"Russia doesn't fight like that": US misjudgment in assessing the Su-57 fighter jet

December 1 2025 35 068 45

Washington analysts constantly view the Su-57 through the prism of the F-22 or F-35. But Russia doesn't fight that way, according to a report in the American publication The National Interest. The author emphasizes that the conflict in Ukraine has revealed a completely different Russian defense strategy.

Its defense strategy, as the example of Ukraine shows, essentially boils down to exhaustion of the enemy: it uses old, simple and reliable Technologythat can be deployed in sufficient quantities to overwhelm the West's advanced platforms

– The National Interest points out.

At the same time, the publication acknowledges the high combat performance of the Russian fifth-generation Su-57 fighter.

Overall, the Russian model is quite effective. The Su-57 boasts sufficient stealth and avionics, excellent missile performance, high maneuverability, and powerful electronic warfare capabilities. Furthermore, it adapts perfectly to combat conditions.

- emphasized in the material.

It's worth noting that the special military operation in Ukraine significantly increased foreign interest in the Russian Su-57 fighter jet. The aircraft's combat performance impressed not only Russia's potential adversaries but also friendly states.

For example, according to foreign media reports, New Delhi plans to raise the issue of purchasing a batch of these aircraft during Vladimir Putin's visit to India on December 4-5.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Alexpan

+1

1 December 2025 14: 32

And the Yankees still can't get over the idea that a "gas station" can make good weapons. But they always have to downplay it; they can't avoid it. In modern warfare, planes no longer chase each other, and the more electronics, the more vulnerable the weapon.
1. CEBEP
  
  +1
  
  4 December 2025 02: 44
  
  The Su-57 is a standalone aircraft. The F-35 fights in conjunction with other assets, ranging from satellites and AWACS aircraft to multifunctional UAVs, within the framework of a global Combat Information System (CIS). Russia doesn't have such a system. So what's wrong with this assessment? The conditions for the Su-57's use haven't been met. The F-35, though a penguin, is a fully functional and capable fighter. After all, a fifth-generation aircraft is a universal CIS element, and we don't have such a comprehensive system! We can't see anything, even in the Black Sea and at a distance from the LBS, in real time and continuously. There's no information field. The Russian Federation's 2014 military doctrine hasn't been implemented to this day...
  1. Alexpan
    
    0
    
    8 December 2025 08: 12
    
    Therefore, we are not talking about the aircraft itself, but about how it is incorporated into the context of military operations.
Real_pots

+2

1 December 2025 15: 01

The combat performance of the Su-57 has already impressed everyone in the world, but we don’t know why exactly. I personally haven’t seen a single article about the use of the Su-57, which is probably true, but I would like specifics: what operations, what results? I’ve only read something about the MiG-31 and about strategists, the Su-35 wins in air combat, but where is the Su-57???
1. sannyhome
  
  +1
  
  1 December 2025 15: 18
  
  Quote: Real_pots
  We just don't know what exactly, there isn't a single article about the use of the Su-57.
  
  Oh yeah, right. Even the crests wrote about how they tried to catch the 57th, firing their missiles literally at random, at the spot where the bomb started falling, without seeing the plane itself.
  1. vitgusin
    
    -3
    
    1 December 2025 15: 28
    
    Quote: sannyhome
    without seeing the plane itself..
    
    You are right, because the plane was on Russian territory, it is very dangerous to fly behind the front line. random There will be no serious buyers if the plane hits or crashes.
    1. Dart2027
      
      +2
      
      1 December 2025 19: 07
      
      Quote: vitgusin
      You're right, because the plane was on Russian territory. Flying behind the front lines is very dangerous; if it were accidentally hit and crashed, there would be no serious buyers.
      
      Are you talking about the F16 and F35 in Israeli service?
      1. vitgusin
        
        -4
        
        1 December 2025 19: 39
        
        Quote: Dart2027
        Are you talking about the F16 and F35 in Israeli service?
        
        No, what are you saying? I was just writing about the Su-57. Over the course of 12 days in June 2025, more than 200 aircraft carried out 1400 combat sorties over a distance of 1700-2300 km against nuclear facilities, ballistic missile infrastructure, and the Iranian military leadership, without losing a single manned aircraft, and along the way, they made 600 mid-air refuelings and destroyed 80 air defense batteries.
        Can the F16 and F35 in Israeli service do that? No way!
        
        Dart2027
        
        +6
        
        1 December 2025 20: 25
        
        Quote: vitgusin
        Can the F16 and F35 in Israeli service do that? No way!
        
