Why dont they send it out, it makes the F-22 and F-35 looks bad.

Why don’t they send it out, it makes the F-22 and F-35 looks bad.

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    not enough made

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It would make the Su-57 look bad.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >iToddler

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Engines don't work.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I mean, they work. They're just not the engines the -57 was supposed to have. I think they're Su-27 engines with a fancy paint job and some electronics duct taped to them.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The paint makes them somehow even smokier than factory fresh.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Extra electronics nothing but an Airplane 2:The Sequel reference.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    "Canadian" hands typed this post.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It'd just crash.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This again? It's a paper plane with less than ten working machines

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because they only made 12, 2 of which are scrap, and half the remaining don't work. We're not sure about the other half.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They fucking wish they could send one out. I can only imagine the anal devastation if one gets domed by Ukrainian AD or more hilarious if their own AD swacks it out the sky.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Even better if it crashes with no outside influence because the pilot had no flight hours like that SU-25.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Even better if it crashes with no outside influence because the pilot had no flight hours like that SU-25.
        Probably one of the only cases where having like 5 working models all used for parades is to their advantage, even vatnigs can muster pilots who can put in hours on that few in safe areas.

        But yeah none of that prepares it for combat. It's a hanger/parade queen.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine if it gets shot down by a MiG-29 with an AMRAAM nigrigged onto it

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Is that better or worse than being shot down by some partisan with a Stinger?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Is there a practical difference
          Eventually you're so far down the shame tree that even a massive difference is immaterial and Russia is long beyond that point.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >>top gun irl
        American pilots would die of jealousy

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    One crashed, they need remaining three for military parades, and one for spare parts.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because Tom Cruise shot 3 down in a 40 year old plane with a malfunctioning radar.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I like to make it my headcanon that the Su-57 in TG:M sucked because they were actually monkey models that Russia sold to (scammed) Iran.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Inbred pilots too.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      only because he was able to surprise attack them at close range because they thought he was one of theirs

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    does russia have the capability to make these function correctly in their role as SEADers? Do they have the advanced network infrastructure to justify using stealth aircraft?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No and no.

      https://i.imgur.com/pzEHGA9.jpg

      Since the Russians are putting literal museum pieces into service, I doubt the Su-57 is even fit for combat

      At least if the US broke out AAA from the 50's it would come with actual fire control directors.

      F-18s are such assholes in DCS. Fucking AOA...

      Now imagine fighting a Hornet you can't lock up that's firing AIM-9Xs backwards at you over the shoulder.
      Welcome to the F-35.

      Meh, still not on the same level as an F-22 is, as far as I'm aware they're intended to basically drop in and destroy far away targets like SAM sites, that and/or provide close air support if necessary. Either way it's purpose is completely different than of a fucking 22 or some weird Russian offbrand version of it.

      >Still not on the same level as an F-22
      The F-22 is a dedicated single-purpose air dominance fighter like the F-15C. The F-15C being optimized for A2A does not somehow make the F-16 not a fighter. Same shit.
      >Either way it's purpose is completely different than of a fucking 22
      Yeah because it's actually supposed to do more than one fucking job. And even then the F-35 has 20 years on the F-22 as far as avionics goes. The APG-81 is a superior radar and the F-22 doesn't even have optical detection at all, while EO-DAS is basically cheating. All in a package that out-turns a Hornet and out accelerates a Viper.
      Who cares if the #1 fighter edges out the F-35? It's still #2 by a wide fucking margin.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Since the Russians are putting literal museum pieces into service, I doubt the Su-57 is even fit for combat

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Vodkamoron vaporware

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It doesn't exist, except for prototypes that aren't operational, four than can't be flown b/c flaws in manufacturing and 1 that is saved for photo ops.
    It is science fiction.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >it makes the F-22 and F-35 looks bad
    it looks bad when an olympic wrestler breaks the spine of a malnourished peasant (the Su-57)

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Really bro?

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Only from a distance anon, up close you can see the screws and the bad joints.
    also, looks do not equate to performance.

