Military Review

The rollout of the first F-35B Lightning-2 fighter took place in Italy

170
Rolling out the first F-35B “Lightning-2” fighter in the short-takeoff and vertical-landing version assembled outside the United States took place on May 5 on the Final Assembly and Check Out line in Cameri (Italy), reports TSAMTO.


The company belongs to the Italian Ministry of Defense and is managed by Leonardo together with Lockheed Martin. Around 800 specialists assemble airplanes with normal takeoff and landing of the F-35A and the F-35B variant, as well as the production of wings for the F-35A.

According to Lockheed Martin, the aircraft, designated BL-1, will perform the first flight at the end of August and should be transferred to the Italian Ministry of Defense in November.

The first F-35B Lightning 2 fighter was rolled out in Italy


Two more F-35A aircraft will be assembled on the line at Cameri in the current year: the first by July, and the second by the fourth quarter. So far, the company has produced seven F-35A, four of which are now located at the Luke base (Arizon) to participate in the international pilot training program, and three at the Amendola air force base in Italy. The total flight time of the Italian Air Force pilots on the F-35A stationed in Amendola exceeded the 100 hours.

As planned, after a series of control flights based on Cameri, at the beginning of 2018, the Italian pilot will perform an F-35B flight on the Patuxent River airbase (Maryland) as part of an assessment of the effects of electromagnetic environmental effects. The next Italian F-35B is to be delivered in November 2018 of the year.

The FACO final assembly and inspection line in Cameri is the only company that produces F-35B outside the USA. This line should produce a total of 30 F-35B and 60 F-35A for the Italian Air Force, and 29 F-35A for the Netherlands Air Force. In addition, the plant may receive additional orders if F-35 is selected by other European countries. In December 2014, the Pentagon also stated that the company in Italy will provide maintenance, repair and modernization of F-35 fighter jets to the USAF stationed in Europe. The plant will also manufacture X-NUMX F-835A wing kits.

The first Italian-made F-35 performed the first in stories the international flight program 7 September 2015, and in February 2016, the F-35A performed the first transatlantic flight. In December 2016, the first pair of F-35A aircraft delivered by the Italian Air Force landed at the Amendola airbase.
Photos used:
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us.html
170 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. xetai9977
    xetai9977 11 May 2017 12: 35 New
    21
    Now the adherents of "all rust" will appear and begin to write that this is a product of cutting dough and has no prospects laughing I think that the F-35 and its variations will be the most massive after the triumph at the time of the F-16
    1. Cxnumx
      Cxnumx 11 May 2017 12: 45 New
      +5
      judging by the price, Americans cannot become new mass fighters in principle))
      1. Thunderbolt
        Thunderbolt 11 May 2017 12: 49 New
        +5
        Quote: K0
        judging by the price, Americans cannot become new mass fighters in principle))

        However, they are ordered more actively than others.
        1. supertiger21
          supertiger21 11 May 2017 16: 04 New
          +5
          Congratulations to the Italians, they made the right choice! yes F-35 is an excellent aircraft with the latest avionics and enhanced stealth, serial analogues of which so far no country in the world has. Without a doubt, it surpasses in its parameters all the fighters that have ever been and were in the Italian Air Force, including EF-2000 and F-16. soldier
      2. Walanin
        Walanin 11 May 2017 12: 50 New
        +8
        more than 200 units before the start of a major series is not mass?
        1. Cxnumx
          Cxnumx 11 May 2017 12: 55 New
          +5
          well, it is likely that it will be like that - it’s necessary to look after 5-10 years) but let's not take into account NATO countries - where the model and number of purchased equipment is often decided on the principle: "do not take our equipment? and you have democracy in the country generally?!" )))
          1. Walanin
            Walanin 11 May 2017 12: 56 New
            +8
            In NATO, no one prohibits the purchase of any equipment other than American. An example of a Tornado, Eurofighter, Leopards and other Leclercists and a host of other weapons, and even Turkey with the S-400, are hinting.
            But F-35 is bought not only by NATO members.
            1. Cxnumx
              Cxnumx 11 May 2017 13: 16 New
              +3
              Quote: Walanin
              In NATO, no one forbids the purchase of any other equipment

              let's be honest, any technique is not acc. NATO standards (it is also American) are acquired by them in exceptional cases; if they themselves do not produce an analogue - in most cases the American is taken (it’s difficult for me personally to separate econom and polit reasons); about s-400 in Turkey - so far it’s from the category “maybe it’s,” i.e. so unlikely that ...
              for me, the only indicator can be sales of equipment to countries outside of any blocks (explicit and not explicit). those who can buy airplanes on the fingers of one hand can be counted. and yes, today it’s the only aircraft of this level and such readiness.
              Threat and yes, I do not think it sucks. frank sludge from amers is not much, frankly. But he doesn’t seem to be a super-duper either, sorry. he’s just the first one) yes, Americans in the aviation and navy have always been one of the first
              1. Walanin
                Walanin 11 May 2017 13: 39 New
                0
                That is why standards are needed to unify and simplify interaction.
                Ktozh interferes with the standards, and not anyhow how?)
                Quote: K0
                the only indicator can be sales of equipment to countries outside of any blocks

                Well done, if most of the richest countries in the world are included in various blocks. They are getting rich because they lower their costs and buy better weapons.
              2. Ararat
                Ararat 12 May 2017 06: 38 New
                0
                Greece bought the S-300 and BMP-3 from Russia.
        2. g1washntwn
          g1washntwn 11 May 2017 13: 49 New
          +3
          If all competitors are obsolete, then rancid seeds can be sold in bulk and passed off as the advantages of the product itself :). Despite all the assurances, the F-35 does not belong to the fifth generation (that’s how it was thought - yes, but pulled by 4 +++ and no more) and went into a series with a bunch of imperfections that hastily patched up the first foreign deliveries.
          A and C look much better than vertical-B, which is exactly the “penguin” and which they are now trying to vtyuhivat everyone. The British tried to disown him, but it didn’t work out - they will buy this same “mass plane”, making it even a little cheaper.
          Original task of the Americans To do This project is massive, or the phrase "aggressive marketing" as many people think in the US military-industrial complex do not know? ;)
          The T-50 was originally conceived precisely as generation 5 and all the delays were precisely tailored to this standard, nobody was going to do it on a massive scale, it has its own task in the VKS system and for these tasks it is not necessary to use mass and throw caps, namely the requirements of the fifth generation . The tasks of the T-50 and F-35 are the same in appearance, but the approach, performance and capabilities are different - as a result, we have different planes. F-35 is a business project, the T-50 is a prototype of the future fifth generation.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 11 May 2017 14: 05 New
            +6
            "If all competitors are outdated" ///

            Who is outdated all competitors belay ? And Boeing with F-15 and F-18 and
            Europeans with their Eurofighter (Typhoon) and Grippen and Rafale
            haven’t gone anywhere. They live and live and participate in all tenders.
            Competition exists and is very tough. But many prefer
            namely F-35. And there are purely technical reasons for this.
          2. Walanin
            Walanin 11 May 2017 14: 20 New
            +1
            Quote: g1washntwn
            The T-50 was originally conceived precisely as generation 5 and all the delays were precisely in the fit to this standard, nobody was going to do it on a massive scale,

            would there be money would make
            Quote: g1washntwn
            T-50 and F-35 have the same tasks

            no not the same. The T-50 is a heavy fighter, the F-35 is a light IFI strike
          3. supertiger21
            supertiger21 11 May 2017 16: 24 New
            +3
            Quote: g1washntwn
            If all competitors are obsolete, then rancid seeds can be sold in bulk and passed off as the advantages of the product itself :).


