Russian Su-57 Aircraft Thread (PAK-FA and IAF FGFA)

[Gloire_bb]

Next time try google.

This I know, of course.
And it's entirely different from what you said, in every part.
So I'm waiting for confirmation of your statement.

So SpaceX' BFR is uncapable just because it uses many engines?
You know, the most powerful rocket engine is also Soviet(Russian).
Probably, because they couldn't make enough engines.

 

[FORBIN]

Also re Russian manufacturing being rubbish. This is as true for Chinese manufacturing. So I'm not really picking on Russians because of some alleged personal vendetta am I? This was also in the context of why they can't seem to build any refined fighter skins in particular. Russian worksmanship is generally quite rough. This is true for every piece of military equipment. Chinese inherited this weakness in manufacturing COMPARED to the West. Toshiba or someone else had to build Soviet submarine turbines. This was said relating to the poor surface finish of Sukhois again COMPARED to the West. They can at least manufacture stuff which puts them in the top 10 countries in the world so again no personal vendetta. All I see is people not liking being NOT constantly praised and having others (me) rubbish their ridiculous claims and theories. I do this to the Chinese side too. Sorry about off topic but need to defend myself against all these low post count members coming out blaming me for being anti Russian and putting words in my mouth by misquouting/ misunderstanding me.

OT sorry for all
But i like much submarine yes Toshiba but not for turbines machine tool to make Akula/971 propellers is the 1st Soviet submarine with Kilo 877 to be really silencious to 110 DBs same than 688 but the 688i is more quiet 105 after they build unique Akula III also silencious, Russians have always minimum a generation of delay for noise with US boats and dangerous reactors !

USA have also better sonars and electronic but Russians subs plunges deeper especialy with 2 hull which allow also a more big resistance less vulnerable a critical hit on the pressure hull is more difficult but Oscar host 24 missiles btw 2 hulls ! 2 hull host ballasts much more small for Western subs in the front and rear
A sub with 2 hull have a displacement superior to ~25 / 30 % much more big a Akula without is for size about a 688*
Externals hull do some mm internal/pressure severals cm about 4 - 5 dépends boats

Russians also especialy SSN-SSGN have a more big weapons load but to consider US missiles are much more small compact but not supersonic in addition Soviet had need build specialised submarines especialy SSGNs for monstruous SS-N-3/12/19... for all weapons especialy missiles even now US have an advantage do more compact.If you want continue for this matters we have submarines topic https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/ssn-thread-older-operational-but-not-plan.t7082/

*

ougoah you can answer 2 time in a post...

 

[ougoah]

uhmm i thought the skin did not matter yeah so F-22 has poor workmanship but still manages to get better frontal stealth yes my friend black pain hides details like an ugly woman that puts a lot of make up

LOL you need to learn english. Not sure when I've said skin doesn't matter. It does. I'm trying but failing to teach you this.

 

[ougoah]

This I know, of course.
And it's entirely different from what you said, in every part.
So I'm waiting for confirmation of your statement.

So SpaceX' BFR is uncapable just because it uses many engines?
You know, the most powerful rocket engine is also Soviet(Russian).
Probably, because they couldn't make enough engines.

No the most powerful isn't Russian. So you're wrong. Also explain to me what is different from what I said? I said Soviets needed outside help on certain parts of the sub, these included milling turbines. Maybe you're again making small words into mountains. Learn to read. I don't want to carefully watch every single word I say like i'm writing a contract. It's up to you to understand. You're claim of Russian rocket most powerful is 100% wrong. They made a closed cycle engine which was an amazing feat but still doesn't make what you said correct.

 

[ougoah]

OT sorry for all
But i like much submarine yes Toshiba but not for turbines for propeler Akula is the 1st Soviet submarine with Kilo 877 to be really silencious to 110 DBs same than 688 but the 688i is more quiet 105 after they build unique Akula III also silencious, Russians have always minimum a generation of delay for noise with US boats and dangerous reactors !
USA have also better sonars and electronic but Russians subs plunges deeper especialy with 2 hull which allow also a more big resistance less vulnerable a critical hit on the pressure hull is more difficult but Oscar host 24 missiles btw 2 hulls ! 2 hull host ballasts much more small for Western subs in the front and rear
A sub with 2 hull have a displacement superior to ~25 / 30 % much more big a Akula without is for size about a 688*
Externals hull do some mm internal/pressure severals cm about 4 - 5 dépends boats

