commitment that you did not consider is that Russia has way more artillery The US has 2862 artillery pieces Russia has 14564 artillery pieces how could you say Russia is not committed to artillery when they have over five times the artillery pieces as the US.
@@nattygsbord The MiG-21 is meh, the MiG-27 is not at ALL boxshaped. What pin are you talking about?
They don't? Very few aircraft there have a kill ratio to begin with, as the last air to air engagement before the ongoing series of wars was in the '80s.
@@WALTERBROADDUS No air superiority? I take it that a lack of Ukrainian aircraft operating within 50km of the frontline isn't air superiority, right?
Just learned this week (from the Not A Pound for Air to Ground channel) that a HMCS was proposed for the F-106, of all things. It would have been based off the tech that was to be used in the still-born AH-56 Cheyenne attack helicopter (and which presumably made it's way into the AH-64).
Love your videos, Mover. Thanks for doing what you do
Quick correction. The US Navy was the first to field a HMCS system with the VTAS starting in 1969. 3:22
When was it first used operationally?
Quick correction, VTAS was not adopted until March 1972.
@@nemesis2264did it work though? On a F4-J the sidewinders at that time weren’t high off boresight at all.
@@jordancourse5102 from what I understand, it was only for pointing the radar, and thus aiming the radar missiles, I'm not sure if the sidewinders could also be aimed with radar slaving
@@jordancourse5102 Did I even mention anything about it working or not though?
I simply stated it was not adopted until March 1972.
Forget stealth fighters.
It’s time for endo-Exo atmospheric fighters.
Star Wars
We need interplanetary travel first.
Why do people talk about the Su-57 like it's a real production aircraft? Haven't we learned to stop giving the Russians the benefit of doubt on their claims yet?
Most beautiful bird 🐦 in the sky by far 😢
Do you know if su57 is used as an awacs? At least temporary. I've seen couple of things that suggest that su27/30/35 are provided with intelligence from airborne platform possibly using SU-57, after A-50 incidents early 2024.
Make a review about an F18 that being shot down in red sea by "Friendly Fire"
This flat nozzle design by the Russian is actual simpler by far, that the one with round nozzles. The reason is that each element in the round nozzle has its own hydro-mechanical actuator, where as in in the flat nozzle you have actuators above and below the nozzles, and another pair outside the horizontal planes. The mechanism is easier, more durable and much lighter
Merry Christmas Mover.🎁🎄
I feel like some kind of 3D thrust vectoring like this is going to be included in NGAD. All the concepts we've seen so far lack vertical stabilizers, and they're going to need some way to control yaw.
Differential thrust
@@RedTail1-1not efficient or precise.
They're gonna have ports that divert thrust through the body to move the plane, like the space shuttle reactor thrusters. This will enable better stealth and manuverability in ultrahigh altitudes. A space fighter essentially that can handle LEO satellites and rain hypersonic missiles from high above any other fighter. Top attack worked so well with tanks in Ukraine we figured why not apply that to air combat.
Its not "thurst" per se but redirected bleed air.
@@RedTail1-1 That will work if the engines are far apart, but if they're close together like a Hornet differential thrust won't have as much leverage to impact yaw. You also only get half the thrust because you have to reduce the power of one engine. If 2D thrust vectoring will be adopted from the 22 for high AOA pitch control, they might as well go 3D.
The can use drag rudders, like the B-2 and B-21.
Thanks for the pretty unbiased just the facts breakdown
So it's getting a "working" ejection seat, a LORAN C system, rear view mirrors and a handicap placard?
Cy 57 #51F1 They have nailed it...
1. There is a pic of a F-22 pilpt wearing the Scorpion helmet. Any news in this regard?
2. According to the first USN F-35C SQN commander, the F-35 is good detectable from behind with IR.
T-50 means that the prototype for Su-57 is a tank built in 1950.
Oh boy, wait until you hear about the T-50 tank from... You guessed it! 1941!
@@TheArcticFoxxoAlso the prototype for the Su-27, the T-10, is a tank from 1953 and not from 2010 as one would believe
@@FRGBlackBurn The Su-57 isn't even a plane either, it's the domestic designation for the T-48 motor gun carriage.
From promo video i've seen idk if their 3 axis is real tbh i think 2 axis is possible but the third one that move sideway is a bit questionable but i could wait untill their show it during airshow.
Nice review Mr Lemoine 👍
They talk about next gen in terms of the engines and it being capable of operating unmanned drones directly from the plane itself. That's what they mean by the 6th gen capabilities.
Word is they’re finally using flush rivets 😎
They always have used flush rivets on non-prototype jets.
I think you only seen the prototypes like T-50 . Su-57's are much cleaner
Where Ace combat 7 react?
It's another test design. On an actual flying jet. That makes sense. I'm only surprised that they released photos.
You have to realize Russia is doing all these amidst sanction, imagine what they would have if not for those.
Maybe it could have been a normal prosperous country with toilets, so it didn't have to steal toilets from neighbouring countries?
It could never be a prosperous country when it is seen as an adversary to US interests. Look how the US is trying to slow down Chinese chip development. NATO Admiral Rob Bauer said that Ukraine is of strategic importance. Not that hard to figure out why Russia has the same view.
Russia still use western electrinics, what are talking about?
@@vp6087 What exactly didn't you understand?
@@Holztransistor
Russias ruling elite just have to scapegoat Johnny foreigner, because how else can they justify stealing all their country's wealth an putting it all in their own pockets? So they hide behind a fake patriotism. How else will they justify making themselves rich while the rest of russian people getting nothing? In what ways would the average russian get a better life under Putin and his corrupt cronies than if they had foreign multinational oil companies plundering all oil and gas from russia?
The answer is of course that they havn't got anything better at all by having their corrupt elite taking all their money to build yachts, buy apartments in London and build luxury palaces.
And to keep Putin safely in power of his country have an oversized security apparatus been created to waste even more money.
Other oil rich countries can prosper - Like Norway. However russia does not perhaps have enough oil to lift 144 million people out of poverty, but if the money was well used then it could go a long way. And the Dutch disease is not inevitable. But the corrupt elite do not wanna see people getting rich from other sources of wealth that could challange their power base, so russia is what it is.
Its fossile fuel riches has become more of a curse than a blessing.
And the dictatorship breeds corruption, which breeds ineffiecency. And the country is afraid of all forms of change. Putin is basically waging a war against modernism. Putinists think that best thing is to drive the car backwards into the future.
I think they finally got an export order as well, it got announced at the China air show. Didn't say who though.
C.W. 3 Russian systems I want to hear about MIG-41, S-500 and when the S-700 is coming?
Probably someone already asked, but what is outro music? It's cool af
👽👽👽👽pls bring bigmac in $1 menu👽👽👽👽
Hmm…. They should just try to BUILD them first
Mig-31k, Mig-31BM are the best interceptor fighter jets on the planet. They exceed 3000km/h. The modernization of these jets is to make an almost new jet.
You are living in the year 1970 apparently? And are still using those metrics and tactics.
Had top speed been most important, then I doubt that the US Navy would have replaced the F-4 Phantom with slower planes, as it is still the fastest plane to have flown in the US Navy til this day. And likewise do I doubt that Sweden would have let Gripen replace the much faster Viggen which was so fast that it was capable of hunting down a SR-71 Blackbird and gain a missile lock on it.
Flying super fast is just dumb, and cause stress on the airframe and it also dramatically increase the fuel consumtion and thereby decrease range and flying time. And nearly all air combats happens in speeds near Mach 1, and air combats at Mach 2 are as rare as unicorns.
So flying 3000km/h is a worthless skill. It just shows that the designers of the aircraft have prioritized the wrong things, and therefore are incompetent. A fast flying plane is just about bragging rights, and not about effiency on a battlefield.
@@nattygsbordyeah that's why US builds entire fleet of fast F-15EXs to support slow F-35s, as well as wanting NGAD to be hypersonic, yeah, speed totally doesn't matter
@@Янус_Ырт Speed is only important up to a point, say Mach 2. Beyond that it doesn't matter that much.
