Russian Media Claims Su-57 Outperforms F-35 with Double Engagement Distance, Hypersonic Missiles and "Nearly Invisible" Stealth

Russian state-owned media outlet Sputnik recently published a feature article praising the capabilities of the Sukhoi Su-57, Russia's fifth-generation fighter jet. The article, celebrating 15 years of Su-57's first flight, claims the aircraft surpasses its Western counterparts, including the American F-35, in several key areas.

Sputnik describes the Su-57 as a multi-role fighter designed for both air-to-air combat and ground attack missions. It highlights the aircraft's stealth technology, asserting that it is "nearly invisible" to enemy radar.

The Su-57 is also lauded for its maneuverability and impressive performance specifications, including a service ceiling of 20 kilometers, a range of 5,500 kilometers, and a top speed of 2,470 kilometers per hour.

The article emphasizes the Su-57's weapons systems, particularly the R-37M long-range air-to-air missile. Sputnik claims this missile allows the Su-57 to engage enemy aircraft at twice the distance of the F-35.

Additionally, the Su-57 can reportedly carry the Kinzhal hypersonic missile, designed to overcome sophisticated air defence systems.

Sputnik also draws attention to the Su-57's advanced sensor suite, stating that it is equipped with six radars providing superior situational awareness to the pilot. This comprehensive radar coverage enables enhanced battlefield monitoring and threat assessment.

Furthermore, the article highlights the Su-57's unique defensive capabilities. It describes a Directional Infrared Countermeasures System (DIRCM) that uses laser beams to disrupt the guidance systems of incoming missiles.

While Sputnik's claims are certainly bold, it is important to consider them within a broader context. The Su-57 program has faced challenges, with reports of delays and technical issues, particularly concerning its engines and stealth capabilities. Independent assessments of the aircraft's true performance remain limited.

If Sputnik's claims prove accurate, the Su-57 could pose a significant challenge to Western air dominance. Its purported combination of stealth, speed, maneuverability, and advanced weaponry would make it a formidable opponent in any future conflict. However, until more independent data is available, a degree of caution remains warranted in assessing its true capabilities.

 

[Dredd]

SU57 may or may not be as advanced in stealth compared to F35. Buying critical US platforms will be a big risk. You never know when they armtwist you. It will be much more steadier than Rafales. AMCA is atleast 15 years away from induction.
Cancel MRFA. Buy 2-3 squadrons each of Rafales and SU57.

Su57 capabilities are untested and looking at the jet in chinese air show it also have poor workman ship and large issues in stealth coating, Engine are also not yet available. Su 57 currently is high risk investment.

 

[Indian1]

Only 20 odd su 57 in service. More than 1000 F 35 are in service now. Those planes which never fly will never crash

 

[sunilanalysis]

Russian weapons are always superior to NATO on paper and also for russian fans in services...
just that the facts are out in karabakh and ukraine war...

 

[Preet]

Su57 capabilities are untested and looking at the jet in chinese air show it also have poor workman ship and large issues in stealth coating, Engine are also not yet available. Su 57 currently is high risk investment.

That wasn't a production variant🤣 it was T50, the initial prototype.

And stealth coating issue? Is it because it doesn't have a silver color like F35 or J20? Is that what you understand by stealth?? I'm sure people wouldn't be complaining about stealth if Russia made it silver-colored rather than camouflage 🤣 99% of social media thinks silver paint means stealth..🤣🤣

The engine issue is resolved with AL51. And honestly, India doesn't have any options. The F35 won't be available, Rafale and all shouldn't be bought. Su57 is the best option..!!

 

[Anant]

"S-300 can detect f35" - question is detection range 10km or 20km ? LoL (max engagement range is 75 km when target detected)

"Iran's modern air defense" - so s300 is modern, it developed in 1970s?

"F35 moved in"? Really, they used f35 from standoff distanse against s300 and after jamming s300 radars.

You label others as false claim but yourself provide nothing else but just lies mixing with little truth.

You believe f35 against 1970s s300 as an achievement, lol

Ukraine using Patriot, NASAMS, iris-t, and other best of the western air defense system. And you are comparing it with Iran's s300 system. (On lighter note, Well could be true how these are performing in Ukraine 😂).

"Wipes out Iran's air defense", so jamming radars equivalent to destroying these?
What about su30 jamming f35 radar? Will it be counted as wiping out f35 by su30?

