(1) what does it mean extreme for you? is there mass and size in requirements? Had such Su-57? Because if not then fulfilling requirements makes you to use specific technological solutions. Not the other way around. And no there is no rule fighter has to be compact.
Actually there is... look at twin engined fighters of WWII... and you will see that with propeller driven aircraft two engines is not so efficient.
For the same reason there are no three or four engined fighters in service today... in fact, I have not looked to be sure, but the only three engined fighter I know of was the Yak-41... and it was cancelled.
(2) As can you see F-35 without VSTOL ability is still bulky and fat. Still looks poorly comparing to Su-57. Perhaps you missed here that F-35 is much smaller and has less place for bomb bays regardless on vtol or not .
The external shape is unified, so the STOVL model needed room for a lift fan in the front... so they all have that shape, but the conventional models don't actually have the fan so they have more internal space for fuel.
Actually for fleet defense or ship countering tasks tell me why 5-6 tons shall be not enough?
You were the one claiming that the F-35 was superior because it could carry so much... except that it can't without giving up stealth.
But I prefer to ask the question: why Russian Navy knowing much better then any of us, do still insists in VSTOL?
They might want a long endurance subsonic STOVL cheap fighter that operates very close to ships, that could also do anti sub work with dipping sonars or whatever...
(1) And what is real performance?30 years ago of Yak 41? which could BTW be a decent fighter in 2-3 iterations, no worse then MiG-29.
No it could not... having three jet engines directing afterburning super hot air directly at the ground beneath the Yak-41 meant no ordinance or external fuel tanks on the body of the aircraft... and its rather small wing had four weapon hard points... not to mention there is no way for it to land or take off vertically without hot exhaust gas from entering those big air intakes at the front and stalling the engine/s which in a hover are fatal.
Replacing the two lift jets with a main engine powered fan was the solution that was never adopted on the Yak-41 because it would require a complete redesign... it was implemented on the F-35... but the volume requirements would much better suit a subsonic aircraft that does not need to be super slim and aerodynamic.
VVS is Air Force a part of VKA (aerospace forces), it they say it is a fighter-bomber then you know better?
According to Bondarev, flight tests of the new fighter are expected to be completed in summer this year, right after which a contract to purchase 30 MiG-35 jets will be concluded between the Mikoyan corporation and the Russian Defense Ministry. "Then in a short while we will replace the whole fleet of lightweight fighters with such jets," he added, saying there are plans to purchase no less than 170 MiG-35 planes.
There is a slight difference: in 2023 the second stage engine tests should be accomplished. MiG-35 state tests was accomplished AFAIK. Su-57 is at least 2 times more expensive and not so badly needed as small fighter. Yet RuAF ordered 2x as much.
So you are assuming they are buying 6 because they don't actually want it... then why buy any at all?
WTF are they going to do with 6 planes if all the rest are going to be Sukhois?
You sound like one of those trolls that said because only 12 Su-57s have been ordered it is a failure and that is all they will buy... pathetic.
If they are only buying 6 because they want to create an export market and don't want the MiG-35 are they doing the same with the Su-57 and its 12 airframes ordered... and if it is different how is it different?
I dont think they have anything new before 2030 frankly speaking.
Mind then making a prototype and finalizing tests takes some time in Russia.
Hahahahahaha... of course... even nothing means continuing with MiG-29s in service is better than a MiG-35... So why bother with ever putting anything at all into service?
And in the west 6th gen super planes will just instantly appear... I mean look at how quickly Europe got those 5th gen fighters into service... only in Russia things take time... of course maybe if the F-35 had taken a little longer it might actually be a better aircraft...
There is simple explanation: Current drone generation is not about fighters but strike missions. Next gen will be autonomous. That's main differentiation between fighter generations.
Bullshit. First generation fighters were autonomous... as are second and third and fourth and fifth... or were they remote controlled too?
Perhaps because during last tender MiG-35 was not finished fighter and had enormous problems with quality? (vide: Algerian MiGs) + politics (also internal) of course.
