Comments by "Sedna063" (@Sedna063) on "Sukhoi Su-57 - RUSSIAN STEALTH FIGHTER?" video.

  1. lyxar777 60 billion is nothing for the US when they get a working design. Russia spend 1/6th of the development sum, their economy is 1/10th and they didn’t even get a working design
    1
  2. andy capp nope. It will prove to be the day Russia lost the competition in jet fighters for top tier
    1
  3. Skippy I will give you a detailed answer as soon as I have access to my laptop.
    1
  4. Павел Петрович Avionics: The F22 uses an AESA radar, an improved version over the previous model. Meanwhile Russia is still working on an AESA, but its likely they have to equip this thing with a PESA. F-22 uses full sensor fusion. They have radar warners that are advanced enough to find a jet without using their own radar. F-22 is fully stealthy. The Su-57 isn’t. Did you see the bolts on the wings? Huge RCS increase, especially because they are metal. There are edges all around the wing. The engines aren’t hidden but the fan is exposed. Likewise is the exhaust not boxy but round - huge RCS. Just a 90s low tech stealth design
    1
  5.  @ПавелПетрович-з5ы  First of all, the US have stealth fighters mainly in the X-Band region, hence the new Su-57 X-Band AESA will not be that efficient. We also do not have a TRM count and lets not forget that the US has now fielded a 3rd generation AESA whereas the Russians are now working to implement their first AESA on a yet. F-22 had one since the early 2000s. Currently the most advanced Russian radar in service is the Irbis-E, a PESA with technology from the 80s and comparable to the F-15 C from that time. I very much doubt that they can skip 2 decades and match parity with the US. A common misconception about stealth is that it only works in one frequency band. Fun fact, it doesn't. Those L-Band thingies aren't radars but so called passive radar warning receiver. They do not emit, they only detect. However, any adversary would be very smart not to emit frequencies, especially in L-Band if the enemy would use it. They cannot see something that does not emit. Quantum radar is currently a thing of the future, not of the present. There is no nation on the world close to develop a system like that, not for the next 20 years. Whether it would work is still a question. The Stealth Technology wasn't designed by a Russian :D. The earliest stealth programs originated in the 60s. Khibiny: Literally any other Defense suit does this. Be it EuroDASS, SPECTRA, The American defense suites. It is literally nothing out of the ordinary. Please read those answers from Quora: https://www.quora.com/Why-Su-57-uses-L-band-radar-only-for-FF-identification-given-its-effectiveness-against-stealth-fighters-as-a-search-radar/answer/Abhirup-Sengupta-5?ch=10&share=e05effaa&srid=m6SN https://www.quora.com/q/militaryaviation/State-of-Low-Frequency-Radars-against-Stealth-aircraft https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-flaws-with-Russias-Stealth-Su-57 https://www.quora.com/Why-do-F-35-fans-start-seething-when-there-is-praise-about-the-Su-57-while-Su-57-fans-dont-seem-to-care-or-pay-attention-to-the-F-35
    1
  6. faron tilley like what? Sensors? Avionics? Su-57 isn’t even remotely in the same league
    1
  7.  @forzaisspeed  Nope. It isn't. 1. At 0:11, I see multiple portruding surfaces - RCS is already bigger. 2. There are other points in the video where you can see rivets made from metal on the bare surface - huge RCS increase. 3. The engines aren't hidden, fan blades are still accessible to see for radar. Huge RCS increase. Su-57 comes with an RCS in the league of an Eurofighter. The technology inside the Su-57 is already dated. 1) Radar: The current operational radar is the Irbis-E which is a dated 1980s design. The Russians claim to implement a new AESA but the US is already fielding a 3rd generation AESA and therefore have the edge here, with a large number of TRMs, software and great jamming resistance. 2) Missile warning system: Outdated, not good against modern BVR missiles. 3) L-Band antennas are by far more a waste of space than useful.
    1