            Bullshit ... The same American Boeing often puts a pig to the Lokhidovites, everywhere trying to squeeze their F-35 with their F / A-18. This is not to mention the European competitors, Rafaly, Eurofighter and Gripen, who are also trying to push the F-35 even in the west. Nevertheless, most countries opt for the F-35, although nobody forbids them to buy the same Super Hornets. Our situation is different. We sell Su to almost everyone, but they have put something on the MiG for a long time ... hi

            Quote: g1washntwn
            Despite all the assurances, the F-35 does not belong to the fifth generation (exactly like that, I thought - yes, but pulled it to 4 +++ and no more)


            Each country has its own requirements for fifth generation fighters. But the stealth is common to all and Lightning fully corresponds to this parameter. The only thing the 5th does not meet of all the requirements for the 35th generation is: over-maneuverability and over-the-body supersonic, but with the presence of excellent avionics and stealth technologies it is excusable.

            Quote: g1washntwn
            Yes, and went into a series with a bunch of imperfections, which in a hurry patched up to the first foreign deliveries.


            Children's illnesses are characteristic of any new aircraft, and the F-35 is no exception. Remember how many times they modified and reworked the Su-27, but what a great fighter it turned out in the end ?! good

            Quote: g1washntwn
            A and C look much better than vertical-B, which is exactly the “penguin” and which they are now trying to vtyuhivat everyone. The British tried to disown him, but it didn’t work out - they will buy this same “mass plane”, making it even a little cheaper.


            Nonsense ... Just the same, modifications B and C will be the least mass, in addition to the Navy and the United States ILC, only Canadians, British and Italians will buy them. And the US Air Force and another 9 countries will fly on the most massive F-35A.

            Quote: g1washntwn
            The initial task of the Americans to MAKE this project massive, or the phrase "aggressive marketing" as many people think in the US military-industrial complex do not know? ;)


            The initial task was to create a new generation universal fighter that will replace the F-16 and F-18 fighters, as well as the A-10 and AV-8 attack aircraft.

            Quote: g1washntwn
            The T-50 was originally conceived precisely as generation 5 and all the delays were precisely tailored to this standard, nobody was going to do it on a massive scale, it has its own task in the VKS system and for these tasks it is not necessary to use mass and throw caps, namely the requirements of the fifth generation . The tasks of the T-50 and F-35 are the same in appearance, but the approach, performance and capabilities are different - as a result, we have different planes. F-35 is a business project, the T-50 is a prototype of the future fifth generation.


            The PAK FA is conceived primarily as an aircraft of complete air supremacy, hence the high requirements to it, such as the F-22 at one time. And the F-35 was not originally created specifically for these purposes, but a bias was made for universality - the same efficiency as a fighter, and as an attack aircraft, and as a bomber. soldier
            1. KaPToC
              KaPToC 11 May 2017 19: 06 New
              0
              Quote: supertiger21
              But the stealth is common to all and Lightning fully corresponds to this parameter.

              This parameter is not the main one.
              1. supertiger21
                supertiger21 11 May 2017 19: 43 New
                0
                Quote: KaPToC
                This parameter is not the main one.


                And what do you think is most important? Almost all other requirements for a 5th generation aircraft, such as: afterburning supersonic sound, multifunctionality, super maneuverability, etc. - can be implemented on some 4th generation fighters, the so-called 4 ++. The same American F / A-18E / F and our Su-35S confirm this. However, do not upgrade how many of them, and do not hang up the “pluses” - they will not achieve stealth similar to that of the F-35. That is why stealth is the business card of 5th generation fighters. bully
                1. KaPToC
                  KaPToC 11 May 2017 21: 51 New
                  0
                  Quote: supertiger21
                  That is why stealth 5th generation fighter card

                  Fifth Generation AMERICAN Aircraft.
                  You need to reduce visibility, no one argues here, but too many Americans have sacrificed this parameter.
                  1. supertiger21
                    supertiger21 11 May 2017 23: 22 New
                    0
                    Quote: KaPToC
                    Fifth Generation AMERICAN Aircraft.


                    Right. Each country has its own requirements for the 5th generation.

                    Quote: KaPToC
                    You need to reduce visibility, no one argues here, but too many Americans have sacrificed this parameter.


                    So why not, if this quality makes Raptors and Lightings invulnerable over long distances. Indeed, stealth remains with the aircraft throughout its operation: 24 hours a day and 7 days a week, whether the plane is in the hangar or dissecting the stratosphere in supersonic mode. Stealth is a kind of innate gift.
                    1. KaPToC
                      KaPToC 11 May 2017 23: 28 New
                      0
                      Quote: supertiger21
                      Stealth is a kind of innate gift.

                      I will give some examples.
                      You can not take ammunition on the external sling - the stealth is immediately lost.
                      You can not turn on the locator - the stealth is immediately lost.
                      And if you need to defend your units attacked by the enemy (crossing, port, nuclear power plant)? You do not have the opportunity to hide in the stealth, you need to fight to the death, but this is just the raptors and lightings can not.
                      1. socks
                        socks 12 May 2017 00: 27 New
                        +2
                        But you can launch a rocket along the beam of the enemy’s locator. But you can quietly go to a certain area and there already lose stealth. But it is possible to launch a missile in stealth mode from a third-party guidance.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. Dallas78
        Dallas78 11 May 2017 12: 56 New
        +8
        Quote: K0
        judging by the price, Americans cannot become new mass fighters in principle))

        Well, not like T50 for 5 pieces a year wassat
        1. Cxnumx
          Cxnumx 11 May 2017 12: 58 New
          +1
          do you now compare the characteristics of the device or the loot swollen in its production?))
        2. NEXUS
          NEXUS 11 May 2017 14: 32 New
          +2
          Quote: Dallas78
          Well, not like T50 for 5 pieces a year

          And we do not have the task of equipping them with the NATO bloc in full force. In addition, a heavy fighter a priori cannot be as massive as a light one.
      5. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 11 May 2017 12: 59 New
        +8
        Quote: K0
        judging by the price, Americans cannot become new mass fighters in principle))

        They are no more expensive than the F-16I.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 11 May 2017 14: 32 New
          +1
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          They are no more expensive than the F-16I.

          And if you take the cost of the life cycle?
      6. alex73s
        alex73s 11 May 2017 13: 01 New
        +4
        Quote: K0
        judging by the price, Americans cannot become new mass fighters in principle))


        Rafal and Eurofighter are even more expensive.
      7. iwind
        iwind 11 May 2017 13: 03 New
        +9
        Quote: K0
        judging by the price, Americans cannot become new mass fighters in principle))

        Well, actually F-35 is now one of the cheapest western aircraft ...
        It costs $ 95 million.
        European somewhere around 10-20 $ more expensive.
        Yes, he has already become massive
        1. opus
          opus 11 May 2017 13: 50 New
          +2
          [quote = iwind] Well, actually F-35 is now one of the cheapest western aircraft ... [/ quote]
          Low Rate Initial Production lot 9 (not including the engine) are:

          F-35A: $ 102.1 million / jet
          F-35B: $ 131.6 million / jet
          F-35C: $ 132.2 million / jet
          they said that LRIP 10 would be 5-7% cheaper
          Boeing remains confident in additional F / A-18 orders (2014)
          [quote] [Also, Super Hornets cost $ 52 million with engines, avionics and weapons systems, while Growlers cost about $ 8 to $ 9 million more - far less than the F-35, according to Gibbons.

