PAK-FA, T-50: News #4

Then it will be up to them to fix this media fuck up.

Here is the other aspect to this - they may be trying to fool the west.  Ever thought of that? There is a word for that in Russian, something that has been mentioned here multiple of times.

Anyway, Austin was the one who pointed it out on the other forums.  Was it a media blunder?  Maybe Su-57 will not be inducted in its current form?  Maybe it will be upgraded and then built in numbers.  There is that.

We don't really know.  All we know is this:

- It was stated they are not going to mass produce the jet just yet and that they will procure small amounts at first.  Which is the smart thing to do.
- Su-35 has shown to have worked very well and that they will continue to also procure them.
- Plane isn't ready yet.  12 is for induction and testing purposes.

Alright, I am very behind on the news but this is what I got.

Can someone link me to the Russian article of where this is stated that is being spread around the net?  I just followed what Austin posted on keypub and that is what I got:

https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?145474-Su-57-News-and-Discussion-version_we_lost_count!&p=2450250#post2450250

Anyway, I look at it this way - if they can apply radar systems like Photonic radar to Su-35.  It will be able to spot and identify the aircraft from hunderds of km's.  There are also plenty of systems to help counter stealth.

Its a useless debate.

I mean, I am all for Su-57.  I think it should be standard and replace all the current flanker fleet.  But I would just wait till they have everything down pat.  And at that point, Su-57 may be a different aircraft.

They are working on both Photonics and GaN both by Rostec.  I figure they may have been informed and shown examples and were impressed and state that they will wait.  A lot of jets need to be replaced for sure.  Su-35 is a solid piece of hardware.  But guess how long it took for it to be added to the inventory?

Edit: I seem to have recollection that they said they would never purchase Su-35 when it was first showcased. I seem to recall that articles were flying around that there would be no Su-35 as it showed little improvement over upgraded Su-27's (which is obviously wrong) and that it just was not ideal for Russia. Now here we are.

Media doesn't play a roll, neither does twitter, you or I or anyone else make a decision for Russia's armed forces. Or for other nations for that matter.

You know what does? People who test the units, and the politicians who work with the military.

I don't think Borisov, or the rest are trying to screw Russia over military like. Since the military has a lot of authority and they more or less know what they want.

I wrote here... some... 2 years ago. 12 is the ZERO SERIES, BATCH, it has always been, in every airforce in the world. Serial production starts when 0 series finishes tests in units, thats how it has been for last 50 years, thats how it is going to be for the next 50 at least.

So you can expect real serial production post 2022. lets say.

US didnt go and order 1500 F-35s instantly didnt they? If i recall first ordered batch was like 14. True they followed up with another 25 next year but that is the cappacity of the industry that we shall ignore on this point here.

Plus the misstranslations and clickbite headlines... relax.

Militarov wrote:I wrote here... some... 2 years ago. 12 is the ZERO SERIES, BATCH, it has always been, in every airforce in the world. Serial production starts when 0 series finishes tests in units, thats how it has been for last 50 years, thats how it is going to be for the next 50 at least.

So you can expect real serial production post 2022. lets say.

US didnt go and order 1500 F-35s instantly didnt they? If i recall first ordered batch was like 14. True they followed up with another 25 next year but that is the cappacity of the industry that we shall ignore on this point here.

Plus the misstranslations and clickbite headlines... relax.

And what the su57 can do with the F35s?

An S400 missile is cheaper option to take care of them.

The Su57 needed in 50-100 batch, no more aircraft required, and that amount will be enough to screw up the NATO air defence systems, and force everyone for high cost investments.

Singular_Transform wrote:

And what the su57 can do with the F35s?

An S400 missile is cheaper option to take care of them.

The Su57 needed in 50-100 batch, no more aircraft required, and that amount will be enough to screw up the NATO air defence systems, and force everyone for high cost investments.

Cheaper option? Arguable. Have you checked cost of S-400 batallion recently? And its effectiveness in full scale war is questionable, that is not debate here and i dont want to go into it.

Russians themself claimed requirement for 200 borts. Even tho it should be higher than that. 50 borts for something that they spent 20 years developing and billions of dollars. That would be probably per bort more expencive project than F-35.

If they do things in good way they could buy 100-150 su-57 for airforce and another 40-50 for future carrier. India, algeria, bielorussia, kazakstan, indonesia and why not some ME countries could buy 12 each and more for india which means 300 su-57. If venezuela manage to get better they fould also order 12-20 to replace older f-16 that will need to be replace.

