Military Review

The expert explained how the F-15 and F-22 are inferior to the Russian Su-30CM

162
The American F-15 Eagle and F-22 Raptor fighters in an air battle will lose to the fourth-generation Su-30SM Russian aircraft. This conclusion was made by the deputy commander. aviation aerobatic teams "Swifts" in 2004-2006, a military pilot of the 1st class Vladlen Rusanov. He shared his thoughts with Channel Five.


First of all, an experienced pilot practitioner noted that he does not understand why the F-15 Eagle, which has been used in the United States since 1976, is considered a fourth-generation fighter. Even its modern modification Strike Eagle ("shock eagle"), adopted by the US Army in 1988, is significantly inferior to Su-30CM.

The expert explained how the F-15 and F-22 are inferior to the Russian Su-30CM


The Russian aircraft of the 4 ++ generation was created in the 2012 year to gain air supremacy day and night, even in the most difficult weather conditions. He is able to perform combat missions at a low altitude, regardless of any electronic interference.

Su-30M is capable of blocking enemy airfields far beyond the front line, destroying naval and land targets, controlling group hostilities and destroying enemy troops right in the air. This is a multi-purpose aircraft that can be used in any air operations. Other countries simply do not have aircraft with such characteristics.
- considers Vladlen Rusanov.

The Russian expert notes that the only F-30 American stealth rival Su-22M is an invisible aircraft with good weapons and equipment. However, it is much inferior to the Russian fighter in maneuverability. After all, Su-30SM installed engines with variable thrust vectoring. Thanks to this, the Russian fighter can instantly turn in any direction, and even turn around almost on the spot and change the flight path.

Due to this, the Su-30CM has no analogues and equal in the world.
- considers Rusanov.
Photos used:
TASS
162 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sergei75
    Sergei75 1 November 2017 15: 20 New
    +9
    Well, due to what, what indicators are superior - speed, maneuverability, payload, weapons on board, electronics, radar, what exactly?
    1. Vladimir16
      Vladimir16 1 November 2017 15: 23 New
      17
      There is Internet, since you are on the site. Read it.
      Who should answer your questions? Who cares?
      1. Sergei75
        Sergei75 1 November 2017 17: 21 New
        12
        So there is no need to mislead people.
        In general, by this logic, you can talk about all questions and all statements - Read on the Internet!
    2. True
      True 1 November 2017 16: 35 New
      10
      [quote = Sergei75] Well, due to what, what indicators are superior - speed, maneuverability, payload, weapons on board, electronics, radar, what exactly?
      [/ Quote]
      How, aren't you enough ?! [quote] Su-30SM has no analogues and equal in the world [quote] Or maybe you are a traitor?
      1. Sergei75
        Sergei75 1 November 2017 17: 21 New
        +1
        Interested in ...
    3. Bare
      Bare 1 November 2017 19: 57 New
      +5
      Variable thrust vector engines are a major advantage.
    4. Nemesis
      Nemesis 1 November 2017 20: 03 New
      13
      The American F-15s and F-16s are inferior in strength to the design itself and cannot withstand the overloads designed for the French Mirages and Russian Dryers, which affects not only the ability to conduct close combat, but also the possibility of high-speed flights in the mode of enveloping the terrain. The Americans are inferior to Rusks at maximum speed, if we compare their F-22 and F-35 with the Su-30,35, or 57. It is difficult to say electronically, but the Americans could not win a single Indians on the Su-15 on the Su-30 training battle.
      1. mvg
        mvg 1 November 2017 20: 30 New
        +1
        "Baire Today, 19:57 ↑ New
        Variable thrust engines are a major advantage. "
        And, you, by chance, are not brothers-in-mind? )))
      2. Sergei75
        Sergei75 1 November 2017 21: 04 New
        +1
        the stump is clear, it's time to send the F-15 to the museum.
  2. Rushnairfors
    Rushnairfors 1 November 2017 15: 22 New
    15
    Well, f15, our drying will dry without a problem, but f22 .... Here, perhaps, only in BVB is an advantage. Comrade Rusanov said everything correctly.
    1. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 1 November 2017 15: 26 New
      19
      F15- in terms of maneuverability, capabilities of the RLPK- will definitely hit, by the composition of armaments- they are approximately equal, but in the sum of su30 it wins. F22 has the best invisibility characteristics and a powerful RLPK, therefore, in the DVB the Su30 will lose, at medium distances the capabilities will be approximately equal, well, in close combat there is no fighter that would compare with the su30cm (except for su35)
      1. Same lech
        Same lech 1 November 2017 15: 32 New
        28
        F22 has the best invisibility characteristics


        Only in front view ...
        as soon as he changes the viewing angle for the radar ... he will be visible like all ordinary aircraft ...
        the invisibility of the F-22 is spread by the Americans, but in reality everything is somewhat different.
        1. Rushnairfors
          Rushnairfors 1 November 2017 16: 13 New
          +5
          Lyokha, people with this beast "butted", they are responsible for the bazaar
          1. Zhelezyakin
            Zhelezyakin 1 November 2017 18: 24 New
            +3
            Excuse me, with the F-22? Where does the information come from? I cannot draw such conclusions from the text of the article.
            1. Same lech
              Same lech 1 November 2017 18: 31 New
              +1
              There was an article on VO on this subject in 2015 ... and things are still there.

