一架俄羅斯SU57戰(zhàn)機(jī)發(fā)射導(dǎo)彈，擊落了一架俄羅斯S70隱形無人機(jī)，這是怎么回事
S-70 Okhotnik & Su-57: What Happened?
譯文簡介
網(wǎng)友：S-70拒絕向SU-57提供Wi-Fi密碼
正文翻譯
@arduinoguru7233
S-70 had family you know.
你知道的，S-70是有“家人”的。
評(píng)論翻譯
很贊 ( 4 )
收藏
The S-70 refuses to provide wi-fi password to SU-57
S-70拒絕向SU-57提供Wi-Fi密碼
Thats accurate tho
確實(shí)如此
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
the S-70 took too long to grab the beer for the SU-57
S-70拿啤酒給SU-57花了太長時(shí)間
S-70 wanted the “Boeing employee” experience
S-70想要體驗(yàn)“波音員工”的待遇
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
That sums up the Russo Ukrainian conflict....just kidding
這概括了俄烏沖突……開個(gè)玩笑
'The Bluetooth device is ready to pair'
“藍(lán)牙設(shè)備已準(zhǔn)備好配對(duì)”
Funny but possibly accurate.
有趣，但可能還真是如此。
It quiet likely is something as stupid as that
很有可能就是這么愚蠢的事情
Paired to the Patriot system instead
反而配對(duì)到了愛國者系統(tǒng)上
Correction: this was not an UMPK but an UMPB glide bomb. It is a more refined glide bomb that can be launched both from the air or from the ground by a Smerch, similar to how GBU-93 can be either dropped from a plane or launched by a HIMARS as GLSDB. UMPK, for those who aren't familiar, is a more rag-tag glide kit made to upgrade Russia's stocks of old FAB series of aircraft bombs into glide bombs.
更正：這不是UMPK，而是UMPB滑翔炸彈。這是一種更精細(xì)的滑翔炸彈，可以從空中或通過龍卷風(fēng)發(fā)射，類似于GBU-93可以從飛機(jī)上投放或通過?，斔挂钥丈浞绞桨l(fā)射。對(duì)于不熟悉的人來說，UMPK是用來將俄羅斯的舊FAB系列航空炸彈改裝為滑翔炸彈的簡易套件。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Yes, my mistake
是的，我的錯(cuò)誤
S-70 is a new weapon system undergoing combat tests, it failing and being shot down by the Su-57 from being found intact is actually a decent outcome for the Russians. I'd say it is much better outcome than having your brand new stealth drone captured by Iran fully intact like the RQ-170 for US
S-70是一種正在進(jìn)行戰(zhàn)斗測(cè)試的新武器系統(tǒng)，被Su-57擊落而沒有完全損毀對(duì)于俄羅斯來說已經(jīng)是一個(gè)不錯(cuò)的結(jié)果。我認(rèn)為這比美國全新的隱形無人機(jī)RQ-170被伊朗完整捕獲要好得多。
This unfortunate event for Russia disapproved some myths around the Su-57 and the S-70.
1. They both aren't mockups, in active production and being used in the combat zone;
2. They both are stealth enough to be unchallenged right over the frontline even at high altitude.
對(duì)于俄羅斯來說，這次不幸的事件打破了一些關(guān)于Su-57和S-70的謠言。
1. 它們都不是模型，正在積極生產(chǎn)并在戰(zhàn)區(qū)使用；
2. 它們的隱形性能足夠好，即使在高空飛越前線也不受挑戰(zhàn)。
The S-70 isn't in active production though. There are thought to be two models that have been built so far.
不過，S-70還沒有進(jìn)入批量生產(chǎn)階段。目前估計(jì)只有兩個(gè)型號(hào)。
There are less than 10 production design Su-57 built and in service. There is no particular reason to think Israel is currently doing anything but track Russian aircraft based in Syria. They are not combatants in Lebanon.
Su-57的生產(chǎn)型數(shù)量不到10架，并已投入使用。目前沒有特別的理由認(rèn)為以色列除了跟蹤駐扎在敘利亞的俄羅斯飛機(jī)外，還會(huì)在黎巴嫩參與戰(zhàn)斗。
When did Russia perfect their advanced stealth rivet tech? Cause there are a lot of rivets on the S-70. Those, and the naked nozzle - not so much stealth.
俄羅斯什么時(shí)候完善了他們的高級(jí)隱形鉚釘技術(shù)？因?yàn)镾-70上有很多鉚釘。而且還有裸露的噴嘴——這可不怎么隱形。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
"There are thought to be two models that have been built so far."
This is definitely incorrect. There's reports that the day this one was lost, Russia was flying THREE of them. There's also multiple sources stating that at least 4 serial production S70s have been produced, along with at least 2 or 3 prototypes.
“目前估計(jì)只有兩個(gè)型號(hào)?！?這肯定是不正確的。有報(bào)道稱，在這架飛機(jī)失蹤的當(dāng)天，俄羅斯正在飛行三架。此外，還有多個(gè)消息來源稱至少有4架量產(chǎn)型S-70和至少2到3個(gè)原型機(jī)已經(jīng)生產(chǎn)出來。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
small details such as rivets don't really matter at range as long as the surface features are smaller than the radar wavelength they won't have any effect on stealth. Also there are multiple pictures of the second airfrx with a flat nozzle and fewer fuselage protrusions.
像鉚釘這樣的細(xì)節(jié)在遠(yuǎn)距離情況下并不重要，只要表面特征小于雷達(dá)波長，它們對(duì)隱形沒有影響。此外，有多張第二架飛機(jī)的照片顯示其配備了平坦的噴嘴和較少的機(jī)身突起。
"There are less than 10 production design Su-57 built and in service."
There were 21 of them last year....
“生產(chǎn)型的Su-57不到10架并已服役?！?去年有21架……
i think you're including the 9 (or more) pre-production models, Which are unlikely to reflect the capabilities or be fully equipment of the final production design.
我認(rèn)為你算上了9架（或更多）預(yù)生產(chǎn)型號(hào)，它們不太可能反映最終生產(chǎn)型的全部能力或配置。
No I'm not. If we count those it'll be 31
沒有，我沒有算。如果算上那些，總數(shù)是31架。
The S-70 has only been in serial production for a few months, and since they haven't published any information for a new batch of S-70s like they did for the Su-57s, it is unlikely they have more than the two prototypes.
