Sukhoi T-75 LTS (CheckMate)

I agree with some essential parts to the article but it is so full of polemical language and even outright venom it is hard to take seriously. If caatsa wasn't a thing and Russia wasn't sanctioned into a corner than a lot of these projects would have much better chances internationally. As things stand I think s75 is not just viable but could be a cheaper pathway in developing more mature fifth gen technologies.

Also many mods and respected posters have lost serious credibility with the Ukraine conflict. I won't name names as some have already been called out here recently. It is as if many old guard defense insiders and bloggers have gone all in in some weird ideological struggle with Russia. Bizarre and foolish imo. The sanctimony and snark and toxicity is getting out of hand. I am just glad to see younger people coming here from outside the western and neolib/neocon geopolitical bubbles. I hope it might wake the youth here that you don't have to ascribe to the points of view as seen by many mods here.
 
Last edited:
TMA1 said:
I agree with some essential parts to the article but it is so full of polemical language and even outright venom it is hard to take seriously. If caatsa wasn't a thing and Russia wasn't sanctioned into a corner than a lot of these projects would have much better chances internationally. As things stand I think s75 is not just viable but could be a cheaper pathway in developing more mature fifth gen technologies.

Also many mods and respected posters have lost serious credibility with the Ukraine conflict. I won't name names as some have already been called out here recently. It is as if many old guard defense insiders and bloggers have gone all in in some weird ideological struggle with Russia. Bizarre and foolish imo. The sanctimony and snark and toxicity is getting out of hand. I am just glad to see younger people coming here from outside the western and neolib/neocon geopolitical bubbles. I hope it might wake the youth here that you don't have to ascribe to the points of view as seen by many mods here.
Click to expand...
Okay this is put in a way that I get. I don't support Putin at all, but that doesn't mean there should be hate for all Russians and their various things like I've seen on social media, and other places.
 
Why bother? Just another reputation bet.
If it won't fly, there's going to be a point.
If it will, we'll get another tarnish reputation.

It's time for this particular aircraft to fly.
Sukhoi maintains something like a new major product every 10 year cycle, and S-70 is almost there.
 
GTX said:
hushkit.substack.com

Stalemate: Why the Sukhoi Su-75 Was Always Bullshit and Will Never Happen

Russia's Low Accountability Light Fighter
hushkit.substack.com hushkit.substack.com
Click to expand...

Trying to look at the article from a neutral position, some claims are reasonable and some aren't:

1. Russia is obviously struggling to field new systems. The USSR always had a more limited GDP and after the break-up of the USSR the situation is obviously more difficult for Russia, with the current war further draining resources (and limiting export opportunities to support the industrial base). So it is difficult to sustain an ability to field new systems in large numbers.

2. "Plasma stealth" claims were always closer to what you'd read in 'Popular Mechanics'. Judging the credibility of U.S. aerospace companies based on what is published in Popular Mechanics would be unreasonable.

3. Failure of the initial FGFA isn't that surprising, especially if one looks at the history of international joint-development projects (e.g. in Europe). It doesn't even necessarily reflect significantly on the design itself.

4. The failure to field a single engine type after the Mig-23/Su-17 is a conscious doctrinal decision. The proposals for single engine types were developed by industry (generally unsolicited). The question is whether VKS doctrine continues to forbid the use of single-engine types, not whether they could field one if they wanted to. The aversion to single-engine designs at a doctrinal level would seem to count against the success of the Su-75... but the fielding of the S-70 suggests that at least an unmanned CCA is a possibility.

5. Russia with its reduced economic base is very interested in finding export customers and regaining some prestige to support those exports. China has a huge economic base and GDP in comparison and is interested in creating deterrence through uncertainty (in a Cold War like situation). Neither is going to provide particularly accurate information about what is actually going on.

One could also question whether any modern fighter has been rolled out "at scale, on schedule, and without compromise" (at the author puts it).

So some of the observations (economic base, doctrinal aversion to single-engine designs) are fair, but a lot of the other observations could apply equally well to any other country.
 
GTX said:
hushkit.substack.com

Stalemate: Why the Sukhoi Su-75 Was Always Bullshit and Will Never Happen

Russia's Low Accountability Light Fighter
hushkit.substack.com hushkit.substack.com
Click to expand...
Again, the same issue from a few weeks ago. What this obvious biased rubbish (posted by a moderator no less) contributes to this topic, other than baiting for clicks and a reaction here? I recall discussion a while back including Overscan concluded something to the effect that if an article starts with "Why ..."then it's not worth our time, unless someone posting such rubbish has an agenda.

If you wanted to post something meaningful here, would have been better served to have a look at what insiders say recently, my understanding is that they're thinking of the period from the end of 2026 to sometime during 2027 when we might see a major milestone for T-75, such as a first flight. So we'll see in a year or thereabouts who's right.
 
lancer21 said:
Again, the same issue from a few weeks ago. What this obvious biased rubbish (posted by a moderator no less) contributes to this topic, other than baiting for clicks and a reaction here? I recall discussion a while back including Overscan concluded something to the effect that if an article starts with "Why ..."then it's not worth our time, unless someone posting such rubbish has an agenda.

If you wanted to post something meaningful here, would have been better served to have a look at what insiders say recently, my understanding is that they're thinking of the period from the end of 2026 to sometime during 2027 when we might see a major milestone for T-75, such as a first flight. So we'll see in a year or thereabouts who's right.
Click to expand...


I generally agree with you, but the same applies in reverse to those who post here, and even more so in the Su-57 thread—even though nothing truly relevant has happened and much has already been discussed countless times—to, as you put it, "obvious biased rubbish" or "have] an agenda."?!

You have to be careful and understand the perspective: I tend to be more like "Nothing's happened, so there's no need to post, so what's posted often comes across as an exaggeration or "obvious biased rubbish". While others—and apparently you as well—interpret every post that could be even remotely negative as an attack or an insult posted as "obvious biased rubbish".

The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle, and everyone has to decide for themselves what they think, but that's what forums are for.
 
Deino said:
I generally agree with you, but the same applies in reverse to those who post here, and even more so in the Su-57 thread—even though nothing truly relevant has happened and much has already been discussed countless times—to, as you put it, "obvious biased rubbish" or "have] an agenda."?!
Click to expand...

Brilliant post.

en.wikipedia.org

The Mote and the Beam - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Attachments

  • IMG_0272.jpeg
    IMG_0272.jpeg
    64 KB · Views: 92
  • IMG_0273.jpeg
    IMG_0273.jpeg
    67.6 KB · Views: 87
  • IMG_0274.jpeg
    IMG_0274.jpeg
    86.1 KB · Views: 83
  • IMG_0275.jpeg
    IMG_0275.jpeg
    77.9 KB · Views: 91

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom