Thanks for the report. Regarding combat aircraft, specifically the Su-57, I believe you've correctly reported the number of aircraft (24) currently in the Russian fleet. However, it's possible that we will not see the fleet grow appreciably over the next year or two. This isn't a matter of Russia not being able to build more, but due to a delay in producing serial versions of the new engine for these aircraft: the Saturn AL51. The current aircraft are fitted with an older version, the AL41, and there are reports that Russia is slow-rolling the production of Su-57's due to the engine development delay. Once the new engine is available, production will once again increase to the level we've seen recently - about 12 per year. Despite the delay, the current version of the Su-57 is a remarkable aircraft with cutting-edge capabilities and the current fleet is easily capable of handling its present role in the SMO.
Regarding US combat aircraft, their fleet backbone are the F-16 and the F-35. These too are very capable aircraft on paper however their reliability is suspect, especially the F-35. Public reports from the Pentagon indicate that no more than 40% of the F-35 fleet is airworthy. (It's a very complex aircraft with difficult to maintain systems.) As for the F-16, it requires about 17 hours of servicing for every hour flown. Under intense use it appears likely that the USA's ability to sufficiently service the F-16 fleet would be in question.
Sheer numbers of combat aircraft in a country's arsenal - while relevant - are not the most important statistics. What matters, obviously, is how many of them are working properly and available for the needed role. An aircraft that can fly three sorties per day is worth triple the number of aircraft that can only fly one.
The situation isn't entirely clear. There are reports that some new engines have been produced, but that these are still being tested on the Su-57 airframe. Reportedly the engine is not yet in serial production. It's possible that a couple of airframes will be produced this year with the new engine for testing, but further production will wait until the power-plant is fully certified. This is from non-official (but credible) sources so take it with a grain of salt.
Lack of clarity has several reasons. Firstly the development of the engine is a secret project 😊. Secondly because of the low production numbers the word “serial” production will always be somewhat speculative. The units are necessarily hand built to a very high degree. Very much like the top end sports cars like Lamborghini.
Thirdly the new engine had theoretical performance parameters set at the outset of the design phase and it may be difficult to reach some of the specific (ambitious) goals. That doesn’t mean that the earlier versions of the engine are not “good enough” for performing combat sorties. But until the parameters are achieved the development phase continues. On the other hand engineers may find ways to refine the engine by improving alloys or other methods so that the engine will exceed its design parameters. This is clearly desirable, but will obviously lengthen the development phase.
SU57 is clearly meant to exceed many of the standard requirements for combat aircraft and it looks like Rostec will not rest until those goals are reached or exceeded. Whether we can ever call it serial production in the normal industrial sense is debatable.
Marat it is always such a pleasure to read your informative and engaging articles. While Russian technical, moral and intellectual capacity is beyond question, what happened to the US? I have understood the evil of US leadership since the Cuban missile crisis, the incompetence, while vastly appreciated, is such a mystery. America is a warring state and it seems that such a state should be at the top militarily even while the rest of the country disintegrates. Any enlightening thoughts on this subject will be much appreciated.
Thanks for the report. Regarding combat aircraft, specifically the Su-57, I believe you've correctly reported the number of aircraft (24) currently in the Russian fleet. However, it's possible that we will not see the fleet grow appreciably over the next year or two. This isn't a matter of Russia not being able to build more, but due to a delay in producing serial versions of the new engine for these aircraft: the Saturn AL51. The current aircraft are fitted with an older version, the AL41, and there are reports that Russia is slow-rolling the production of Su-57's due to the engine development delay. Once the new engine is available, production will once again increase to the level we've seen recently - about 12 per year. Despite the delay, the current version of the Su-57 is a remarkable aircraft with cutting-edge capabilities and the current fleet is easily capable of handling its present role in the SMO.
Regarding US combat aircraft, their fleet backbone are the F-16 and the F-35. These too are very capable aircraft on paper however their reliability is suspect, especially the F-35. Public reports from the Pentagon indicate that no more than 40% of the F-35 fleet is airworthy. (It's a very complex aircraft with difficult to maintain systems.) As for the F-16, it requires about 17 hours of servicing for every hour flown. Under intense use it appears likely that the USA's ability to sufficiently service the F-16 fleet would be in question.
Sheer numbers of combat aircraft in a country's arsenal - while relevant - are not the most important statistics. What matters, obviously, is how many of them are working properly and available for the needed role. An aircraft that can fly three sorties per day is worth triple the number of aircraft that can only fly one.
It was reported that all of the Su-57s they are building this year have the new engine.
The situation isn't entirely clear. There are reports that some new engines have been produced, but that these are still being tested on the Su-57 airframe. Reportedly the engine is not yet in serial production. It's possible that a couple of airframes will be produced this year with the new engine for testing, but further production will wait until the power-plant is fully certified. This is from non-official (but credible) sources so take it with a grain of salt.
Lack of clarity has several reasons. Firstly the development of the engine is a secret project 😊. Secondly because of the low production numbers the word “serial” production will always be somewhat speculative. The units are necessarily hand built to a very high degree. Very much like the top end sports cars like Lamborghini.
Thirdly the new engine had theoretical performance parameters set at the outset of the design phase and it may be difficult to reach some of the specific (ambitious) goals. That doesn’t mean that the earlier versions of the engine are not “good enough” for performing combat sorties. But until the parameters are achieved the development phase continues. On the other hand engineers may find ways to refine the engine by improving alloys or other methods so that the engine will exceed its design parameters. This is clearly desirable, but will obviously lengthen the development phase.
SU57 is clearly meant to exceed many of the standard requirements for combat aircraft and it looks like Rostec will not rest until those goals are reached or exceeded. Whether we can ever call it serial production in the normal industrial sense is debatable.
Thanks. More evidence that US lost the war 3 years before it began and it was always fought with a domestic audience in mind, not reality.
Essentially US lost real hegemony (mostly to China) some 7 years ago - every thing since has just been confirming it.
Marat it is always such a pleasure to read your informative and engaging articles. While Russian technical, moral and intellectual capacity is beyond question, what happened to the US? I have understood the evil of US leadership since the Cuban missile crisis, the incompetence, while vastly appreciated, is such a mystery. America is a warring state and it seems that such a state should be at the top militarily even while the rest of the country disintegrates. Any enlightening thoughts on this subject will be much appreciated.