S-70僅進(jìn)入量產(chǎn)幾個(gè)月，且他們沒有像對(duì)待Su-57那樣發(fā)布任何新一批S-70的信息，所以不太可能有超過兩個(gè)原型機(jī)。
If you would have the capability to track a Russian stealth plane you would not want to tell others. Let Russia think they have an advantage.
如果你有能力跟蹤一架俄羅斯的隱形飛機(jī)，你不會(huì)想告訴別人。讓俄羅斯以為他們有優(yōu)勢(shì)吧。
Russia have 4 S-70 prototypes and they're not in serial production just yet but based on information they're in final stage before entering serial production.
俄羅斯有4架S-70原型機(jī)，尚未進(jìn)入量產(chǎn)階段，但根據(jù)信息顯示，它們處于進(jìn)入量產(chǎn)前的最后階段。
I haven't found anything about 2 more S-70 prototypes. I thought they entered serial production in July? They said that they would begin serial production in the latter half of 2024.
我沒有找到關(guān)于另外2架S-70原型機(jī)的消息。我以為它們?cè)?月進(jìn)入量產(chǎn)？他們說會(huì)在2024年下半年開始量產(chǎn)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
nozzle don't matter unless you want to waste a missile on a plane that is already going Cold. F-22 fly around Full of rivet tech.. And even cracked fuselage.. What the point on always copium on some bs?
噴嘴并不重要，除非你想把導(dǎo)彈浪費(fèi)在已經(jīng)脫離目標(biāo)的飛機(jī)上。F-22滿是鉚釘技術(shù)，甚至還有裂縫的機(jī)身?？偸亲プ∵@些無意義的東西不放有什么意義？
I hate that childish copium statement that sounds like some teenage stoner.
First, if they could be tracked no one is likely to say.
Second, they were just over the frontline, most Ukrainian air defenses have been moved back from there for obvious reasons.
Third, you can see the interceptor that may not be the SU57 as it's all guesswork, turned and ran pretty quickly.
Fourth, it was obviously video'd, a video we most likely would not have seen if not for this incident.
Fifth, you see no other contrails so it wasn't operated in a group.
And finally, we know there are no Russian jets flying in Ukrainian airspace with impunity otherwise they would not be using glide bombs from beyond the front lines and missiles, they would have used strategic bomb strikes by now if they could.
我討厭那種幼稚的說法，聽起來像是某個(gè)青少年迷幻藥者的言論。
首先，如果他們能夠被追蹤到，沒有人可能會(huì)透露出來。
其次，他們當(dāng)時(shí)就在前線上方，大部分烏克蘭的防空系統(tǒng)因明顯原因已經(jīng)撤離。
第三，你可以看到攔截機(jī)，這可能不是SU57，因?yàn)檫@些都是猜測(cè)，而且它很快就掉頭離開了。
第四，很顯然是被拍到的視頻，如果不是因?yàn)檫@次事件，我們很可能不會(huì)看到這個(gè)視頻。
第五，你沒有看到其他的尾跡，所以它并沒有組隊(duì)飛行。
最后，我們知道沒有俄羅斯飛機(jī)可以在烏克蘭領(lǐng)空為所欲為，否則他們就不會(huì)在前線之外使用滑翔炸彈和導(dǎo)彈了，如果可能的話，他們?cè)缇褪褂脩?zhàn)略轟炸了。
Hiw did you manage to make that conclusion number 2???
你是怎么得出第二個(gè)結(jié)論的？？？
the whole front is infested with Western AA. Since last year Ukraine has moved a lot of its AA system from city to the front. That’s why this year Russia lost a lot of Su-34. And you have videos like the last month of a Su-34 evading a lot of Patriot missiles.
And if that wasn't enough proof just yesterday a whole Patriot battery was destroyed near the incident by Iskandar missile.
整個(gè)前線布滿了西方的防空系統(tǒng)。自去年以來，烏克蘭已經(jīng)將很多防空系統(tǒng)從城市移到了前線。這就是為什么今年俄羅斯損失了很多Su-34。你還能看到上個(gè)月一架Su-34躲避大量愛國者導(dǎo)彈的視頻。如果這還不足以證明，昨天就在事故附近，一整個(gè)愛國者發(fā)射陣地被伊斯坎德爾導(dǎo)彈摧毀。
To my knowledge there are 20 serial SU-57 built + or - some
據(jù)我所知，大約有20架量產(chǎn)型SU-57，可能會(huì)多或少幾架
From what I recall airfrxs 1 to 9 were preproduction, 10 (first production) crashed leaving airfrx 11 onwards as (early) production models. I think 7 to 9 (plus 11) were the three deployed to Syria first time round a couple of years ago now.
據(jù)我回憶，機(jī)體1到9是預(yù)生產(chǎn)型，10號(hào)（第一架生產(chǎn)型）墜毀，11號(hào)及以后的機(jī)體屬于早期生產(chǎn)型號(hào)。我認(rèn)為7到9號(hào)（加上11號(hào)）是幾年前首次部署到敘利亞的三架飛機(jī)。
In reality there is no such thing as a stealth aircraft. You just need the right technology / gear to detect it.
實(shí)際上，沒有什么真正的隱形飛機(jī)。你只需要合適的技術(shù)/設(shè)備就能檢測(cè)到它。
Another myth pushed by Russia and China that "stealth is useless because we can detect stealth" was also busted. Russia and China continue to pursue stealth while trying to play down its advantages.
另一個(gè)由俄羅斯和中國推動(dòng)的“隱形無用論，因?yàn)槲覀兡芴綔y(cè)到隱形”也被揭穿了。俄羅斯和中國繼續(xù)追求隱形技術(shù)，同時(shí)試圖淡化其優(yōu)勢(shì)。
that is incorrect. They matter more when they are smaller than the wavelength.
那是不對(duì)的。當(dāng)它們比波長小的時(shí)候，影響更大。
lol no. At least their fasteners are flush
哈哈，不是的。至少它們的緊固件是齊平的。
It just showed their drones are bugged and aren't stealthy
這只是表明他們的無人機(jī)有問題，并且不具備隱形能力
True, and who would be able to test their own detection systems against state of the art stealth for the last 40+ years?
