Beaner? you not can be more original? No, taths true with you 50 IQ only you can write this insult. Anyway, the russian avionic are SUPERIOR to your millionaire aircraft de luxe. years ago, the AK-47 eats the bad Quality M-16 and now the best plains are the Europeans. You can still insult me with idiots comments but the truth its evident, american avionic is Down and the world are the Witness. ¿Why Venezuela buy russian airplanes and cancel the F-16 adquisition?
!hahahah! ¿Lunchbox? its the best comparison ever made for these plane.
And yes, Sukhoi is the king for introducing the new avionic concept. The first time I see this video really I´m impresed for the movements of the planes.
Everybody have an other kind of view if it comes up to Jets ;-).
Yes you're right, I'm allways impressed when i see movements like this. When i saw it first time i couldn't believe that it's possible but this is reallity. SU's and Mig's have a manuevrability that the F-22 and F-35 don't have.
Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия
too ,late they knew it for quite a while now, this is why they desperately working on the stealth fighters such as f22 raptor. Suk27 series are the amount beautifulness's and deadliest air craft in the world. Before you can get a ride for $20,000 for 45 minutes in russian after soviet clapsed.
again to stevan1934, the reason they want to have stealth is simply to prevent other planes to detect them, and kill them before they see you. ha3 yeah sometimes I think why they don't bomb each other, well that's up to the politicians to decide. Why don't you ask Wolfritter? He seems read alot about miltary stuff and politics behind it. I'm just a fluid dynamics engineer in australian defence, so don't know much about politics ha3.
The idea behind stealth is that it increases survivability and kill ratios. For example the F-22 regularly wins in simulated engagements in 8-1 odds, and did so at the Red Flag Exercises in Australia (Red Flag pilots are the best in their respective nations and the F-22A flew against both RAF and RAAF planes), with performance like that you can afford to have say 1/8th the number of F-15's you used to have and still have the same performance.
Although, this isn't the ideal method, I'd have much preferred if the US would have focused on high speed and high altitude bombers rather than ballistic missiles, this has the benefit that they can outrun most modern missile systems and can be called back instead of if one flies they all fly. Had it been so the US and it's allies would be flying at about Mach 7 at altitudes reaching the exosphere. However McNamera killed it, unless the Aurora is real.
Hi man, yeah that's a good point, but in that kind of speed its pretty hard to do sudden maneuver from pilot and frame point of view (if it is a fighter bomber, but if its just a bomber so I think it's ok). If they make it unmanned that will be better coz i'm not sure with kind of G-force the pilot can have, and I thought F-22&35 will be the last manned fighters.
Trust me, if we had gone with high and fast bombers there would be no fighters, only interceptors, which are designed to fly right into a bomber formation and shoot them down. Plus the G-Suits would have had more reason to evolve.
yeah, as far as I know Europe has the most advanced G-suits in the world for their Typhoon pilot (in 2004). I think one reason why Ballistic is still popular because they will not cost money and time as much as developing brand new plane(from researching and development point of view).as far as I know the cost to develop 1 plane +- = 20 planes.
Now they will, the cost to develop Mach 3+ Aircraft would bankrupt the country, but had we gone the other way it would've been cheaper. The thing that makes the missiles so expensive isn't the missile themselves, it's the hardened installations that let them survive a first srike buclear attack. The XB-70 could be scrambled in five minutes, and another one off the runway every three minutes. They can also turn around in event of a mistake, if a single missile flies, they all fly.
mach 7?,I want to know what kind of engine they use.3 months ago I did a simple analysis for the ramjet intake (before combustion chamber)by using simple oblique and normal shocks calculation, the max I can get was mach 3.But that mach 3 was not even 3x340m/s due to the temp.but I guess they already have tricks to solve it.
The YF-12A is based on the A-12, the same A-12 the SR-71 was based on, the YF-12A would have looked a lot like it's brother, but would've been armed with only three nuclear air-to-air missiles, which were the basis for the AIM-54. YF-12A would have run at about Mach 3.35. We'd be using the same kind of jets just tooled for a new typed of performance.
another reason that I think why ballistic is still popular because lots of countries still believe that it is the best and fastest missiles/bombs around. If you or your friend has access to AIAA check this: Journal of Propulsion and Power 2004,0748-4658 vol.20 no.1 (27-58)
And they're wrong. If we have an inkling that a first strike is coming we can scramble our bombers and send them on their way, if it's a false alarm we can turn them around. However with missiles, you can't turn them around, unlike these action movies you see there's no device that lets you shut a nuclear missile down midflight, when it goes it's gone, no stopping it or returning it, thus your enemy has to fire.
Folks what's the music composition that starts playing at 1:51?? That music composition is definately Mozart's but which one????? Mozart has more than 600 music opuses.....
don't care what people say about other planes, but as An Engineer I have to say that this sukhoi 37, spitfire, and F-16 are the most beautifull planes ever designed in their era.
Sukhoi planes are awesome. Ask any american who has flown one,which they had a chance, when east germany meged with west germany. Had a good chance to test the sukhoi's that were part of the east german stable.
well answering my own Q... it is all about money... i'v been drinking with Russian God Pilot formerly, and he mentioned "we all have to feed our families..." Putin can u pay ur pilots well, man... uhhh...
chineeze can not fly SUKHOI, period. These rats have to hire Russian Pilot to fly this awesome plane. I have to as the Pilot they hire - why??? Why in the world MAN YOU are flying YOUR best AIRCRAFT for chineze rats???? Who knows... God... Rats rule? PERIOD.
Russian planes have always lagged behind in one crucial element of aerial combat: computer power. This is changing, however, as sophisticated electronics are imported from western Europe and even the USA (under Clinton, many supercomputers were transferred).
I like how people here assume russian planes are better because of overused thrust vectoring at slow speeds. Im not saying their better or worse but weve all seen the cobras and flips in countless Russian, Us test planes
Damn good planes. Fuck gripens, i would like if we (Croatia) were to buy Su-35 instead of gripens. But of course, they are russian products so it must mean they aren't so good as western. Fuck that, sukhoi and migs ruuuuuuuuule.
MAybe teh SUkhio is teh better plane but its no teh plane which win, its the PIlot so. Just think a moment and you will kwno who is the better Pilot, its the american ;)
how do you know the american are better pilot? from films like top gun, behind enemy lines, red fox, airwolf, etc? well that's explain a lot about american dreams, time to wake up and face reality.