              https://topwar.ru/70173-o-nepobedimyh-stelsah.htm
              l
              1. Zhelezyakin
                Zhelezyakin 1 November 2017 20: 11 New
                +4
                I got acquainted. Quite believable reading. However, my question was a little about something else. My interest lies in the fact that the author of the comment points out (as I understand it) precisely the contacts between the aircraft
        2. floyder
          floyder 2 November 2017 08: 14 New
          +2
          For some reason, no one says that it is possible to aim long-range Su-30 missiles using external target designation. For example with radar A-70. Well, he surely will see the Raptor from a distance. The fact is that fighters now use ultra-low altitude for stealth. Therefore, the same Triumph, despite the indicated high detection range of the ALTITUDE target, can actually detect the Raptor at relatively short ranges. A -70 will detect much further. Therefore, now technologies are being created to integrate into a single air defense and air defense system. The question is that Russia has few such aircraft, unlike the United States. The effectiveness of such interaction between AWACS and US fighters has repeatedly shown. Fighters do not include radar, but are aimed at targets from the AWACS. Why not give target designation to ROCKET? After the launch, a long-range missile goes to the target according to the instructions from the A-70, at a distance of about 30 km, its own missile guidance system is turned on and ... I think that such an option has already been created.
      2. ydjin
        ydjin 1 November 2017 15: 58 New
        12
        Quote: Rushnairfors
        F15- in terms of maneuverability, capabilities of the RLPK- will definitely hit, by the composition of armaments- they are approximately equal, but in the sum of su30 it wins. F22 has the best invisibility characteristics and a powerful RLPK, therefore, in the DVB the Su30 will lose, at medium distances the capabilities will be approximately equal, well, in close combat there is no fighter that would compare with the su30cm (except for su35)

        I think that the one who will have a better system of combat use will possess superiority. In this regard, I recall ASUV (Automated Troop Control Systems). He served on the “Maneuver”, in the internet called “Glade” in Eberswald-Finov, the idea was different! The combination of all heterogeneous funds in a single management with the possibility of flexible redistribution of goals and objectives! In the early 90s, this was an advanced military thought. Summed up the elemental base and the weakness of our electronics. All ideas of the so-called called network-centric wars have a birth from the ideas of SA.
        1. Rushnairfors
          Rushnairfors 1 November 2017 16: 17 New
          +3
          Eugene is what you wrote, the detail is substantial and important, but I compared the “clean” characteristics, the machah where the thread over the sea or desert of the two Papuans, without clues from the earth or sky, electronic warfare and other supporting actions, the ring so to speak
          1. Sergei75
            Sergei75 1 November 2017 17: 34 New
            +3
            "Go out into the field to fight one on one!" After a global nuclear strike - perhaps, but not before.
        2. Sanichsan
          Sanichsan 1 November 2017 17: 32 New
          +2
          Quote: ydjin
          In this regard, I recall ASUV (Automated Troop Control Systems).

          Have you heard about the American Millennium Challenge exercises? their elemental base did not disappoint, but it was a complete failure anyway. there are a lot of pitfalls.
      3. The comment was deleted.
    2. NIKNN
      NIKNN 1 November 2017 15: 31 New
      13
      Quote: Rushnairfors
      Well, f15, our drying will dry without a problem, but f22 .... Here, perhaps, only in BVB is an advantage. Comrade Rusanov said everything correctly.

      Yes, the advantage in the BVB is very great, but maneuverability of such quality as that of drying can also contribute to avoiding DVB missiles, as a rule they are not very maneuverable, modern ones are certainly better, but you can count on the breakdown of an escort with timely maneuver ...
      1. Rushnairfors
        Rushnairfors 1 November 2017 16: 18 New
        +2
        Tka for sure, good evening
        1. NIKNN
          NIKNN 1 November 2017 16: 20 New
          +1
          Quote: Rushnairfors
          Tka for sure, good evening

          smile Good evening hi
      2. Sanichsan
        Sanichsan 1 November 2017 17: 27 New
        +7
        Quote: NIKNN
        Yes, the advantage in BVB is very large, but maneuverability of such quality as that of drying can also contribute to avoiding DVB missiles

        I want to clarify one detail, but how will the F-22 use rockets in DVB? if I’m not mistaken with the radar. right? do you think, and in this situation he will not look like a “heroic American marine” with a flashlight on his forehead crawling into a dark basement? In the sense of what will its invisibility be equal after turning on the radar? I suspect nothing ...
        what is the outcome?
        or the F-22 flies with the radar turned off and is hardly noticeable in the frontal projection, or with it turned on, completely losing its “invisibility”. in the first case, we have BVB or liquidation at an average distance (the invisibility is not complete, the drying radar will find it before visual contact), in the second it is equal to the DVB (well, relatively equal. here anyone has better rockets).
        1. NIKNN
          NIKNN 1 November 2017 17: 32 New
          +2
          Quote: SanichSan
          I want to clarify one detail, but how will the F-22 use rockets in DVB?