          Aboulafia has estimated F-35s cost roughly $ 135 million, while Lockheed said last year the cost was “under $ 100 million” and will reach $ 85 million by 2019.

          Operating costs are also less - about $ 16,000 to $ 17,000 per flight hour, says Gibbons.

          By comparison, in May 2013 the US Air Force estimated its F-35As would cost $ 32,000 hourly./quote]
          Congressional Add: In FY 2016, the unit cost of an F / A-18E / F Super Hornet is $ 67.2 million (flyaway cost) or $ 70.0 million incl. non-recurring and support costs. The cost of the airframe is $ 46.21 million, the two F414-GE-400 engines cost $ 10.72 million ($ 5.36 million each), and the avionics costs $ 8.71 million.

          Where is the real zing?
          Aircraft Specifications: F-16 Fighting Falcon
          [quote] Price / Unit Cost: F-16C / D: $ 18.8 million (FY 1998 constant dollars) [/ quote]
          my moscow is boiling




          For BAE, the strongest and most accessible prospect would be a follow-on order from Saudi Arabia, which currently operates 64 Tranche 2 (40) and Tranche 3 (24) fighters, with another 8 due to be delivered. BAE is hoping to secure an additional order of 48 aircraft for £ 4bn ($ 4.91 billion US).

          $ 4 910 000 000,00: 48 = $ 102,3 ppm for SAUDITES
          strong corruption in a European concern

          [quote] “We can't accept that Austrian taxpayers are co-funding bribes by way of the purchase price,” Defense Minister Hans Peter Doskozil told journalists in Vienna. “We have clear evidence that Eurofighter and Airbus deceived Austria. This deception has caused massive financial damage. ”[/ Quote]
          1. Walanin
            Walanin 11 May 2017 13: 56 New
            +1
            Actually, the batch of LRIP-10 has already passed and the even cheaper LRIP-11 begins. At the same time, LRIP is not even a series yet.
            For LRIP 10, the per-plane price of an F-35A model sits at $ 94.6 million (7.3% reduction from LRIP 9), an F-35B jump-jet model used by the US Marine Corps sits at $ 122.8 million (6.7% reduction from LRIP 9), and an F-35C carrier version is at $ 121.8 million (7.9% reduction from LRIP 9 )
            1. opus
              opus 11 May 2017 14: 18 New
              +1
              Quote: Walanin
              At the same time, LRIP is not even a series yet.

              Why are you referring to it then?

              Quote: Walanin
              For LRIP 10, the per-plane price of an F-35A model sits at $ 94.6 million

              for the glider.
              Why did it go and where, I xs.

              1. Walanin
                Walanin 11 May 2017 14: 32 New
                0
                Then, even without entering the stage of a large series, the 5th generation aircraft already costs many of the 4th at a cost.
                What is there on your muddy pictures, by the way, too, xs. It is impossible to make out anything.
              2. iwind
                iwind 11 May 2017 15: 00 New
                +3
                Quote: opus
                Quote: iwind
                Well, actually F-35 is now one of the cheapest western aircraft ...

                Low Rate Initial Production lot 9 (not including the engine)

                This is a very old price.
                Now 95.
                Quote: opus
                for the glider.
                Why did it go and where, I xs.

                EEE is not F-35 .... Ch-53k is not at all
                here about F-35 for 2017


                Airframe $ 62.475
                CFE Electronics $ 16.315
                Engines 12.889 $
                ECO 1.834 $
                + investments to expand production. and add. equipment for the plant.
                = $ 98.994 million

                for 2018 even less ..
                Quote: opus
                For BAE, the strongest and most accessible prospect would be a follow-on order from Saudi Arabia, which currently operates 64 Tranche 2 (40) and Tranche 3 (24) fighters, with another 8 due to be delivered. BAE is hoping to secure an additional order of 48 aircraft for £ 4bn ($ 4.91 billion US).
                $ 4: 910 = $ 000 million / piece for SAUDITS

                namely, only after all they did not inform the amount of the contract for the plane. there was only the total amount.
                That deal - worth more than £ 40bn, according to former BAE chief executive Mike Turner - was credited with saving the company from a near financial crisis.
                But the supply of arms has come under renewed scrutiny after Saudi Arabia's recent attacks on Yemen.
                The BBC's Newsnight recently revealed that an influential select committee had compiled a draft report calling for a ban on all exports. A final report from the committee has yet to be released.
                http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37575599
                "The Austrian Ministry of Defense accused the European manufacturer of Airbus aircraft of" fraudulent actions "and filed a lawsuit against it. This is a contract concluded between the Ministry of Defense and Airbus in 2003, according to which Austria ordered Eurofighter fighter aircraftand € 2 billion (for 11 pieces). The Department of Defense accuses the corporation of misleading it about the price of fighter jets. According to a statement released by the ministry, it has already sued Vienna’s prosecutor’s office on Airbus (then EADS) and Eurofighter, 46% of which is owned by Airbus. "
                Typhoon is a very expensive plane. He even goes for 100mln for his Air Force
                1. opus
                  opus 11 May 2017 15: 38 New
                  +1
                  This is a very old price.
                  Now 95.

                  Quote: opus
                  F-35A: $ 102.1 million / jet
                  F-35B: $ 131.6 million / jet
                  F-35C: $ 132.2 million / jet
                  said that LRIP 10 will be 5-7% cheaper

                  $ 102.1 million / jet-7% = $ 94,953 million
                  95 and 94,953? Am I wrong somewhere?
                  the truth was there was no engine
                  Quote: iwind
                  EEE is not F-35 .... Ch-53k is not at all

                  not glued. quite old

                  Quote: iwind
                  Typhoon is a very expensive plane. He even goes for 100mln for his Air Force

                  F-18 remains.
                  T.ch.
                  Quote: iwind
                  Well, actually F-35 is now one of the cheapest western aircraft ...

                  not true
                  1. iwind
                    iwind 11 May 2017 16: 00 New
                    +2
                    Quote: opus
                    95 and 94,953? Am I wrong somewhere?
                    the truth was there was no engine

                    If you're about my 95, then I'm just rounded. These pennies are not so important
                    Quote: opus
                    F-18 remains.
                    T.ch.

                    Quote: opus
                    not true

                    Well, I still did not write that he most cheap and one of.
                    F-18 is now also very expensive.

                    It certainly costs less than 100 million, but not at times.
                    Now the Navy has asked for 2018-2019 "to purchase aircraft, including 24 Super Hornet (+ $ 2.32 billion)"
                    1. opus
                      opus 11 May 2017 17: 17 New
                      +1
                      Quote: iwind
                      Well, I still did not write that it is the cheapest, but one of.