On this year Asian air show in singapore I asked this one question to an F-15/E strike eagle pilot. "what happen if you engaged a Sukhoi 37?"
this is his answer:
"if it is one on one, I will not engage, it will out perform my plane. if one againts two, it depends, I'm not sure. but if it is one againts three We'll engage."
I think that's already conclude the answer.
I wonder what's the answer of an F-22 pilot if he meet a sukhoi-47.
The F-35 utilizes many of the stealthing technology of the F-22 and has an RCS the size of a Golfball, which in itself is going to pretty much look like little more than the standard fuzz you get on radar anyhow, the F-22A's aproximate RCS size is classified but is supposed to be dramatically smaller than the F-35.
Yes, yes, and this video was really propoganda as well, sure, there's a huge vast conspiracy dedicated to lying about how weak the American Military really is, despite being the World Super Power and having not one Carrier like most but 24 Carriers.
You're forgetting the Wasps and Tarawas which are technically Carriers. As for a Russian Carrier, fat load of good it'll do them, their planes are falling out of the skies and their ships and subs are falling apart. One new Aircraft Carrier isn't going to make them a Blue Water Navy.
No, Russian nukes never really worried us, if they were to ever launch their nukes they would be completely wiped off the map, we however would merely be mildly irritated. Oh how I wish you were right, though, my grandfather still dreams of Pax Sovieticus.
Emotional devastation is different from physical, for example our industry base is rather spread around, Russia's is highly concentrated into a couple areas, unlike what you may have been told MAD did not and does not exist, and it was certainly never our policy.
Even if it wouldn't kill you, would you like me to stab you in the foot? Of course not; this is what we wanted, we allowed the USSR to bleed itself dry, because we knew it wouldn't last. If we thought they were such a threat then please explain why we weren't nuking them left and right from 1945 to the mid 1950's when we were the only ones mass-producing nuclear arms and they were still testing.
even the usa knew the soviets would'nt bleed themselves dry in the 60s,do you honestly think there could be a winner in a full scale nuclear war? and if so,what would there be left to win?
Actually you're right, we did it earlier, George F. Kennan did it in 1949. What would be left? Most of the US, the Soviets relied on many large explosion, we relied on many many more accurate slightly smaller explosion. Or industry is rather uncentralized, we don't have factories in only a couple areas, they spread across the entirety of COTUS.
U r an idiot. I can't believe u r my countrymen. If this is the shit u learned in school our education system is worse than the media reports. I suggest you study up on the subject matter u so freely comment falsely about.
Wow, a scathing rebuttle full of sourced information and evidence that points out how I'm wrong... Oh wait, no it isn't, it's a moron screeching UR WRONG without showing how.
Your optimism for surviving an all out nuclear exchange somewhat flies in the face of rational thought.Although your comments on the technical prowess of the F22 may be correct,by then insisting that the US could survive,even "win" a protracted nuclear war you drift into fantasy.Try arguing about missile CEP's and throw weights after the event."I know not with what weapons WWIII will be fought,but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones."Einstein.
That's cute, except Einstein was only involved in the Philagelphia Project, the very first nuclear weapons. If you like I could send you a thread where you can get it from the horses mouth, if you would like?
Are you saying Einstein over estemated the destructive power of nuclear weapons?Blimey,you really ARE an optimist.Of course,the military of each side MUST say that nuclear war is surviveable,in order to justify the potential for using nuclear weapons.But thinking you're invincible is not a healthy state of mind.
Yes, because I'm sure Einstein invisioned the yield and exact effects of of the Davy Crockett Nuclear-Warhead, which will kill it's firer from radiation poisoning. What you're pulling is an appeal to authority fallacy, Einstein knew first generation nuclear weapons, so until you show me some evidence of Einstein understanding the inner workings of a Peacekeeper or a Minuteman III you can try again.
Try again?There's no point,mate.You're one of a small minority who believes that all out nuclear war would not result in total devestation for all involved(and many not involved).Lord knows why we haven't had one years ago."Mr President,I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed.But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed,tops.Depending on the breaks." General"Buck"Turgidson.
Keep flinging the appeals to authority, mate. The only country that has the warhead stockpiles to even consider flinging at America is Russia, and if they do then they also have to look at the repurcussions, the lose American trade the largest economy in the world and it supplies food to a good portion of the world, then there's the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. I'll also remind you that despite all evidence to the contrary, I'm one of the few people who knows Hitler was a Christian.
Just so I can expand, what I meant with the last part was: Despite all the evidence to the contrary, such as the many pictures of him entering and leaving Churches with Catholic priests saluting him, or the concordant, or the fact that neither side touched the Vatican despite their claims of Hitler being an atheist, I'm still one of the few who actually know Hitler was a Christian.
Also, there's also no such thing as a protracted nuclear war against the US or Russia, not so long as we don't have Missile Defense Systems, and the F22 would be intercepting Tupolevs, very easy for the most sophisticated plane in the world.
Crippled with grief? If you think the Russians would target civillian targets like the 9-11 attacks did, then you drastically underestimate their intelligence; they'll be aimed at the Pentagon, the White House, and military and military industrial targets. Russia won't be able to focus on the US entirely, they still have to deal with numerous NATO members' militaries and industries, especially with a country directly beside them being a member.
I have a project at defence force in Australia, they want to buy F-35. but start to re think it because Indonesia and Malaysia just purchgased Su-27 and Su-30. The Air marshall himself said in the report that I read that the Su 27-30 will out perform it.
don't know about F-22, Su-47-37, but he was talking about a present russian plane and future US plane. this is an Air Marshall I'm talking about he knows plane better than anyone on this forum.
I seriously doubt you know an actual Air Marshal, but fine. First of all you aren't getting a Raptor, a Flanker-F, or a Berkut; the Raptor at the moment contains too many military secrets, their are no more Flanker-F's since the one they modified into the Terminator was converted back into a FLanker-F, and the Berkut was a technology demonstrator, meaning it wasn't for combat.
Continuing on, it was fallacious for you to think that all Su-30's are made equally, they are not. As it is, two companies make them, IRKUT and KNAAPO, KNAAPO uses older air-frames which mean more maintenance and shorter service lives and use inferior indigenous electronics, Malaysia got the Su-30MKM, which is based on IRKUT's Su-30MKI.
Asking which one is better is a bit difficult since they have different purposes, you're going to have to tell me what you want, a multirole or an air-superiority fighter? IMNSHO the Su-30MKM is faster, but the F-35A sports a superior AA Armament in twelve AIM-120D's and two AIM-9X or if you prefer IRIS-T's.