確實(shí)如此，那么過去40多年里，誰能夠用最先進(jìn)的隱形技術(shù)來測(cè)試他們自己的檢測(cè)系統(tǒng)呢？
Su-57 engines aren't even available yet. There are zero production Su-57s so far. My understanding is the govt instructed the govt-owned manufacturer to not bother even making any more airfrxs as the engines aren't available and I guess won't be soon.
Su-57的發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)還沒準(zhǔn)備好。目前還沒有生產(chǎn)型的Su-57。據(jù)我所知，政府指示國有制造商不要再制造任何機(jī)體，因?yàn)榘l(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)還沒到位，我猜想短期內(nèi)也不會(huì)有。
Su-57 engines aren't even available yet. There are zero ACTUAL production Su-57s so far. My understanding is the govt instructed the manufacturer not to even bother making any more for that reason. I'm also curious how we could determine that the electronics and comms and software in them is finished yet? The Russian govt announced that stuff was finished and working and we believe that? Or has there been some independent confirmation?
Su-57的發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)還沒有準(zhǔn)備好。目前還沒有任何真正的生產(chǎn)型Su-57。我的理解是，政府指示制造商出于這個(gè)原因不要再制造更多。我也好奇我們?nèi)绾未_定它們的電子設(shè)備、通訊和軟件已經(jīng)完成了？俄羅斯政府宣布這些已經(jīng)完成并能正常工作，我們就相信了嗎？還是有獨(dú)立的確認(rèn)？
OK.
好的。
The 4th prototype is the agreed on production variant it's fully weapons capable, has aerodynamic refinements and a flat nozzle exhaust, the one downed over Ukraine was the first prototype that was tested in Syria.
第4架原型機(jī)是商定的生產(chǎn)版本，具備完整的武器能力，進(jìn)行了空氣動(dòng)力學(xué)改進(jìn)并配有平坦的噴嘴排氣裝置，在烏克蘭被擊落的那架是第一個(gè)在敘利亞測(cè)試的原型機(jī)。
The Russian S400s in Syria have been signature mapping Israeli F35s for years, now Iran has S400s and likely that database as well.
駐敘利亞的俄羅斯S400多年來一直在進(jìn)行以色列F35的信號(hào)特征捕捉，現(xiàn)在伊朗也擁有S400，很可能也有這個(gè)數(shù)據(jù)庫。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
those are the production models they typically have double digit markings or none at all except for the red star
那些是生產(chǎn)型，通常有兩位數(shù)的標(biāo)記，或者除了紅星之外沒有任何標(biāo)記
How do you know? Russia said so and you believe that? Or do we have some independent confirmation, even such as them flying a successful mission?
你怎么知道的？俄羅斯這么說你就相信了嗎？還是我們有一些獨(dú)立的確認(rèn)，甚至是他們執(zhí)行了一次成功的任務(wù)？
Because it's not meant to be full stealth? Try to keep up with the basic facts, at least.
因?yàn)樗緛砭筒皇菫榱送耆[形？至少試著跟上基本事實(shí)。
They're NOT stealth planes. I know you're obsessed with stealth since it's literally the last straw you can grasp at, but the soviet unx literally invented and perfected stealth technologies, and immediately abandoned them because they realized even back then it was a road that lead nowhere against advanced radar technology.
And indeed stealth limitation was proven when a '60s radar was able to successfully lock a '70s anti air missile on what at the time was the non plus ultra of stealth technology, the F17, over Serbia's skies in the 90s and destroy it.
And that was radar tech 2 decades older than the plane. No plane is stealth today, not against modern radars.
它們不是隱形飛機(jī)。我知道你癡迷于隱形技術(shù)，因?yàn)檫@幾乎是你能抓住的最后一根稻草，但蘇聯(lián)實(shí)際上發(fā)明并完善了隱形技術(shù)，然后立即放棄了，因?yàn)樗麄儺?dāng)時(shí)就意識(shí)到這在對(duì)抗先進(jìn)雷達(dá)技術(shù)時(shí)是走不通的。確實(shí)，隱形的局限性得到了驗(yàn)證，當(dāng)時(shí)一部60年代的雷達(dá)能夠成功鎖定一枚70年代的防空導(dǎo)彈，并在90年代的塞爾維亞上空擊落了當(dāng)時(shí)頂級(jí)的隱形技術(shù)飛機(jī)F117。而且那時(shí)的雷達(dá)技術(shù)比飛機(jī)要早20年。今天沒有飛機(jī)能在現(xiàn)代雷達(dá)面前隱形。
i believe they fly low within the valleys when they don't have the radar return booster on.
我認(rèn)為他們?cè)跊]有打開雷達(dá)回波放大器時(shí)會(huì)在山谷中低空飛行。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Maybe this is indeed a pre-production series of combat approval tests?
也許這確實(shí)是一系列預(yù)生產(chǎn)機(jī)型的戰(zhàn)斗審核測(cè)試？
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
I love the fantasy that Soviet fanboys come up with to try and make up the gap in their mind. Taking the fact that an early paper on the concept of stealth was published by a Soviet scientist somehow proves that Soviets perfected stealth technologies is a complete fabrication and if you didn’t already know that then I’ll be the one to tell you.
我喜歡那些蘇聯(lián)粉絲編出來的幻想，試圖彌補(bǔ)他們心中的差距。把一篇關(guān)于隱形概念的早期論文發(fā)表在蘇聯(lián)科學(xué)家的名下當(dāng)成蘇聯(lián)完善了隱形技術(shù)的證明，這完全是杜撰出來的，如果你還不知道的話，我來告訴你吧。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Entered Europe and got overwhelmed by GDPR notifications..
進(jìn)入歐洲后就被導(dǎo)鎖定警告通知淹沒了。
Ukraine is no more Europe than European Russia, but still... LM.