          Unfortunately, modern DVB missiles can receive target designation all the way from AWACS ... and, on the final site, using active GPS. Progress does not stand still. One hope is that ours go along the same path, so that the DVB will essentially be on an equal footing ... smile
          1. Mih1974
            Mih1974 2 November 2017 06: 25 New
            +3
            tongue "according to the conditions of the task" is a one-on-one battle without any (in general) external support!
            So either we measure ourselves with "combat systems" including electronic warfare, AWACS, air defense, satellites or - what you can do. good
            1. NIKNN
              NIKNN 2 November 2017 11: 27 New
              +1
              Quote: Mih1974
              "according to the conditions of the task" is a one-on-one battle without any (in general) external support!

              Under these conditions, they simply will never meet ... tongue Fuel is not enough to find each other ... laughing
          2. Sanichsan
            Sanichsan 2 November 2017 14: 26 New
            +2
            Quote: NIKNN
            Unfortunately, modern DVB missiles can receive target designation from AWACS aircraft ..

            fine! that is, in our battle it’s not the F-22 and Su-30 but the armed forces of both countries.
            but then besides AWACS aircraft on both sides (by the way, are they chtol like the red cross machines we have listed? Can't you shoot at them? wink ) there are also EW funds by which Russia is definitely a leader.
            so, what is next?
            and then the F-22 has no chance at all. the radar even when turned on shows crap. moreover, the F-22 and the Su-30 have all the rules. that is, in principle, really DVB. Rather, DVI (Beating).
            By the way, what about the F-22 with electronic warfare? except paint? and what about the SU-30? I don’t know .. but those who know will not say wink
            PS
            as far as I know, many long-range missiles have problems with course correction at the final flight site. and then good maneuverability will be very helpful.
            1. NIKNN
              NIKNN 2 November 2017 14: 35 New
              +2
              Quote: SanichSan
              By the way, what about the F-22 with electronic warfare? except paint? and what about the SU-30? I don’t know .. but those who know will not say

              It is assumed that in the future the Khibiny electronic warfare complex will be mounted on Su-30M fighters and similar vehicles. http://fb.ru/article/218498/kompleks-reb-hibinyi-
              sredstva-apparatura-reb-hibinyi --- chto-eto-takoe
              In addition, the new electronic warfare systems under development provide for their container versions for use on early aircraft ... hi
              1. Sanichsan
                Sanichsan 2 November 2017 15: 41 New
                +1
                Well, here it is.
                no, of course the “monkey with a grenade” is in any case a danger. even if you can neutralize it from a long distance, but .. in fact, things are not so bad at all with us as it seems to some "experts" wink
                It’s important not to stop and continue development!
                here recently I saw an article about the crying of NATO generals about some new Russian radar, not AFAR but something else. they suffered very much that they say that they have a significantly larger range than theirs with AFAR and that they see their stealth almost in photographic quality.
                but these are NATO generals and the dog knows what they had in mind bully
                1. NIKNN
                  NIKNN 2 November 2017 15: 51 New
                  +2
                  Quote: SanichSan
                  but these are NATO generals and the dog knows what they had in mind

                  Do not read the statements of NATO strategists before lunch. wink
                  It is natural that for every tricky nut there is a bolt with a left-hand thread. Ours, knowing that all the same, Stealth is a temporary measure (before the advent of new radars) and did not bother with invisibility, which is comparable in cost to a squadron of aircraft with limited visibility. It’s just that these grandmas were sent to the development of electronic warfare, so now it’s difficult to see the Tu-160 ... smile hi
    3. Shura Sailors
      Shura Sailors 1 November 2017 15: 58 New
      +2
      Tell me, on which Russian aircraft is the AFAR used (not the PAR, but the AFAR)? And on the F-15, a similar one was tested back in 2011. Since 2017, they are installing in the process of modernizing the fleet.
      PS I think it makes no sense to argue about the advantages of AFAR over PAR
      1. Bersaglieri
        Bersaglieri 1 November 2017 16: 13 New
        0
        On the Su-57. On the Su-35 is planned. While PFARstoit (Irbis which)
      2. Pogrom
        Pogrom 1 November 2017 16: 24 New
        +7
        More passionate, but proven technology, better newer and more raw. Like the last locomotives, they were more cheerful than the first locomotives. And this means that our PFARs are in many ways no worse than Western AFARs. That is to say in simplified terms. So, you can argue here. We also saw AFARs. H036 Squirrel for Su-57. I think there will be a good radar.
        1. Shura Sailors
          Shura Sailors 1 November 2017 17: 26 New
          +3
          Otozh and it is that so far only sawing
          1. Pogrom
            Pogrom 1 November 2017 17: 30 New
            10
            Are you sawing in your nenko except Russophobia? We are not going to enter the arms race and we are not printing money. Let everything in this sphere take its course. So do not be clever fan afar. These AFARs will not protect you if tomorrow, the bucket will tell your rabble to attack on Donetsk. Where do you get the cabbage soup, and then roll back to Lviv. Shura is free.
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
                      2. True
                        True 1 November 2017 20: 09 New
                        +4
                        This backward hamlo suffocates with bile from his own impotence. Knows that you are right.
    4. weksha50
      weksha50 1 November 2017 19: 53 New
      +1
      Quote: Rushnairfors
      Comrade Rusanov said everything correctly.