Australia is quite unique they don't really interested with air superiority fighter. As far as I know they are more intersted in multirole fighter such as: F-18 and F-18 super hornet.
are you also working in aerospace industry wolfritter?
Ah, well then the F-35 is your choice, the whole reason the Aussies have been talking about obtaining the Raptor was because they didn't know when they'd obtain the -35, but the Su-27 is still at best equivelant to an Eagle, and their next multirole the Su-50 is still in concept stage. No, I'm not in the industry, but I do know a couple people who are, one in particular was involved in Project Nike.
ah yes, project Nike, I've heard about that. But I didn't know they still doing it. Early next year I will perform a research about far field hydro acoustics. The plan is to reduce noise in both F-18 and naval submarines. I don't know how they will implement it in F-18 though, submarine is more make sense.
oh yes the report is not from the current air marshal but the previous one Ted Bushell, Paul Purcell and from a guy named A Davies from Australian strategic policy institute that I met. try to google about australias plane, and their name you can see alot about this Australian F-35 and the controversial purchase of superhornet.
I didn't know the detail of the contract, but apparently buying the super hornet is pissing of many aerospace expert and the military expert in Australia, some of my colleagues in Australian Strategic policy institute is concern.
If you're not in aerospace industry are you an engineer or scientist?
FYI, I'm not taking your claim at face value, after all everyone on the internet is a 16-year old bisexual catholic schoolgirl with a twelve-inch dick and five doctorates, if you catch my drift. But, no, I'm not an engineer or scientist. Obviously you should talk to real ones, but my not being either one certainly does not mean I don't know anything about either, after all that would be fallacious thinking.
I did not say that, I'm just impressed with your knowledge about fighter planes, that's why I thought You're an engineer or someone who work in aerospace industry. sorry If you're offended
No, I was just saying that whilst my not being an engineer should not impact whether you listen or not, that I would not blame you for getting a second opinion.
of course I don't know the air marshal, like I said I read his report. And Like I said I didn't know about F-22, Su 37 or 47 coz it does not involves australia, indonesia and malaysia. The one that I read is between Su-27, Su-30 that belong to Indonesia and Malaysia and F-35 that will be Australia's main fighterplane.
Then the F-35 is your choice, so far stealth is proving to be the biggest Force Multiplier in the History of Military Aviation. For example, when the Langley F-22 Squadron flew the Red Flag Exercise against RAF and RAAF Aggresor Squadrons in Australia, the pilots couldn't even get a lock when they could see them from the cockpits. Which is impressive when you consider the Red Flag Pilots are the best pilots from their respective countries.
The main concern from Australia airforce is that if other countries such as Russia, India, or china can find a way to detect stealth fighter(we believe they already did although how deep it is we don't know),unlike US-or OZ, they don't tell public their advancement in technology until very end. This will create a problem coz as far as we know Su-27, and Su-30 can out perform F-35 in dog fight. as engineers always say "anything ca fail", that's why my research is about reducing noise.
Here's why I don't believe you actually work in the Industry, there are a number of ways, EM emissions and visibility; and if you did work in The Business you'd know both the Aussies and Russkies claim they can detect them through wing vortexes, of course there's no evidence to suggest that it is accurate enough for engagements or cueing an engagement system, in fact, Russia's building of a Stealth Aircraft contradicts this.
Up to you if you doubt I don't mind. My research title is Computational Hydroacoustics based on Mohring's acoustic analogy with DSTO, you can ask one of your colleagues who is doing fluid mechanics about it. this technique is quite new, and next year we will start to build computer program to simulate this.
I don't believe you, since Youtube isn't the place to be looking for things on World Affairs, there are idiots who think we can blow up the world five times over simply with nukes.
When US-NATO air forec 1999 bobared Serbia,do you think Serbia or Russia didn't have radars to detect US stealth fighter'? if in case is that aircraft is or was invisible,why Russia or US,would bother to make such expensive Airplane,when thy could use stealt hissales, and bomb each other as much as they wish?
hi stevan, I'm not really sure about the Serbia and Russia radar capability, Because it is usually classified by each nation. and my specialty is in fluid not electrodynamics-instrumentation. I suppose Russia should be able to detect it, although it is difficult coz stealth plane has small radar cross section, but again, I don't know. I always think the Russian is on the same league as US, it just unlike western countries, Russia does not often showed off their technology to publicl.
Agree...if in such tehcnology big business are not involved,the world would be much more peaceful,on expense of the US tax payer', the USA, corporatio' are geting big and biger rich and richer,but none see' that the people geting poor and poorly.
I'm totally agree with you my friend, although the technology is impressive from engineering point of view, personally I think it is sad that they use it to kill people. Sometimes I don't feel comfortable that they hide the cruelness of this machine behind coolness (eg: films).
maybe you're right about the undetected vortex coz I'm not electronic or electrodynamic specialist, my stuff mostly involves fluid. What I do know is that DSTO has put aside grant to perform this hydroacoustic research for their hornets and collin class sub, exactly how they going to use it to reduce noise in hornets I don't know, the submarine is more feasible in my personal opinion.
I've been reading you'r argument in all of this sukhoi stuff in the past 6 months. I think you (wolfritter) just an arrogant and jealous guy who thinks know everything about planes from wikipedia and underestimates other people and other countries. I understand Americans are arrogant, but Please try to be more respectful to other people.
Let's see, an ad hominem containing strawman and projectionism. Please show where I said I know everything about planes, and please show where I underestimated other people from other countries? I even asked for what purpose he wanted in the planes and he said a multirole platform, this clearly makes the F-35 the choice, over an air-superiority fighter like the Su-30.
anyway It's been pleasure talking about planes with you, I'm off to overseas for 2 weeks, there will be no computer for me, so I will not be able to reply your message soon.
I love these videos. But have yall heard about those planes that the government has been testing at area 51? Apparently theres an experimental bomber than can reach mach 5.
Hey bro, I've try to mute sound of this clip. Start from word 'Stars of SHUKOI' and togather play this music '..youtube watch?v=ORlWeIrKPp0' right after injecting the fuel, music stop. Result very nice clip. Pls try...