If chinese j-20 is shit they will buy also some of them like they did with su-35 to improve their own flanker. Russia could oblige them to buy more than 50 to have a fair deal. Or why not let them build them in china like with su-30 if they sign for more than 200 jets.

They should save money on su-35 and stop buying it for more su-57 (even without new engines it will make it cheaper).

Isos wrote:If they do things in good way they could buy 100-150 su-57 for airforce and another 40-50 for future carrier. India, algeria, bielorussia, kazakstan, indonesia and why not some ME countries could buy 12 each and more for india which means 300 su-57. If venezuela manage to get better they fould also order 12-20 to replace older f-16 that will need to be replace.

If chinese j-20 is shit they will buy also some of them like they did with su-35 to improve their own flanker. Russia could oblige them to buy more than 50 to have a fair deal. Or why not let them build them in china like with su-30 if they sign for more than 200 jets.

They should save money on su-35 and stop buying it for more su-57 (even without new engines it will make it cheaper).

Without new engines Su-57 is barely marginally superior to Su-35 but with twice the price tag and several times longer delivery time

There will be no Su-57 for carriers because by the time they build a carrier (unlikely to even happen) that can launch it Su-57 will be ready for decommission

India and Venezuela will not be buying any, rest migh buy small numbers at best (still doubtful)

Without new engines Su-57 is barely marginally superior to Su-35 but with twice the price tag and several times longer delivery time

No. New engines are not magical. They allow a better supercruise that won't be used always. And maybe a marginal better consumsion of fuel that isn't an issue for russia.

Radars, stealth, datalinks, detection tools, weapons are better on su-57 than on su-35. Older or newer engine don't change that fact.

The engines can be changed later and use to old on su-30SM when izd.30 is in production.

There will be no Su-57 for carriers because by the time they build a carrier (unlikely to even happen) that can launch it Su-57 will be ready for decommission

India and Venezuela will not be buying any, rest migh buy small numbers at best (still doubtful)

Depend what they are planing for Kuznetsov. If they want really a carrier they can adapt it to carry 15 su-57 and even sell a naval version with catapult capability for Indian carriers or even for chinese.

India will buy su-57. What other 5th generation fighter will they use ? F-35 ? Or pay another 20 or 30 billion for 36 rafale modernization ? Or funnier make a stealthy Tejas Mk3 ?

If they had also upgraded yak 44 for carrier use, china and india would have bought it. At least 8 each for the carriers they are building. But no they prefere to spend billions in different design of corvettes all armed with one uksk and same weight... They have 0 clue in buisness management. They don't see oportunities.

Militarov wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

And what the su57 can do with the F35s?

An S400 missile is cheaper option to take care of them.

The Su57 needed in 50-100 batch, no more aircraft required, and that amount will be enough to screw up the NATO air defence systems, and force everyone for high cost investments.

Cheaper option? Arguable. Have you checked cost of S-400 batallion recently? And its effectiveness in full scale war is questionable, that is not debate here and i dont want to go into it.

Russians themself claimed requirement for 200 borts. Even tho it should be higher than that. 50 borts for something that they spent 20 years developing and billions of dollars. That would be probably per bort more expencive project than F-35.

That wouldn't come close to the same expense as the F-35.

Isos wrote:

Without new engines Su-57 is barely marginally superior to Su-35 but with twice the price tag and several times longer delivery time

No. New engines are not magical. They allow a better supercruise that won't be used always. And maybe a marginal better consumsion of fuel that isn't an issue for russia.

Radars, stealth, datalinks, detection tools, weapons are better on su-57 than on su-35. Older or newer engine don't change that fact.

The engines can be changed later and use to old on su-30SM when izd.30 is in production.

There will be no Su-57 for carriers because by the time they build a carrier (unlikely to even happen) that can launch it Su-57 will be ready for decommission

India and Venezuela will not be buying any, rest migh buy small numbers at best (still doubtful)

Depend what they are planing for Kuznetsov. If they want really a carrier they can adapt it to carry 15 su-57 and even sell a naval version with catapult capability for Indian carriers or even for chinese.

India will buy su-57. What other 5th generation fighter will they use ? F-35 ? Or pay another 20 or 30 billion for 36 rafale modernization ? Or funnier   make a stealthy Tejas Mk3 ?

If they had also upgraded yak 44 for carrier use, china and india would have bought it. At least 8 each for the carriers they are building. But no they prefere to spend billions in different design of corvettes all armed with one uksk and same weight... They have 0 clue in buisness management. They don't see oportunities.