烏克蘭和歐洲俄羅斯沒什么不同，但還是……笑死我了。
Good place to get a fair assessment. Quality level-headed information as always
這是個(gè)獲得公正評(píng)估的好地方。信息始終保持高質(zhì)量和冷靜。
I think it's pretty simple really, ground control lost control of the drone and the SU57 wasn't able to hook up to it. and to make sure it does not end up in the wrong hands intact they chose to destroy it leaving little left to salvage and study. It would make sense if the buffer is full that no further commands could be queued/controlled and would not be able to return to point of destination to land either. So most likely a software bug, must be using Windows 11
Look at the F35 that is riddled with bugs in the software grounding the planes a number of times for months at a time. Software is becoming more and more complex and tightening security against exploits that could be used but in turn making it harder to bypass if you encounter a bug.
我認(rèn)為這很簡單，地面控制失去了對(duì)無人機(jī)的控制，而SU57也無法與其對(duì)接。為了確保它不會(huì)完好無損地落入敵手，他們選擇摧毀它，只留下一些殘骸可供打撈和研究。如果緩沖區(qū)已滿，無法執(zhí)行進(jìn)一步的命令，并且也無法返回目的地降落，這就說得通了。
所以很可能是軟件漏洞，肯定是在用Windows 11?？纯碏35，它的軟件漏洞使飛機(jī)數(shù)月內(nèi)多次停飛。軟件變得越來越復(fù)雜，并加強(qiáng)了對(duì)可能被利用的漏洞的安全防護(hù)，但這反而使得在遇到漏洞時(shí)更難以繞過。
Oh there was plenty left to salvage/study. Ukrainians had a huge laugh at Russian stealth coatings.
哦，還有很多可以打撈和研究的東西。烏克蘭人對(duì)俄羅斯的隱形涂層大笑不已。
Every Windows OS since 8 has been utter pish even worse than Vista.
從Windows 8開始的每個(gè)Windows操作系統(tǒng)都糟透了，甚至比Vista還差。
Bro, 10 was leagues better than 8. It's 11 that's actively trying to claim the title of Microsoft's biggest P(OS).
兄弟，10比8好得多。11正在積極爭(zhēng)奪微軟最大“渣作”的稱號(hào)。
Yet it was just a few km from Chasiv Yar which has heavy air defence and from the video they are clearly at high altitude too... Much like cope cages, you know everyone mocked them, and you see them all over Ukrainian vehicles and tanks, heck even Israel has them on their Merkava 4 tanks that also have APS installed...
但它距離有重防空的Chasiv Yar只有幾公里，而且從視頻中看，它們顯然也在高空……就像防護(hù)籠一樣，你知道大家都嘲笑它們，你可以在烏克蘭的車輛和坦克上看到它們，甚至以色列的梅卡瓦4型坦克上也有防護(hù)籠，而且還安裝了APS系統(tǒng)……
I jumped to Linux after Windows 7 as a tech I still have to know how to use Windows OS of course, they're all basically malware masquerading as an OS at this point.
在Windows 7之后我轉(zhuǎn)向了Linux，作為技術(shù)人員，我當(dāng)然還是需要了解如何使用Windows操作系統(tǒng)，但它們現(xiàn)在基本上都是偽裝成操作系統(tǒng)的惡意軟件。
It was XP that gave us UPNP you should look up that particular exploit.
是XP帶給了我們UPNP，你應(yīng)該查一下那個(gè)特定的漏洞。
The S-70 told the Su-57 that it’s “not stealth”, and for that it got shot down
S-70告訴Su-57它“不隱形”，于是它被擊落了
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Most stupid comment of the year
年度最蠢評(píng)論
A lot of people commenting how Russia only has two S70 drones, the one that was downed over Ukraine is the first prototype that was tested in Syria, the 4th prototype is the production variant, the fact this and a SU57 were over the frontlines undetected is very telling.
很多人評(píng)論說俄羅斯只有兩架S70無人機(jī)，在烏克蘭被擊落的是第一個(gè)在敘利亞測(cè)試的原型機(jī)，第4個(gè)原型機(jī)是生產(chǎn)版本，這架和一架SU57在前線未被發(fā)現(xiàn)的事實(shí)很能說明問題。
The russians also expended a valuable iskander ballistic missile to bomb the crash site , so make of that what you want
俄羅斯人還使用了一枚寶貴的伊斯坎德爾彈道導(dǎo)彈轟炸了墜毀地點(diǎn)，你可以自行判斷。
definitely didnt want anyone picking it up.
絕對(duì)不希望有人撿起它。
i cant find any actual source for this one, can you share some?
the only i can see are proofless / says its unconfirmed
我找不到任何實(shí)際的來源，你能分享一些嗎？我所看到的都是沒有證據(jù)的/說這是未經(jīng)證實(shí)的。
i have read of it and someone post a pic of the impact but i don't feel like its real.
我有讀到相關(guān)內(nèi)容，有人發(fā)布了打擊后的照片，但我感覺這不是真的。
Iskander has too big a warhead to do that little damage, even if it was off. Even if it did miss, there would be a massive crater somewhere in the vacinity of the crash site.
伊斯坎德爾的彈頭太大，無法造成那么小的破壞，即使未命中。如果真的偏離目標(biāo)，墜毀地點(diǎn)附近也會(huì)有一個(gè)巨大的隕石坑。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Not really. The Iskander doesn't really leave craters all that big. If it hit near the crash it wouldn't be all that visbile as the ground was burned.
不完全是。伊斯坎德爾實(shí)際上不會(huì)留下那么大的彈坑。如果它擊中墜毀地點(diǎn)附近，可能不會(huì)太明顯，因?yàn)榈孛嬉呀?jīng)被燒毀了。
Probably it was at least partially recovered and sent to NATO.
可能至少部分被回收并送往北約。
there are different warheads for iskander it can even carry a nuclear charge
伊斯坎德爾有不同的彈頭，它甚至可以攜帶核彈頭。
500 kilos of explosives leaves pretty large hole, but there we see partially intact light building right on the spot. Doesn't add up.