I suggest to The Brazilian Government to buy a dozen of SU-37, for long term support, cost efficient and agile air defence. You don't trust me, let's play Flanker game.
common misconception that the US airplanes have better technology. Mig-31, was the first plane to have phased array radar, while all nato jets still used mechanically-steered antennas *squeek*. bschott was right, the Rssn military does not export the really cool gadgets. those 4*pi Steradian passive-IR "crystal ball"-sensors, for example. Since upgrades in the 80's, the Su's also had electronic countermeasures against most nato attack patterns. F-22 is +5% performance, +200% cost.
all you bush ass-kickers can say whatever you want,but no american plane can compare to the sukhoi. it's twice as fast as any other plane.....it glides with ease through the sky and can take any us plane, any day
Which Sukhoi? The F-22 has 1.26 Thrust/Weight the best I can find was the Su-27 Flanker with 1.085, so no Flanker is 'Twice as fast as any other plane' unless you're wanking.
He claimed a Sukhoi was twice as fast as any other plane, when I pull up a planes recorded capabilities, it isn't wank, if I were wanking I'd say that the F-22 can take any number of Sukhois and win. So sit down a shut the fuck up.
Wow, real witty, may I ask if you actually know anything about military jets or do you just become a fanboy to one and insult the abilities of a plane which has shown better performance?
what is the name of the music in 1:52
air2grnd 3 weeks ago
Ураа!!
J365hjwef 5 months ago
PIĘKNE MASZYNY.
flanker1227 6 months ago
What is the name of the track at 3:00 and 5:00..
please and thank you (:
elpolillo92 10 months ago
What is the name of the song/author between 1:50 until 3:00...
thanks in advance!!
Nicomedes70 1 year ago
@Nicomedes70
Thats "Rondò Veneziano - Rondo Veneziano "
666mabus 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nicomedes70
Thats "Rondò Veneziano - Rondo Veneziano " - tube/watch?v=h_XKOjj7h-s
666mabus 1 year ago
Idk about which planes are better american or russian but I'm an american and I gotta say the Sukhoi ones are freaking beautiful!
kevinboyman 1 year ago
la musica esta muy coool!!!
jyssus 1 year ago
Comment removed
jyssus 1 year ago
I got airsick starting at about 2 minutes lol!
kevjay777 1 year ago
Beaner? you not can be more original? No, taths true with you 50 IQ only you can write this insult. Anyway, the russian avionic are SUPERIOR to your millionaire aircraft de luxe. years ago, the AK-47 eats the bad Quality M-16 and now the best plains are the Europeans. You can still insult me with idiots comments but the truth its evident, american avionic is Down and the world are the Witness. ¿Why Venezuela buy russian airplanes and cancel the F-16 adquisition?
Mexicanceltic 2 years ago 3
0:52 Nao that was low!
BumbarATM 2 years ago
SU-37 BERKUT is the best
SovjetPhoenix 3 years ago 3
su37 is the flanker-f(terminator). berkut is the su47 firkin.
HayTxa 3 years ago
¡Yes! Now you are my friend
¡SU-47 Berkut its the most elegant plane ever made! (Okay, Su-27 and 35 are too)
Mexicanceltic 2 years ago
It's really elegant. The F-22 have no elegance, it looks like a flying Lunchbox or something like that.
Maybe the F-22 is really good, don't know never sat in one of them...but they are too expensive and US-Airforce can't get more of them.
People say one of the SU jets is the King of the Sky ;-)
SovjetPhoenix 2 years ago 2
!hahahah! ¿Lunchbox? its the best comparison ever made for these plane.
And yes, Sukhoi is the king for introducing the new avionic concept. The first time I see this video really I´m impresed for the movements of the planes.
Mexicanceltic 2 years ago
Everybody have an other kind of view if it comes up to Jets ;-).
Yes you're right, I'm allways impressed when i see movements like this. When i saw it first time i couldn't believe that it's possible but this is reallity. SU's and Mig's have a manuevrability that the F-22 and F-35 don't have.
SovjetPhoenix 2 years ago
And remeber this. The F-22 don´t cover the great spectatives. ¿Why introducing the F-35 if the F-22 win the contract with army?
The american air tech has stopped in our limits and can´t advance more.
Mexicanceltic 2 years ago
i luv su...look at the wings !
LickMeDontKickMe 3 years ago
whats the semi classical song near the beginning called
fig11us 3 years ago
el voto 1062 fue desde el pentagono
Ynero 3 years ago
just awesome vid! i wish a flanker or berkut would perform at an airshow here.. :-/
cooker1080 3 years ago
well done !!!!!!!!SUKHOIS ARE THE BEST!!!!!!!!!!
su27forserbia 3 years ago 3
Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия Россия
aleksandarfriscic 3 years ago 2
too ,late they knew it for quite a while now, this is why they desperately working on the stealth fighters such as f22 raptor. Suk27 series are the amount beautifulness's and deadliest air craft in the world. Before you can get a ride for $20,000 for 45 minutes in russian after soviet clapsed.
kenluikhing 3 years ago
Poetry in motion. I used to be in awe of F15's and 16's. But these jobbies kick ass. Let's hope the Yanks never have to find out...
Quokka57 3 years ago
I've always said the Mig 29 is a Ferrari of fighter jets, but Sukhois are F1s! :)
hussar2343 4 years ago 10
agreee
bnugroho 3 years ago
awesome planes! it's amazing how the pilots just throw them around! Great skill!
The Berkut is great! supersonic plane, but looks like its gonna cope well with tricky manouvers and ultra slow speeds.
How much? :)
hussar2343 4 years ago
The last time i saw a F-16 doing a maneuver like that i saw it crashing!! :D
ComradeLynx 4 years ago 17
ha ha ha well said.
bnugroho 3 years ago
@ComradeLynx Last time i saw f-16 doing a maneuver like that i had to turn off hawx and go to school
aleksandarfriscic 1 year ago 2
The best of the best!
