Recent explosive news revealed the latest development of the Russian Aerospace Forces’ “loyal wingman” program, a project similar to the U.S. Air Force’s cooperation with unmanned combat aircraft (CCA) for the F-35 stealth fighter and sixth-generation fighter, but the disclosure of the information was quite dramatic.
On October 5th, over the frontline in eastern Ukraine, a Russian S-70 “Okhotnik-B” flying wing attack drone (UCAV) was chased and shot down at close range by a Su-57 fighter jet. The S-70 is positioned as the “loyal wingman” for Russia’s fifth-generation stealth fighter, the Su-57, serving as an extended reconnaissance and long-range strike partner. According to the Russian Ministry of Defense, the new S-70 drone has radar stealth capabilities, in addition to its flying wing design, special materials, and coatings. Since 2022, the S-70 has been undergoing long-term combat testing on the Russian-Ukrainian battlefield.
Embarrassingly for the Russian military, the first public appearance of the S-70 drone was during combat testing in the Russian-Ukrainian battlefield when it was shot down by a missile launched from its own leading aircraft, becoming the world’s first stealth drone to be shot down.
As the “loyal wingman” for the Su-57, the S-70 ironically fell under the hand of its leading aircraft. There are various speculations from the public about this incident. One explanation is that Ukraine managed to hack into the S-70 control system using Western technology in an attempt to seize it. The Su-57 had to take action against the unmanned S-70 that lost control, shooting it down at close range. Another possible scenario is that the S-70 experienced a control system malfunction during testing, flew into Ukrainian territory, and led to the same result. A third speculation is that the Ukrainian air defense system detected, targeted, and shot down the S-70. Among these speculations, the possibility of Ukrainian air defense actively engaging in shooting down the drone seems unlikely, given the challenges of targeting such a stealth aircraft with their current systems. Until the truth is revealed, these explanations remain speculative, though they may sound surprising and somewhat plausible.
Regardless, an analysis of the scene captured in the video footage suggests a higher likelihood of the Su-57 taking the initiative. In such a dangerous airspace near the frontline, even the condensation trails from the aircraft’s jet exhaust could make its presence visible to the naked eye, essentially signaling its position to the opponent. In such a situation, the aircraft’s stealth capability becomes less important, as infrared surface-to-air missiles or concentrated ground fire could effectively target it. Typically, even conventional fighter jets would refrain from such actions, let alone stealth fighters that prioritize concealment. Thus, flying so conspicuously close to the frontline only points to one scenario: the S-70 had indeed lost control or was hijacked, prompting the Su-57 to take control of the situation, move closer to the frontline, and ultimately shoot down the S-70 to prevent it from falling into enemy hands.
If sensitive advanced drones like the S-70 were to go missing deep within Ukrainian territory and potentially crash in relatively intact condition, it would pose a significant problem for Russia, both technically and in terms of future combat use. Therefore, the decision by the Russian Aerospace Forces to shoot it down appears to be a reasonable choice.
In the video, the Su-57 seemed to track the drone for a period, possibly observing its status or attempting to regain control. After confirming that there was no chance of recovery, the Su-57 fired an air-to-air missile at close range to bring down the drone. Normally, air-to-air missiles would not be used in such close proximity during combat, indicating that it was a last resort. Of course, this essentially rules out the possibility of Ukrainian Air Force involvement, as such tactics do not align with their operational style, especially when their aircraft capabilities are inferior to their counterparts. If the Ukrainian Air Force fighters had the opportunity to engage in such close-range combat with Russian fighters on the frontline, the Su-57 would be a more probable target than the S-70.
Analysis of on-site images indicates that the S-70 was carrying at least one precision-guided glide bomb. This seemingly confirms that the drone was conducting some sort of ground attack test. The reason for flying so close to the frontline may have been to test the S-70’s actual attack capabilities against Ukrainian targets in a disputed environment. As of now, details about the specific weapons the S-70 can or will carry have not been disclosed. For drones of this type, air-to-ground ammunition and sensors for reconnaissance are relatively easier to implement compared to autonomous air-to-air combat capabilities, which are far more complex. It is uncertain whether the S-70 possesses autonomous air-to-air combat capabilities, but the notion of it being the “loyal wingman” for the Su-57 suggests it should have the potential in this regard.
Despite the Russian Aerospace Forces shooting down the S-70 drone, they were not quick enough to prevent its wreckage from falling into the Konstantinovka area under Ukrainian control. Moreover, from the on-site imagery, many parts of the wreckage remain relatively intact, including sensors on the wings that are clearly visible, significantly increasing the risk of technology leakage. If Ukraine were to obtain the remnants of the S-70, it could potentially provide the U.S. with simultaneous technical intelligence, thus understanding the status of Russia’s so-called fifth-generation “loyal wingman.” Western analysis of this aircraft could potentially compel Russia to abandon it before formal deployment or start the whole program anew.
Reports suggest that after the S-70 was shot down, Russia launched an Iskander missile at the crash site, destroying the remnants of the drone once again. It is said that comparative images before and after the Iskander missile strike show that Ukraine had already taken crucial components before the attack. If these reports are accurate, it indicates that Russia aimed to prevent the West from acquiring the aircraft wreckage, fearing that the deceased drone may reveal harrowing tales.
The primary concern is not just about the leakage of new technology. Russians themselves acknowledge that their stealth technology lags behind the West, even with the optimistic claims made about the Su-57, suggesting its stealth performance is inferior to similar U.S. aircraft. Their bigger worry lies in the West exploiting their technological weaknesses.
Western engineers may discover how the S-70’s design intends to counter various wavelengths from different angles and where it remains visible. This could partially compromise the drone’s stealth capability. Given that this is a relatively large, slower, stealthy, and expensive drone designed to counter Western advanced capabilities, any degradation in its stealth performance could render its other capabilities less effective. Furthermore, since the S-70 was designed alongside the Su-57, it likely features similar stealth materials and technologies. If the workings of the S-70 are deciphered, the West could gain insights into how to defeat the Su-57. This is the real secret that the Russians aim to conceal, indicating that their stealth technology might just be a case of “The Emperor’s New Clothes.”
In fact, analysts were surprised by the rough appearance shown in the recent images of the new Su-57 released by Russia. Stealth aircraft require a completely smooth surface to minimize even the slightest projection because even minor reflections can significantly impact radar echoes. The B-2 bomber and F-22 fighter are well-known for their expensive maintenance due to stringent stealth coating requirements (though improvements have reportedly been made with the F-35). In contrast, the Su-57’s wings and fuselage are dotted with exposed rivets, suggesting a lackluster stealth performance based on common sense judgment.