      Just keep in mind that Rusanov is an ace, a pilot of the highest qualification with a huge touch and experience ...
      When it comes to performance characteristics of aircraft, for some reason they lose sight of the fact that not all aces will be sitting in their cabins ...
      A pilot who knows his car as himself will surely be able to squeeze all the possibilities out of it and win the battle even with a more powerful and advanced machine ... This is an axiom ...
      And we won’t know which car is stronger and more powerful, yet ... In general, it’s better not to know, but simply to predict ...
      And no one will agree to arrange experimental battles between our and Amer’s planes ... Ours may have agreed ... Maybe ...
  3. NEXUS
    NEXUS 1 November 2017 15: 24 New
    +8
    Su-30M is capable of blocking enemy airfields far beyond the front line, destroying naval and land targets, controlling group hostilities and destroying enemy troops right in the air. This is a multi-purpose aircraft that can be used in any air operations. Other countries simply do not have aircraft with such characteristics.

    The correctness or fallacy of this thesis can be revealed only by real air combat. In this case, pilot training and the arsenal must also be taken into account.
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 1 November 2017 15: 26 New
      +2
      The correctness or fallacy of this thesis can be revealed only by real air combat. In this case, pilot training and the arsenal must also be taken into account.


      Right ... what otherwise you understand the enemy with only one Aryan authority of exclusivity, you can crush the invincibility of the American super-duper weapon.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 1 November 2017 15: 34 New
        11
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        otherwise you understand the enemy with only one Aryan authority of exclusivity, you can crush the invincibility of the American super-duper weapon.

        Judgments, albeit a battle ace, are subjective, since he did not fly a pangolin, although he probably knows the level of training of mattress pilots. The 30th car is notable and has not yet exhausted its modernization resource, but the SU-35 is already replacing it.
        Quote: Partyzan
        but it would be better if it happened between third countries

        Perhaps it will be so. But you understand that the United States will not fight with a strong enemy, but with a weak ... well, like Yugoslavia ... 7 MIG-29 of the first series, the entire coalition tried two weeks (if sclerosis does not change) knock down, despite the fact that radar stations, air defense systems were suppressed in the early days of the war.
        1. LSA57
          LSA57 1 November 2017 16: 00 New
          +7
          Quote: NEXUS
          despite the fact that radar stations and air defense systems were suppressed in the early days of the war.

          but at the same time one complex managed to ground one unit of "invisibility" with the help of a microwave
        2. Mih1974
          Mih1974 2 November 2017 06: 33 New
          +2
          You know, I will more believe the "subjective judgments" of the one who "ate the dog" on flights, aerobatics and, in general, than you do. Moreover, there was a video of an American test pilot about our Su-27 of the furry 90s. And there, this 100% American (then there was "detente") said - "..for you all these aerobatics, only beautiful pirouettes, but for me these are opportunities in a real battle. Do you admire the beauty or think that this is just" dancing " , and I see - how, with this bend, the Russian will leave my capture of the target, will go into my back and knock me down ... "(c)
          Well, there he said a lot of things, mostly admiring the opportunities that our Su-27 gives to the Pilot. It could be seen from his eyes and face that this was not a “Kremlin spy,” but a professional who recognized the threat from the enemy and did not hide the size of this threat. bully
          There were very strange words ".. you see, on the F-15 we constantly need to keep in mind the restrictions imposed by the capabilities of the aircraft, while the Russian does not need it. Their aircraft have amazing wide piloting capabilities, which gives the pilot the freedom to analyze the situation and make decisions, while I’m constantly thinking that it wouldn’t go beyond the limits. It's hard for you to understand, but this is a big problem in a real battle. " (with)
      2. Shura Sailors
        Shura Sailors 1 November 2017 16: 02 New
        +1
        Ponte is a great power laughing
    2. Partyzan
      Partyzan 1 November 2017 15: 27 New
      +6
      Quote: NEXUS
      The correctness or fallacy of this thesis can be revealed only by real air combat.

      but it would be better if it happened between third countries
    3. LSA57
      LSA57 1 November 2017 15: 54 New
      +8
      Quote: NEXUS
      At the same time, pilot training should also be considered.