And the reason why USA keeps the F15EX probably has to do more with its ability to have more hardpoints than just the 4 sitting on F35. Plus that F-15EX will be able to carry much larger long range missiles that are too big to fit inside the weapons box of F22 and F35. So it is mostly just a missile truck, using F15s powerful performance and big cargo carrying capacity. Mach2 dogfight capabilities are not a priority.
Only people who knows nothing about aircrafts and air combat believes such things are important.
Planes do not normally fly at those speeds. To reach those speeds you normally need to use an afterburner which dramatically increase the fuel consumption. And normally will the plane run out of fuel after between 3 and 15 minutes. And training an aircraft in peace time to fly at those speeds would probably not be welcome, as it puts the aircraft under enormous stress and pressure - which shorten the life of an extremely expensive aircraft.
And MiG-25 and 31 designed by Ukranians
This American still can't stop envying the Russians... The documentary Maverick ahahahahahah....
So no video on the f18 crash?
We did it last night on the podcast.
No ejection seat upgrades? So disapointing.
Imagine a Yf23 with three-dimensional thrust vectoring
If you look closely, I think the Su 57 was inspired in the YF23 because it is very similar in appearance in some aspects
@@manuel969 If the SU57 had a double delta wing I would say yes, but it is a lifting body, like the F23 was, unlike the F22 which is a flying brick
@@MrJunglebear1 Brick? You're sauced.
The Russians weren't first with the HMCS. They got it from South Africa.
For Fighter jets
No mate the Russians have never copied anything from South Africa, especially during the Soviet Union
No thoughts, none, I am a meat popsicle.
Better barrel rolls🛩✈
Please react on Houtese short down the American F15 .
Naw, what they did was add a gear shifter to the pilots pedal/propulsion system. This allows the pilot to adjust their pedaling intensity to the situation.
They added larger pedals to prevent the notorious issue of pilots feet slipping off at high pedaling speeds and they removed the horn.
As the su35 is already quite excellent, if the russians can keep enough mystery around the felon then western countries will always be cautious around russias ability. It has to be better than thier navy and army anyway
Cutest girl.. top model beauty but humble.. someone will be or is very lucky :)
Algorithmic engagement comment.
Has any of this been approved by Elon? Until then it's just speculation.
My favorite documentary is Armageddon, but Top Gun is pretty good too.
As someone who mocked Russians on podcast for air defence friendly fire incidents (like it never happens in US) What's your thoughts about F18 getting shot down and another jet narrowly scape getting shot down by friendly fire in less than a week ??? 🤡
Some one made a video of mavericks solo proving run over dubbed with the song Freebird...you should check it out.
It's 3d tvc just like the Su-30 it's just canted.
Special Self-Disassemble Operation.
Mover, I’m not impressed. It needs to have Jimi Hendrix capabilities for me to be impressed.
WTF is a 3d thrust vectoring nozzle? Up-down, port-starboard, and ?-?
Are they counting nozzle dilation? (big-small opening)
It is more about the plane movements that the nozzle can control:
- F-22 is considered having "2D" because its nozzle can control pitch (moving up or down together) and roll (moving each one separately in opposed directions - one up and the other down - so creating a movement on the roll axis)
- a plane with "3D nozzle", aside the above, can also move "left-right", so acting also in the "yaw" axis of the plane. The common used russian planes with such (Su-35 and actual SU-57) have "round nozzles" that can vector themselves in all directions, so they have a "pure" 3D nozzle capabilities... the "new SU-57" discussed here has similar nozzles to those of the F-22 (rectangular, and capable to move only up or down) but as it was shown, they are mounted at an agle, rather than horizontally alike in the F-22: they will loose some degree of freedom rather than a "pure round 3D nozzle", but still capable to influence all the 3 movement axis (pitch, roll and yaw), even if in a slightly diminished capability...
The diminished return in manouverability could be considered a good trade-off, when "flat nozzles" have better performance in anti-radar performance (a round surface will have ALWAYS a face that could rebound radar waves to its receptor... that is why modern "stealth planes" try to avoid much as possible a perfect round shape - they are all flat-angular surfaces - F-22/F-35 alike, or the old F-117 - or very squashed - alike the B-2 and future deployed B-21)
Up Down. Rotate 90Degrees, the Up down becomes Left Right. You can set the rotation to any degrees and can get 3D movement.