Danda1999 4 years ago 3
again to stevan1934, the reason they want to have stealth is simply to prevent other planes to detect them, and kill them before they see you. ha3 yeah sometimes I think why they don't bomb each other, well that's up to the politicians to decide. Why don't you ask Wolfritter? He seems read alot about miltary stuff and politics behind it. I'm just a fluid dynamics engineer in australian defence, so don't know much about politics ha3.
bnugroho 4 years ago
The idea behind stealth is that it increases survivability and kill ratios. For example the F-22 regularly wins in simulated engagements in 8-1 odds, and did so at the Red Flag Exercises in Australia (Red Flag pilots are the best in their respective nations and the F-22A flew against both RAF and RAAF planes), with performance like that you can afford to have say 1/8th the number of F-15's you used to have and still have the same performance.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Although, this isn't the ideal method, I'd have much preferred if the US would have focused on high speed and high altitude bombers rather than ballistic missiles, this has the benefit that they can outrun most modern missile systems and can be called back instead of if one flies they all fly. Had it been so the US and it's allies would be flying at about Mach 7 at altitudes reaching the exosphere. However McNamera killed it, unless the Aurora is real.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Hi man, yeah that's a good point, but in that kind of speed its pretty hard to do sudden maneuver from pilot and frame point of view (if it is a fighter bomber, but if its just a bomber so I think it's ok). If they make it unmanned that will be better coz i'm not sure with kind of G-force the pilot can have, and I thought F-22&35 will be the last manned fighters.
bnugroho 4 years ago
Trust me, if we had gone with high and fast bombers there would be no fighters, only interceptors, which are designed to fly right into a bomber formation and shoot them down. Plus the G-Suits would have had more reason to evolve.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
yeah, as far as I know Europe has the most advanced G-suits in the world for their Typhoon pilot (in 2004). I think one reason why Ballistic is still popular because they will not cost money and time as much as developing brand new plane(from researching and development point of view).as far as I know the cost to develop 1 plane +- = 20 planes.
bnugroho 4 years ago
Now they will, the cost to develop Mach 3+ Aircraft would bankrupt the country, but had we gone the other way it would've been cheaper. The thing that makes the missiles so expensive isn't the missile themselves, it's the hardened installations that let them survive a first srike buclear attack. The XB-70 could be scrambled in five minutes, and another one off the runway every three minutes. They can also turn around in event of a mistake, if a single missile flies, they all fly.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
mach 7?,I want to know what kind of engine they use.3 months ago I did a simple analysis for the ramjet intake (before combustion chamber)by using simple oblique and normal shocks calculation, the max I can get was mach 3.But that mach 3 was not even 3x340m/s due to the temp.but I guess they already have tricks to solve it.
bnugroho 4 years ago
The YF-12A is based on the A-12, the same A-12 the SR-71 was based on, the YF-12A would have looked a lot like it's brother, but would've been armed with only three nuclear air-to-air missiles, which were the basis for the AIM-54. YF-12A would have run at about Mach 3.35. We'd be using the same kind of jets just tooled for a new typed of performance.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
another reason that I think why ballistic is still popular because lots of countries still believe that it is the best and fastest missiles/bombs around. If you or your friend has access to AIAA check this: Journal of Propulsion and Power 2004,0748-4658 vol.20 no.1 (27-58)
bnugroho 4 years ago
And they're wrong. If we have an inkling that a first strike is coming we can scramble our bombers and send them on their way, if it's a false alarm we can turn them around. However with missiles, you can't turn them around, unlike these action movies you see there's no device that lets you shut a nuclear missile down midflight, when it goes it's gone, no stopping it or returning it, thus your enemy has to fire.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
i heard this song years ago whats it called
fig11us 4 years ago
american jet is sucks !!! Russian Jet rules !!!!!
algorges 4 years ago
VERY COOL VID ;)
greendragoonk 4 years ago
cool
PeneTraidor 4 years ago
Folks what's the music composition that starts playing at 1:51?? That music composition is definately Mozart's but which one????? Mozart has more than 600 music opuses.....
Tsobanian 4 years ago
im looking quite a while too for that song..
delta12H21 4 years ago
The one that starts at 1.51 i meant.
delta12H21 4 years ago
don't care what people say about other planes, but as An Engineer I have to say that this sukhoi 37, spitfire, and F-16 are the most beautifull planes ever designed in their era.
bnugroho 4 years ago
some of those manuvers are pretty rediclous, good plane
Phyrex999 5 years ago
i think that the only aircraft that could perform "the cobra" is the Su-27...
mujerr 5 years ago
alot others can, such as Su-35, Su-37... any aircraft with thrust vectoring should be able to do this...
SnowAlpineBunny 5 years ago
As can the F-22.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Sukhoi is good! nice music too!
delta12H21 5 years ago
BVR engagements tend not to happen in real life.
icn001 5 years ago
Your source for this?
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Su-47 rules and the F-22 sucks!
Su47BerkutGolden 5 years ago
Sukhoi planes are awesome. Ask any american who has flown one,which they had a chance, when east germany meged with west germany. Had a good chance to test the sukhoi's that were part of the east german stable.
TechCrazy 5 years ago
Hey what is the name of this song, its so catchy, tell me!
jlkm2000 5 years ago
Russian's Plane's Kick Ass!
DrGerli 5 years ago
Awesome!
hyemp3s 5 years ago
I like sukhoi
Su47BerkutGolden 5 years ago
I like Russian Jets, special Su-37 and Su-47 Berkut
zenki987 5 years ago
NATO air combat theory is like Shotokan Karate
Russian dogfight mentality is Jeet kune do
lape2002 5 years ago
Great pilots!
Rugalez 5 years ago
the sukhoi is the best aircraft of the world
YamiNemesis 5 years ago
well answering my own Q... it is all about money... i'v been drinking with Russian God Pilot formerly, and he mentioned "we all have to feed our families..." Putin can u pay ur pilots well, man... uhhh...
rustiz 5 years ago
chineeze can not fly SUKHOI, period. These rats have to hire Russian Pilot to fly this awesome plane. I have to as the Pilot they hire - why??? Why in the world MAN YOU are flying YOUR best AIRCRAFT for chineze rats???? Who knows... God... Rats rule? PERIOD.
rustiz 5 years ago
Nice planes but the editing was funny - Borat: Cultural learning of Russian plane for make benefit glorious nation of Kazahkstan.
SmiertSpionem 5 years ago
You just gotta love SU27.
Give this baby some american technologies...
But who knows, americans had opportunity to test theirs planes over the planet (violent nation), while russian didnt.
I think SU33 has never been in real combat.
Second thing is money...we all know how much money american goverment spend on millitary and how much russians.
But still they make better planes.
darijo203 5 years ago
Russian planes have always lagged behind in one crucial element of aerial combat: computer power. This is changing, however, as sophisticated electronics are imported from western Europe and even the USA (under Clinton, many supercomputers were transferred).