      In his book "You Take Off" describes such a case. I bring from memory. The author has heard the debate of several teenagers which pilot is better. Fighter, transporter, or polar explorer. Of course, they could not find out, each defended his candidacy. To stop the argument, the author asked which musician is better: a pianist, violinist or guitarist. (Maybe other musicians, it doesn’t matter). One called the one he liked, the second said, "moore is your music." The third one answered, better one that plays better
  4. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 1 November 2017 15: 28 New
    +5
    "This conclusion was made by the deputy commander of an aerobatic aerobatic team
    "Swifts" in 2004-2006, the military pilot of the 1st class Vladlen Rusanov "////

    Swifts, with all due respect to their skills, can hardly be called combat pilots. It’s more like acrobats.
    For some reason, they think that real air battles consist of spectacular ones for the audience.
    somersaults in the air.
    In fact, aerial combat, starting in the 80s, came down mainly to shelling
    enemy aircraft with medium-range explosive missiles. Previously noticed, earlier shot.
    In addition to the sequence of conventional bends at transonic speed, no aerobatics was required.
    Even tailings were almost never used.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 1 November 2017 15: 39 New
      15
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Swifts, with all due respect to their skills, can hardly be called combat pilots. It’s more like acrobats.

      With what fright? The pilots of both the "Swifts" and the "Knights" are BUILDING COMBAT pilots.
      Quote: voyaka uh
      For some reason, they think that real air battles consist of spectacular ones for the audience.
      somersaults in the air.

      But do you think otherwise? Have you sat in the cockpit of a combat aircraft at least?
      Quote: voyaka uh
      In fact, aerial combat, starting in the 80s, came down mainly to shelling
      enemy aircraft with medium-range explosive missiles. Previously noticed, earlier shot.

      This is in air battles with a obviously weaker enemy. And with an equal opponent, excuse me where were the air battles? M
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 1 November 2017 15: 48 New
        +9
        "This is in air battles with a obviously weaker enemy" ////

        What does it have to do with it? No one does somersaults, not yet seeing the enemy.
        And when the enemy noticed you, but you are not there, he shoots, and do somersaults
        too late.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 1 November 2017 16: 05 New
          10
          Quote: voyaka uh
          No one does somersaults, not yet seeing the enemy.

          So what? At this point, the question is, who is the first to notice whom ...
          Quote: voyaka uh
          And when the enemy noticed you, but you are not there

          And I wildly apologize, but with what kind of vegetable, do you think that the opponent of the 30th will notice earlier?
          Quote: voyaka uh
          then he shoots and do somersaults
          too late.

          Seriously? wassat That is, we do not consider avoiding the rocket at all? Stupidly let go of the helm and pray?
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 1 November 2017 16: 32 New
            +8
            "and from what vegetable, do you think that the opponent of the 30th will notice earlier?" ///

            With a very simple vegetable called EPR. In the Su-30 (Su-27 glider) it is very large,
            in modern 4th generation aircraft, it is smaller, in the 5th generation - by orders of magnitude less.
            And the second is radar. This is not the most powerful feature of the Su-30.
            In general, the Su-30 must strive for daytime close combat with visual contact with the enemy. And then the Swifts aces will win. At long-medium distances and at night, Su- shines nothing good.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 1 November 2017 16: 46 New
              +9
              Quote: voyaka uh
              With a very simple vegetable called EPR. In the Su-30 (Su-27 glider) it is very large,
              in modern 4th generation aircraft, it is smaller, in the 5th generation - by orders of magnitude less.
              And the second is radar. This is not the most powerful feature of the Su-30.

              You are on the radar account, how do you know, you can find out? And then I'm sitting, not in the know at all.
              And so, look what we have ...
              The series began with the teachings "CopeIndia 2004". On the part of the USAF, six F-15C fighters from the Elmendorf air base (Alaska) took part in them. India was represented by Su-30K, which in terms of combat capabilities did not exceed any significant Su-27.

              The exercises “CopeIndia 2004” were not complex, but represented separate offensive and defensive air battles, both individual and group.

              The results were unexpected for both sides: Indian pilots, to their surprise, not to mention the Americans, simply defeated the enemy.
              In distant battles outside visual visibility, the F-15C and Su-30K (with the H001 radar!) Detected each other using radar at approximately the same distances, but Indian pilots were more often the first to perform conditional launches of the P-27 missiles and, accordingly, more often won.

              In a maneuverable battle, the Su-30K (with engines without a controlled thrust vector!) Totally surpassed the F-15C. One of the factors of victory was a large supply of fuel, which allowed more often to use the forced mode of engines.

              The conditional loss ratio was 9: 1 in favor of the Indian Air Force. True, some of the victories came in the Mirage 2000 and the upgraded MiG-21-93. Note, "CopeIndia 2004" were the only exercises, when the defeat was not denied by representatives of the US Air Force.