2D is up/down, 3D is up/down/sideways.
@@masoodjalal1152 They don't rotate
@@CapitanoAraym Actual Su-57? Even the T-50 had it, as it and the Su-35S have the same engine. Current Su-57Ms still build on this design.
They are pure 3D nozzles? They have 20dg of movement in their primary axis with 16dg of supplemental movement left/right.
The F-35 features a round nozzle, unlike the F-22.
Su-57 isn’t a Felon. It’s a Hero aircraft.
Nice, can they afford to upgrade all 10 of them?
They are in talks with Elon...
@@chrismaggio7879 Elon thinks the F-35 is a waste of resources because it has a pilot in it; he's not going to do anything to help update anything that has a pilot in it and also isn't as good.
cnn told you they have 10..??
Even with the ones they've lost, I believe they have more than 10.
@@PhycoKrusk None have been lost, and there are 33/34 (debated due to the conflicting comments of 1 being held back for testing)
I predict they'll get about 3 of these upgrades flyable in the next 10 years.
took f35 20 years dozens of fails and crashes to look something that resembles an working airplane, i say su57 is on good track compared to it !
lol do you realise the main reason the program was delayed and low production output was due to waiting on the Al-51fs, the Russian mod was not accepting orders from sukhoi because of that , a whole new production line has been made for the su-57 in Kazan
Resembles a working plane?? Come on now.
@@noir1923 F-35 is in serial production, deployed around the world and has been combat tested (Iran's air defense went bye bye, lmao). All the Su-57 has done is shot its own wingman.
@@Edcreviewer I mean the F-35 program was delayed and overbudgeted but look where it is now. Successful and over 1000 built. Pak-Fa program is doing better compared to it.
We stopped building the F-22, and we're not doing NGAD anymore. We're FALLING BEHIND!
The sky is not falling.
The US attacks more than they defend. That makes multirole and attackers are lot more valuable than fighters. They could pump out more Raptors but all they'd do mostly is intercept civilian aircraft lol
@@WALTERBROADDUS but our fighters aren't the undisputed ass kickers that they once were. In air combat, you WANT the unfair advantage! We no longer have that. Yes, the F-22 is good, but thanks to Commie Obama, we don't have enough of them. The F-35 is good in BVR, but in WVR, it's perhaps F-16 level; it's not at Su-27 level, let alone Su-57 level.
B-21 can do most of what NGAD would have, and the Navy F/A-XX is still in development. If that's falling behind, I'd sure like to fall behind a bit more
@@BreandanAnraoi I suppose the USAF could use the Navy's F/A-XX; it wouldn't be the first time the USAF used USN aircraft. Remember the F-4 Phantom II? That started life as a Navy fighter.
I'd like to see us return to the days of the Century Series fighters, the F-8 Crusader, etc., where we designed and built new, cutting edge fighters every couple of years.
Modernize the A-10 (angry Hog) maybe with mild burners 😬-Skid can be chief of program.
Modernize the F-14 (Tomcat six-9). Mover chief pilot and Gonky buckled in the backseat.
TG-Mav was zero CGI (therefore factual) and proved the 54 year old Tomcat can whoop the 57. 🫡
No....
The current single test example of an LO thrust vectoring exhaust nozzle on an Su-57 is 2D only and is angled off of 90degrees to try and get more angle performance.
It kept slanted 2D TVC design used in Su-35 and 57
@@ГеоргийМурзич The Su57 doesn't have this design as evidenced by the fact that its only just now testing one...
The Su-35 also does not have 2D nozzles of any kind.
@@Ihasanart what I meant is that both Su-35S and 57 have axisymmetrical nozzles with slanted 2D TVC
@@Ihasanart TVC: Thrust Vectoring Control
@@ГеоргийМурзич No they don't.
beau beast...
India need SU-57
You know, since we need modern, capable, and affordable fighters (something we can't do anymore), why not license build the Korean KF-21 Bromae? It's the F-22's Mini Me. We could afford 1,000 of them!
Step backward in technology and capability.
@@WALTERBROADDUS how do you figure?
