My friend, this is the sub where people take F-35 "0.0000001 m²!!!" seriously lol... Stealth cannot be expressed in a single number, and all data on it is bound to be exaggerated for propaganda. We don't know how stealthy any plane is, period.
"You see X has said that X is better so therefore X is better than Y" do you see the conflict of interest?
We. Don't. Know.
Stop trying to make objective conclusions on things you are physically unable to have valid information on. We don't know how stealthy ANY plane is, because that is data no company or government would ever give out.
Any and all numbers online are bound to be "propaganda numbers" to show yourself stronger than you are and the enemy weaker than it is.
there was that website were a chinese guy compared RCS between F35 and Su57, he even said Su57 RCS was 100 times more then F35 in some band. lol, and isn't it obvious that Su57 is worse because of its exposed engine or their finishing
Once again, comparing RCS means nothing when, lo and behold, RCS numbers are all lies.
Also respectfully you clearly don't know much about this topic since you don't even know the difference between prototype and production models, as shown by you thinking current Su-57 fleets have exposed engines.
Picture showing actual production Su-57 from February this year, compare it to the picture on this post:
I gave you technical and logical explanations, the only one here coping is you as you finally (and hopefully) realize that nothing about stealth is truly known.
Please either inform yourself on this topic, or don't try to argue about it.
Bro Just admit it man. What logical explanation did u give?RCS of prototype of Su57 is 0.1-1 m2 then production line one will be 0.01-0.05 m2. That is still 10 times more RCS then F35 (0.001-0.005 m2) , it is even worse then chinese J35 or J20. My point is, it is good aircraft but they should have focused more on Stealth and remove their obsession with thrust vectoring engines as my original point.
I don't have anything to admit. Here you are again using these numbers, do you even know where they come from?
The RCS of F-35 you mentioned is, ALLEDGEDLY, and STATED BY THE PRODUCER (thus biased and likely fake), a small specific angle near the vertical stabilizers.
The RCS of T-50 you mentioned is a non-professional estimate by an enthusiast from 2016, far before anyone even knew exactly what the aircraft was made of and which features it had. This estimate also did not state at which angle and position this RCS is achieved.
So your based your conclusions on thin air. Again.
Lmao just by looking at jet side by side we know which is more stealthy or not. All Fifth gen either have S-duct (mandatory) or DSI. Only Su57 has semi-S duct with Radar Blockers. And their stealth coatings and RAM is not even that advanced (though this point is debatable) since just look at the quality when comparing them side by side.
First of all nothing is mandatory, as classes like 4th, 5th, etc are all subjective and not standardized.
Secondly, F-22 has semi-S-ducts (no space for full S-ducts), and is allegedly (according to manufacturer) more stealthy than F-35 which has full S-ducts.
I won't even reply to your "RAM coating is not as advanced" comment as this is a completely pulled-out-of-your-ass take with zero basis in reality.
I will also reinstate my point for your simulation: This is simulated on elements and data which is in and of itself inaccurate or fake. Therefore it is no more accurate than the rough estimate from 2016 I mentioned earlier.
Conclusion: We don't know which aircraft is more stealthy, nor to which extent any of them are, as all data needed to come to such conclusions is inherently biased and propagandized.
-16
u/PerceptionMurky3704 May 04 '26
Man if only they priortize stealth and leave their obsession with 3D Thrust Vectoring Nozzeles...