Now pulling stuff from your ass... the Algerian MiGs were not MiG-35s and the fact that the Russian AF is currently using the MiG-29SMTs they rejected suggests there was nothing at all wrong with them.
They rejected the MiGs because Sukhoi offered Su-30s for the same price.
Su-35 needed a lot of changes after experience in Syria... was it a finished fighter when it entered Russian service?
They have been talking about MiG-35 contract in decent numbers 10 years or so. And effect we see. 6 units.
They have been talking about the MFS for decades and what do we have... an order for 12.
You are resilient to argument and Getting emotional dont you?
When you have no answer you get personal don't you...
Did any VSTOL dumped or cheated on you or what?
It is like the American dream... looks good on paper, and makes all sorts of promises, but when you look into it you find it is all smoke and mirrors and in the end... bullshit.
Because USA failed to deliver ? and this is your strongest argument? Suspect Suspect Suspect then pwnd.
The US had access to Yaks designs and technology... they had to buy it because no one else had engine technology that would allow a 20 ton thrust turbojet engine to direct its thrust 95 degrees off axis and they had to buy that from Yakovlev... they also looked at their experience with lift jets and took their ideas on main engine powered lift fans... and with all their money and all the brains of the Russians they still fucked up.
What they should have done was have two different types... a STOVL fat subsonic aircraft like a buccaneer that can take off from anywhere that can take a vertical 20 ton thrust blast of AB... (ie aircraft carriers with heat resistant surfaces, and airfields with heat resistant matts put down) the lift fan can be angled back slightly to prevent hot air coming in the front intakes... and a slim stealthy F-16 type supersonic platform... and it would have all been quicker and cheaper...
But they were dumb and tried to have everything in one...
BTW Yak-44 was cancelled y Navy too. Because it was crappy. And Preferred Ka-32 as better option. What about this?
The Yak-44 was never actually cancelled, but when there was no catapult equipped large carrier developed they never needed the Yak-44... it would never work on a Kuznetsov sized ship without a catapult, so it was not continued... which is not the same as cancelled... which is what happened to the Yak-41 because there was no way to fix it without an enormous redesign... they used lift turbojets because they were compact... a fan would require a much fatter nose area which would have killed supersonic aerodynamics and required a complete redesign... no funding for that.
Even the Yak-43 was killed by this because a bigger main engine didn't solve the problem...
MiG-35 barely flew first years. Indians rejected is as crap worse then French 4 times as expensive fighter.
Indians passed it, but chose the Rafale because they didn't want an all Russian fighter fleet... they actually wanted domestic production of the Mirage 2000, but France refused.
F-35 is shit so Russian VSTOL have to be as well. You must never have been working with requirements and client acceptance criteria. Otherwise this would be pretty straight forwad.
Have a good look at the Yak-43 drawing... no models, but the drawing looks a lot like the F-35... do you think it is an accident?
The F-35 is basically a Yak-43 but made much more expensive because it is three different types instead of just a STOVL like it is supposed to be.
BTW F-35 if is shit then of course because CATOBAR F-35 requirement. This was restricting size and increasing weight . Secondly it was to be stealthy strike aircraft with large payload (more 15% higher then MiG-35) . So they paid the price.
But if there is no penalty to STOVL why even bother with CATOBAR models... why not just make them all STOVL and they can operate anywhere....
Booth AWACS platform and EMALS is both risky, long and expensive project.
But STOVL is a home run... already in the bag...
But RuN should fund it just because you hate VSTOL? wow. It looks like RuN so far has chosen to develop top tech in VSTOL direction
You make it sound like there is no funding for AWACS or EMALS... and they hate STOVL too. Otherwise Putin would not have had to step in... they said they want a carrier with slightly more capacity than the Kuznetsov... doesn't sound like they want a small STOVL carrier...
Cool, tell me then about newest progress with this regard?