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah, bad-ly over-the-top

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why sending future weapons when old S-300 can shoot down f22 from 300 km? HATO send real competitor or fuck off, don't waste my time to amateur league.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >S-300 can shoot down f22 from 300 km

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Why sending future weapons when old S-300 can shoot down f22 from 300 km?
      What did he mean by this? Where are these numbers even coming from? How does he even know the capabilities of an F-22 when the pilots aren't even allowed to use their full capability unless their dog fighting real threats. This guy must be a top tier top gun pilot, the best the United States has to offer.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Where are these numbers even coming from?
        says so right in the fucking name can you even read mutt moron? or brain rotted like senile joe biden? "S-300": the "s" stands for "shoot down" and the "300" is for "300km". it is literally for shooting down f-22s or f-35s or any other hato jet from 300km away. suck it.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      300Km is the maximum theoretical range.

      Live the newer versions like S400 (S500?)

      Should have 400km and 500km range.

      That's the missile range.

      Detection depends on the target type and the radars used and the position of said radars respective to the target.

      Since F-22 is a stealth aircraft the detection range will likely be much lower so to the effective range will be lower too.

      The question is simply if the F-22 can dectect and fire missiles to the s300/400/500 before the it can see it or engage it.

      Considering that the Israeli managed to defeat some S400 using modernized F16s the answer is likely that the F-22 can hit the S400 before it can detect the plane.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The S-400 has a detection ran of 13mi - 21mi for the F-22 and F-35. They would get hit with an SBDII or AARGM-ER long before it knew they were out there. The F-35 can also jam with its radar even while using the other half of the AESA to scan, track, and target threats. Or, it can inject malware into the networked radar systems and take control of it with Suter. Suter now upgraded to Suter 3, a Cyber Warfare tech able to be used by air assets like the Rivet Joint, all US fighters, UAVs, and even ground units. It was run by the US Air Force BIG SAFARI unit starting in the early 1990s, under the Senior Suter program, and used in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and more. It allows a pilot to locate, target, and inject malware into enemy air defense systems without their knowing. You can then control the radar, turning it away from your position to insure you or your attack isn't seen by them. They're not able to do anything about it. Now with the F-35 350th spectrum warfare wing this should be even easier, as they also have this Cyber Warfare attack.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suter_(computer_program)

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Israel used it - with the help of the US - in Syria. Part II is more relevant, though I figured I'd post the full article.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            PART II

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          More on Suter.

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'd hope it makes the F-35 look bad. The F-35 isn't even necessarily a "jet fighter", the fact you even put them in the same boat tells us how big of a piece of shit it is.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      the f-35 is in fact necessarily a jet fighter

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Meh, still not on the same level as an F-22 is, as far as I'm aware they're intended to basically drop in and destroy far away targets like SAM sites, that and/or provide close air support if necessary. Either way it's purpose is completely different than of a fucking 22 or some weird Russian offbrand version of it.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          F-35 in a dogfight would easily shit on anything 4th gen just because it can always fire missiles.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Norwegian pilots say an F-35A with a 500lb bomb internally carried can out-gun a completely clean F-16. Clean, meaning no missiles and minimal drag. Allowing the F-16 to perform at optimal conditions in the dogfight - which in a combat scenario it wouldn't have, as it would have missiles and/or bombs strapped to the wings. The F-35 was designed to have the high alpha characteristics of the F-18 Hornet, with the power and energy recovery of the F-16. It's the best of each plane with stealth, low drag internal carry weapons, unmatched avionics, and situational awareness.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              F-18s are such assholes in DCS. Fucking AOA...

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Fucking AOA...

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The Ghost of Feednseed strikes again!

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The US knew, you don't name your aircraft after the villain of the insect world without knowing.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The fucking Gripen E has both better OTH range and in-range agililty, and all the same countermeasures the Fat Amy does.
            This plane will never see a dogfight, not one, but if it did, any modern fighter and most of the next gen will take it out like the trash. Even money on a F-15, for that matter

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >This plane will never see a dogfight, not one, but if it did, any modern fighter and most of the next gen will take it out like the trash. Even money on a F-15, for that matter
              The F-15 got eaten alive in red flag by F-35s.