India will indeed buy su 57's. It will be too good of a deal for them to turn down. There is no other way that they could get a 5th gen stealth jet in the air with Indian colors in such a short amount of time. Even if they just buy a small amount first. Power projection is about the look as much as anything. And some su 57's in Indian colors will show up the J-20 just fine.

The USA keeps throwing these ham fisted offers to them for 4th gens. "You can build them in India ! Do I ever have a 4th gen offer for you !" The US won't sell them F-35's.

I think Russia and China should build a joint 5th gen carrier jet. China has all the money but limited experience. Russia has the experience. China needs to get something together for its carriers.

Pierre Sprey wrote:

Militarov wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

And what the su57 can do with the F35s?

An S400 missile is cheaper option to take care of them.

The Su57 needed in 50-100 batch, no more aircraft required, and that amount will be enough to screw up the NATO air defence systems, and force everyone for high cost investments.

Cheaper option? Arguable. Have you checked cost of S-400 batallion recently? And its effectiveness in full scale war is questionable, that is not debate here and i dont want to go into it.

Russians themself claimed requirement for 200 borts. Even tho it should be higher than that. 50 borts for something that they spent 20 years developing and billions of dollars. That would be probably per bort more expencive project than F-35.

That wouldn't come close to the same expense as the F-35.

O ye? Do you know how project cost per bort is being calculated? You sum all the expences of development, prototyping, starting of production, industrial modernisation etc.. then divide it by number of borts produced.

Lesser the number of borts, higher the project cost per bort... as basic math suggests.

If there are only 50 borts produced cost of this project will be.... insane. Probably would match the obscure cost of Tu-160 project was in its time.

Militarov wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

And what the su57 can do with the F35s?

An S400 missile is cheaper option to take care of them.

The Su57 needed in 50-100 batch, no more aircraft required, and that amount will be enough to screw up the NATO air defence systems, and force everyone for high cost investments.

Cheaper option? Arguable. Have you checked cost of S-400 batallion recently? And its effectiveness in full scale war is questionable, that is not debate here and i dont want to go into it.

Russians themself claimed requirement for 200 borts. Even tho it should be higher than that. 50 borts for something that they spent 20 years developing and billions of dollars. That would be probably per bort more expencive project than F-35.

It is WAAAAAAY cheaper than to use the f35s for air defence purposes.


200 will not be enough for AD purposes.
They would need way more than that number for this, and still there would be need for 100(s) of NEBOs as well.

PapaDragon wrote:

Isos wrote:If they do things in good way they could buy 100-150 su-57 for airforce and another 40-50 for future carrier. India, algeria, bielorussia, kazakstan, indonesia and why not some ME countries could buy 12 each and more for india which means 300 su-57. If venezuela manage to get better they fould also order 12-20 to replace older f-16 that will need to be replace.

If chinese j-20 is shit they will buy also some of them like they did with su-35 to improve their own flanker. Russia could oblige them to buy more than 50 to have a fair deal. Or why not let them build them in china like with su-30 if they sign for more than 200 jets.

They should save money on su-35 and stop buying it for more su-57 (even without new engines it will make it cheaper).

Without new engines Su-57 is barely marginally superior to Su-35 but with twice the price tag and several times longer delivery time

There will be no Su-57 for carriers because by the time they build a carrier (unlikely to even happen) that can launch it Su-57 will be ready for decommission

India and Venezuela will not be buying any, rest migh buy small numbers at best (still doubtful)

That's a load of f--ing nonsense. The su 57 still has better kinematics, more range, lighter, will maneuver better, (better than the most maneuverable jet in the world)


The su 27 came out in the 80's. Its 30+ years old and will be in service for another 40 years at least. It is in top service at 30 years old. The su 57 is the new su 27. It will be a staple for 50 years+

Here is a table showing the failed and cancelled su 57 vs the F-35

Singular_Transform wrote:

Militarov wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

And what the su57 can do with the F35s?

An S400 missile is cheaper option to take care of them.

The Su57 needed in 50-100 batch, no more aircraft required, and that amount will be enough to screw up the NATO air defence systems, and force everyone for high cost investments.

Cheaper option? Arguable. Have you checked cost of S-400 batallion recently? And its effectiveness in full scale war is questionable, that is not debate here and i dont want to go into it.

Russians themself claimed requirement for 200 borts. Even tho it should be higher than that. 50 borts for something that they spent 20 years developing and billions of dollars. That would be probably per bort more expencive project than F-35.

It is WAAAAAAY cheaper than to use the f35s for air defence purposes.