              In 2008, the "drying" and "needles" met again, this time in the USA. The situation in the Air Force of both countries has changed by this point. And it's not just that the F-22A have become operational. In 2006, the new radar with an active phased antenna array AN / APG-63 (V) 3 was completed. This created the basis for a massive modernization of the 200 F-15C / D of the Air Force and the US National Guard. In 2004, the United States Air Force already had F-15C / D, the locator of which - AN / APG-63 (V) 2 - also had AFAR. However, they did not take part in the “CopeIndia 2004” exercises.
              According to the Indian version, Su-30MKI did not lose a single battle to the “aggressors” of the 18-th squadron during the training in Mountain Home. Moreover, in the melee, the “drying” never even turned out to be close to the F-16 damage zone. Several fights ended to no avail: the fighters could not occupy the position necessary to ensure the destruction of the target.

              When coordinating the RedFlag 2008 scenario, the modes of operation of the Bars radar were the subject of heated debate. The American side, in the hope of getting as much information as possible about the most modern sights of the Russian design, insisted on using combat modes. However, the Indians categorically refused to disclose all the parameters of the radar Su-30MKI.

              Also, the Indian Air Force Command banned the use of active and passive jamming in the US, although this prohibition seriously complicated the lives of pilots. In addition to jamming, the Su-30KI airborne defense complex can “open” the air defense system, which is of great importance for the victory in the RedFlag exercise. Another Indian limitation was the refusal to imitate combat using the P-77 missiles, an analogue of the American AIM-120 AMRAAM.

              "Drying" took part in several group air battles. In one of these battles, “blue”, which included Su-30MKI, conditionally shot down a red aircraft 21. In other episodes, the Americans managed to shoot down several Su-30MKIs, but mainly when performing the task of destroying ground targets.

              Another feature of "RedFlag 2008", which can not be ignored. At CopeIndia 2004, F-15C / D operations were not supported by AWACS aircraft, which equalized the chances of American and Indian fighters. In Nevada, the situation has changed: F-15 and F-16 received target designations from E-3 aircraft in an automated mode, while the Su-30MKI could, at best, count on voice commands via radio. Nevertheless, American fighters could not achieve superiority.

              Following the results of the participation of the Indian Su-30MKI fighters in international exercises, a number of important conclusions can be made.

              In battles outside the visual visibility of the Su-30MKI, at least, it is not inferior to any Western fighter of the 4 and 4 + generation, even under conditions when the enemy uses AWACS aircraft.

              In fights within visual visibility, the Su-30MKI wins due to super-maneuverability, which is provided by engines with controlled thrust vectoring and a more sophisticated aircraft control system. The only serial fighter capable of withstanding the Su-30MKI in close combat is potentially the F-22A Raptor.

              At the same time, the probability of engaging in “dog fights” remains high even with long-range missiles. At CopeIndia 2004, there were cases when jamming stations of old Indian MiG-21-93 fighters blinded the radar of American F-15 fighters, after which there was simply no alternative to close combat.

              And these are not even Russian pilots and not on the Russian version of the SU-30.
              Quote: voyaka uh
              At long-medium distances and at night, Su- shines nothing good.

              Yeah ... nothing at all. laughing
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 1 November 2017 17: 07 New
                0
                I did not read about the early Red Flag. In the last Americans,
                as they wrote, they figured out how to outplay the Indians.
                F-15 radars were replaced during 2007-2010 with a new generation ..
                1. NEXUS
                  NEXUS 1 November 2017 17: 11 New
                  +5
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  In the last Americans,
                  as they wrote, they figured out how to outplay the Indians.

                  Well, yes ... then, from the age of 4, the Indians wash their mattresses with their notions and tactics on their "antediluvian" SU-30MKI / K and so on.
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  F-15 radars were replaced during 2007-2010 with a new generation ..

                  Radars and we are modernizing so what?
                  At the same time, the SU-30 is already replacing the SU-35. Which is still a big question on the teeth whether the lizard or not.
                2. Pogrom
                  Pogrom 1 November 2017 17: 13 New
                  +1
                  Well, since they "wrote" and "changed" everything, you can be calm))).
        2. Pogrom
          Pogrom 1 November 2017 16: 32 New
          +6
          Yes, yes, you must immediately cover yourself with a sheet and crawl to the cemetery. Or what do you propose to do? Eject after each exposure report? Just the same, high maneuverability plays on defense. You are spinning to dodge the rocket and shoot down the grip. This is where over-maneuverability will work, which in the opinion of many game experts is not needed. And who will notice whom first, is a separate question. Yes, and missiles can argue to hoarseness.
          1. floyder
            floyder 2 November 2017 08: 31 New
            +1
            An important fact is that the Americans recognize the superiority of the Russian optoelectronic complex. Melee is a VERY important factor.
        3. Mih1974
          Mih1974 2 November 2017 06: 40 New
          +2
          Especially for you, I explain - they teoterize about a clash of technologically equal opponents, which, as you were told, a long time ago (since Vietnam).
          USSR Mig-25 showed you what he thinks about your aircraft, your country and you in general. tongue bully
    2. purple
      purple 1 November 2017 16: 36 New
      +4
      And it never crossed your mind that you can get away from a rocket?
    3. the most important
      the most important 1 November 2017 19: 36 New
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      In fact, aerial combat, starting in the 80s, came down mainly to shelling
      enemy aircraft with medium-range explosive missiles. Previously noticed, earlier shot.
      In addition to the sequence of conventional bends at transonic speed, no aerobatics was required.
      Even tailings were almost never used.