500公斤的炸藥會(huì)留下相當(dāng)大的洞，但我們?cè)诂F(xiàn)場(chǎng)看到的是部分完好的輕型建筑。這不合邏輯。
maybe they used a cluster warhead
也許他們使用了集束彈頭。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Отличный ролик по очень сжатой информации. Мы не можем знать, что произошло, ведь даже ВКС скорее всего еще разбирается
非常棒的視頻，信息非常簡潔。我們無法知道發(fā)生了什么，畢竟即使是俄羅斯空軍可能還在調(diào)查中。
actually not the UMPK, but the remnants of the UMPB D-30SN, a longer range glide bomb using FAB-250 as the warhead iirc, can also be launched by Tornado-S MLRS and it’s been seen being used by the 34 in the war from time to time. Great video as always.
實(shí)際上不是UMPK，而是UMPB D-30SN的殘骸，這是一種使用FAB-250作為彈頭的遠(yuǎn)程滑翔炸彈，據(jù)我所知，也可以由“龍卷風(fēng)-S”多管火箭系統(tǒng)發(fā)射，并且在戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)中偶爾被34部隊(duì)使用。視頻一如既往地精彩。
also wanted to add on something interesting, S-70 has been seen flying with some kind of flanker last year (maybe Su-30?). I’d post a lix here, but the comment would be nuked. It’s on the YouTube channel ‘лампа знаний’
還想補(bǔ)充一些有趣的事情，去年看到S-70與某種伴隨機(jī)一起飛行（可能是Su-30？）。我想在這里發(fā)布鏈接，但評(píng)論會(huì)被刪除。它在YouTube頻道‘лампа знаний’上。
They lost control of it , and had to shoot it down .
他們失去了對(duì)它的控制，不得不將其擊落。
Fr
說的對(duì)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Just like the movie STEALTH (2005) with Jamie Foxx
就像杰米·?？怂怪餮莸碾娪啊峨[形戰(zhàn)鷹》（2005年）一樣。
The crash locations suggest that the Su-57 and Su-70 were operating in Ukraine.But nobody talks about it.This is proof that the Sukhoi 57 is a true stealth aircraft.
墜毀地點(diǎn)表明Su-57和Su-70正在烏克蘭作戰(zhàn)。但沒有人談?wù)摯耸隆＿@證明了蘇霍伊57是一款真正的隱形飛機(jī)。
It's quite amazing that the and SU57 seems to not care about Ukranian AA.
令人驚訝的是，蘇57似乎不在乎烏克蘭的防空系統(tǒng)。
Dont question the narrative please. The su 57 has no stealth!
請(qǐng)不要質(zhì)疑這個(gè)說法。蘇57沒有隱形能力！
definitely more than previous non-stealth aircraft of Russia, but surely not as much as the f22
絕對(duì)比俄羅斯以前的非隱形飛機(jī)強(qiáng)多了，但肯定不如F22。
nah its not stealthy at all
不，它一點(diǎn)也不隱形。
thats just being ignorant lol
那只是無知而已，哈哈。
please dont challenge the narrative...
請(qǐng)不要挑戰(zhàn)這個(gè)說法……
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
There is no narrative that the Su-57 isn't stealthy. No one who is serious about aircraft would believe that.
沒有說蘇57不隱形的說法。任何認(rèn)真對(duì)待飛機(jī)的人都不會(huì)相信。
So you are trying to say that a plane that entered ukranian airspace wich has dozens of anti aircraft sistems wasn't shot down and was able to fly several kilometers into ukranian territory isn't stealthy?
所以你的意思是，一架進(jìn)入烏克蘭領(lǐng)空的飛機(jī)，那里有數(shù)十個(gè)防空系統(tǒng)，卻沒有被擊落，能夠飛入烏克蘭領(lǐng)土數(shù)公里，這架飛機(jī)并不隱形？
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
If only. Though your doubt shows me that something is starting to change in the western mindset. A year back, you would likely have agreed with me.
要是如此。雖然你的懷疑讓我覺得西方的思維方式正在開始改變。一年前，你可能會(huì)同意我的觀點(diǎn)。
No I wouldn't. The only people who claim the Su-57 isn't stealthy are trolls who clearly don't know what the term stealthy means.
不會(huì)的。唯一聲稱蘇57不隱形的人是那些明顯不了解“隱形”是什么意思的噴子。
Yet you did not managed to understand that you were trolled...
但你沒能理解自己被惡搞了……
Some people are just genuinely ignorant. Today in this very comment section, a saw a guy that thought that a stealth'd plane will not be visible to the eye ;)
有些人真的很無知。就在今天，在這個(gè)評(píng)論區(qū)，我看到一個(gè)人認(rèn)為隱形飛機(jī)肉眼不可見;)
i saw that in American mowie zziiiip and the plane desapired
我在美國電影《飛天大盜》中看到過那樣，飛機(jī)就消失了
that must have been a joke along the lines of "su 57 is so stealthy that we can't even see it"
那一定是類似“蘇57隱形到我們都看不見它”的笑話
Because there was none.
因?yàn)楦緵]有。
it proved it is
這證明了它確實(shí)如此。
atleast su57 used only one misille to shoot down a moving drone, f22 needed more than Missile to take down a still balloon
至少蘇57只用了一個(gè)導(dǎo)彈擊落了一架移動(dòng)的無人機(jī)，F(xiàn)22卻需要多個(gè)導(dǎo)彈才能擊落一個(gè)靜止的氣球
true
確實(shí)如此。
how can you not see it.? Big as how it is, stealth does not mean you can't see it, it means hard to detect it with anti aircraft
你怎么能看不見呢？無論它多大，隱形并不意味著你看不見它，而是指難以被防空系統(tǒng)探測(cè)到。
that's why I specifically said "joke"
這就是為什么我特別說“笑話”。
Because its low observable... it likepy has an RCS similar to that of the F117 and likely a little better
因?yàn)樗哂械涂捎^測(cè)性……它的雷達(dá)散射截面（RCS）類似于F117，可能還稍好一些。
As far as I know, according with this channel, among others, the s57 is stealthy but in another scale of the western aircraft. I don't remember numbers but it's like, at the same distance, to the same radar, a s57 looks like a bird while a f35 looks like a fly.
據(jù)我所知，根據(jù)這個(gè)頻道和其他渠道，S57是隱形的，但在西方飛機(jī)的另一個(gè)尺度上。我不記得具體數(shù)字，但就像在相同距離、相同雷達(dá)下，S57看起來像一只鳥，而F35看起來像一只蒼蠅。
It uses engines from SU27 same as the S70, those have massive reflection, its a huge round blob of steel not covered by anything.
