Watch this unique footage of Russia’s most advanced combat planes

This cool video features the stealthy PAK-FA next generation fighter along with other interesting Russian hardware.

To celebrate the Russian Aerospace Force Day, the Russian MoD has published an interesting clip showing some of its most advanced combat planes including the newest Sukhoi T-50 fifth generation fighter PAK FA – Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii—Future Tactical Air System.

Along with the stealth aircraft equipped with a front, side and rear AESA radar, as well as L Band radars, TVC (Thrust Vectoring Control), a top speed exceeding Mach 2 and supermaneuverability, the footage shows the Tu-160 Blackjack, the Tu-95 Bear bombers, the MiG-29KUB naval fighter, Yak-130 advanced jet trainer, Su-35S fighter, Su-33 naval fighter (during Top Gun-like ops), as well as Fulcrums and Flankers of the Strizhi (The Swifts) and Russkiye Vityazi (The Russian Knights) aerobatic display teams.

According to TASS, the footage was recorded by Pavel Novikov from an Antonov An-12 military transport aircraft in south Russia this year.

About David Cenciotti
David Cenciotti is a journalist based in Rome, Italy. He is the Founder and Editor of “The Aviationist”, one of the world’s most famous and read military aviation blogs. Since 1996, he has written for major worldwide magazines, including Air Forces Monthly, Combat Aircraft, and many others, covering aviation, defense, war, industry, intelligence, crime and cyberwar. He has reported from the U.S., Europe, Australia and Syria, and flown several combat planes with different air forces. He is a former 2nd Lt. of the Italian Air Force, a private pilot and a graduate in Computer Engineering. He has written five books and contributed to many more ones.


  1. When are they going to show an aircraft taking off from their carrier that actually carrying combat armament?

    • Thats probably something that isnt too high on the russians list as they are not rying to be the worlds police force like the usa. The russians dont go poking there head into everybody else’s business(like the u.s.) unless it is absolutely needed or if asked by another sovereign nation, i.e. syria, if one does their homework & not just listen to the bought & paid for media that lies everyday with no actual evidence, just pure propaganda. Look at Killary, blaming the russians for pretty much EVERYTHING.

      • “killary” is not wrong … all of the security companies (headed & employing dems & reps) said the various ‘bears’ did all the stuff that they are accused of & that they’re state employed & sponsored actors/attackers.

        Defenseone dot com is a good place to start if you care … or like most people, you might not care, maybe you’re just out to reaffirm your already held beliefs instead of informing & challenging your beliefs.

  2. Looking at the photo’s of Russia’s latest aircraft you would be forgiven for thinking they were F35’s, so the U.S. spends Billions on R & D and they just copy everything.

    • How can you copy something if you came up with the idea first? The F-35 is older than the T-50, so you’d be forgiven to think that the latter is a copy of the former.

      • I think you have proved my point, the F35 was designed before the T-50 so there was a template to copy, and who brought out the swing wing first the U.S., which emerged as the General Dynamics F-111, the first production variable-sweep wing aircraft, not too long after the MiG-23 appeared.

        • So now you’re saying Sukhoi copied Lockheed? Also, the modern variable-sweep wing concept is from the 50’s, and it was first developed in the US with the Bell X-5 (well before the MiG-23).

          Anyway, I’m not sure what you’re saying there in your second comment. If two planes happen to sport a certain design feature, that means one copied the other? Guess what, the Su-33 and the Typhoon both have canards. Is the Typhoon a copy of the Su-33 or vice versa?

          • well i’m not sure what he’s saying… but physics is the same no matter what country you live & develop aircraft in… and thus you get convergence & convenience.

            Nationalist twits will claim “copying”, educated people will say: “why try to reinvent the wheel with millions of dollars in research & a decade of wasted time when our final product will be a frickin wheel!”
            which explains both convergence (example, multiple countries all independently inventing RADAR without any knowledge of each others efforts all at the same time) … and convenience, the use of V2 rockets after the war for space & aeronautical research…

            If someone asks someone else to draw(design) a thing, they either pull from memory or use google images … because why? convenience… not copying.

            1 is coincidence & the other is logic … neither is copying.

            Copying is flatout copying… like what the chinese do

            • Exactly what I’m saying. Some Chinese fighter planes are copies of Russian planes, I admit that much. When you have a Chengdu canopy shaped exactly the same as a Sukhoi, you know something’s up. But if two planes happen to exploit the same aerodynamic principle, that’s just engineers knowing what they’re doing.

        • the PAK FA / T-50 is nothing like the F-35ABC or F-22A… The US isn’t dumb enough to put:
          partial aluminum leading edge flaps
          Exposed engine blades
          Exposed metallic engine cases
          Exposed intake in the verticle tail roots
          Full surface rotation tail surfaces
          Full airframe of non contiguous secondary surfaces
          Recycled aluminum alloy accessory & aircraft bracket & framing.

          And why wouldn’t they?
          Because everyone in the world knows that ALL if those things make for a larger radar cross-section… and all of them on 1 aircraft makes for a very large rcs… for this to be called a stealth anything, save a moon is a joke.

          let’s play a game…
          What gives the F-15 it’s giant RCS? (yes the answer is above as a feature of the T-50)

          What do large variable surfaces like canards do to a jet’s RCS? A: make it huge, to tge point that it even includes the air around it as well!!!

          What does large amounts of aluminum alloy do for a jets RCS? A: make it huge

          What do sharp, flat exposed angles, nooks, crannies & unblended surfaces do to a jet’s RCS? A: Make it pronounced.

          What do all of the above do to a jet’s Heat signature? A: make it look brighter than a comet crashing to earth

          What does a fancy paintjob do to a jet’s RCS & IRS? A: NOTHING

          What does the Indian Gov do when they look at this thing? A: they already cut their billions in losses.

          What does the Russian gov do when they face the reality of fielding these vs the raptor & jsf? A: they cut it to 12, never ever enough to ever see combat, thus never expose it’s huge RCS to digital radar arrays & get shot down… that’d be very embarrassing.

            • yeah i have, i’m even familiar with the various physics involved in signal return degradation & antenna performance degradation methods of “jamming”…. i wrote a serial exploratory essay on it in Gr10 as part of my replies to university recruiters… which was a big waste… as i never went to any of them… straight into the army… heck never even finished highschool until years later.

              Well not a complete waste, it did get me a contact with Raytheon … which i still have & was pretty cool as a 15 year old kid…

              BUT REGARDLESS, the EA-18G carries jamming technology, arguably the most advanced carried by any fast jet in the world… along with many other fast jets… heck, the EA-18G is built on the F/A-18EF rhino/’super’ hornet which has various radar cross-section enhancements over the legacy hornet… BUT THAT DON’T MAKE IT A STEALTH AIRCRAFT … heck, if a big ass RCS & jammers is what makes for a “stealth” aircraft… then throw away all mission planning and the F-22A & F-35s too … because their detection computation & mission planning are just as unnecessary as their very-low ‘radar’ cross-sections.

              YES, i’ve heard of jammers… & the EA-18G isn’t stealthy.

              • Ask the US Navy how a Growler jammed and shot down a F-22 or
                how a F-16 agressor pilot beat a overconfident F-22 rookie pilot.
                As Chuck Yeager says its the pilot not the machine.

                • umm, yeah… but now you’ve just pivoted to a tangent on pilot training, which the US does more of than anyone else than any other country. if you want to compare pilots, The US spends the money to make sure pilots are better than china & russia, even training allied pilots in F-16, F-15 & T-38 jets (amongst others). there’s good reasons for T-38’s ‘shooting down’ F-22A’s, and it’s ensuring that the F-22A’s going to war have all had the experience to no longer suffer that fate.

                  BETTER JET + BETTER PILOT trumps a par per yesterdays standards jet with a certified pilot

        • You don’t redesign the wheel for obvious reasons, what works, works, basic engineering…

      • JSF development started in 1996 and little to show. Getting tired now and lack of carriage and fuel load doom the fuselage.

        PAK-FA is a a more recent shape and with 2 not one engine.

    • When the fasteners used can hold the plywood on past mach0.9 and not send the previous SU underneath into a death spiral

    • Never…?
      Actually if SU prefix is for full production then never is correct…
      Look for limited operational status, minimum 12 airframes, in the mid 2020’s maybe

Comments are closed.