      Or maybe the pilots simply did not know how to do anything else ???
    4. CAT BAIYUN
      CAT BAIYUN 1 November 2017 22: 14 New
      +6
      For some reason, they think that real air battles consist of spectacular ones for the audience.
      somersaults in the air.

      Wai .... And how do you, nevertheless, know what the pros of the Swifts think to themselves there.
      I am always always impressed by your very knowledge. laughing
      If you already, all the same, know everything for yourself, well, tell them that they wouldn’t “figure in the air,” but learn to fly correctly and kosher. They don’t know that you know everything! So they write and say all nonsense! laughing
  5. Herculesic
    Herculesic 1 November 2017 15: 28 New
    0
    Strange, but to be objective, F15 was the first fighter of the 4th generation in the world! recourse
  6. Egorovich
    Egorovich 1 November 2017 15: 32 New
    +7
    So far, only theoretical battles are going on between these aircraft (Su-35, 30 and F-22), so you can argue before hiccups. Only practical, not computer battles can determine the fittest.
    1. Mih1974
      Mih1974 2 November 2017 06: 48 New
      +3
      Well, not only disputes, recently, in a mattress country, a proud mars-ass ACC, who thought that he would be able to "curb the captive" Drying, took refuge (to death), but bite tongue good
  7. okko077
    okko077 1 November 2017 15: 40 New
    +4
    Pilot from the aerobatic team reflects on the capabilities of a combat aircraft? Maybe he was assigned class 1 in vain?
    After all, this should testify to his level of combat professionalism ...
    Comparing the capabilities of other aircraft with the SU-30SM, let us clarify that in combat at long and medium distances it is inferior to F22 and F35, and given the widespread tactics of using AWACS aircraft of a potential enemy, it is inferior to F15.
    In close maneuverable combat, he surpasses all these aircraft, but before this battle still needs to fly. In addition, the main tactics of the US Air Force can avoid such a fight ...
    The new modification of the French fighter Rafal is already superior to the SU-30SM in long and medium combat, and can compete on equal terms in close combat, but again it must be noted that they avoid such a battle ....
    The time of our theoretical superiority has already ended, and during this time we have not yet accumulated a large number of new SU-30 and SU-35 aircraft, and have not commissioned the SU-57 .....
    1. Viktor.12.71
      Viktor.12.71 1 November 2017 15: 58 New
      +1
      Quote: okko077
      The main tactics of the US Air Force can avoid such a fight ...

      Вы правы, американцы еще во время тихоокеанской компании против Японии успешно применяли тактику Boom & zoom и вступать в маневренные бой против зеро было глупо. Сейчас кто первый обнаружил тот и победил, догфайта не будет.
      1. zulusuluz
        zulusuluz 1 November 2017 20: 51 New
        +1
        In the USSR, during the Korean War, they also thought so. Even the cannon was removed from the MiG. As a result, “Phantoms” they were smashed like kittens. And when the cannon was returned, and the phantoms were given ...
        The battle is fleeting. The question is how to guess when it will start. In the far distance or in the near?
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 1 November 2017 16: 00 New
      11
      Quote: okko077
      Pilot from the aerobatic team reflects on the capabilities of a combat aircraft? Maybe he was assigned class 1 in vain?

      Can you assign class 1 with your cunning experience of sorties?
      Quote: okko077
      Comparing the capabilities of other aircraft with the SU-30SM, let us clarify that in combat at long and medium distances it is inferior to F22 and F35, and given the widespread tactics of using AWACS aircraft of a potential enemy, it is inferior to F15.

      Seriously? That is, we do not have AWACS aircraft? laughing And where is such an expert opinion about the superiority of the lizard and Lightning and Eagle over the 30th? Do you know the REAL combat capabilities of mattress aircraft? Or draw conclusions based on Wikipedia data?
      Quote: okko077
      The new modification of the French fighter Rafal is already superior to the SU-30SM in long and medium combat, and can compete on equal terms in close combat, but again it must be noted that they avoid such a battle ....

      Well, if you say, it means probably, most likely ... wassat I wonder here why avoid it? laughing

      Quote: okko077
      The time of our theoretical superiority has already ended, and during this time we have not yet accumulated a large number of new SU-30 and SU-35 aircraft, and have not commissioned the SU-57 .....

      Do you think we need the same amount as the entire NATO bloc? Question-Why? In the ranks at the beginning of November 2016 there are: Su-30M2 - 20, Su-30SM - 71, Su-35S - 48 (By the 20th year there will be 98 cars).
      1. okko077
        okko077 1 November 2017 16: 06 New
        +4
        For dummies, I took the tests to allow pilots to fly, and when checking readiness for class ... Leave the sofas for yourself, sit on them and do verbiage further ....
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 1 November 2017 16: 10 New
          +6
          Quote: okko077
          For dummies, I took the tests to allow pilots to fly, and when checking readiness for class ... Leave the sofas for yourself, sit on them and do verbiage further ....