                      I think Lockheed Martin is compensating for lost profits on upgradAX.
                      There still needs to be done
                      Quote: voyaka uh
                      The price drops with each new lot.

                      let's see the price is not for Israel
          2. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 11 May 2017 14: 12 New
            +2
            The price drops with each new lot.
          3. The comment was deleted.
            1. Walanin
              Walanin 11 May 2017 15: 01 New
              0
              It would be strange for a typhoon to be cheap, given that workers and engineers are not paid a salary of not $ 500, and production volumes are measured in dozens.
    2. sir_obs
      sir_obs 11 May 2017 13: 16 New
      +1
      And what was the triumph? If about the press and Hollywood masterpieces, then this is not a triumph, but advertising
    3. Krabik
      Krabik 11 May 2017 13: 33 New
      +3
      The MIG-31, which has no analogues in the world, will tear all your penguins like an awesome rag!
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 11 May 2017 14: 44 New
        +2
        Quote: Krabik
        The MIG-31, which has no analogues in the world, will tear all your penguins like an awesome rag!

        And you offer any western pilot, on any fighter, to compete with the MIG-31 at least in a training battle.
        1. Krabik
          Krabik 11 May 2017 14: 53 New
          +4
          I’d better suggest competing with IL-2, why injure pilots with an unmatched iron aircraft of the 70s ?!

          Italians lively tails tuck from one name IL-2 attack aircraft%)
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 11 May 2017 15: 26 New
            +1
            Quote: Krabik
            I’d better suggest competing with IL-2, why injure pilots with an unmatched iron aircraft of the 70s ?!

            He said, like in a basin, I'm sorry, farted ... well oh well, consider that he answered smartly.
            1. SUPAHFLY
              SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 07: 17 New
              +1
              Quote: Krabik
              why injure pilots with an unparalleled iron aircraft of the 70s

              this one can.
              The radar is the same as on the Su, the link replaces AWACS, the F-35 can break just flying past it at 2 times the speed, above 11 thousand F-15 it is forbidden to enter with it maneuverable combat, the best hunter for the KR, and F-22 one cannot escape from it either - a bad plane, yes ... in vain do Krabik try? "Officer Daughter" Detective, LOL
              1. Krabik
                Krabik 12 May 2017 13: 16 New
                0
                SUPAHFLY

                The Canadian special registered in May of this year and stuffing epaulets on gullible forum users, of course knows better how and where the MIG-31 can dodge.

                Why does your country not buy the MIG-31, but buy the F-35?
                1. SUPAHFLY
                  SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 13: 48 New
                  0
                  you already in another place explained that Canada does not buy them, she, like the United States pays for those that are Israeli
                  you bought your own, you envy, lol?
                  1. Krabik
                    Krabik 12 May 2017 13: 55 New
                    0
                    I don’t understand where from the blatantly unfriendly Canada a valiant patriot came to defend our (not yours!) Old planes ?!

                    Trying to fill shoulder straps at all costs?

                    And if not a secret, your parents fought on whose side in the Second World War?
                    1. SUPAHFLY
                      SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 18: 07 New
                      0
                      LOL did not ask you to tell about their ...
                      LMAO for epaulettes better money was not enough?
                      1. socks
                        socks 13 May 2017 15: 09 New
                        0
                        I'm sorry to interrupt, but I was wondering, do you think posts in which you do not sign, that vomiting, or vice versa?
                      2. SUPAHFLY
                        SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 15: 39 New
                        0
                        do not laugh but laugh, interestingly - count, but it will not be accurate ...
        2. Walanin
          Walanin 11 May 2017 15: 03 New
          +3
          Quote: NEXUS
          compete with the MIG-31 at least in a training battle.

          In the near for example) Which pilots of the Mig-31 do not even work out.
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 11 May 2017 15: 25 New
            +3
            Quote: Walanin
            In the near for example) Which pilots of the Mig-31 do not even work out.

            First, come to the 31st to launch rockets of your near hand, and then we'll talk, smart guy.
            1. Krabik
              Krabik 11 May 2017 15: 53 New
              +5
              First, come to the 31st to launch rockets of your near hand, and then we'll talk, smart guy.


              Laughed almost died;)

              Radar "Barrier" "detection range of an air target of the type" fighter "(EPR = 3 m², with a probability of 0,5) in the rear hemisphere: 35 km".
              We pull the cat on a double-barrel and get Barrier-M 50 km.

              EPR F-22 - according to various sources, from 0,0001 to 0,3-0,4 m².

              Radar AN / APG-77 - "target detection range with EPR = 1 m² - 225 km (normal mode) and 193 km (LPI mode), cruise missile (0,1 m²) - 125-110 km.".

              AIM-120D - launch range 180 km.

              How would the odds against the F-22 ZERO!
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 11 May 2017 16: 11 New
                +5
                Quote: Krabik
                Laughed almost died;)

                So I can’t get rid of you the second day ... laughing fool
                Quote: Krabik
                Radar "Barrier" "detection range of an air target of the type" fighter "(EPR = 3 m², with a probability of 0,5) in the rear hemisphere: 35 km".

                On the MIG-31BM is Barrier-AM, and not Barrier. fool
                Quote: Krabik
                EPR F-22 - according to various sources, from 0,0001 to 0,3-0,4 m².

                Why not 0,00000000001 mm? wassat A lover of fence inscriptions. fool
                Quote: Krabik
                AIM-120D - launch range 180 km.

                I’m not even going to talk about R-37 ... there is a R-33 with a range of more than 200 km ... wassat
                Quote: Krabik
                How would the odds against the F-22 ZERO!

                Of course... lol fool Dream Clown. wassat
                1. Krabik
                  Krabik 11 May 2017 16: 16 New
                  +3
                  Missile 200, and the radar does not pull, that's not the task, does the F-22 come out really invisible to the MIG-31?
                  1. NEXUS
                    NEXUS 11 May 2017 16: 18 New
                    +2
                    Quote: Krabik
                    Missile 200, and the radar does not pull, that's not the task, does the F-22 come out really invisible to the MIG-31?

                    Shaw, definitely not pulling? lol What a pity... laughing Precisely, convinced, the F-22 is the most traveled
                    and an invisible train on earth. fellow
                    1. Krabik
                      Krabik 11 May 2017 16: 41 New
                      +4
                      You understand the commonplace thing.

                      You compare the old aircraft of the 70s with the artisanal radar from the NIIP Tikhomirov Zaslon-AM to a 5th generation serial fighter with low EPR and advanced electronics in the world.

                      Another question is, how many MIG-31 modernizations went through at these Barrier-AM, otherwise it will come out purely for the sake of showing how 5 pieces were updated with Armata ...
                      1. SUPAHFLY
                        SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 07: 22 New
                        0
                        LOL kind of wrote that from NIIP and get confused in his radar, is it because you are a programmer by profile or "everything is not so clear with you there?"
                      2. Krabik
                        Krabik 12 May 2017 12: 47 New
                        0
                        I wrote that across the road NIIP and my NIIP are developing instruments for space, and this aircraft NIIP in another city!

                        And parents worked there.
                        In general, all my relatives in the military-industrial complex worked and I would have worked if it hadn't been for Humpbacked.