Practically we shouldnt compare su57 and f35, but su30 and f35, where su30 won by detecting and blinding f35 and engaging in vwr. F35 didnt knew what happened when su30 suddenly appeared in front of it.
Su30: 1
F35: 0

1. Iran's S-300 batteries were not the baseline versions from the 1970s. They were the upgraded S-300PMU2 system, which made its debut in 1996, and only entered service in 2004. Moreover, the radar systems accompanying the system were not the downgraded export version radars, but the same radar systems that Russia uses on its own S-300PMU-2 systems. Therefore, going by Russian claims, the F-35 should have been detected at a fairly reasonable range.

2. By the way, those S-300PMU-2 air defence systems were pretty much Iran's most modern air defence systems, alongside their own version of the S-300 (the Bavar 373).

3a. The Patriot systems donated to Ukraine aren't the new PAC-3 systems. They are older PAC-2 systems dating back to 1990, when they entered service.

3b. The IRIS-T and IRIS-M systems are SRSAMs and MRSAMs (maximum range of 40 km), and so would have limited utility if the radars are jammed. The missiles do have IR-guidance, but that does mean you cannot go past a certain range with the guidance system.

3c. Same story with the NASAMS. 15 of Ukraine's 17 NASAMS batteries are of the NASAMS 2 standard, which is a SRSAM, with the rest being the NASAMS 3 MRSAMs.

4. "Wiped out" also refers to a mission kill. If you can block a SAM radar without being detected, you have mission-killed the system. Just because Israel did not physically launch missiles at the launchers does not mean they didn't neutralize the system without being detected.

5. Now, since you are trying to be so much in favour of the Su-57, consider this one point: The Su-57 has pretty much been doing the same thing that the F-35 did in Iran. That doesn't stop you from denigrating the F-35, does it?

6. Finally, I am more than willing to agree that the Su-30 vs F-35 incident (I assume you are referring to the 2023 incident with the Italian F-35) was a mission-kill for the F-35. No two ways there.

However, with all that said and done, if you want a fair comparison, have a fair comparison. You are looking at an aircraft which has had over a thousand airframes built with a fairly low accident rate (11 losses; still waiting on that source for your claim of 31, mind you), and comparing it to a comparable aircraft that has been built in far smaller numbers but has also suffered losses.

 

[Anant]

It is exposed your psychofancy about U S. Tech than nothing

You think and assume what you want. However, like I said, I have never claimed that the F-35 is some wonder machine. Not once, and I challenge you to prove me wrong on that.

However, saying that "the F-35 is accident-prone due to a larger number of accidents and the Su-57 isn't" without looking at external context isn't correct.

As I pointe out, in terms of fleet numbers, the F-35 has a lower attrition rate than the Su-57, and the same is the case with losses per lakh flying hours.

You either make a fair comparison, or you don't make one at all.

 

[Anant]

A 2024 report highlighted that F-35 aircraft are:
Ready for missions only 51% of the time
Falling short of the 65% operational readiness target
The crashes have raised concerns about the aircraft's reliability and maintainability, with critics like Elon Musk calling it the "worst military value for money in history".

This I will agree on with you. The F-35's availability rates have been consistenly lower than what was required, and various operators of the jet rightfully deserve criticism for this.

 

[Anant]

We are considering 11 crashes till 2021 in 2.25 lakh fh till then by USAF citing USAF official docs. Dont mislead again by changing facts.

Overall 31 crashes in 8.5 lakh fh.

Again with this. Including the crash in Alaska two days back, there have been 15 accidents leading to 11 hull losses. I'll even tabulate them by year:

2014: 1 accident (USAF); aircraft repaired at a cost of about 50 million USD.

2018: 1 accident (USMC); aircraft lost; pilot survived.

2019: 2 accidents (1 each for Japan and the Netherlands). The Japanese crash was a hull loss with the pilot also being lost, while the Dutch aircraft (the first Dutch F-35) was accidently doused with firefighting foam rather than water at the welcoming ceremony, which led to about 1.2 million USD of damage. The aircraft was repaired.

2020: 2 accidents (1 each for the USAF and USMC). Both jets were lost, and no pilots were lost. The USMC crash was actually a mid-air collision with a KC-130 during aerial refueling (this latter crash was due to weather and pilot error).

2021: 2 accidents (1 each for the USMC and RAF); No pilots lost. The USMC jet was damaged after a round exploded in the gun barrel, and had to be repaired at a cost of about 10 million USD. The RAF jet crashed in the Mediterranean, and was later recovered. Of course, this was a hull loss.