200 will not be enough for AD purposes.
They would need way more than that number for this, and still there  would be need for 100(s) of NEBOs as well.

US will never use F-35 as primary air defence fighter, countries like Netherlands might, US wont ever do such thing.

You cannot, use only SAMs for air defence, if you do, you lost already. I know you think its possible but its not. Without support from Air Force even the best SAMs are fried. There is you know reason why fighters still exist.

With that information you can do whatever you like. Project numbers of fighters required, project number of OTHs or whatever, but that is how it is.

Militarov wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

Militarov wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

And what the su57 can do with the F35s?

An S400 missile is cheaper option to take care of them.

The Su57 needed in 50-100 batch, no more aircraft required, and that amount will be enough to screw up the NATO air defence systems, and force everyone for high cost investments.

Cheaper option? Arguable. Have you checked cost of S-400 batallion recently? And its effectiveness in full scale war is questionable, that is not debate here and i dont want to go into it.

Russians themself claimed requirement for 200 borts. Even tho it should be higher than that. 50 borts for something that they spent 20 years developing and billions of dollars. That would be probably per bort more expencive project than F-35.

It is WAAAAAAY cheaper than to use the f35s for air defence purposes.


200 will not be enough for AD purposes.
They would need way more than that number for this, and still there  would be need for 100(s) of NEBOs as well.

US will never use F-35 as primary air defence fighter, countries like Netherlands might, US wont ever do such thing.

You cannot, use only SAMs for air defence, if you do, you lost already. I know you think its possible but its not. Without support from Air Force even the best SAMs are fried. There is you know reason why fighters still exist.

With that information you can do whatever you like. Project numbers of fighters required, project number of OTHs or whatever, but that is how it is.

The US using fighters as the MAIN component of the air defence.

And Russia using non stealth fighters to support the air defence network, considering that if a "stealth"jet using its x band radar for whatever reasons then it toasted, it practically giving away its position.

But if the F35 can't use its radar then it is doesn't matter if the enemy is low observable or not.

Pierre Sprey wrote:

That's a load of f--ing nonsense. The su 57 still has better kinematics, more range, lighter, will maneuver better, (better than the most maneuverable jet in the world)


The su 27 came out in the 80's. Its 30+ years old and will be in service for another 40 years at least. It is in top service at 30 years old. The su 57 is the new su 27. It will be a staple for 50 years+

With current engines PAK-FA doesnt really have drastic change in kinematic performance compared to Su-35S.

Lighter? Its not lighter than Su-35S. Actually its almost 1t heavier than it

More range? Not with current engines it does not.

Will maneuver better? Not with current engines.

So everything he says stands... no new engines.. no cookies you mentioned above.

Singular_Transform wrote:
The US using fighters as the MAIN component of the air defence.

And Russia using non stealth fighters to support the air defence network, considering that if a "stealth"jet using its x band radar for whatever reasons then it toasted, it practically giving away its position.

But if the F35 can't use its radar then it is doesn't matter if the enemy is low observable or not.

So? There is reason why they have F-22s and F-15s stationed on intrusion paths... coz they are main air defence fighters. F-35 isnt.

Oh damn, lets remove radars from fighters and lets fast call Lockeed and MoD, they need to hear about these news...

There is reason why they have F-22s and F-15s stationed on intrusion paths... coz they are main air defence fighters. F-35 isnt.

They are used or will be used for air defence for carrier groups. With no supercruise and smal legs and small amount of air to air missiles and bad manoevrability, they will have hard time intercepting launch plateforms at 500 km from carrier .... and hard time intercepting low flying supersonic cruise missiles.
A hornet with better radar would be better for that role. F-14 even more. Stealth is not needed for that at all. While a reduced rcs on su-35 or stealth on su-57 help attacking the carrier group


On the other hand russia can still move and hide its air defence systems on the ground while on the sea US carrier could be considered static iff spoted.

Militarov wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

Militarov wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

And what the su57 can do with the F35s?

An S400 missile is cheaper option to take care of them.

The Su57 needed in 50-100 batch, no more aircraft required, and that amount will be enough to screw up the NATO air defence systems, and force everyone for high cost investments.

Cheaper option? Arguable. Have you checked cost of S-400 batallion recently? And its effectiveness in full scale war is questionable, that is not debate here and i dont want to go into it.

Russians themself claimed requirement for 200 borts. Even tho it should be higher than that. 50 borts for something that they spent 20 years developing and billions of dollars. That would be probably per bort more expencive project than F-35.

It is WAAAAAAY cheaper than to use the f35s for air defence purposes.