                        You are all trying to get out of your Canada, but all the time you fall into a puddle;)
                      3. The comment was deleted.
                      4. SUPAHFLY
                        SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 11: 26 New
                        0
                        tell me more about them here, it’s strange that the KGB only deletes my comments LOL
                2. Walanin
                  Walanin 11 May 2017 18: 00 New
                  +1
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  On the MIG-31BM is the Barrier-AM, not the Barrier

                  there are differences only in replacing lamps with a digital digital computer. Improved noise immunity and more.
                  And what is the Mig-31's hand like that? Or do you think that the R-37 with a maximum overload of target 4 is capable of shooting down anything other than the giant dinosaurs of the past represented by the B-52?)
                  1. SUPAHFLY
                    SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 07: 23 New
                    0
                    For example, I brought down mirages
                    1. Walanin
                      Walanin 13 May 2017 12: 19 New
                      0
                      When did you manage? MiG-31 fought anywhere?
                      1. SUPAHFLY
                        SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 13: 03 New
                        0
                        stereg border, it was mirages that were knocked down by her predecessor
                    2. Walanin
                      Walanin 13 May 2017 13: 20 New
                      0
                      That is, all the same, it did not bring down anything. Clearly understood.
                      1. SUPAHFLY
                        SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 13: 24 New
                        0
                        Do you think there were no violators?
                3. KaPToC
                  KaPToC 11 May 2017 19: 09 New
                  +1
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  Why not 0,00000000001 mm?

                  This is a special NANOlighting, on a scale of 1 to 100000
                  1. SUPAHFLY
                    SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 07: 24 New
                    +2
                    ninja penguin
            2. supertiger21
              supertiger21 11 May 2017 18: 26 New
              +4
              Quote: NEXUS
              First, come to the 31st to launch rockets of your near hand, and then we'll talk, smart guy.


              Understand Andrey, MiG-31 is an excellent interceptor good but for its time. He can not compete on equal terms with either the F-35 or the F-22, if only because he simply does not even see them on his radar. The Barrier-M power is enough to detect, intercept and shoot down a R-37 missile with a 4th-generation fighter with a large EPR, for example, the F-16. But the EPR of the Reptor and Lightning is not even half a meter, so at long distances they are invulnerable, I would even say invisible to the 31st. In addition, their latest APG-77 and APG-81 AFAR radars are capable of detecting the MiG-31 already over 200 km away, intercepting and shooting down AIM-120 missiles until the enemy even has time to detect, and even more so move on to retaliation . And this applies not only to the MiG-31. So it will be with any 4th generation fighter: Sushki, Rafaly, Efrofaytera and others. American F-22, F-35 and our T-50 will have complete dominance at medium and long distances in front of the machines of the previous generation. The era of stealth has come! soldier
              1. Krabik
                Krabik 11 May 2017 18: 37 New
                +1
                supertiger21

                At T-50 engines stick out, God forbid, the developers did not even bother about reducing visibility in the IR range.

                Another T-50 is the F-22 clone, which is also outdated, now we need to hide the rockets in the housing to reduce the EPR, and the T-50 with its flat body does not fit much there and it will fly with outboard missiles and glow no worse MIG-31.

                In short, they make our design bureau frank junk shove it to uneducated citizens, through a zombie creature, like an airplane that has no analogues in the world.

                And even this old rubbish of the 90s of the development cannot be completed ...
                1. supertiger21
                  supertiger21 11 May 2017 18: 58 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Krabik
                  At T-50 engines stick out, God forbid, the developers did not even bother about reducing visibility in the IR range.


                  Actually, there is talk of replacing round nozzles with flat ones, like on the Reptor.

                  Quote: Krabik
                  Another T-50 is a F-22 clone, which is also outdated,


                  Ahahah, well, do not tell laughing Not a single 5th generation aircraft will become obsolete for at least the next 20-25 years.

                  Quote: Krabik
                  Now you need to hide the rockets in the hull to reduce the EPR, and the T-50 with its flat body does not fit much there and it will fly with outboard missiles and glow no worse than the MIG-31.


                  Well, it's too early to draw conclusions, because work on the PAK FA is still underway. After all, so far there has not even been a test of weapons from the internal compartments. When they finish, then we'll talk.

                  Quote: Krabik
                  In short, they make our design bureau frank junk shove it to uneducated citizens, through a zombie creature, like an airplane that has no analogues in the world.


                  Sorry, but your "truncation" recourse gone "sounds even funnier than the antonym" fellow , we don’t have a man-made world "... Let's remain realistic without going to extremes. hi

                  Quote: Krabik
                  And even this old rubbish of the 90s of the development cannot be completed ...


                  Mistake! Work on the PAK FA began in 2002, and not in the 90s. Or do you mean the Su-47 and MiG-1.44? Well, these are completely different aircraft, although their technologies were used to create the T-50.
        3. socks
          socks 11 May 2017 19: 35 New
          +1
          And where is only a combat vehicle? Well, for example, the MiG-31 will fall into Israeli airspace, and if it does not fly away using the direct speed advantage, it will get rid of the Israeli F-15C in a maneuverable battle for two reasons at most.
          1. SUPAHFLY
            SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 07: 28 New
            0
            what is it for?
            1. socks
              socks 12 May 2017 12: 59 New
              0
              Adapted from Israel, the adapted version of the F-15C is equipped with the best avionics and much better software, and the pilot is equipped with a much better information helmet. In addition to the speed advantage, basically on a straight stretch of the trajectory, the Mig-31 actually has no other advantages over the F-15 in dynamics, and in the vertical carousel the F-15 has all the advantages at speeds within 1.5-1.8M because there are no more will work out. The advantage of the American and the duel on the guns. T.O. if the Mig, which is well detected at maximum speeds, does not hit a long-range missile, which is also not very adapted for targets like the F-15 and does not go away at maximum speeds, its fate in the Israeli sky is a foregone conclusion even without any air defense involvement.
              1. SUPAHFLY
                SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 13: 42 New
                0
                helmet on it - it’s clear ... but what’s wrong with the gun?
                1. socks
                  socks 12 May 2017 16: 38 New
                  0
                  The initial velocity of the projectile is greater, the ammunition is greater, the rate of fire is greater, the possibility of contactless guidance of the fire system to the target from the helmet. The combination of these advantages is more than enough that in a cannon battle the victory of Miga was possible only due to the stupidity of the enemy pilot, or fatal accident.
                  1. SUPAHFLY
                    SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 18: 28 New
                    0
                    the first helmets appeared in the USSR ... the rate of fire of the MiG gun is much higher and it beats further, unless of course the guns on the F-15C and F-15I are the same.
                    1. socks
                      socks 12 May 2017 19: 30 New
                      +1
                      That you have a lot of the first appeared. For example, my grandfather received a silver medal of the VDNH of the USSR for the method of compensating reactive currents in high power networks for Soviet freslavs. So while they implemented the method. it was bought by the Japanese, introduced, modernized, released the second version of a fundamentally better solution and sold it back to Scoop. From such a story.