@@WALTERBROADDUS as I've said elsewhere, the best fighter in the world means nothing if you don't have enough of them. Look at Germany's Me262 at the end of WWII; it was the F-22 of its day, yet it made no difference. Why? Germany never had more than 70 in service; that was a drop in the bucket compared to the thousands of inferior prop driven fighters of the Allies. It's better to have a large number of good fighters vs. having a few elite fighters.
It is not even in mass production, there are less than two dozen, and they already announce "upgrades" - the flying Lada must be real piece of work...
🗽👉💪🏾💪💪🏻🦅🗽🇺🇸🇺🇸
South Africa was the first with a helmet sighting system. Russia stole this technology.
Looks like they made the exhaust nozzle more stealthy. Yes, they are finally getting around to streamlining the RCS ... somewhat. The Russian design concept is to have low hour "things" like engines that break and you just replace them completely vs having a complex repair chain. Also, notice how Russian airfields are only now getting more aircraft hangars, for decades everything just sat in the open, winter or summer. HMS, yep, the first in the 80s. Cool. How much did we train against the HMS and ARCHER? :) Its a step up but not quite playing ball with F-22.
🐷 👁
Can we at least agree that because they only have 20 (approximately) aircraft operational, it really doesn’t matter what they do to this aircraft and given the fact that we have nine times that amount in F 22s.
A little over 30, with the recent delivery.
Who cares about how many F-22s there are in comparison to the Su-57? Does the F-22 carry 4 cruise missiles along with air to air munitions?
SU-57 Upgrade? From what I've seen of the SU-57s falling out of the skies of Ukraine, they need it. Maybe some upgrades to their potbellied pilots too?
When did they fall out of skies? Last I heard they were effectively knocking down Ukrainian SU27s.
yanks may need to worries more about F18s falling out of the skies of Houthi lmao🤣🤣
why russia is still trying to compete with the US and now China is beyond me.
The SU-57 is for sale, so these upgrades are probably at least to some degree for marketing.
And even if you can't compete with the US and China, what can they do? Shut down their flight industry completly? Freeze it? They have engineers on their payroll and why shouldn't they implant new stuff?
Like I said, the alternative would be to completly axe their aircraft-industry. But that wouldn't look good for the population, would it?
China made it with stolen technology from Russia and US made f35 with 15 other countries and it still took 20 years to make it, Russia made su57 alone. They are competing pretty good.
@@wedgeantilles8575 I think they should start over with a clean sheet design, that realistically looks at their production and capacity
@@noir1923 Su-57 issues aren't the design itself, its the production and procurement. F35 took a long time yes, but there are over 1,000 in service right now, whereas Su-57 barely has a squadron.
lol do you know what engines are on the j-20 and j-35 as we speak🤦🏾♂️😂
good looking plane from the side and front.. but i've more faith in that Turkish Kaan jet than this one.
Wait wait so they are modernizing a vehicle they haven’t even finished a full series on, wtf kinda backwards think speak is this 😂😂
F22 is much better, it has a lot of features, a lot of equipment. However, is more expensive than the SU 57
all available in 20-30 yrs
3:22 they did, just decided to not show it until now
Correct, a somewhat similar helmet had been prepared in 2016.
Cover Red Sea tragedy. How could that have happened?
It was covered on last night's live show.
They did
It will likely be uploaded as a separate video on the live channel
‘Modernizing’ something that hasn’t even started full scale production 😭💀
Su-57 has a new engine, izdelie30. The top speed of this jet will be over 2500km/h. This engine will also be installed in the steath drone s-70 okhotnik, the wing brother of su-57.
No one is impressed by Mach 2 speeds anymore. That's not the metric you judge Fighters by.
@@WALTERBROADDUS But being able to super cruiser mark 2 is impressive which is what the engines will allow the su-57 to do the plane could already reach mark 2
@@madnow1 I doubt any fighter can supercruise at those speeds. Especially not a flying brick.
And no flying 2500km/h is a worthless capability that only impress politicians and other clueless people. No air combats takes place at Mach 2. And flying at such speeds is just dumb, as it will make the plane instantly run out of fuel, and the airframe will take a severe beating and cutting deeply down the lifetime of the plane as a result.