S70它使用的是與蘇27相同的引擎，這些引擎反射強(qiáng)烈，是一個(gè)巨大的圓形鋼塊，沒有任何遮蓋。
It doesn't use the same engines, it uses a derivative of those engines. That also doesn't mean it isn't stealthy.
它不使用相同的引擎，而是這些引擎的衍生產(chǎn)品。這也不意味著它不隱形。
It does mean that it is not stealthy. It's still and engine from 45 years ago
這確實(shí)意味著它不隱形。那仍然是45年前的引擎。
Its engines were made in the 2000s, don't make things up. And additionally, that is not what being stealthy means. It is VLO from the front, and it, like the F-35 doesn't have all aspects stealth.
它的引擎是2000年代制造的，不要編造。此外，這并不是隱形的定義。它是從正面低可觀測(cè)（VLO），并且像F-35一樣并不具備所有方面的隱形。
Those two are not comparable. The ancient engine is in the open that means that pretty much from every angle it reflects back to radar and the engine is from 1980.
This is really not a matter of opinion, the nozzle does not even have any form of cooling or heat shielding.
It's typical russia BS shaped to look like something american but it is really not anything comparable.
這兩者無法比較。古老的引擎是開放的，這意味著從幾乎每個(gè)角度都反射回雷達(dá)，而且引擎來自1980年。這真的不是意見問題，噴嘴甚至沒有任何形式的冷卻或防熱屏蔽。它是典型的俄羅斯設(shè)計(jì)，形狀像美國的某種東西，但實(shí)際上無法比較。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
It is shaped like an engine. At this point you're just yapping. Not to mention the fact that the Su-57 can super cruise, so it doesn't need to activate the after under like the F-35.
它的形狀像一個(gè)引擎。到這一步你只是嘮叨。更不用說蘇57可以超巡航，所以它不需要像F-35那樣激活后燃器。
You may want to google why modern engines dont look like old soviet ones. You cannot large metal pipe sticking out of your place on all sides and pretend that it wont generate return on Radar or IR seekers.
F35 does super cruise. It's a single engine jet. It needs to speed up on afterburner but then in glides in the envelope without it.
你可能想谷歌一下為什么現(xiàn)代引擎不像老式蘇聯(lián)引擎。你不能在各個(gè)方向都有大型金屬管突出，然后假裝它不會(huì)在雷達(dá)或紅外尋標(biāo)器上產(chǎn)生回波。F35確實(shí)可以超巡航。它是單引擎噴氣式飛機(jī)。需要在加力器上加速，但隨后在不使用加力器的情況下滑行。
Yes but these are birds and flies travelling at Mach that's why the B-2 is subsonic to improve it's overall stealth capabilities.
是的，但這些是以音速飛行的鳥和蒼蠅，這就是為什么B-2是亞音速的，以提高其整體隱形能力。
That isn't exactly how they show up on radar. Radars automatically filter out some signals, as such there is an average target tracking range that they can fire at a stealth aircraft from.
它們?cè)诶走_(dá)上的顯示并不是那樣。雷達(dá)會(huì)自動(dòng)過濾一些信號(hào)，因此有一個(gè)可以從中對(duì)隱形飛機(jī)進(jìn)行射擊的平均目標(biāo)跟蹤范圍。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
No, It was sarcasm...
不，那是諷刺……
Granted F-35 is primarily a single engine strike aircraft, as opposed to F-22. It was derived from the Joint Strike Fighter program.
What's surprising is how low is the Su-57's claimed supercruise speed at Mach 1.4. While the F-22 from over 20 years ago achieved Mach 1.8. Not to mention Su-57 lacks significant numbers, due to budgetary and powerplant issues.
誠然，F(xiàn)-35主要是單引擎戰(zhàn)機(jī)，與F-22不同。它源自聯(lián)合攻擊戰(zhàn)斗機(jī)項(xiàng)目。令人驚訝的是，蘇57宣稱的超巡速度只有馬赫1.4，而20多年前的F-22達(dá)到了馬赫1.8。更不用說蘇57由于預(yù)算和動(dòng)力系統(tǒng)問題，數(shù)量上也不多。
ad essere onesti, molti esperti ritengono che il SU-57 sia l'aereo di quinta generazione più collaudato e testato in una situazione di combattimento reale rispetto agli altri attualmente esistenti.E sì, non è la prima volta che viene utilizzato in Ucraina e in Siria. E di conseguenza, dopo ogni missione di combattimento in Ucraina, viene ulteriormente migliorato e alla fine il SU-57 diventerà senza dubbio il miglior aereo di quinta generazione al mondo e il più capace di combattere.
說實(shí)話，許多專家認(rèn)為，SU-57是目前存在的第五代飛機(jī)中在真實(shí)戰(zhàn)斗環(huán)境中測(cè)試和驗(yàn)證最多的。是的，這不是它第一次在烏克蘭和敘利亞使用。因此，在烏克蘭的每一次戰(zhàn)斗任務(wù)之后，SU-57都會(huì)進(jìn)一步改進(jìn)，最終無疑會(huì)成為世界上最好的第五代戰(zhàn)斗機(jī)，也是最具戰(zhàn)斗能力的。
Forget it mate. These trolls clearly don't know what low RCS mean. If they think it shows up on radar like a 747 than so be it.
別管了，伙計(jì)。這些噴子顯然不知道低雷達(dá)散射截面（RCS）是什么意思。如果他們認(rèn)為它在雷達(dá)上像747那樣顯示，那就這樣吧。
Being as visible as a normal jet from the back doesn't change the fact that it still has 1/10th or lower RCS of modern 4.5 gen aircraft.
You are proving once again you don't understand what stealthy means.
從后方看起來和普通噴氣機(jī)一樣明顯，并不改變它仍然擁有現(xiàn)代4.5代飛機(jī)1/10甚至更低的雷達(dá)散射截面（RCS）的事實(shí)。
你再次證明了你不理解“隱形”是什么意思。
Me, in the first seconds... interesting shades you got there, Igor.
