SU-57 deployed to Syria

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

botsing

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 885
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2015, 18:09
  • Location: The Netherlands

Unread post05 Mar 2018, 18:18

mixelflick wrote:2 days does not make much of a "combat deployment".

Two days is more than enough to make the Su-57 a more viable hybrid warfare weapon.

A nice example of that you can already see a few posts above yours, where a person is already speculating that the Su-57 was involved with the shootdown of an Israeli F-16.
"Those who know don’t talk. Those who talk don’t know"
Offline

nutshell

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 487
  • Joined: 04 May 2016, 13:37

Unread post05 Mar 2018, 19:00

awsome wrote:I still wonder how long they were really there and if they had a hand in the downing of the Israeli F-16...


Blue on blue from a.defective PCA
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4157
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post07 Mar 2018, 15:53

botsing wrote:
mixelflick wrote:2 days does not make much of a "combat deployment".

Two days is more than enough to make the Su-57 a more viable hybrid warfare weapon.

A nice example of that you can already see a few posts above yours, where a person is already speculating that the Su-57 was involved with the shootdown of an Israeli F-16.


Other than wild speculation, what sources do these people have? Can't tell if you're serious here or not. And "hybrid warfare weapon"? What's that??
Offline
User avatar

botsing

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 885
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2015, 18:09
  • Location: The Netherlands

Unread post07 Mar 2018, 18:40

mixelflick wrote:Other than wild speculation, what sources do these people have? Can't tell if you're serious here or not. And "hybrid warfare weapon"? What's that??

Mostly their sources are speculations based on half truths. These speculations are often repeated from different angles to make them look more legit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_warfare

The first sentence on that page sums it up nicely:
Wikipedia wrote:Hybrid warfare is a military strategy that employs political warfare and blends conventional warfare, irregular warfare and cyberwarfare with other influencing methods, such as fake news, diplomacy and foreign electoral intervention.


Sending the Su-57 to Syria can be used to make "speculative claims" about the status of the Su-57 project, Russia's technology level and Russia's goals in the middle east. As such it can be "weaponized" for hybrid warfare, just take a peek at sites like RT and Sputnik news to see what propaganda can be brewed from it.

While this might not be the main reason why the Su-57 was send to Syria, it is clear that Russia will use any "speculative claims" to their fullest ability.
"Those who know don’t talk. Those who talk don’t know"
Offline

viper12

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 272
  • Joined: 28 Jun 2017, 14:58

Unread post07 Mar 2018, 19:48

botsing wrote:Sending the Su-57 to Syria can be used to make "speculative claims" about the status of the Su-57 project, Russia's technology level and Russia's goals in the middle east. As such it can be "weaponized" for hybrid warfare, just take a peek at sites like RT and Sputnik news to see what propaganda can be brewed from it.


Spot on. That's why I'd suggest any forum regular to NOT put any link to RT, Sputnik and the like, for even if one doesn't believe [s]an ounce[/s] an atomic mass unit of what they say, putting such a link effectively helps the Russian propaganda machine.
Everytime you don't tell the facts, you make Putin stronger.

Everytime you're hit by Dunning-Kruger, you make Putin stronger.
Offline

awsome

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 186
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2008, 03:11
  • Location: vancouver

Unread post08 Mar 2018, 01:23

viper12 wrote:
botsing wrote:Sending the Su-57 to Syria can be used to make "speculative claims" about the status of the Su-57 project, Russia's technology level and Russia's goals in the middle east. As such it can be "weaponized" for hybrid warfare, just take a peek at sites like RT and Sputnik news to see what propaganda can be brewed from it.


Spot on. That's why I'd suggest any forum regular to NOT put any link to RT, Sputnik and the like, for even if one doesn't believe [s]an ounce[/s] an atomic mass unit of what they say, putting such a link effectively helps the Russian propaganda machine.


So what is the alternative... hide here in your F-16.net/CNN echo chamber? In an environment where those who know know and everyone else is a spy, wild speculation is the only fun that is left.
Offline
User avatar

white_lightning35

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 403
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2016, 03:07
  • Location: Home of nuclear submarines, engines, and that's about it.

Unread post08 Mar 2018, 02:35

awsome wrote:
viper12 wrote:
botsing wrote:Sending the Su-57 to Syria can be used to make "speculative claims" about the status of the Su-57 project, Russia's technology level and Russia's goals in the middle east. As such it can be "weaponized" for hybrid warfare, just take a peek at sites like RT and Sputnik news to see what propaganda can be brewed from it.


Spot on. That's why I'd suggest any forum regular to NOT put any link to RT, Sputnik and the like, for even if one doesn't believe [s]an ounce[/s] an atomic mass unit of what they say, putting such a link effectively helps the Russian propaganda machine.


So what is the alternative... hide here in your F-16.net/CNN echo chamber? In an environment where those who know know and everyone else is a spy, wild speculation is the only fun that is left.


I don't recall f-16.net being listed as an affiliate to CNN, nor do I see many articles from CNN being posted here, so make of that what you will. And no, one does not have to engage in "wild speculation" when talking about these things, although sometimes it is fun. Many here actively cut through the misinformation on the internet, and attempt to share interesting knowledge with others. So avoiding giving RT and Sputnik extra clicks is a noble cause, for they peddle misinformation constantly, like many others.

Now, I am not the type to support the censorship of misinformation, because what is and isn't truth is whatever those with the most power say it is, in the eyes of too many. So I say let's make sure our side is the one with the most power.