AL-51F-1.
@@madnow1 the ability to network information and stealth capability; counts more in the fifth generation era.
Most forget Russia cant print money like America can,sometimes they got to pick and choose what to accommodate in their budget(they can still do better especially regarding corruption)
Yeah, and rumor has it they also print other countries currency.
Sure they can lol.
Omaigott they changed de nozzel
Su kool sukhoi
but its great when lockheed martin does it?
@@sujitbala1492 Lockheed Martin already did it lmao. Russia's only starting to figure it out
@@shinygemsbro If they think its optimal for them, why worry? You don't see the F-35 having flat nozzles do you?
@@sujitbala1492nobody is worrying about an aircraft with a total of 76 orders by the VKS, the export market is dominated by F-35 and for non US friendly countries it'll be the J-35, countries like India won't be buying Su-57E if they are smart and not panic buy due to Pakistani J-35 procurement, they are better off continuing AMCA program.
@@kermittoad India is looking for the Su-57M if they can. And even if it is the Su-57E it is the best aircraft that can deter the pakistani J-35s as a stop gap before the AMCAs come in service. It will take at least 10 more years for it to be developed.
Mover should have mentioned that the ruzzians T-90 turrets has more fly time than the un-upgraded Su-57.
how can they even upgrade a fighter that dont even exist at least in any huge number to speak off
There is at least an operational squadron of Su57s and the only reason there aren't more is the VVS didn't want any more until the proper engines, the AL51 was ready... This has now received its certification status and so more of these birds will enter service. Besides, you don't have stop modernization or development just because you've not built many yet. There would have been trade offs made that can now be overcome and overall there's always a modernization plan.
In short: they CAN produce it, but they don't want to produce it.
They are waiting for the new engine to be fully developed and compatible for the Su-57, then they will go on to production. Why buy an aircraft when you can buy a superior version of it later next year, it saves costs.
They wont fall for the Concurentcy trap of F-35 program
@@sujitbala1492 It is, Su-57M production started in Q4'23.
This "fighter that dont even exist" has more combat kills then all F22 and F35 together
man i hate that its such a terribly built jet because its a gorgeous design
Sukhois have been flying non stop in Ukraine for the past 3 years. Maybe not so terribly built.
they're not terribly built. just tons of outdated information + anti russia incentive is being spread like wildfire on the internet.
We don't know how well they're built.
It's a prototype. They change and upgrade. It is stitched from all parts.
We don't really know for certain. The Russians might have sent a version without the main stealth features I.e. coatings, clean surfaces as China is a strategic competitor even if partners of convenience at current. The plane would be certain to be scanned by radar and possibly scanned by other sensors on the way so makes sense to send the agile version but not the full one.
I may be looking at this the wrong way but to me this comes across as the Russians modernizing a jet that should already be modernized. That is if we are looking at this like it is to contend with other designs that are categorized as 5th generation aircraft. Thanks for the coverage Mover!
You are looking at it wrong. The Russians don't have the money to throw at it like the US does nor do they even have the same missions sets or doctrine. They made many compromises to get this built and only now as they get involved in a really hot war, are they prioritizing other aspects of the program development. They understand their limitations which is why they haven't used their Su57s for deep strikes in very contested air spaces yet... More for quarterbacking their other air ops and assets.
They prefer to get some suckers to buy them and fund the upgrades and provide some of the engineering work, then they build the improved version for themselves. Russia has done this several times before with their customers. They only want to fund enough to get a lucrative foreign contract that then funds and develops the product more fully.
Why should it have already been modernized? It's been in production for a little under 3 years and saw development during one of the largest technological inclines in aviation technology.
This is literally nothing more than a nozzle retrofit for an engine that is ALREADY PRESENT on a modernized variant that's ALREADY IN PRODUCTION.
@@stupidburp Such as?
@@TheArcticFoxxo Alright, no need to overreact, I was mainly making a light hearted joke and poking fun at the perceived technological gab between Russian fighters and other modern aircraft designs in the 5th generation category, not an actual question of intent. What I do find interesting is that the Su-57 did not already have the new nozzles prior to the first production aircraft entering service sooner despite their complexity.