TigerTikka 5 years ago
I like how people here assume russian planes are better because of overused thrust vectoring at slow speeds. Im not saying their better or worse but weve all seen the cobras and flips in countless Russian, Us test planes
chloroxjello 5 years ago
i'd suggest malaysian airforce should use good sukhoi's thought...they have one but the bad ones...
one question: don't you feel sick or felt to barf in the aircraft when you do tricks???
spitfirepanzer092 5 years ago
Damn good planes. Fuck gripens, i would like if we (Croatia) were to buy Su-35 instead of gripens. But of course, they are russian products so it must mean they aren't so good as western. Fuck that, sukhoi and migs ruuuuuuuuule.
crosniper84 5 years ago
yo i practice the cobra manouvers on flight sim, it's not that hard it's full throt then quickly pull up, try not to stall!
ADFX32 5 years ago
So I was drinking my own pee one day when I thought to myself, "Self, you could be eating you own shit". So I did.. I ate my own shit.
TigerTikka 5 years ago
MAybe teh SUkhio is teh better plane but its no teh plane which win, its the PIlot so. Just think a moment and you will kwno who is the better Pilot, its the american ;)
halfadollarsuck 5 years ago
WTF did you just write, learn to spell.
ADFX32 5 years ago
how do you know the american are better pilot? from films like top gun, behind enemy lines, red fox, airwolf, etc? well that's explain a lot about american dreams, time to wake up and face reality.
bnugroho 5 years ago
Sorry, dumbass, the Russian pilots only get about 1/10th of the flight time, and most of that is spent playing roller coaster for some rich oligarch.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
On this year Asian air show in singapore I asked this one question to an F-15/E strike eagle pilot. "what happen if you engaged a Sukhoi 37?"
this is his answer:
"if it is one on one, I will not engage, it will out perform my plane. if one againts two, it depends, I'm not sure. but if it is one againts three We'll engage."
I think that's already conclude the answer.
I wonder what's the answer of an F-22 pilot if he meet a sukhoi-47.
bnugroho 5 years ago
Raptor shoots it down before the -47 even knows it was fired at.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
wwhat makes you think so?
ComradeLynx 4 years ago
The F-35 utilizes many of the stealthing technology of the F-22 and has an RCS the size of a Golfball, which in itself is going to pretty much look like little more than the standard fuzz you get on radar anyhow, the F-22A's aproximate RCS size is classified but is supposed to be dramatically smaller than the F-35.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
And ever heard of heat seeking missiles? They will see craptor like a fuckin chrismas tree!!!!!11
ComradeLynx 4 years ago
and MiG-35's OLS can detect even stealt targets
ComradeLynx 4 years ago
Oh the Radar picks it up, but the signature's so small you won't be able to tell the Raptor(s) from the fuzz.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Well see that...
ComradeLynx 4 years ago
I suggest you look up the results of the Red Flag Exercise that included the F-22A Raptors.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Educated ppl know that is propaganda and numbers are really smaller
ComradeLynx 4 years ago
Yes, yes, and this video was really propoganda as well, sure, there's a huge vast conspiracy dedicated to lying about how weak the American Military really is, despite being the World Super Power and having not one Carrier like most but 24 Carriers.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
24? Thats a big lie, theres only 12 of them :) And new Russian carriers will be built in 2015
ComradeLynx 4 years ago
You're forgetting the Wasps and Tarawas which are technically Carriers. As for a Russian Carrier, fat load of good it'll do them, their planes are falling out of the skies and their ships and subs are falling apart. One new Aircraft Carrier isn't going to make them a Blue Water Navy.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
I didnt say so. Russia just needs bunch of nukes to wipe your sorry ass off this planet
ComradeLynx 4 years ago
No, Russian nukes never really worried us, if they were to ever launch their nukes they would be completely wiped off the map, we however would merely be mildly irritated. Oh how I wish you were right, though, my grandfather still dreams of Pax Sovieticus.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
mildly irritated? 2 buildings fell down,and your country was crippled with grief.imagine 200 nuclear warheads.
krisstruss 4 years ago
Emotional devastation is different from physical, for example our industry base is rather spread around, Russia's is highly concentrated into a couple areas, unlike what you may have been told MAD did not and does not exist, and it was certainly never our policy.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
you said russian nukes never really worried you,i beg to differ,the world was in a shitstorm during the cuban missile crisis.
krisstruss 4 years ago
Even if it wouldn't kill you, would you like me to stab you in the foot? Of course not; this is what we wanted, we allowed the USSR to bleed itself dry, because we knew it wouldn't last. If we thought they were such a threat then please explain why we weren't nuking them left and right from 1945 to the mid 1950's when we were the only ones mass-producing nuclear arms and they were still testing.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
even the usa knew the soviets would'nt bleed themselves dry in the 60s,do you honestly think there could be a winner in a full scale nuclear war? and if so,what would there be left to win?
krisstruss 4 years ago
Actually you're right, we did it earlier, George F. Kennan did it in 1949. What would be left? Most of the US, the Soviets relied on many large explosion, we relied on many many more accurate slightly smaller explosion. Or industry is rather uncentralized, we don't have factories in only a couple areas, they spread across the entirety of COTUS.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
U r an idiot. I can't believe u r my countrymen. If this is the shit u learned in school our education system is worse than the media reports. I suggest you study up on the subject matter u so freely comment falsely about.
1BuckeyeNation 4 years ago
Wow, a scathing rebuttle full of sourced information and evidence that points out how I'm wrong... Oh wait, no it isn't, it's a moron screeching UR WRONG without showing how.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Your optimism for surviving an all out nuclear exchange somewhat flies in the face of rational thought.Although your comments on the technical prowess of the F22 may be correct,by then insisting that the US could survive,even "win" a protracted nuclear war you drift into fantasy.Try arguing about missile CEP's and throw weights after the event."I know not with what weapons WWIII will be fought,but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones."Einstein.
numberstation 4 years ago
That's cute, except Einstein was only involved in the Philagelphia Project, the very first nuclear weapons. If you like I could send you a thread where you can get it from the horses mouth, if you would like?