        Of course they can't. The real damage to Iran's air defenses was caused by recruits from Afghanistan, recruited by the Mossad, using drones. Ballistic missiles flew safely into Israel, so much so that the Iron Dome and other structures were reduced to shreds (the US and British had to step in). And attacks on nuclear facilities were also carried out by the US Air Force, though there were a lot of oddities there. However, they could, at best, bomb Gaza, which has no air defenses at all.
        
        vitgusin
        
        -3
        
        1 December 2025 21: 17
        
        Quote: Dart2027
        Iron Dome
        
        The comrade didn't understand or, pardon me, is illiterate.
        Israel's air defense/missile defense system
        
        Iron dome
        The system is designed to intercept and destroy missiles and artillery shells. short range , released with distances from 4 to 70
        km
        
        Barak MX
        capable of intercepting modern tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, unguided rockets and modern aircraft.
        
        Sling of David
        Interception of aircraft, drones, tactical ballistic missiles, medium- and long-range missiles and cruise missiles launched from ranges from 40 to 300 km
        
        arrow 3
        Provides exoatmospheric interception of ballistic missiles (during space flight on a section of their trajectory), including intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs)
        
        Iron beam
        A short-range laser guidance system designed to intercept missiles, artillery shells and mortar bombs.
        
        Dart2027
        
        +5
        
        1 December 2025 21: 57
        
        Quote: vitgusin
        The comrade didn't understand or, pardon me, is illiterate.
        
        Really?
        
        Quote: Dart2027
        hole...Iron Dome and the rest
        
        I was too lazy to list everything.
        
        Quote: vitgusin
        50 missiles and one UAV successfully penetrated the defenses. 29 people were killed and 3490 were injured (a cut finger or severe fright is considered an injury).
        
        Yes, yes, yes... But the "victors" somehow quickly ran to shout "help, save us," and agreed to peace, forgetting all their loud declarations at the beginning. Well, for example, the air conditioner at Mossad simply exploded. And how many days did it take to put out the fire at the port?
        
        vitgusin
        
        -4
        
        1 December 2025 21: 33
        
        Quote: Dart2027
        ballistic missiles flew safely towards Israel
        
        Iran has released about 591 ballistic missiles and launched more 1050 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) towards Israel
        50 missiles, one The drones successfully penetrated the defenses. Twenty-nine people were killed and 3490 were injured (a cut finger or severe fright are considered injuries).
        
        Dima
        
        +4
        
        1 December 2025 22: 17
        
        Keep convincing yourself. But the question arises: if the Israeli military completely destroyed Iran's air defenses, escaping with a cut finger and a fright, why did they so quickly involve American "protection"? Why expose the spy network, spend so many resources, and negotiate peace without achieving any real results? Iran continued its nuclear program, Mossad agents were caught, China and Russia organized the delivery of new fighter jets and air defense systems.
        
        vitgusin
        
        -3
        
        1 December 2025 22: 26
        
        Quote: Dima
        Iran continued its nuclear program,
        
        When he continues his nuclear program, you will immediately find out about the second series and will write similar nonsense again.
        
        Quote: Dima
        China and Russia have organized the delivery of new fighter jets and air defense systems.
        
        The leadership of Russia and China is much smarter than you think.
        
        Dima
        
        +1
        
        2 December 2025 12: 52
        
        You seem to only read Israeli websites, otherwise you'd know that Russia and China have agreed and already begun supplying fighter jets and air defense systems to Iran. Precisely because: "The leadership of Russia and China is much smarter than you think."
        
        svoroponov
        
        +6
        
        1 December 2025 21: 41
        
        Yes, in Iran, it was mainly saboteurs who were working against air defenses. Israeli aircraft operated from abroad or flew only into areas where air defenses weren't available or where there were no aircraft. Our Su-35s, except for a couple of twin-engine fighters and a few Yak-130s, weren't delivered to Iran in time. Israeli aircraft were shot down, but the debris fell near the Iranian border in Iraqi territory. Therefore, there is no confirmation from the ground yet. The Israelis are trying to hide a lot, including the Iranian missile attacks. But everything comes to light over time. Israel has suffered a fair amount. This is evident from the requests for funds to repair what was destroyed and the requests for the purchase of military equipment and materiel, which, ostensibly, weren't involved in the conflict, but were either damaged or destroyed by Iranian missile strikes.
        
        vitgusin
        
        -3
        
        1 December 2025 22: 17
        
        Quote: svoroponov
        The Israelis are trying to hide a lot of things.
        
        You equate everything with yourself. In Israel, it is impossible to hide anything from the people. Even an attempt to hide anything provokes an investigation by journalists, which then leads to a criminal investigation and trial.
        