2022: 4 accidents (1 each for South Korea, the USN, USAF, and USMC): No pilots lost. The South Korean jet had a systems failure and crashed, leading to repairs costing some 60 million USD. The USN jet crashed on a carrier after a ramp strike (pilot error), and was lost (though recovered later). The USAF and USMC jets were lost during training flights, and both aircraft were hull losses.

2023: 1 accident for the USAF or USMC: The pilot ejected following a mishap, and the aircraft was lost.

2024: 1 accident for the USAF or USMC. The pilot ejected safely, and the aircraft was lost.

2025: 1 accident so far in Alaska for the USAF. Pilot ejected, aircraft lost.

Therefore, you have a total of 15 incidents / accidents (1 each in 2014, 2018, 2023, 2024, and 2025, 2 accidents each in 2019, 2020, and 2021, and 4 accidents in 2022). These led to 11 hull losses (1 each in 2018, 2019, 2021, 2023, 2024, and 2025, 2 losses in 2020, and 3 losses in 2022). Of these 15 accidents, atleast 3 incidents were either due to pilot error or other factors external to the aircraft, and atleast 9 are attributable to the aircraft itself (with reasons for the remaining 3 still unknown or not released). All this led to the loss of one pilot.

Right, now show your 31 crash claim, would you?

 

[Dredd]

That wasn't a production variant🤣 it was T50, the initial prototype.

And stealth coating issue? Is it because it doesn't have a silver color like F35 or J20? Is that what you understand by stealth?? I'm sure people wouldn't be complaining about stealth if Russia made it silver-colored rather than camouflage 🤣 99% of social media thinks silver paint means stealth..🤣🤣

The engine issue is resolved with AL51. And honestly, India doesn't have any options. The F35 won't be available, Rafale and all shouldn't be bought. Su57 is the best option..!!

Where is AL51? Not beyond any testing bed jet. Even Russian ordered jets won't feature them.

It's not about the color scheme of Su-57 but panel gaps, exposed rivets, exposed engines, IRST sensor bulb, and many more things.

 

[Preet]

Where is AL51? Not beyond any testing bed jet. Even Russian ordered jets won't feature them.

It's not about the color scheme of Su-57 but panel gaps, exposed rivets, exposed engines, IRST sensor bulb, and many more things.

AL51 will go in production in 2025. Certification needs time!

Panel gaps? Again, see the production variant and not the prototype. And rivets? Why don't you google exposed rivets of F22? 🤣 Please do google this.

Exposed engines? What? So where do you want to hide them? 🤦 kuch bhi..

IRST sensor bulb has a stealth cap when not in use. But I feel it's still an issue, and India should look for integration of EOTS with it if we purchase Su57!

 

[Sandeep]

This I will agree on with you. The F-35's availability rates have been consistenly lower than what was required, and various operators of the jet rightfully deserve criticism for this.

I think that availability rate is based on the amount of stealth missions it wants to undertake. I think that availability rate would be much higher if they needed to conduct a strike without having 100% optimal stealth jet material and paint.

 

[Sandeep]

Until Russia clears their jet for production we will not know entirely. Russia is still designing, developing and improving their technology and equipment.

So at the moment the F35 will be more advanced but the Su 57 does have a lot of new technology and capabilities which the the F35 doesn’t have or is weak in.

 

[rtnguy]

F35 will be an operational nightmare due to 50k + maintenance cost per hour. Not to forget that it is remote controlled from pentagon so if US does not like IAF bombing Pakistan the plane will fall from sky. Su 57 is the only rational choice for IAF especially after Rafale pilots confirmed that Rafales stand no chance against stealth jets. Su 57 RCS while currently 0.5 can be brought down to 0.1 or even lower which is good enough for a stealth jet. Moreover IAF can upgrade the jets on its own. its a no brainer.

 

[Dredd]

AL51 will go in production in 2025. Certification needs time!

Panel gaps? Again, see the production variant and not the prototype. And rivets? Why don't you google exposed rivets of F22? 🤣 Please do google this.

Exposed engines? What? So where do you want to hide them? 🤦 kuch bhi..

IRST sensor bulb has a stealth cap when not in use. But I feel it's still an issue, and India should look for integration of EOTS with it if we purchase Su57!

Come on, there is no close picture of the Su-57 like we have for the T-50 version. All are far away pictures of the Su-57 taking off or taxiing. You can't make out if the issues have been fixed, and yes, the exposed engine is a very big stealth negator. Not to mention that it doesn't have diverterless supersonic intakes, instead it has a partially exposed engine from the air intakes. There is no data on its avionics capability; they are probably behind us in avionics and radar at this point in time.