              >The aircraft achieved a kill to loss ratio > 20:1 with 145 kills to 7 losses against agressor F-15C's, F-16C's and T-38's, all 7 losses occured in a WVR environment in which “They werent seen on the radar, they just were seen passing by” — Lt General (S) Harris, Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategic Plans and Requirements speaking at the House Armed Services comittee hearing on the 16th of Febuary 2017 regarding Red Flag 17-1.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The F-15 got eaten alive in red flag by F-35s.
                oh gee, in a showboat to see if the new bitch is better than the old bitch they made the old bitch lose what a sur-prise Andy

                >The fucking Gripen E has both better OTH range and in-range agililty,
                In what fucking universe? Viper can't turn with it, Hornet can't turn with it, I don't know why or who keeps telling people the F-35 isn't agile but it's fucking ridiculous.
                And the Gripen is literally worthless.

                argue with reality, not me
                Gripen
                >Maximum instantaneous turn rate: 30 degrees/second
                >Maximum sustained turn rate: 20 degrees/second
                >Roll rate: > 250 deg/sec
                F 35
                >fat piggy pig pig

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous
              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                instantaneous turn rate: 30 degrees/second
                sustained turn rate: 20 degrees/second
                >>Roll rate: > 250 deg/sec
                Thanks for confirming how retarded you are. F-35A has a max of 42 and a sustained of (at least) 28. And lets not forget it out accelerates a clean F-16C with 50% fuel while carrying a full combat load of gas and bombs.

                Actual reality:
                Gripen has:
                No arms
                No legs
                Not LO in any way, shape or form
                Barely supersonic
                Anemic radar, reliant on missile load to define offensive effectiveness
                It's a fucking EuroTejas. Pull your head out of your ass. Do you expect me to be shocked that a Cessna 172 can turn real good? And it's not even more agile than the F-35A in the first place.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                bitch bro an A-10 can out turn a F-35

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Too bad an A-10 can't see an F-35 even if that were true.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                How many of those kills were friendly?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                All of them

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >The fucking Gripen E has both better OTH range and in-range agililty,
              In what fucking universe? Viper can't turn with it, Hornet can't turn with it, I don't know why or who keeps telling people the F-35 isn't agile but it's fucking ridiculous.
              And the Gripen is literally worthless.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >still not on the same level as an F-22 is
          Nothing is on the same level as the F-22, though. The F-35 mauls clean F-16s in dogfights.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          F-22 doesn't even allow integrated helmet displays lmao. You gotta literally turn the aircraft to see the target to aim.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Watch yo tone

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      High vis Tomcat paintjobs are so fucking sexy i dont know how they got away with it for so long.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Stealth wasn't the de facto so planes could have cool livery

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why is the back of the plane shaped like flexing arched back muscles?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Visible exertion from the weight of Russia's expectations.

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The entire US military would be unable to shoot down a single squadron of Su-57s

    because there aren't enough of them for a single squadron

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    obviously it's dogshit compared to f35 and f22 combat-wise but physicially i'd agree it makes f35 look bad for sure (admittedly i don't like how it looks tha much in the first place).

    so aethetically-wise, su57 or f22 PrepHole? i'm gonna have to go with the su tbh

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Su from a distance maybe, up close you can see it's stretch marks and c-section scars

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's a meme prototype that would get romper stomped by an F-22. You seem to be the only retard in the world who didn't get the memo. It wouldn't even last in the sky long enough to know that an F-35 was in the sky with it while it was vanishing in a plasma cloud.

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    One of these really needs to fall into western hands before Russia goes completely tits up. She needs to be saved from rabid scrapper hordes and put in a museum (or actually made to function!). Otherwise were gonna end up in another poor Su-47 situation.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >She needs to be saved from rabid scrapper hordes and put in a museum (or actually made to function!
      I sure hope my local avaition museum has enough funds to go on a shopping spree in russia once this clow show invasion is over and the fire sale starts, i cannot stand those one-off aircraft rusting to shit in bumfuck nowhere
      Also take buran (or whats left of it) for good measure

      >poor Su-47 situation.
      I- I can save her

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >two of the surviving soviet shuttles are in kazakh hands as the relations between the two nations can't get any worse (without outright invasion)

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Here's to russia defaulting on some payments and Kazakhstan selling them

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What's cool about the enemy F-14 in TG:M is that it looks like it's literally the Iranian version.
    >F-14A
    >no chin pod IRST or camera
    >no drop tanks (Grumman wasn't done with them before the revolution happened)

    There seems to be a shitton of detail put into accurately portraying the F-14, seems someone on the production team was really fucking autistic. Maybe it was Cruise himself, being fed up over nerd telling him for over thirty years how and why the systems in Top Gun were mostly fantasy.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      100% some autist for the F-14 jumped to join the production team the moment the movie plans were made public.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Tom Cruise?

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They have https://www.aviacionline.com/2022/06/the-sukhoi-su-57-in-combat-operations-over-ukraine/

Your email address will not be published.