a reply to: 727Sky
The Russians can field 7 of their stealth aircraft for the cost of one F-35.
Let's compare the Su-57 and F-35 shall we. Bear in mind I don't know as much about the Su-57 as I do about the F-35, this will cause me to miss
aspects of the Su-57 I was not aware of.
- 28,999 lb empty weight
- Single engine
- One AESA Radar array
- Integrated IRST system
- Extremely advanced Missile Approach Warning System
- Advanced Datalinks
- Extremely advanced HMDS
- Production rate for 2018 will be at least 90 aircraft, with full rate production at 160 aircraft per year. 280 have been delivered so far
- 39,680 lb empty weight
- Two engine
- Three AESA Radar arrays
- Two Electronic Warfare arrays
- Integrated IRST
- Missile Approach Warning System
- Advanced Datalinks
- Advanced HMDS
- Production rate will probably be less than a dozen aircraft per year. Only 12 exist so far since first flight in 2010.
The Su-57 is a bigger aircraft than the F-35, with more
equipment. It will burn more fuel than the F-35. The F-35 will be produced in huge
numbers, with huge economies of scale, the Su-57 won't be. In fact, there are 23 times more F-35s than Su-57s, and the majority of those Su-57s are
prototypes. If you count Su-57s in the or close to the final configuration, the figure is more like 140 times as many F-35s as Su-57s.
way the Su-57 can ever be cheaper than the F-35 is because it's made in a place with low wages or if quality is sacrificed. It's simple common sense.
This is like arguing that a tank costs more than a SUV, it should be understandable to small children, I don't know why it isn't. Even if the Su-57 is
cheaper than the F-35, bear in mind that Russia has a GDP smaller than Italy.
Russia also has one fighter aircraft manufacturer
. A monopoly. Do you really
think they do not rip off the Russian taxpayer?
The figures Zaphod posted indicate the Su-57 is somewhat less to somewhat more expensive than the F-35, despite being made in a country with a per
capita GDP which is 17% that of the United States. The american aircraft that is more similar in size and role to the Su-57, the F-22, was about 70%
to 90% more expensive than the F-35. Anyway, usually people are proud of building things in America. Do you advocate for outsourcing manufacturing to
China? Do you favor outsourcing defense manufacturing to China or Russia?
If you want I can actually explain why the Su-57 probably is a good aircraft and why it's dangerous and I will do so without reposting propaganda.
We in America do not get the bang for the buck other countries like China or Russia does. AND even after we spend a friggen fortune there are
still big bad bugs that...... with just another few million or billion and a few software upgrades in the next few years it will be one humdinger
When operators from the United States have flown Soviet Aircraft, often their opinions are not flattering. The Mig-23 was initially thought of by the
west as being a cheap, mass-produced mini F-14. When they actually few it out of Tonopah Test Range they discovered that it was a dog, to the extent
that it was practically unusable in combat. It was also dangerous and killed several american pilots, uncontrollable roll at high speeds, a tendency
for the air intakes to 'un-start' leading to loss of control, or if the throttle was pulled back too quickly at high speed, the engine would explode,
the fix was to basically prevent the aircraft from decelerating quickly from high speed.
They found the Mig-17 was an excellent aircraft for its time, albeit it has dangerous roll characteristics which killed an american pilot. The Mig-21
was also an excellent plane, I don't think I've heard a bad thing about it. One interesting aspect was Soviet canopy's were more clear than american
ones, but didn't last as long - they figured this out after the canopy caved in on a pilot.
Read the book Red Eagles: America's Secret MiGs. Of course, in this case the Americans lacked soviet expertise in operating the aircraft, so it was
much more dangerous.
More recently Americans have flown the Mig-29 and they generally said it was a great aircraft, with less
polish than american fighters, and
outdated avionics. The IRST was described as
but the helmet mounted targeting system was fantastic. Note that in the article the author does say negative things about the
F-35, but since the same author has changed his position
The takeaway is that the Soviets were on planet earth, and had to deal with the same issues that the Americans did. To believe anything different is
to believe in fairy tales. This was actually the entire point of Constant Peg, to expose this to american fighter pilots. Unfortunately the US does
not have access to the most modern Russian fighters, but there's no reason this should have changed.
edit on 6/3/18 by C0bzz because: (no