                      According to open data, the Miga gun’s rate of fire is lower and noticeable. The firing range is lower and noticeable, the initial speed is lower and noticeable, there is no option to use a projectile with a penetrating core of depleted uranium. Noticeably less ammunition. Do not invent combat capabilities that are not. So you will soon have pink elephants from the bombers begin to fall out, destroying the enemy with a heart attack from surprise.
                      1. SUPAHFLY
                        SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 01: 46 New
                        0
                        someone else just sent him there and fucked him
                        English open look
                      2. SUPAHFLY
                        SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 01: 59 New
                        0
                        LMAO with us - yes, more than anywhere else ... for some reason.
                        American repatriates are not, don’t you? Lol
    4. The brightest
      The brightest 11 May 2017 14: 43 New
      0
      Quote: xetai9977
      Now the adherents of "all rust" will appear and begin to write that this is a product of cutting dough and has no prospects laughing I think that the F-35 and its variations will be the most massive after the triumph at the time of the F-16

      So why do we need this, you yourself have already written everything)
    5. KaPToC
      KaPToC 11 May 2017 19: 02 New
      0
      Quote: xetai9977
      Now the adherents of "all rust" will appear and begin to write that this is a product of cutting dough

      It does not interfere.
  2. gukoyan
    gukoyan 11 May 2017 12: 49 New
    0
    Oh, they can even take off?
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 11 May 2017 12: 54 New
      +6
      Well, for a transatlantic flight, they somehow took off.
      1. novel66
        novel66 11 May 2017 13: 14 New
        +3
        thrown off the transporter
        1. socks
          socks 11 May 2017 13: 23 New
          0
          You have interesting dreams. I would like that too.
          1. novel66
            novel66 11 May 2017 13: 46 New
            +2
            but figs to you. you have to earn your dreams
            1. socks
              socks 11 May 2017 14: 27 New
              +1
              I agree. Was wrong. You deserve yours. So you need it.
  3. Rabinowicz
    Rabinowicz 11 May 2017 13: 26 New
    0
    I do not like its shape. I hope Israel didn’t get rid of these planes, otherwise I often read here that they are so-so ...
    I hope they are capable of something.
    1. novel66
      novel66 11 May 2017 13: 48 New
      +2
      the form is just disgusting, and if you recall the words of Tupolev about the connection between external beauty and LTH ..... I am more interested in its stealth, if it is real - it makes sense on the plane, even if it doesn’t fly very
      1. Krabik
        Krabik 11 May 2017 16: 13 New
        +1
        The novel is a great form, but not as fast as that of SU or MIG.

        For a subsonic plane, more than enough.

        If you look at the question why such a penguin turned out, then in general everything falls into place.
        1. SUPAHFLY
          SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 14: 02 New
          0
          you on 1C or explain why the OS is not written in C generation ++?
          1. Krabik
            Krabik 12 May 2017 14: 18 New
            +1
            You for reference, dear.

            I programmed in 1C with his language in Russian
            Example: If (1 == x) Then a = 5;

            And I write in SI now in breaks for your trolling.
            For example:
            GPIO_InitTypeDef GPIO_InitStruct;
            float temp = 0;
            uint8_t bt = 0;
            uint8_t task = 0;

            lcd8544_init (& hspi2);
            lcd8544_putstr (0, 0, (uint8_t *) "TEMPERATURE", 0);
            lcd8544_putstr (0, 32, (uint8_t *) "CAN:", 0);
            lcd8544_putstr (0, 40, (uint8_t *) "CANID:", 0);
            lcd8544_putstr (0, 8, (uint8_t *) "SEN:", 0);
            LCD_LIGHT0;

            can_filter_init ();
            clear_can_rxtx ();

            This is the code from the STM32F103C8T6 microcontroller for checking the passage of packets on the CAN bus between the device modules and for outputting debugging information to the LCD screen.

            And before that, he wrote in SI ++ and mastered so many languages ​​that you don’t even know their existence;)

            This I wrote to that, so that you could imagine how much between us a monstrous gap in intelligence;)
            1. SUPAHFLY
              SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 18: 32 New
              0
              so monstrous that you did not answer the question ...
              1. socks
                socks 12 May 2017 19: 46 New
                0
                You were banned in Google, huh? I will help you.
                1. SUPAHFLY
                  SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 01: 51 New
                  0
                  ++ there is clearly not in the first place
                  1. socks
                    socks 13 May 2017 03: 31 New
                    0
                    But it is not so small. And this is only until the 13th year
                    1. SUPAHFLY
                      SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 03: 36 New
                      0
                      but its much less
                      1. socks
                        socks 13 May 2017 03: 38 New
                        0
                        The trend however is clear RTOS on the pros will continue to grow.
                      2. SUPAHFLY
                        SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 03: 53 New
                        0
                        it seems to be not, and it was not about the trend.
                      3. SUPAHFLY
                        SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 11: 29 New
                        0
                        and the question was not for you, you can’t always fit in for yours even when they’re wrong lol
          2. Walanin
            Walanin 13 May 2017 12: 22 New
            0
            Generation C ++ is something new. Don't say that anymore.
            1. SUPAHFLY
              SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 14: 05 New
              0
              with C behind bars there’s quite a LMAO bun
              1. Walanin
                Walanin 13 May 2017 15: 58 New
                0
                Hmm. I bet you don’t know fully either C or C ++
                Quote: SUPAHFLY
                LMAO

                The level of your culture is clear.
                1. SUPAHFLY
                  SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 16: 49 New
                  0
                  LOL, instead, maybe at least you answer that question?
    2. socks
      socks 11 May 2017 14: 30 New
      +1
      Look at form B-2. When designing for specific requirements, it is often not up to aesthetics.
    3. jonhr
      jonhr 11 May 2017 15: 12 New
      +1
      in flight f-35 looks pretty elegant
      1. SUPAHFLY
        SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 13: 57 New
        0
        tastes don't argue lol
        1. jonhr
          jonhr 13 May 2017 21: 28 New
          0
          I see very badly. how are you at work looking for my comments laughing
        2. socks
          socks 13 May 2017 22: 54 New
          0
          They argue because you have no taste.
  4. sabakina
    sabakina 11 May 2017 13: 43 New
    +3
    So far, the f-35 has not shown itself in any way, so we'll see.
    (c) My post was created in order to prevent the aggressive acceptance by the Israeli members of the forum of posts of connoisseurs of Sukhara and MIGs.
    1. socks
      socks 11 May 2017 14: 31 New
      0
      I agree with you. It really is. But considering that in Israel, the first sparkle will be formed quite soon, and our planes go into battle and / or for training just every day, I think we will soon find out if it is worth the money.
      1. SUPAHFLY
        SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 18: 37 New
        +1
        not worth it, but they're lol and not yours?
        1. socks
          socks 13 May 2017 22: 56 New
          0
          You do not know this yet and the money may not be ours, but the kickbacks from them are still ours. And here you are to them what kind of macarre to this very money? In what country you live so far no one has recognized. Directly all the liquidators of the world's special services are chasing you. Well, I believed.
  5. Golibjon
    Golibjon 11 May 2017 14: 12 New
    0
    I like his shape so fat, looks full like a sheriff.
    1. SUPAHFLY
      SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 14: 00 New
      0
      look him so don't say lmao
      well-fed only looks, it still feed and feed ...
  6. socks
    socks 11 May 2017 14: 35 New
    +1
    Quote: g1washntwn
    F-35 is a business project, the T-50 is a prototype of the future fifth generation.

    But this is a common mistake in the approach of Russian projec management. Everything that is being built and goes into series should be a business project, if you looked at it like that, now an aircraft carrier of the Storm type would already be sailing in the seas.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 11 May 2017 15: 37 New
      +2
      Quote: bas
      But this is a common mistake in the approach of Russian projec management. Everything that is being built and goes into series should be a business project, if you looked at it like that, now an aircraft carrier of the Storm type would already be sailing in the seas.

      That's right, while we have managers at the helm, and not professionals who understand the needs and requirements, we will not see either the Storm or the Leader in the near future. Around managery and trepachki, but specialists and hard workers are needed.
      1. socks
        socks 11 May 2017 15: 57 New
        +1
        A specialist should do his job, but he cannot do it without a competent project management project, i.e. maybe, but not productive. You are really bad with this kind of literacy.
        1. Krabik
          Krabik 11 May 2017 16: 10 New
          +1
          In the 90s, the universities of techies were closed in our country and the economic universities were opened.

