Ukraine claims first Su-57

[Fighterfoto]

Reported in various places but from INews: https://inews.co.uk/news/world/crown-je ... in-3100331

Losing the crown jewel of Russia’s air force is a humiliation for the Kremlin

The reported first loss of Russia’s most advanced fighter jet in an audacious drone strike is an embarrassing and alarming development for the Kremlin, according to a military aviation specialist.

Ukraine claims to have destroyed an Su-57 warplane on a runway at the Akhtubinsk airfield more than 500km across the border in the latest demonstration of Ukraine’s long range capabilities and Russia’s vulnerabilities. Russian military bloggers confirmed the strike but suggested the £35m jet could be repairable.
But the satellite imagery leaves “not much doubt” that the pride of the Russian fleet has been severely damaged, says Thomas Newdick of military news outlet The War Zone.

On Sunday, Kyiv’s defence intelligence agency (GUR) published satellite images showing the wreckage of an aircraft, purportedly an Su-57 at Akhtubinsk airfield near the city of Volgograd.

The GUR did not specify how the jet was targeted. But Russian military news outlet “Fighterbomber”, which is believed to have close connections with the defence establishment, reported that the damage was caused by a drone strike.

“Fighterbomber” claimed that the damage was being assessed to determine if the aircraft could be repaired, adding that if not this would mark the first combat loss of a Su-57. The Su-57, which has been through years of troubled development and is still used only sparingly, is “the most advanced and latest combat aircraft used by Russia” that is supposedly equipped with state of the art stealth capabilities, Mr Newdick said.“If they have been using them in Ukraine, they have been using them very cautiously and from well within Russian airspace,” he added. “Russia has made a considerable effort not to expose them to risk.”

The apparent loss is another blow for Russian military prestige, after more than two years of heavy losses of military equipment, which could impact Moscow’s ability to market hardware around the world. The Su-57 is a “point of pride for the Russian military industrial complex, which they have been making an effort to sell to export customers,” said Mr Newdick.

The strike also underlines Ukraine’s burgeoning drone capabilities, following a series of attacks with home-made unmanned aircraft deep inside Russia’s borders. “As Ukraine has shown over the last few months there is not really any military airfield in the Western half of Russia that is safe from Ukrainian strikes,” the analyst said.

The strike has also stirred discontent among Russian military correspondents, with criticism of the leadership for failing to protect the crown jewel of the fleet.

“All we can add to this is that the cost of repairing one Su-57 could have been used to fully equip several airfields in frontline areas with light shelters for tactical aircraft,” posted popular blogger Rybar, which is run by former defence ministry official Mikhail Zvinchuk.

Since Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine both sides have conducted regular strikes into enemy territory. Ukraine, which lacks the vast arsenal of missiles available to Moscow, has developed a battery of long-range drones to strike targets deep inside Russia. Kyiv was also recently granted permission by the US and several European allies to use the military aid they are supplying to strike targets inside Russia, with varying conditions.

[iainpeden]

£35m? So the RAF could have bought three -57s for each F-35.

[Vulcanone]

£35m? So the RAF could have bought three -57s for each F-35.

I know the F-35 may not be everybodies cup of tea, but I bet Customer support for it is rather better than what anything from Sukhoi is (or whatever they are called nowadays. I think anything Russian makes a nice pairing with Andrexs finest toilet paper

[quid21]

£35m? So the RAF could have bought three -57s for each F-35.

I know the F-35 may not be everybodies cup of tea, but I bet Customer support for it is rather better than what anything from Sukhoi is (or whatever they are called nowadays. I think anything Russian makes a nice pairing with Andrexs finest toilet paper

While the SU-57s are out-maneuvering and shooting down our F-35's I bet the pilots will be pleased the customer support is great! Seriously though, it shows that if you want to win a war against a power such as Russia, you need to master non-conventional weaponary like these drones, and the Houthi drones that cost a fortune to shoot down but don't themselves cost much to produce.

[Vulcanone]

Well lets hope our (or anybody elses) aircrews never have to go up against any Su-57s.

It remains to be seen (IF) the Su-57 is actually any good, I know its been used on ops in Syria I'm not aware of any having done much other than drop bombs.

[quid21]

I agree - trouble with all these very expensive fighters (and bombers for that matter) is that there is a reluctance to use them due to the sheer cost of them!