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Are you saying Einstein over estemated the destructive power of nuclear weapons?Blimey,you really ARE an optimist.Of course,the military of each side MUST say that nuclear war is surviveable,in order to justify the potential for using nuclear weapons.But thinking you're invincible is not a healthy state of mind.
numberstation 4 years ago
Yes, because I'm sure Einstein invisioned the yield and exact effects of of the Davy Crockett Nuclear-Warhead, which will kill it's firer from radiation poisoning. What you're pulling is an appeal to authority fallacy, Einstein knew first generation nuclear weapons, so until you show me some evidence of Einstein understanding the inner workings of a Peacekeeper or a Minuteman III you can try again.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Try again?There's no point,mate.You're one of a small minority who believes that all out nuclear war would not result in total devestation for all involved(and many not involved).Lord knows why we haven't had one years ago."Mr President,I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed.But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed,tops.Depending on the breaks." General"Buck"Turgidson.
numberstation 4 years ago
Keep flinging the appeals to authority, mate. The only country that has the warhead stockpiles to even consider flinging at America is Russia, and if they do then they also have to look at the repurcussions, the lose American trade the largest economy in the world and it supplies food to a good portion of the world, then there's the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. I'll also remind you that despite all evidence to the contrary, I'm one of the few people who knows Hitler was a Christian.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
There's no beggining to your talents.
numberstation 4 years ago
Just so I can expand, what I meant with the last part was: Despite all the evidence to the contrary, such as the many pictures of him entering and leaving Churches with Catholic priests saluting him, or the concordant, or the fact that neither side touched the Vatican despite their claims of Hitler being an atheist, I'm still one of the few who actually know Hitler was a Christian.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Also, there's also no such thing as a protracted nuclear war against the US or Russia, not so long as we don't have Missile Defense Systems, and the F22 would be intercepting Tupolevs, very easy for the most sophisticated plane in the world.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
You're beginning to sound like Dr.Strangelove.
numberstation 4 years ago
Why thank you.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Crippled with grief? If you think the Russians would target civillian targets like the 9-11 attacks did, then you drastically underestimate their intelligence; they'll be aimed at the Pentagon, the White House, and military and military industrial targets. Russia won't be able to focus on the US entirely, they still have to deal with numerous NATO members' militaries and industries, especially with a country directly beside them being a member.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
I have a project at defence force in Australia, they want to buy F-35. but start to re think it because Indonesia and Malaysia just purchgased Su-27 and Su-30. The Air marshall himself said in the report that I read that the Su 27-30 will out perform it.
don't know about F-22, Su-47-37, but he was talking about a present russian plane and future US plane. this is an Air Marshall I'm talking about he knows plane better than anyone on this forum.
comment please? any "expert" here can argue?
bnugroho 4 years ago
I seriously doubt you know an actual Air Marshal, but fine. First of all you aren't getting a Raptor, a Flanker-F, or a Berkut; the Raptor at the moment contains too many military secrets, their are no more Flanker-F's since the one they modified into the Terminator was converted back into a FLanker-F, and the Berkut was a technology demonstrator, meaning it wasn't for combat.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Continuing on, it was fallacious for you to think that all Su-30's are made equally, they are not. As it is, two companies make them, IRKUT and KNAAPO, KNAAPO uses older air-frames which mean more maintenance and shorter service lives and use inferior indigenous electronics, Malaysia got the Su-30MKM, which is based on IRKUT's Su-30MKI.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Asking which one is better is a bit difficult since they have different purposes, you're going to have to tell me what you want, a multirole or an air-superiority fighter? IMNSHO the Su-30MKM is faster, but the F-35A sports a superior AA Armament in twelve AIM-120D's and two AIM-9X or if you prefer IRIS-T's.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Australia is quite unique they don't really interested with air superiority fighter. As far as I know they are more intersted in multirole fighter such as: F-18 and F-18 super hornet.
are you also working in aerospace industry wolfritter?
bnugroho 4 years ago
Ah, well then the F-35 is your choice, the whole reason the Aussies have been talking about obtaining the Raptor was because they didn't know when they'd obtain the -35, but the Su-27 is still at best equivelant to an Eagle, and their next multirole the Su-50 is still in concept stage. No, I'm not in the industry, but I do know a couple people who are, one in particular was involved in Project Nike.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
ah yes, project Nike, I've heard about that. But I didn't know they still doing it. Early next year I will perform a research about far field hydro acoustics. The plan is to reduce noise in both F-18 and naval submarines. I don't know how they will implement it in F-18 though, submarine is more make sense.
bnugroho 4 years ago
No, I said he was involved in it, the Nike Project is long over, if you've heard of Stuart Slade, you'll know who I'm talking about.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Do you think if somehow Russia can find a way to detect F-35, in your opinion does it stand a chance to do a dog fight with Su-30?
bnugroho 4 years ago
Of course there are ways, but not ways that could allow them to sortie.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
oh yes the report is not from the current air marshal but the previous one Ted Bushell, Paul Purcell and from a guy named A Davies from Australian strategic policy institute that I met. try to google about australias plane, and their name you can see alot about this Australian F-35 and the controversial purchase of superhornet.
bnugroho 4 years ago
I remember something about an offer from us about buying those back from the RAAF when the F-35 became available.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
I didn't know the detail of the contract, but apparently buying the super hornet is pissing of many aerospace expert and the military expert in Australia, some of my colleagues in Australian Strategic policy institute is concern.
If you're not in aerospace industry are you an engineer or scientist?
bnugroho 4 years ago
FYI, I'm not taking your claim at face value, after all everyone on the internet is a 16-year old bisexual catholic schoolgirl with a twelve-inch dick and five doctorates, if you catch my drift. But, no, I'm not an engineer or scientist. Obviously you should talk to real ones, but my not being either one certainly does not mean I don't know anything about either, after all that would be fallacious thinking.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
I did not say that, I'm just impressed with your knowledge about fighter planes, that's why I thought You're an engineer or someone who work in aerospace industry. sorry If you're offended
bnugroho 4 years ago
No, I was just saying that whilst my not being an engineer should not impact whether you listen or not, that I would not blame you for getting a second opinion.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
of course I don't know the air marshal, like I said I read his report. And Like I said I didn't know about F-22, Su 37 or 47 coz it does not involves australia, indonesia and malaysia. The one that I read is between Su-27, Su-30 that belong to Indonesia and Malaysia and F-35 that will be Australia's main fighterplane.
bnugroho 4 years ago
Then the F-35 is your choice, so far stealth is proving to be the biggest Force Multiplier in the History of Military Aviation. For example, when the Langley F-22 Squadron flew the Red Flag Exercise against RAF and RAAF Aggresor Squadrons in Australia, the pilots couldn't even get a lock when they could see them from the cockpits. Which is impressive when you consider the Red Flag Pilots are the best pilots from their respective countries.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
The main concern from Australia airforce is that if other countries such as Russia, India, or china can find a way to detect stealth fighter(we believe they already did although how deep it is we don't know),unlike US-or OZ, they don't tell public their advancement in technology until very end. This will create a problem coz as far as we know Su-27, and Su-30 can out perform F-35 in dog fight. as engineers always say "anything ca fail", that's why my research is about reducing noise.
bnugroho 4 years ago
Here's why I don't believe you actually work in the Industry, there are a number of ways, EM emissions and visibility; and if you did work in The Business you'd know both the Aussies and Russkies claim they can detect them through wing vortexes, of course there's no evidence to suggest that it is accurate enough for engagements or cueing an engagement system, in fact, Russia's building of a Stealth Aircraft contradicts this.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Up to you if you doubt I don't mind. My research title is Computational Hydroacoustics based on Mohring's acoustic analogy with DSTO, you can ask one of your colleagues who is doing fluid mechanics about it. this technique is quite new, and next year we will start to build computer program to simulate this.
bnugroho 4 years ago
I don't believe you, since Youtube isn't the place to be looking for things on World Affairs, there are idiots who think we can blow up the world five times over simply with nukes.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
bnugroho: two question?