        Quote: svoroponov
        Yes, in Iran, it was mainly saboteurs who operated against air defenses. Israeli aircraft operated from abroad or flew only into areas where air defenses were not available or where there was no aircraft.
        
        Please do not write nonsense.
        Yes, the special services were at work, and they destroyed radars in some areas.
        But 80 batteries (command post, 4 to 6 launchers, radars) and all of this was destroyed by special services?
        MOSSAD, yes, carried out a super operation (this is one of many). They sold special communications through a front company. And when the planes were approaching, the entire Iranian military command was signaled to immediately assemble in the bunker. When everyone had gathered, they began to find out what had happened and prepared to leave the bunker. Mossad officers were listening in on all of this and told the Air Force to turn on the planes' transponders. Iranian air defense transmitted to the bunker, the Israeli Air Force was approaching, and everyone remained in the bunker. Forever.
        Starting from the third day of the war, there was a constant "carousel" of air forces in the skies over Iran, along with tankers, helicopters, and rescue services, which were not needed.
        The total losses amounted to two UAVs.
        
        svoroponov
        
        +6
        
        1 December 2025 22: 29
        
        I've already written about your "it's impossible to hide anything from the people" line, even giving examples. They constantly try, they hide it, and it works. And those of us who stir up this issue are simply silenced, mostly by unkind methods. You don't live there yourself, but you are of the same nationality. I understand the desire to whitewash the Israeli government and show off the country's strength. But when the chips are down, you run for help to "daddy"—the American resident. And who else before that helped repel Iranian missile attacks on approach to Israel? The Holy Spirit?
        
        svoroponov
        
        +2
        
        1 December 2025 22: 42
        
        And why did some of Iran's top command materialize alive from the bunker back to their homeland? You, Mossad, were simply fed a lie about their deaths to protect the command. You simply don't know much and think Mossad is all-powerful, which is far from true (a miscalculation of the missile threat). Besides, the entire Mossad network in Iran has already been exposed. Some were caught, some escaped. But the intelligence network they built over many years no longer exists. And one more thing. You're poorly aware of the personnel redundancy in Iran's command system. If someone dies, a new, trained person with the same competence and knowledge is immediately brought in to replace them, which doesn't lead to a loss of control over the troops or the country.
        They killed Iran's leading nuclear scientists, but what was the point? The work continued unabated.
        
        vitgusin
        
        -3
        
        1 December 2025 23: 04
        
        Quote: svoroponov
        You, Mossad, were simply fed a lie about their deaths.
        
        With a flick of the fingers NOT the reader turns into a lumpen.
        
        During the 12-Day War, these included the commanders of the General Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces, the IRGC, the IRGC Aerospace Force, and the unmanned forces. A total of three lieutenant generals, eight major generals, and 17 brigadier generals.
        
        https://topcor.ru/61319-v-irane-opublikovan-spisok-pochti-30-generalov-pogibshih-ot-ruk-izrailja.html
        
        The comment was deleted.
2. Semyon Sukhov
  
  -1
  
  1 December 2025 20: 58
  
  They forgot to tell you...
  1. Real_pots
    
    0
    
    2 December 2025 15: 14
    
    Yes? Are you sure? Then tell them I'm waiting for a report.
Sergey Latyshev

0

1 December 2025 15: 51

The plane is good. Of course. They are all good.
But the most he did, according to the media, was launch missiles from afar. According to the media, he wasn't launched over Ukraine at all...
1. vitgusin
  
  -4
  
  1 December 2025 16: 08
  
  Quote: Sergey Latyshev
  They are all good.
  
  There was a time when the MiG-21 had no equal in the world. Without a doubt, the Su-57's airframe is no less impressive than foreign fighters, but that's not nearly enough today. The Su-57's RCS (radio cross-section) alone is approximately 0,5 square meters. frontal planes versus ~0,0001 m² in all angles for the F-22 and F-35 is about 0.005 m²
  1. svoroponov
    
    +1
    
    5 December 2025 01: 00
    
    Well, the Sukhoi's RCS is somewhat lower than you claimed. And are you suggesting that they simply take American aircraft at their word, based on the advertised or marketing specs? Well, well.
    Their Abrams is the "best" tank in the world. Ukraine has demonstrated this. But many things turned out to be completely different in characteristics from what the West claimed.
    1. vitgusin
      
      -1
      
      5 December 2025 16: 11
      
      Quote: svoroponov
      And are you suggesting that we simply take American aircraft at their word, based on their stated advertising or marketing characteristics?
      