[Philly1971]

Does it also bring back the importance of HAS at airbases, perhaps at least until anti drone tech is up and running at core airbases. What’s the point of having a £50m fighter jet being parked on tarmac and then being put out of action by a £1000 drone with a homemade grenade attached? How many F15s just sit out at Lakenheath, or Typhoons at Coningsby, or F35s at Marham?

[Vulcanone]

As far as I know, all the Squadrons at Lossie operate from the HAS sites, both 3 and 11 still do at Coningsby

[jamesg23]

As far as I know, all the Squadrons at Lossie operate from the HAS sites, both 3 and 11 still do at Coningsby

3 and 11 pull the jets out in the morning and leave them on the line till the end of the day. the jets don't actually operate from the HAS. I guess if we was in a conflict then they would be in the HAS more often.

[Finty]

£35m? So the RAF could have bought three -57s for each F-35.

A very compelling argument, clearly the MOD is lacking your expertise... *sighs*

[Finty]

£35m? So the RAF could have bought three -57s for each F-35.

I know the F-35 may not be everybodies cup of tea, but I bet Customer support for it is rather better than what anything from Sukhoi is (or whatever they are called nowadays. I think anything Russian makes a nice pairing with Andrexs finest toilet paper

While the SU-57s are out-maneuvering and shooting down our F-35's I bet the pilots will be pleased the customer support is great! Seriously though, it shows that if you want to win a war against a power such as Russia, you need to master non-conventional weaponary like these drones, and the Houthi drones that cost a fortune to shoot down but don't themselves cost much to produce.

What makes you think the Su-57 would be so good against our F-35s? Both platforms are unproven in a near- peer conflict, with BVR engagements. This isn't 1916.

[iainpeden]

Sometimes numbers count and one -35 with four bvr missiles will be at a disadvantage against three -57s with a total of 12.
The point about drones is a good one; I wonder how effective guns are against them and if any of the drone kills have been by gun.
Also, do the Russians have hardened bases - seems strange if not.

[Vulcanone]

The Ukrainians have shot one drone down using a Yak 52, with a guy in the back using a machine gun. As for Su-57 vs F-35. Most F-35 users have more than Russia has Su-57s....

[Seahornet1]

Sometimes numbers count and one -35 with four bvr missiles will be at a disadvantage against three -57s with a total of 12.

But those three Su-57s would represent about10% of Russia's entire fleet of the type (14% if we ignore test & dev airframes). Pro-rata, they'd be facing over 80 NATO F-35s!

I know this is a highley improbable scenario, but when numbers count, 3x Su57 v 1x F-35 doesn't seem all that likely either...?

[Vulcanone]

As far as I know, all the Squadrons at Lossie operate from the HAS sites, both 3 and 11 still do at Coningsby

3 and 11 pull the jets out in the morning and leave them on the line till the end of the day. the jets don't actually operate from the HAS. I guess if we was in a conflict then they would be in the HAS more often.

Yes James, I hadn't got round to that bit about them all being dragged outside..

[Finty]

Sometimes numbers count and one -35 with four bvr missiles will be at a disadvantage against three -57s with a total of 12.

But those three Su-57s would represent about10% of Russia's entire fleet of the type (14% if we ignore test & dev airframes). Pro-rata, they'd be facing over 80 NATO F-35s!

I know this is a highley improbable scenario, but when numbers count, 3x Su57 v 1x F-35 doesn't seem all that likely either...?

Indeed, good points well made. I don’t know if Russia intends to acquire the 76 they once aimed for, but I remember being in Wales about two years ago and it occurred to me how there were more fifth gen fighters operating in Welsh airspace at that moment than in Russia‘s. Why do people think they’d suddenly outnumber the West’s 35s with 57s?

[gamecock]

As far as I know, all the Squadrons at Lossie operate from the HAS sites, both 3 and 11 still do at Coningsby

Only 2 Sqn, and they drag the jets out as well. Mind you, a hangar roof won't offer much protection.

[trotsenstein]

As far as I know, all the Squadrons at Lossie operate from the HAS sites, both 3 and 11 still do at Coningsby

Only 2 Sqn, and they drag the jets out as well. Mind you, a hangar roof won't offer much protection.

If the attacker has managed to get that close you have bigger problems

[gamecock]

Depends where you launch the drone from!

[Vulcanone]

Or with the technology these days, where they launch either a JDAM style glide bomb or a Cruise missile...