          If you estimate, now leaders from the 90s of training are coming to the posts that Gaidar and Soros taught in their manuals to sell and export everything abroad.

          So the economy and industry are skidding, and we are buying snow in Israel ...
          1. socks
            socks 11 May 2017 16: 58 New
            +1
            So it's time to bring up a new generation of professionally-oriented managers. As a useful example, you can see how we do it.
            We also had a crisis of leading professionals in the 97th. Not like yours, but still. We got out, changing priorities and approach.
        2. NEXUS
          NEXUS 11 May 2017 16: 13 New
          +2
          Quote: bas
          A specialist must do his job, but he cannot do it without a competent project management

          You apparently didn’t understand ... in managerial positions it’s not the managers who should be sitting, but professionals who know and understand their job, and not gorlopov and public relations.
          1. socks
            socks 11 May 2017 16: 56 New
            +1
            I am ready to agree to such an interpretation.
          2. Krabik
            Krabik 11 May 2017 18: 58 New
            +2
            NEXUS

            To you for self-education:
            Manager (translated from English. Manage - to manage, management - management, leadership; with it. Manager - organizer, from French. Manager - manager) - a specialist in the field of management, manager, manager, administrator, manager, chairman, director, Chief.

            Korolev was a manager or an English manager.

            And in our country they began to call cooks, a bouncer and homeless people, losing the meaning of this word.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 11 May 2017 19: 08 New
              +2
              Quote: Krabik
              To you for self-education:

              Listen, dear. You would have to do the education itself ... you look at your comments, and you understand that the exam passed. Less pathos, dear.
              1. Krabik
                Krabik 12 May 2017 13: 49 New
                0
                NEXUS

                Do not you speculate on the exam.

                To begin, figure out why they introduced a single state. exam and what a mess it was with passing exams at universities before its introduction!
                1. SUPAHFLY
                  SUPAHFLY 12 May 2017 18: 50 New
                  0
                  not why and for what, a good thing will not be called a word
    2. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 13 May 2017 13: 57 New
      0
      Quote: bas
      Everything that is being built and goes into series should be a business project,

      But what about the F-22?
      Now an aircraft carrier of the Storm type would already be sailing in the seas.

      Currently, ice-class tankers and rocket icebreakers are relevant.
      Storm will be needed. Storm.
      1. socks
        socks 13 May 2017 23: 08 New
        0
        181 pieces in the series were. Financially, the project did not justify itself at that time, but the series was. Let's see how much time Russia will take for a series of 100 combat T-50s in the troops. And the failing business project F-22 will become worse than the T-50 project. Everything is basked in comparison. There was a failure in financing with the Sivulfs, but we went to the Virginia series, the failure of funding with the Zumvolts is obvious, but Russia does not have such a series as “Bark” that it can afford any failure of this magnitude.

        The missile cruisers are still in tseystnost, but Admiral Ushakov from the 16th already went to the 20th / 21st and let Gd come in that time. And aircraft carriers do not appear at all when necessary, but only as planned. Do your frigates surrender when necessary? The cruiser Oryol underwent repairs without modernization, when the Gauges are needed, is this also necessary? Kuznetsov isn’t 65, but all 89 billion is needed, but they’ll get only 40 and they won’t do anything like it, it’s just as it should.
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 14 May 2017 22: 34 New
          0
          Quote: bas
          181 pieces in the series were. Financially, the project did not justify itself at that time, but the series was.

          Well, you’ve already decided, you are talking about business or technological achievements.
          Quote: bas
          There was a funding failure with the Sivulfs

          Yes, there was no failure in the Sivulfs, why spend money when a potential adversary opened the gates wide for you and the “Wellcome”, who could have suggested that in 15 years these Russians would again express themselves?
          Quote: bas
          And aircraft carriers do not appear at all when necessary, but only as planned.

          Yes, no one is planning them yet, there is no need for them yet, how will the Russians make them, Once again, ice class tankers and missile icebreakers are relevant, do you assume that these are primitive ships?
          Quote: bas
          Do your frigates surrender when necessary?

          What kind of frigates are you talking about?
          Quote: bas
          Kuznetsov isn’t 65, but all 89 billion is needed, but they’ll get only 40 and they won’t do anything like it, it’s just as it should.

          This conversation went to 40 and they will spend all 189, you don’t understand the Russians at all, and what kind of missiles at the end there will be known only to God and whether there will be at all.
  7. KaPToC
    KaPToC 12 May 2017 00: 51 New
    0
    Quote: bas
    But you can launch a rocket along the beam of the enemy’s locator. But you can quietly go to a certain area and there already lose stealth. But it is possible to launch a missile in stealth mode from a third-party guidance.

    So I am talking about the same thing, raptors and lightings are highly specialized machines for specific tasks, and not a mass combat machine at all, they will not replace the fourth-generation American aircraft because they do not fulfill the main task of dumping as much ammunition as possible on the enemy.
    1. socks
      socks 12 May 2017 16: 45 New
      0
      Well, as if the F-22 copes with all the basic functions of the F-15C. The F-35A may well replace the F-16C, the F-16I isn’t quite, but it’s already a kind of remade and re-installed machine for Israel.
  8. socks
    socks 13 May 2017 03: 30 New
    0
    Quote: SUPAHFLY
    someone else just sent him there and fucked him
    English open look


    Yes, everything is already looked. Do not want do not believe.
    1. SUPAHFLY
      SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 09: 26 New
      0
      so it’s understood not so
      1. socks
        socks 13 May 2017 12: 11 New
        0
        Well, yes, and my grandfather read English back to front, but a Jew.
        1. SUPAHFLY
          SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 12: 14 New
          0
          probably that's why you went there and left
          1. socks
            socks 13 May 2017 16: 23 New
            0
            Are you there? So where are you then, answer tip will be?
            1. SUPAHFLY
              SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 16: 50 New
              0
              what for do you need it?
              1. socks
                socks 13 May 2017 23: 12 New
                0
                I want to know in which country you are. And what answer is impossible to get. Only I can ask personal questions and get answers? Come on, don’t have anything to be encrypted, you’re definitely not a dissident of something there.
  9. socks
    socks 13 May 2017 03: 35 New
    0
    SUPAHFLY,
    Quote: SUPAHFLY
    LMAO with us - yes, more than anywhere else ... for some reason.
    American repatriates are not, don’t you? Lol


    Are you talking about pink elephants? Well, I kinda ask in order to be sure that I have not misread.

    Yes, I find that even those who have left here for you and Canada are already somewhat different, but what?
    1. SUPAHFLY
      SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 09: 24 New
      0
      those who came from Russia and from the USA to Israel are many others
      1. socks
        socks 13 May 2017 12: 17 New
        0
        Fear has big eyes, or maybe not fear?
        1. SUPAHFLY
          SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 13: 20 New
          0
          are American repatriates better than you?
          1. socks
            socks 13 May 2017 15: 12 New
            0
            This is a question in the style of someone there is better than Tatar or worse than Tatar?
            1. SUPAHFLY
              SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 15: 29 New
              0
              this is a question to which you did not answer even a question to a question.
              1. socks
                socks 13 May 2017 16: 24 New
                0
                You also did not answer my question, so what flag do you live under?
                1. SUPAHFLY
                  SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 16: 52 New
                  0
                  it somehow relates to the topic which repatriates are better than others on average and why is this? Lol
                  1. socks
                    socks 13 May 2017 23: 15 New
                    0
                    And here it is, remember the popular parable: "- Though I am Silantius, and you are from a cart of tears!” “So there’s no such word?” “I don’t give a damn, get off anyway!"