Little off-topic at the end, but my point still stands.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1557
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post08 Mar 2018, 02:50

awsome wrote: So what is the alternative... hide here in your F-16.net/CNN echo chamber?


You're being quite disingenuous, the 'news' fodder quoted in here, official or otherwise, is constantly challenged re facts, analysed and debated in annoying details. That's not what generally occurs within actual online 'echo chambers', where it's a mirrored consensus line, with nothing else tollerated.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4157
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post08 Mar 2018, 14:42

Why is it this board is seemingly the only one that can see the merits of the F-35?

Every other board I've been on trashes it. Sure, there are problems. But there are problems with any new weapons system. I heard the same BS about the F-15 back in the day. It's too big, too complex, won't work, is too expensive etc.. Today, it's far and away the most successful air to air machine in the world (based on combat record - the only record that matters).

I read a lot, and have yet to find another aircraft that can do ALL of these simultaneously..

1.) Carry a 5,000lb weapons load internally
2.) Pull 9 g's
3.) Fly at up to 50 degrees AOA
4.) Achieve mach 1.6
5.) Have superior SA to everything else flying - including the Raptor
6.) Make everything else around it that much more effective
7.) Has a 600+ mile combat radius
8.) Can carry a whopping 18,000lbs of weapons externally when the situation calls for it
9.) Comes in CTOL, STOVL configurations
10.) Carrier capable
11.) Has the VLO/stealth switch..

Did I miss any? This is a mighty impressive list, and it's only getting longer when new, more powerful and fuel efficient engines get here. Best of all, it's comparable in price (if not cheaper!) than so called 4++ gen Western jets. Russian Flankers are cheaper, but can't perform half of the functions I listed.

Why is this so hard for others to see? Nationalism??
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 456
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2017, 14:43

Unread post08 Mar 2018, 18:16

white_lightning35 wrote:Many here actively cut through the misinformation on the internet, and attempt to share interesting knowledge with others. So avoiding giving RT and Sputnik extra clicks is a noble cause, for they peddle misinformation constantly, like many others.


Good point. I learned here more than in the last decade about military aviation. And its really hard to decide who is right, the US or Russian e.g. when you try to get information in the net as a non expert. You hear all this fancy things about su-35, ibris-e or R-77. And then you see the official site of the manufacturer, and you realize most of it is BS. So its nice to have place were people with real knowledge are willing to share this with others.
Offline
User avatar

white_lightning35

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 403
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2016, 03:07
  • Location: Home of nuclear submarines, engines, and that's about it.

Unread post08 Mar 2018, 23:01

mixelflick wrote:
I read a lot, and have yet to find another aircraft that can do ALL of these simultaneously..

1.) Carry a 5,000lb weapons load internally
2.) Pull 9 g's
3.) Fly at up to 50 degrees AOA
4.) Achieve mach 1.6
5.) Have superior SA to everything else flying - including the Raptor
6.) Make everything else around it that much more effective
7.) Has a 600+ mile combat radius
8.) Can carry a whopping 18,000lbs of weapons externally when the situation calls for it
9.) Comes in CTOL, STOVL configurations
10.) Carrier capable
11.) Has the VLO/stealth switch..



I guarantee that no f-35 will ever pull 9g's, achieve mach 1.6, carry 18,000lbs of weapons, and be carrier capable simultaneously. 8)
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8408
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post09 Mar 2018, 00:03

To be fair, the F-35 cannot do "all" of that simultaneously either.

It can only reach 9G,Mach 1.6, and a 600+ mile radius with internal weapons (5k for A/C and 3k for the B).
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3223
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post09 Mar 2018, 14:00

mixelflick wrote:Why is it this board is seemingly the only one that can see the merits of the F-35?

Every other board I've been on trashes it. Sure, there are problems. But there are problems with any new weapons system. I heard the same BS about the F-15 back in the day. It's too big, too complex, won't work, is too expensive etc.. Today, it's far and away the most successful air to air machine in the world (based on combat record - the only record that matters).


I think it's simple herd mentality. There were some very vocal people calling F-35 a failure and that still lives on as other vocal people are trying to sound intelligent and knowledgeable (and failing miserably).
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3223
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post09 Mar 2018, 14:23

white_lightning35 wrote:I guarantee that no f-35 will ever pull 9g's, achieve mach 1.6, carry 18,000lbs of weapons, and be carrier capable simultaneously. 8)


In APA world Su-27 derivatives can fly at Mach 1.8+, 50,000ft+ and carry 12 AAMs while simultaneously doing Cobras and Kulbits, so why not F-35... :P
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4157
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post09 Mar 2018, 14:56

white_lightning35 wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
I read a lot, and have yet to find another aircraft that can do ALL of these simultaneously..

1.) Carry a 5,000lb weapons load internally
2.) Pull 9 g's
3.) Fly at up to 50 degrees AOA
4.) Achieve mach 1.6
5.) Have superior SA to everything else flying - including the Raptor
6.) Make everything else around it that much more effective
7.) Has a 600+ mile combat radius
8.) Can carry a whopping 18,000lbs of weapons externally when the situation calls for it
9.) Comes in CTOL, STOVL configurations
10.) Carrier capable
11.) Has the VLO/stealth switch..



I guarantee that no f-35 will ever pull 9g's, achieve mach 1.6, carry 18,000lbs of weapons, and be carrier capable simultaneously. 8)


Yes, I shouldn't have used the word simultaneously so broadly :)
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 29 guests