Russians also especialy SSN-SSGN have a more big weapons load but to consider US missiles are much more small compact but not supersonic in addition Soviet had need build specialised submarines especialy SSGNs for monstruous SS-N-3/12/19... for all weapons especialy missiles even now US have an advantage do more compact.If you want continue for this matters we have submarines topic

*View attachment 42941

No one wants to discuss subs here. I mentioned that soviet industry and manufacturing is not particularly strong and just gave one example in passing to push the point further and provide one piece of evidence. These guys were really hurt and now picking apart the words. They still stand. And these guys need to learn to comprehend things or give proper evidence and quote and dissect them if they want to make valuable points. So far just a whole lot of nonsense like G man with his failing to read the wiki link. Click button, read, become aware of Russian shortcomings. If you still want to reply, explain very clearly what I said was wrong using quotes and evidence. E.g. your rocket engine claim is incorrect.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[FORBIN]

No one wants to discuss subs here. I mentioned that soviet industry and manufacturing is not particularly strong and just gave one example in passing to push the point further and provide one piece of evidence. These guys were really hurt and now picking apart the words. They still stand. And these guys need to learn to comprehend things or give proper evidence and quote and dissect them if they want to make valuable points. So far just a whole lot of nonsense like G man with his failing to read the wiki link. Click button, read, become aware of Russian shortcomings.

We are not and don't need to be engineer ! we have some info interesting and even " experts" are not perfect to be humble can help also... you need to try can be good...and tolerant about all religions i have see some things out...

 

[ougoah]

You might but so far Gman and B787 have only been disputing me and saying totally untrue things or totally unsubstantiated things. One or the other. Nothing of real value or nothing interesting with evidence, sources, or reasoning. Defending Russia, courtesy of Kremlin paychecks is their game. Read their posts.

 

[FORBIN]

You might but so far Gman and B787 have only been disputing me and saying totally untrue things or totally unsubstantiated things. One or the other. Nothing of real value or nothing interesting with evidence, sources, or reasoning. Defending Russia, courtesy of Kremlin paychecks is their game. Read their posts.

I see you a bit excited ...the rules are very clear no politic, racism or do "bashing" against religions i have see your post ! next time i report... B787 don' t do it he take her point but correct in the rules...
to disagree is possible many persons on the planet... but not neceaasry to be unpleasant for it in more few things it is not the real life !

 

[ougoah]

Wait I need to clearly express myself again in case of hurt babies. When I said "No one wants to discuss subs here. I mentioned that soviet industry and manufacturing is not particularly strong" I actually may need to clarify that Soviet industry was not as capable of doing everything it sets out to do. It's many failures are as tremendous as their achievements. This is relating back to ~30 pages ago where we were discussing VLO and the refinement of skin surface. Su-57 having rough surface isn't evidence for Russians realising that doesn't matter to VLO but it is because they can't do better! This is because their manufacturing is actually much weaker than the west.

 

[ougoah]

I see you abit excited the rules are very clear no politic, racism or do "bashing" against religions next time i report...

If you're referring to Kremlin troll insinuation, it is in response to your comment about people adding value. I see zero value here (Gloire probably comes back with "zero value from you" like some of his previous stuff... absolute gold). In fact B787 nearly always gets into ridiculous discussions with other members in other threads. Report if you want. I don't think that was out of line. If you think that is "racist" please explain how. This is a military forum. Not a science forum. It is 100% political by definition. Military is always a subset of politics because a military belongs to a country. My comment is in no way against the rules unless you want to stretch them. Explain where I "bashed" another member? I merely said something they don't like. Their claims are untrue e.g. russian engines. e.g. F-35 hit by S-200...........

B787 sounds just like those people paid by a certain country's leadership to do something we're all very aware of and have seen all around the internet. It ought to be against the rules for continuously posting nonsense and falsities. Discussing a topic and never really responding clearly. Like Gloire's comment:

"This I know, of course.
And it's entirely different from what you said, in every part.
So I'm waiting for confirmation of your statement.

So SpaceX' BFR is uncapable just because it uses many engines?
You know, the most powerful rocket engine is also Soviet(Russian).
Probably, because they couldn't make enough engines."

What parts did I say is being referred to? What is it? if the article, it proves it. So this is nonsensical. I don't know what the game is here but you guys continue it. Good luck with the PAKFA.