                    So what flag do you live under?
  10. socks
    socks 13 May 2017 12: 08 New
    0
    Quote: SUPAHFLY
    it seems to be not, and it was not about the trend.

    It was about C1, but switched to this.
    1. SUPAHFLY
      SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 12: 15 New
      0
      was about C generation ++
      1. socks
        socks 13 May 2017 15: 12 New
        0
        But is this not the same thing as C ++?
        1. SUPAHFLY
          SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 15: 30 New
          0
          and what do you think? Lol
          1. socks
            socks 13 May 2017 16: 24 New
            0
            I don’t think I know, and you?
            1. SUPAHFLY
              SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 16: 54 New
              0
              Well, why didn’t they answer the question correctly, but climbed somewhere behind the diagram?
              1. socks
                socks 13 May 2017 23: 17 New
                0
                You also haven’t answered my question right now, so you know the sequence of development of the C and C ++ languages?

                So what country do you live in now?
  11. socks
    socks 13 May 2017 12: 19 New
    0
    Quote: SUPAHFLY
    and the question was not for you, you can’t always fit in for yours even when they’re wrong lol

    Well, about C ++ you are wrong. So why not show me where you are wrong?
    1. SUPAHFLY
      SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 13: 22 New
      0
      why did you decide what is wrong? because they began to forget Russian?
      1. socks
        socks 13 May 2017 15: 14 New
        0
        Spelling is possible, but no more, and you are programming languages ​​or you never knew them?
        1. SUPAHFLY
          SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 15: 32 New
          0
          no, alas, you and him feel bad ... it’s immediately obvious that in Russia they did not live long
          1. socks
            socks 13 May 2017 16: 25 New
            0
            Yes, it’s bad, he lived 24 years, but the five in spelling really never happened.
            1. SUPAHFLY
              SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 16: 55 New
              0
              at least earned a big pension during this time?
              1. socks
                socks 13 May 2017 23: 19 New
                0
                I didn’t work at all, I just graduated, and now where do you live? Have you managed to earn a pension?

                PS Do you have leading questions to help me create a CV? Think I don’t notice it?
  12. Walanin
    Walanin 13 May 2017 13: 27 New
    0
    SUPAHFLY,
    Quote: SUPAHFLY
    Do you think there were no violators?

    I look you are a fan of demagoguery.
    I do not think anything and believe only the facts. You have recently claimed that this missile shot down Mirages. Which violators and violators of which were shot down?
    1. SUPAHFLY
      SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 14: 14 New
      0
      LOL m. don't you understand what? facts such that even her predecessors shot them down, do you know only about one Korean Boeing? not even about two?
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Walanin
        Walanin 13 May 2017 15: 59 New
        0
        Like a demagogue. Instead of answering a direct question, you again mutter something incoherent.
        So you have real facts, or did you take your words from the same place, where do you laugh with your ass?
        1. SUPAHFLY
          SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 17: 02 New
          0
          exactly the demagogue you were here

          SUPAHFLY Yesterday, 07:23 ↑
          For example, I brought down mirages

          Walanin Today, 12:19 ↑
          When did you manage? MiG-31 fought anywhere?

          SUPAHFLY Today, 13:03 ↑
          stereg border, it was mirages that were knocked down by her predecessor
          SUPAHFLY

          Walanin Today, 13:20 ↑
          That is, all the same, it did not bring down anything. Clearly understood.
          Walanin
          0
          SUPAHFLY Today, 13:24 ↑
          Do you think there were no violators?

          with border violators what do they usually do? mutter to yourself further ...
          1. Walanin
            Walanin 14 May 2017 00: 03 New
            0
            Shaw, again? Not tired yet?
  13. socks
    socks 13 May 2017 17: 16 New
    0
    SUPAHFLY,
    Quote: SUPAHFLY
    do not laugh but laugh, interestingly - count, but it will not be accurate ...

    That neigh, neigh. You don’t translate arrows on me. What a switchman!

    So under what falgue do you live and write in real life?
    1. SUPAHFLY
      SUPAHFLY 13 May 2017 18: 30 New
      0
      from this I hear lol
      take it easy not your ... lmao
      1. socks
        socks 13 May 2017 23: 23 New
        0
        Have you already started talking in the style of "fools themselves ..."? Intellectually so ....

        I know that it’s not ours, but which one? Why should I calm down? Does it bother you? Want to talk about it?

        However, they didn’t stop laughing, and in what sequence do you laugh? First LOL then LMAO or vice versa?
  14. socks
    socks 14 May 2017 23: 42 New
    0
    Quote: saturn.mmm
    Quote: bas
    181 pieces in the series were. Financially, the project did not justify itself at that time, but the series was.

    Well, you’ve already decided, you are talking about business or technological achievements.
    Quote: bas
    There was a funding failure with the Sivulfs

    Yes, there was no failure in the Sivulfs, why spend money when a potential adversary opened the gates wide for you and the “Wellcome”, who could have suggested that in 15 years these Russians would again express themselves?
    Quote: bas
    And aircraft carriers do not appear at all when necessary, but only as planned.

    Yes, no one is planning them yet, there is no need for them yet, how will the Russians make them, Once again, ice class tankers and missile icebreakers are relevant, do you assume that these are primitive ships?
    Quote: bas
    Do your frigates surrender when necessary?

    What kind of frigates are you talking about?
    Quote: bas
    Kuznetsov isn’t 65, but all 89 billion is needed, but they’ll get only 40 and they won’t do anything like it, it’s just as it should.

    This conversation went to 40 and they will spend all 189, you don’t understand the Russians at all, and what kind of missiles at the end there will be known only to God and whether there will be at all.


    So the situation with the Sifulfs and 22 is almost the same. If it were not for the period of devastation in Russia, they would have gone further despite the money, maybe not in the quantity in which they would have liked, but Sivulfov would have built eight pieces and 22 would have been smart; a shipped order of 350 pieces had been completed and could commercially no one would give them in the same form, but the British would definitely get the elements, how they got the Virginia elements and receive the elements of boats of the 5th generation of missile carriers. Bines would have taken place, but then bad luck came out. However, the principle is preserved, everything is put on an industrial stream, and this is a business. Here in Russia they also want to organize this, but it turns out with flaws for more and thicker. The technical process is perfect, again the project management is weak. Vaughn and Bulova almost reached the state when there are missile carriers, but missiles may not become.
    Yes, I understand that the Arctic forces are priority for Russia, but I do not agree with you about the aircraft carrier. Won for India how much did? And why? But it is not adjusted for you. And then by selling the aircraft carrier they lost to the Israel its air defense system equipment. 2bn the contract, by the way, as a result of its successful equipment with Barak-8. What do you say, not money?
    Frigates? That same 22350. The ship in the end will be good, but damn it from 2006 and the first to be tested? Can this be called a production cycle? And the new paratroopers? Gren’s corps on magnetic indicators in general, haphazardly finished. Now they can launch another project in a series, and two copies will remain a breakdown of the pen. Well this is a waste of money.
    And on Kuzi's modernization, say 189 bang? Well, it’s so bad that the decisions are momentary. Where are they from if the budget is reduced?