      This applies to any air force except Israel, where all modern equipment has been combat-tested, creating a strong customer base. Yesterday, Germany ceremoniously unveiled the Arrow 3 missile defense system, purchased from Israel and combat-tested. Think about it, Germany from Israel.
      Look at the map 1800 km through 2 countries with a large air defense system from countries you know, did not pick up the phone and told friends what awaited them.
2. svoroponov
  
  +4
  
  1 December 2025 21: 43
  
  They launched them and flew them. One even, while conducting reconnaissance, practically flew all the way to Kyiv.
AC130 Gunship

+1

1 December 2025 19: 39

A firm contract (with advance payment) and a letter of intent are like promising to marry and then getting married.
No one really saw the Su-57 at the LBS, so it's rather strange to talk about the tactics of using them there.
AC130 Gunship

+1

1 December 2025 19: 43

Quote: sannyhome
Quote: Real_pots
We just don't know what exactly, there isn't a single article about the use of the Su-57.

Oh yeah, right. Even the crests wrote about how they tried to catch the 57th, firing their missiles literally at random, at the spot where the bomb started falling, without seeing the plane itself.

A smart bomb flies 70-80 km. By the time it hits, the plane has long since turned around and flown away. They don't actually attach them to the Su-57.
beeper

0

1 December 2025 21: 18

And what about the Su-57 wingman, promoted under Shoigu as almost an alternative, its unmanned twin, the "Hunter"?!
After the unsuccessful debut-disaster over Ukraine and its wreckage ending up with "respected Western partners", there is no news about this "Hunter" in the media?!
A dead-end branch - "forget it" or "will it suddenly fire off" with an unprecedented "double debut"?!
1. svoroponov
  
  +2
  
  1 December 2025 21: 53
  
  So, not one but three hunters were produced. One disappeared somewhere in Ukraine (during the flight, there were problems with the communication line, and our fighter escorting it simply shot it down with a missile to prevent it from flying off to the enemy), one crashed in our country (it was suppressed by our powerful electronic warfare), and one is still in use. But this is simply an interim stage for developing a similar UAV, or rather its systems. This aircraft would need a slightly different engine, with a flat nozzle, and be made of slightly different materials. Or perhaps they already exist. Let's wait and see. But their use in Ukraine, given the nature of the fighting, doesn't seem likely. Where would they be used? There are plenty of other means.
Carlos Hall

0

1 December 2025 21: 30

At the moment, its use in Syria and Ukraine, as well as export to Algeria, look promising.
savage3000

+1

1 December 2025 22: 37

comes down to exhausting the enemy: it uses old, simple and reliable technologies that can be implemented in sufficient quantities,

Utter nonsense, of course.

How come it doesn't fight? The Su-57 doesn't need to dodge missiles; what's easier to do when it's stealthier? Or what?
1. svoroponov
  
  0
  
  5 December 2025 01: 49
  
  You've been completely bamboozled about stealth. Yes, all aircraft are visible, it's just the detection ranges that vary. And why do you think the Americans were so eager for the Turks to get rid of our S-400s before buying (delivering) the F-35s? And keep their distance from areas where our modern air defense systems are located? And for dessert: the F-35s that arrived in Estonia only flew at low altitudes and deep into the country, staying well short of the Russian border by about 150-180 km. That's how "stealthy" they are.
prior

-2

2 December 2025 09: 44

The Su-57 is the "Aurus" of the Russian Air Force.
He's not meant for frontline work. Others will do the work for him.
The best he can do is a flat spin at an air show.
What of the SU-57's armament cannot be mounted on the SU-35 or SU-34?
The advantage of stealth over one's own territory, where there is no enemy air defense, is a very dubious advantage.
And the "Hunter" is a typical "wunderwaffle." And its fate will be a "wunderwaffle."
The Geranium is a workhorse. Compared to it, the Okhotnik is an expensive target aircraft.
1. shinobi
  
  +2
  
  2 December 2025 15: 16
  
  The Geranium is a loitering munition. The Hunter is an attack drone. Its missions are different. The Hunter is being developed for the future, to gain experience. In its current form, it will not go into production initially.
2. svoroponov
  
  0
  
  5 December 2025 01: 51
  
  You should read the opinions of American pilots who saw this aircraft at an air show. They have a more accurate assessment of it. They have experience.
  1. prior
    
    0
    
    5 December 2025 09: 21
    
    The American atomic bombs dropped on Japan were far more powerful than the planes, but they did not lead to victory over Japan.
    I didn't say the plane was bad, but it's not the wunderwaffes that win wars.
    Historical experience.
Avtandil