我，在最初的幾秒……伊戈?duì)?，你的陰影很有趣?/b>
M7 being stalked by his fans. Let the man do his shopping!
M7被他的粉絲盯上了。讓這個(gè)人去購物吧！
One thing about these kinds of drones, is that they are supposed to be expendable.
In other words, this incident is exactly what you expect to happen. Drone gets shot down over hostile territory, the enemy gets to analyze what it's made of.
So it would be in the interest of the operator to not include super secret stuff, but to make sure it doesn't contain something the enemy doesn't already know.
Because if it does have something that you don't want the enemy to know about, you wouldn't be able to operate it in the way it is meant to be operated.
關(guān)于這類無人機(jī)，有一點(diǎn)，它們應(yīng)該是一次性的。
換句話說，這次事件正是你預(yù)期會(huì)發(fā)生的。無人機(jī)在敵對(duì)領(lǐng)土上被擊落，敵人可以分析它的組成。
因此，操作員的關(guān)鍵在于不包含超級(jí)機(jī)密的東西，而是確保它不包含敵人還不知道的東西。
因?yàn)槿绻_實(shí)有你不希望敵人知道的東西，你就無法按照預(yù)定方式操作它。
The S-70 is designed to be a full capability UCAS, not a low capability, low cost, attritable system. So you know you will lose them, like anything you put in harms way, but it's supposed to come home every time like its piloted wingman.
S-70被設(shè)計(jì)為全能力的無人作戰(zhàn)航空系統(tǒng)（UCAS），而不是低能力、低成本、易損的系統(tǒng)。所以你知道你會(huì)失去它們，就像你放入危險(xiǎn)中的任何東西一樣，但它應(yīng)該每次都能像有駕駛員的控制機(jī)一樣返回。
It was quite an early S-70 judging by the nozzle and wing type.
根據(jù)噴嘴和機(jī)翼類型來看，那是一架相當(dāng)早期的S-70。
Its not really expendable considering S-70 is still in its prototype phase.
考慮到S-70仍處于原型階段，它實(shí)際上并不是一次性的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Surely the S70 is programmed to return to base on loss of comms. Maybe highjacking (by NAT0, not Ukr) isn’t so far fetched.
肯定是S70在失去通信時(shí)被編程為返回基地。也許劫持（由北約，而不是烏克蘭）并非完全不可能。
My guy you're off the rocker if you believe Ukr has the capabilities to do it. Lets just remember NATO is flying AWACS planes along the western Ukrainian border 24/7, and they have multiple satellites covering the frontlines.
伙計(jì)，如果你相信烏克蘭有能力做到這一點(diǎn)，那你就錯(cuò)了。讓我們記住，北約每天24小時(shí)都在烏克蘭西部邊境飛行預(yù)警機(jī)，他們有多顆衛(wèi)星覆蓋前線。
software glitch could still prevent it from executing go-home algorithm
軟件故障仍可能阻止其執(zhí)行返航算法。
Not your guy, but its way to far for any NATO plane to jam such a thing. Power density ;-) And I truly believe your underestimating what the Ukraimians are capable of vs. Chinese/bit of Russian tech.
不是你的朋友，但對(duì)于任何北約飛機(jī)來說，干擾這樣的東西太遙遠(yuǎn)了。功率密度;-）我真的相信你低估了烏克蘭人在對(duì)抗中國/部分俄羅斯技術(shù)方面的能力。
yes, but jamming a "state of the art" russian drone meant to heavily augment the VKS & act as a force multiplier would be far beyond an act of escelation, and to russia could be a declaration of war.
是的，但干擾一架“最先進(jìn)”的俄羅斯無人機(jī)，意味著大幅增強(qiáng)戰(zhàn)略航空兵并作為力量倍增器，這將遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超出升級(jí)行為，對(duì)俄羅斯來說可能是一種宣戰(zhàn)。
You would never get any usable power for jamming transmittet that far. Simple as that.
你永遠(yuǎn)無法獲得足夠的功率來遠(yuǎn)距離干擾。就這么簡單。
It's possible if Russia is using satellite relys. Especially considering the West has numeric and technological dominance over Russian space borne assets.
Russia simply doesn't have the budget or domestic industry to compete.
如果俄羅斯使用衛(wèi)星中繼，這是有可能的。特別是考慮到西方在數(shù)量和技術(shù)上對(duì)俄羅斯的太空資產(chǎn)占據(jù)壓制地位。
俄羅斯根本沒有預(yù)算或國內(nèi)產(chǎn)業(yè)來競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。
Due to a minor programming error the S-70 decided to exterminate all human life, so the Su-57 pilot had to step in before the machine uprising got out of hand.
由于一個(gè)小的編程錯(cuò)誤，S-70決定消滅所有人類生命，所以蘇57的飛行員不得不介入，以防機(jī)器叛亂失控。
Thanks you for your thoughts and analysis on this incident. it's good to get unbiased and open source appraisal of these types of things
感謝你對(duì)這一事件的思考和分析。能夠獲得對(duì)這類事情的公正和開源的評(píng)價(jià)很好。
not on first try. we dont know but we can assume that americans were flying over iran A LOT before iran was able to get one of those drones. besides russians dont actually enter airspace. they launch attacks from their own territory
不是第一次嘗試。我們不知道，但我們可以假設(shè)在伊朗能夠獲得這些無人機(jī)之前，美國人在伊朗上空飛行了很多次。除此之外，俄羅斯人實(shí)際上并不進(jìn)入領(lǐng)空。他們從自己的領(lǐng)土發(fā)起攻擊。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
The sound of a jet could give a clear understanding if it was 57 or not.
噴氣機(jī)的聲音可以清楚地判斷它是否是57。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Thank you. That the drone had technical issues and had to be shot down didn't occur to me after the usual western media stance "lololol russians stupid, they targeted their own aircraft again lol".
Additionally, if the drone has been used before and only now has been recognized, when it was shot down and not even by Ukrainian forces no less, is very concerning.