Don't be a
I don't have any more access to secret Russian stuff than you do... and even if I did, I would not post it on the internet just to prove you wrong.
which models precisely?
Yeah, you need the engine as close to the CoG as possible in any case, but ideally you put it directly there and save the additional engines. Additional nozzles for control are necessary but the impact is way smaller.
But the problem there is that having the main engine nozzle at the CG means you need lots of fuel tanks in the rear booms and along the length of the aircraft so as you use up fuel the CG does not shift... there is a radar and a pilot in the front, so you need stuff in the back to balance that out all the time and it can't be fuel or you wont be able to use it without losing CG balance... you need lots of fuel tanks so you can pump around the fuel to control the CG as you use it up.
The other problem is that the large powerful single engine basically gets thrust vector up and down but not sideways because the fuselage extends past it... so limiting any flight advantage of having TVC engine of great power...
Using a fan is the solution to generate lift with cold, low speed air, but the downside is that you need a very big fan area... not really adequate for a supersonic fighter I think.
The fan solution works up front, but at the back of the aircraft with the main engine that powers that fan it will be blasting runway material all over the place...
As far as she is STOVL the rest can be worked out hahaha!
STOVL is easy... it is the Harrier... it has been done already... the problem occurs when you demand supersonic flight and stealth and you just make it too hard to get anything worth having.
A Harrier is a STOVL Buccaneeer... if you took the Rolls Royce engine model Pegasus with a big long engine like a NK-32 variant and take air near the front with side nozzles blowing down near the front of the aircraft and one big 25 ton thrust nozzle at the rear where the main engine blows air down you should be able to get an interesting aircraft because the front nozzles will be cold air, which can be angled slightly backwards to stop the main jet exhaust of hot air getting into the main intakes...
But you are basically designing a whole new engine, and internal carriage of weapons means it is going to be a big fighter that would really struggle to be supersonic...
And it will still only be usable with heat resistant tiles... ie on your carrier only... it could not fly to a land airstrip and land except conventionally on a very long runway...
No advanced physics at all... in regards of aeronautics I am 90% a layman too
I am 80% layman, 40% mathematician, 30% superhero, and 20% bullshit artist
I think it is ok but I doubt a plane which can only lift 5-6 tons in total could carry an Onix or Kinzhal. And those are extremely destabilising weapons as far as I can see. One single fighter with a Kinzhal under its belly is a serious risk for a CSG...
I don't think air borne Onyx would be more than 2.5-3 tons and I would expect the same of the Zircon...
there is only 30 Rafale there are no other CATOBAR navalized fighters in the world.
MiG-29/33, and Su-27/33
That's precisely how Buyan copied Columbia Shuttle
Just showing your ignorance here... Buran had the same external shape as the US space shuttle, because NASA spent 2 billion dollars researching and testing thousands of different shapes and designs and came up with one that was good.
Buran copied the shape but was a totally different design... it was a glider that sat on a big rocket, the US shuttle was more like a C-130 transport with an enormous external fuel tank and solid rocket boosters to get it into space.
Soviet design was vastly superior, yet simple rocket was superior to both when it comes to taking people to and from a space station.
Ironic it was called the space shuttle because that was its least effective and efficient use.
Yak-141 without VLO was lean. IT didnt need any bomb bays. Bomb bays are either for bombers or VLO fighters/strike aircraft.
It needed to be lean to be supersonic... which is why they went for lift jets instead of a lift fan...
The result is the equivalent of an Su-25 and a MiG-29K sat on their tail and directing the max thrust of their engines at the runway for a vertical take off... the two lift engines on the Yak-41 are 4.5 ton thrust each, which is what the Su-25s engines are... and two 9 ton thrust engines would put 18 tons of thrust directly down... which is comparable to the 20 tons thrust of the R79 main engine of the Yak-41...
PS: Unfortunately, perhaps it's just a notional nose model of T-50, the image comes from this video, see at 22:15 minute
If it is a nose model for the T-50 then why does it have a MiG emblem on its side?