How effective have they been these last few years, are they legitimately on par with the f-35 and f-22?
>>64703778I am going to assume you aren't baiting. For all intents and purposes, the Su-57 hasn't been produced in numbers enough to be a serious military aircraft.
F35s operated over Iran supressing air defense and striking targetsSu57s won't approach the Ukrainian border and instead lob long range missilesThat should tell you what you need to know
>>64703781(me)Forgot I had a WEBM.
>>64703778The MiG-31 is the most useful plane since it can go really fast. The Su-57 is just a super expensive missile truck. They'd be vastly better off with more Su-30s.
>>64703794>They'd be vastly better off with more Su-30s.Not Su-35's?
>>64703784Pretty bad sign for your "advanced" aircraft if it can't fly over Ukrainian air space.
>>64703800My understanding is the two-seater Su-30 gives it better strike capabilities than the single seat Su-35. But truly what do I know. Few things are more inscrutable than Russian model designations.
>>64703778Seeing as how they've had massive sales with a decade long backlog I'd say pretty damned effective.
>>64703800>>64703923Su-30 is supposed to be the slavchimp Strike-Eagle. The Su-35 is mostly an air-superiority fighter, but it's also multirole. So maybe it's like a slavchimp land-based Super Hornet.