0

2 December 2025 10: 49

The Indians either turn up their noses or quit joint programs. Then they line up to buy them. They're really picky girls!
1. svoroponov
  
  0
  
  5 December 2025 02: 02
  
  Some of their high-ranking military personnel are oriented (or subservient) to the French and British. That's why they muddy the waters during procurement, like the Commander-in-Chief of their Air Force, who promoted the purchase of Rafales from the French. And since their design school for many types of weapons is weak, they're looking not only to buy equipment but also to secure production with technology transfer. Do the sellers need that? It'll take a lot of sweat to convince them to buy. They even acknowledged their aircraft as superior to our Su-57. But it only exists on paper, and even then, it's unclear what engine it will have, with a 2035 service date. And their creation recently crashed at an exhibition. Just ask how many years it took to make (and never finished, under the watchful eye of those same French).
shinobi

+1

2 December 2025 15: 11

The F-22 is a good aircraft. When it first went into production, it was the best in its class. Only our Su-27s could compete with it. Now it's obsolete. The F-35 is a sad piece of junk. Not for technological reasons, but for purely structural ones. The Yankees tried to create a universal platform in a single aircraft and failed miserably. Even though all the world's experience tells us it's fundamentally impossible.
1. vitgusin
  
  0
  
  2 December 2025 22: 24
  
  Quote: shinobi
  Only our Su-27s could fight him.
  
  F-22 Raptor
  Generation Fifth generation
  Primary Role: Air Superiority
  Stealth High (designed for low visibility)
  Speed 2,25 Mach (supersonic without afterburner - supercruise mode)
  Maneuverability High, with controlled thrust vectoring
  Avionics Advanced sensor fusion, highly integrated systems
  Radar sensors with AFAR AN/APG-77
  AIM-120 AMRAAM, AIM-9 Sidewinder
  
  Su-27
  Generation Fourth generation
  Primary Role: Fighter-bomber
  Stealth Low (not intended for stealth)
  Speed 2,35 Mach (depending on variant)
  Maneuverability: Very high, especially at low speeds
  Avionics: Modern, but not as advanced as the F-22
  Irbis-E PESA radar sensors
  Weapons: R-77, R-37 and other missiles
  Сonclusion
  The F-22 outperforms the Su-27 in stealth, engines, and avionics.
  The Su-27 has the advantage of supersonic speed and impressive supersonic air combat capabilities, which are not relevant today.
  The F-22 is capable of destroying a large number of enemy aircraft without even being detected, which is the most important indicator today.
  
  F-35 1230 aircraft produced, orders exist until 2030.
  The production of 170 aircraft is planned for this year.
  1. svoroponov
    
    0
    
    5 December 2025 02: 19
    
    The F-22 Raptor was the manufacturer's stated specification. But it had its drawbacks: peeling paint, problems with the oxygen system, problems with two-way radio communication, and very high operating costs per hour of flight. There were also other shortcomings associated with low-altitude flights. That's why they didn't sell it to anyone and tried to operate it only in the US or near certain airfields. And they tried to write it off as quickly as possible (what's the big deal? It was the best). Yes, it encountered our Su-35 in Syria. It looked very good in our targeting, but that's not the main thing. Having what they call an "excellent" radar, it didn't notice our fighter approaching it, which detected its location from a hundred kilometers away and flew to close air combat range. So the Americans decided to get it out of there, just to be on the safe side. And one more thing. When our two Su-57s flew to Syria, they flew over three American bases along the route: they passed from us through Iran, Iraq, and into Syria. They were never seen; they passed unnoticed.
    1. vitgusin
      
      0
      
      5 December 2025 16: 26
      
      Quote: svoroponov
      Yes, he met with our Su-35 in Syria. He looked very good in the sights of our dry jet, but that's not the main thing.
      
      But the main thing is different
      US F-22s intercept Russian jets over Syria, fire warning flares
      Two US F-22 stealth fighter jets intercepted two Russian aircraft on Wednesday after the Russian jets crossed the Euphrates River into Syria, flying east of the "deconfliction line" that separates Russian and US-led coalition aircraft operating over Syria, two US defense officials told CNN.
      U.S. aircraft fired warning flares while intercepting two Russian Su-25 close air support aircraft after they crossed the line of contact several times, officials said.
      One official said a Russian Su-35 fighter jet was also involved in the incident and that the dogfight lasted "several minutes."
      The official said coalition officers contacted their Russian counterparts about the incident via a pre-established conflict prevention hotline.
The comment was deleted.
Beloyar

0

4 December 2025 21: 38

So, the Su-57 was supposedly initially developed jointly with India, but then they refused to participate in the project.