200 will not be enough for AD purposes.
They would need way more than that number for this, and still there  would be need for 100(s) of NEBOs as well.

US will never use F-35 as primary air defence fighter, countries like Netherlands might, US wont ever do such thing.

You cannot, use only SAMs for air defence, if you do, you lost already. I know you think its possible but its not. Without support from Air Force even the best SAMs are fried. There is you know reason why fighters still exist.

With that information you can do whatever you like. Project numbers of fighters required, project number of OTHs or whatever, but that is how it is.

What will be the primary fighter then ? The F-35 is supposed to be

Militarov wrote:

Pierre Sprey wrote:

That's a load of f--ing nonsense. The su 57 still has better kinematics, more range, lighter, will maneuver better, (better than the most maneuverable jet in the world)


The su 27 came out in the 80's. Its 30+ years old and will be in service for another 40 years at least. It is in top service at 30 years old. The su 57 is the new su 27. It will be a staple for 50 years+

With current engines PAK-FA doesnt really have drastic change in kinematic performance compared to Su-35S.

Lighter? Its not lighter than Su-35S. Actually its almost 1t heavier than it

More range? Not with current engines it does not.

Will maneuver better? Not with current engines.

So everything he says stands... no new engines.. no cookies you mentioned above.

You got me. I thought the Aus air power report said that it was lighter. But its not. Maneuverability is a toss up.

But this shows even more, that there was just one main reason that the su 57 was built. And that reason is stealth. Yet the propagandists keep peddling this fiction that Russia didn't care about stealth and that stealth wasn't a priority. And then they butter it up on some of its other features. Their point still is, to deny the jet stealth. That is their goal. And even some Russia supporters get dragged into this nonsense. And that's what it is. Fucking nonsense. The su 57 was built to neutralize the stealth of the US fleet. Its basic military doctrine.

Militarov wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:
The US using fighters as the MAIN component of the air defence.

And Russia using non stealth fighters to support the air defence network, considering that if a "stealth"jet using its x band radar for whatever reasons then it toasted, it practically giving away its position.

But if the F35 can't use its radar then it is doesn't matter if the enemy is low observable or not.

So? There is reason why they have F-22s and F-15s stationed on intrusion paths... coz they are main air defence fighters. F-35 isnt.

Oh damn, lets remove radars from fighters and lets fast call Lockeed and MoD, they need to hear about these news...  

So the US's main AD fighters for the foreseeable future are a discontinued model and a 4th gen ?

Militarov wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:
The US using fighters as the MAIN component of the air defence.

And Russia using non stealth fighters to support the air defence network, considering that if a "stealth"jet using its x band radar for whatever reasons then it toasted, it practically giving away its position.

But if the F35 can't use its radar then it is doesn't matter if the enemy is low observable or not.

So? There is reason why they have F-22s and F-15s stationed on intrusion paths... coz they are main air defence fighters. F-35 isnt.

Oh damn, lets remove radars from fighters and lets fast call Lockeed and MoD, they need to hear about these news...

These are legacy fighters, the F35 is THE jet of the US. : )
everything else is just a stop gap until its full implementation. : )

Singular_Transform wrote:

These are legacy fighters, the F35 is THE jet of the US. : )
everything else is just a stop gap until its full implementation. : )

F-15 will serve into 2040s. F-22 will serve into 2050s at least. You can expect many things to change in 30 years.

Pierre Sprey wrote:

So the US's main AD fighters for the foreseeable future are a discontinued model and a 4th gen ?

Yes? And?

Fighter is not a cellphone model to be "discontinued". Certain fighters production ceased 35 years ago and they still fly.

And Russian main fighter in same role is MiG-31BM. Discontinuned, legacy platform from late 70s. So?

Russia has a rather good grasp at this. They know their AF is more AD than offensive minus Su-24/34/30 which are more geared towards ground attack. But as mentioned, as soon as F-22/35 or any jet for that matter turns on it's radar, it let's off radiation which newer jets, even upgraded 4th gen jets, have sensors to pick those signals up and provide direction as to where it's coming from. In Russia's regard, the AF compliments the AD systems which ground based radars and what not, with much better detection range, resolution and alike, can feed data to surrounding systems - be it jets or AD systems. In this regard, such rolls as defense, the aircraft doesn't need to be stealthy. Add to that, the stealth jets capabilities diminish when you really cant use your own radar anyway. So I know NATO relies a lot on AWACS and other jets to act as a mini awacs. Issue with that though is they are spotted far far away. It's just then up to how to take such assets down from afar.