謝謝你。無人機(jī)出現(xiàn)技術(shù)問題并被擊落這一點(diǎn)在我看來并沒有在西方媒體通常的立場(chǎng)“哈哈哈，俄羅斯人太愚蠢了，他們又一次瞄準(zhǔn)了自己的飛機(jī)，哈哈”之后被提及。此外，如果無人機(jī)之前已經(jīng)使用過，只有現(xiàn)在才被識(shí)別出來，而且被擊落時(shí)甚至不是由烏克蘭部隊(duì)擊落的，這非常令人擔(dān)憂。
S 70 have been used in Ukraine for quite some time now. And probably Su 57 as well.
S-70已經(jīng)在烏克蘭使用了一段時(shí)間了?？赡苓€有Su-57。
I heard it was a friendly fire shot, is it possible that the drone was hacked and they needed to shoot it down?
我聽說這是友軍誤擊，是否有可能無人機(jī)被黑客攻擊，他們需要將其擊落？
you dont need to be hacked for a Drone to lost control
in 2017, 2 US Predator lost control and crashed for random malfunction in span of 2 week
無人機(jī)失控并不需要被黑客攻擊。
2017年，2架美國捕食者無人機(jī)在兩周內(nèi)因隨機(jī)故障失控并墜毀。
Hacking into a this kind of machine is almost impossible with currant military grade encryption technologies , but loss of signals due to Jamming is realistic possibility. most likely some communication device failed on the drone and lost control as M7 explained here.
用當(dāng)前的軍用級(jí)加密技術(shù)幾乎不可能入侵這種機(jī)器，但由于干擾導(dǎo)致信號(hào)丟失是現(xiàn)實(shí)的可能性。很可能是無人機(jī)上的某個(gè)通信設(shè)備故障，導(dǎo)致失去控制，正如M7在這里解釋的那樣。
Well tg publics instantly said drone was shot down cuz they lose controle on it(some milfuction)
公眾立刻說無人機(jī)被擊落，因?yàn)樗麄兪チ藢?duì)它的控制（某種故障）。
My vote also goes to some form of software or hardware failure being the most likely culprit. If that is the case there is probably some issue with their redundancy. Could be a lack of it or a poor implementation.
我也認(rèn)為某種形式的軟件或硬件故障是最可能的罪魁禍?zhǔn)?。如果是這樣，可能是它們的冗余系統(tǒng)出了問題。可能是缺乏冗余或?qū)嵤┎涣肌?/b>
I didn't necessary mean someone else than Russian military took control of the drone, jamming could be a possibility. If you jamm and glonass spoof or other technical wizardry, you could make it fly over Ukraine to pick it up for study. This kind of drone is the future of warfare, getting one specimen early means a lot.
我不一定意味著除了俄羅斯軍方之外的其他人控制了無人機(jī)，干擾可能是一種可能性。如果你干擾并進(jìn)行GLONASS欺騙或其他技術(shù)魔法，你可以讓它飛越烏克蘭以便進(jìn)行研究。這種無人機(jī)是戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的未來，提前獲取一個(gè)樣本意義重大。
The drone was not hacked, its signal receiver broke and it stopped executing commands and was flying towards Ukraine, so the Russians decided to destroy it. There is a video of an escort plane launching a missile at an S-70
無人機(jī)沒有被黑客攻擊，它的信號(hào)接收器壞了，停止執(zhí)行命令并飛向?yàn)蹩颂m，所以俄羅斯人決定摧毀它。有一段伴飛機(jī)向S-70發(fā)射導(dǎo)彈的視頻。
I dont think it being "stealth" matters as their was a non stealth russiam plane directly behind it.
我認(rèn)為它是否“隱形”并不重要，因?yàn)樵谒蠓接幸患芊请[形的俄羅斯飛機(jī)。
Unlikely. Because Russia and Ukraine uses a lot of drones and signal jamming equipment. And now drones are very resistant to jamming. The second reason is that if the C70 is controlled from a fighter, then a very strong signal is needed for this
不太可能。因?yàn)槎砹_斯和烏克蘭使用了很多無人機(jī)和信號(hào)干擾設(shè)備。而現(xiàn)在無人機(jī)對(duì)干擾非常抗拒。第二個(gè)原因是，如果C70是由戰(zhàn)斗機(jī)控制的，那么這需要非常強(qiáng)的信號(hào)。
Hacked? No. Out of control? Maybe.
被黑客攻擊？不。失控？可能。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
I really wonder where the wreck of that S-70 is now. Langley, Virginia ? Skunkworks ? Area 51 ?
我真的很想知道那架S-70的殘骸現(xiàn)在在哪里。弗吉尼亞的蘭利？斯卡克伍克斯？51區(qū)？
At garbage collecting plant.
在垃圾收集廠。
Considering the fact that it's a prototype which is still far from being a serial production I doubt there's anything worth studying
考慮到它還是一個(gè)遠(yuǎn)未量產(chǎn)的原型，我懷疑有沒有什么值得研究的東西。
Don't underestimate how thorough the inteligence agencies are.
Every bit of info can be a hint to someting.
Feed it into a powerful AI and who knows what estimations you can gather.
不要低估情報(bào)機(jī)構(gòu)的徹底性。
每一條信息都可能是某種線索。
將其輸入強(qiáng)大的AI，誰知道你能收集到什么樣的估計(jì)。
it MIGHT be a prototype. Although, it is very unlikely, mainly because it raises the questions: who the hell would bring a PROTOTYPE with a LIVE MUNITION into ENEMY TERRITORY???
它可能是一個(gè)原型。雖然這非常不可能，主要是因?yàn)檫@會(huì)引發(fā)問題：到底誰會(huì)帶著帶有實(shí)彈的原型進(jìn)入敵方領(lǐng)土？？？
It was a prototype. The intact wing was clearly super early S-70. And bringing a prototype into live warzone brings many useful things...mainly data.
那是一個(gè)原型。完整的機(jī)翼明顯是早期的S-70。將原型帶入實(shí)戰(zhàn)戰(zhàn)區(qū)帶來了許多有用的東西……主要是數(shù)據(jù)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
cuz it's the best way to accelerate the development
因?yàn)檫@是加速開發(fā)的最佳方式。
My guess is the drone malfunctioned and was shot down to make sure it didn't fall into enemy hands.
我的猜測(cè)是無人機(jī)發(fā)生了故障，并被擊落以確保它不會(huì)落入敵人手中。