When US-NATO air forec 1999 bobared Serbia,do you think Serbia or Russia didn't have radars to detect US stealth fighter'? if in case is that aircraft is or was invisible,why Russia or US,would bother to make such expensive Airplane,when thy could use stealt hissales, and bomb each other as much as they wish?
stevan1934 4 years ago
hi stevan, I'm not really sure about the Serbia and Russia radar capability, Because it is usually classified by each nation. and my specialty is in fluid not electrodynamics-instrumentation. I suppose Russia should be able to detect it, although it is difficult coz stealth plane has small radar cross section, but again, I don't know. I always think the Russian is on the same league as US, it just unlike western countries, Russia does not often showed off their technology to publicl.
bnugroho 4 years ago
bnugoho
Agree...if in such tehcnology big business are not involved,the world would be much more peaceful,on expense of the US tax payer', the USA, corporatio' are geting big and biger rich and richer,but none see' that the people geting poor and poorly.
stevan1934 4 years ago
I'm totally agree with you my friend, although the technology is impressive from engineering point of view, personally I think it is sad that they use it to kill people. Sometimes I don't feel comfortable that they hide the cruelness of this machine behind coolness (eg: films).
bnugroho 4 years ago
I like this comment. US behaves like fashion models, while Russians keep their weps secret... :)
Stefan123455666 2 years ago
a ha ha ha good one
bnugroho 2 years ago
maybe you're right about the undetected vortex coz I'm not electronic or electrodynamic specialist, my stuff mostly involves fluid. What I do know is that DSTO has put aside grant to perform this hydroacoustic research for their hornets and collin class sub, exactly how they going to use it to reduce noise in hornets I don't know, the submarine is more feasible in my personal opinion.
bnugroho 4 years ago
I've been reading you'r argument in all of this sukhoi stuff in the past 6 months. I think you (wolfritter) just an arrogant and jealous guy who thinks know everything about planes from wikipedia and underestimates other people and other countries. I understand Americans are arrogant, but Please try to be more respectful to other people.
MRMuaha 4 years ago
Let's see, an ad hominem containing strawman and projectionism. Please show where I said I know everything about planes, and please show where I underestimated other people from other countries? I even asked for what purpose he wanted in the planes and he said a multirole platform, this clearly makes the F-35 the choice, over an air-superiority fighter like the Su-30.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
anyway It's been pleasure talking about planes with you, I'm off to overseas for 2 weeks, there will be no computer for me, so I will not be able to reply your message soon.
have a good one.
bnugroho 4 years ago
it was 12000km--
FUTUREFIGHTER 5 years ago
after motodelta trike, this is the best aircraft of the world!
DeltaTrike 5 years ago
I love these videos. But have yall heard about those planes that the government has been testing at area 51? Apparently theres an experimental bomber than can reach mach 5.
SuperButtSauce 5 years ago
Russia got Ayaks--bomber can reach 1200 km an hour
FUTUREFIGHTER 5 years ago
Hey bro, I've try to mute sound of this clip. Start from word 'Stars of SHUKOI' and togather play this music '..youtube watch?v=ORlWeIrKPp0' right after injecting the fuel, music stop. Result very nice clip. Pls try...
maksiat123 5 years ago
I suggest to The Brazilian Government to buy a dozen of SU-37, for long term support, cost efficient and agile air defence. You don't trust me, let's play Flanker game.
maksiat123 5 years ago
common misconception that the US airplanes have better technology. Mig-31, was the first plane to have phased array radar, while all nato jets still used mechanically-steered antennas *squeek*. bschott was right, the Rssn military does not export the really cool gadgets. those 4*pi Steradian passive-IR "crystal ball"-sensors, for example. Since upgrades in the 80's, the Su's also had electronic countermeasures against most nato attack patterns. F-22 is +5% performance, +200% cost.
icn001 5 years ago
The Brazilian Government is thinking about buying some SU's.. but still thinkin between SU's Migs or the F's...
carlosbernauer 5 years ago
all you bush ass-kickers can say whatever you want,but no american plane can compare to the sukhoi. it's twice as fast as any other plane.....it glides with ease through the sky and can take any us plane, any day
PlaviPride 5 years ago
Which Sukhoi? The F-22 has 1.26 Thrust/Weight the best I can find was the Su-27 Flanker with 1.085, so no Flanker is 'Twice as fast as any other plane' unless you're wanking.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Wanking? Thhats what you just have done
ComradeLynx 4 years ago
He claimed a Sukhoi was twice as fast as any other plane, when I pull up a planes recorded capabilities, it isn't wank, if I were wanking I'd say that the F-22 can take any number of Sukhois and win. So sit down a shut the fuck up.
WolfRitter 4 years ago
F-22 is a craptor
ComradeLynx 4 years ago
Wow, real witty, may I ask if you actually know anything about military jets or do you just become a fanboy to one and insult the abilities of a plane which has shown better performance?
WolfRitter 4 years ago
Whats the name of the first music. Its old..... but so catchy.. I want to DL it. ^^
jlkm2000 5 years ago
Cool video and nice planes. Anybody coul'd be proud to pilot these.
loginvidea 5 years ago
the plane with the swept wing is a Su-47
they are the f-22 of russia.
I would love to see a dogfight between an f-22 and
a su-47. With all the technology the f-22 will win
but without the technology (only the pilot skills)
it would be a great dogfight. I think the su47 is
more maneuverable at high speeds.
prmaster 5 years ago
prmaster--why u think f22 is gonna win---cuz its stealth--tell me what is stealth?-----
FUTUREFIGHTER 5 years ago