          You are doing just that, DIGITAL FORCE. And rightly noticed, the opinion of the sofa teapot, which, not knowing the real possibilities, not only the lizard and lightning, but even our 30th, sits through the lip and gives pearls about the complete superiority of some over others ... this is an indicator of your level of judgment. Namely, the nose whistled, it's time to remove it from the stove.
          1. NN52
            NN52 1 November 2017 16: 34 New
            +9
            NEXUS

            Well, why are you fighting with okko077 not for life, but for death? Everyone has their own opinion...

            And on the topic, Su 30 should be compared with 22. where is 15?
            You will not believe it, but at one time I did term paper, and in an instant 23 mld failed 15. I defended it.
          2. Rushnairfors
            Rushnairfors 1 November 2017 17: 00 New
            +5
            Guys, let's not swear. Today, not only the Indians were chopping with the dinosaurs, but our guys, above the Baltic, mainly, and mainly on the Su27cm, but were also on the Su30, right now Petrik will arm himself with 35mi, I think the adversary will wash himself. Su30 really hammering f15 / 16/18, eurofighter and rafal, su27 does the same, but exclusively in close combat, so that conclusions can be drawn, specifically we are outnumbered, in a sense, our A50s are less perfect than their avaxes, but in the duel, the Su30 is stronger than any 4th generation fighter.
            1. NN52
              NN52 1 November 2017 19: 59 New
              +7
              Colleague, I want to clarify the worse our 50?
              1. NN52
                NN52 1 November 2017 20: 00 New
                +7
                Have you been guided through them?
        2. purple
          purple 1 November 2017 16: 40 New
          0
          Write, write, the Internet will endure everything ...
      2. Mih1974
        Mih1974 2 November 2017 06: 51 New
        +1
        And of course, all THEIR Yksperdy will always forget about the MiG-31 for some reason, which actually has these “Avaks” for breakfast. good Who "sees" any invisibility, shoots him just at a long distance and flies home, but no one can ever catch him. bully good
    3. shans2
      shans2 1 November 2017 16: 29 New
      0
      comrade, at least learn a little about the capabilities of the Russian electronic warfare and air-to-air missiles ...
  8. _Jack_
    _Jack_ 1 November 2017 15: 54 New
    0
    Well, I agree with the F-15 in many ways, and then, if we compare the Su-35, and not the Su-30, with it. But with the raptor he got excited.
    1. Pogrom
      Pogrom 1 November 2017 16: 35 New
      +2
      Su-35 and Su-30 dry better F-15 in service. It is much better than the experienced F-15 silent needle (single copy) and is quite comparable to the F-22.
      1. _Jack_
        _Jack_ 1 November 2017 16: 40 New
        0
        quite comparable to the F-22
        Unfortunately, stealth gives the raptor a big advantage, otherwise the Su-57 would not be needed
        1. Pogrom
          Pogrom 1 November 2017 16: 50 New
          +4
          Stealth is a sphere of vacuums. None the war did not confirm the vital necessity of this feature. At least over all other features. In the Su-57, nobody made a bet on stealth. She will be worse than a lizard unambiguously. But what will be better will be done by the Su-57 UFO among fighters and the lizard, or it will be necessary to write off, or undergo another multi-million dollar modernization in order to at least somehow maintain parity.
          1. _Jack_
            _Jack_ 1 November 2017 16: 55 New
            +1
            Not a single war has confirmed the vital need for this feature.

            Not a single war with a serious adversary, where "this feature" could be confirmed and did not exist. There was only a beating of the weak, but it doesn’t matter there - stealth, not stealth.
            The fact that stealth significantly reduces the detection distance of the aircraft is a proven fact. And this is the very advantage - the first saw, the first fired a rocket and dumped. And arguing with that is stupid.
            Just don’t start the old silly stories about the meter range radar and so on and so forth, everything has already been chewed a hundred times - in the first there are none, in the second you can’t launch missiles at them.
            In the Su-57, nobody made a bet on stealth.

            At least a controversial statement. It’s another matter that they tried to combine stealth and super-maneuverability in it, but one doesn’t get along well with the other, so they stepped aside stealth, so yes, the Su-57 is worse than the F-35.
            1. Pogrom
              Pogrom 1 November 2017 17: 07 New
              +2
              Quote: _Jack_
              Not a single war with a serious adversary, where "this feature" could be confirmed and did not exist. There was only a beating of the weak, but it doesn’t matter there - stealth, not stealth.

              Well, why did you decide in this case that with equal rivals, stealth will be a decisive advantage? I’m thinking the opposite. With modern means of electronic warfare, stealth will not give a damn to its carrier, because he simply cannot take advantage of his radar and stealth. Long-range missiles also did not confirm their characteristics in wars. Well, where did these fairy tales come about: invulnerable American stealth, which will be wetted by our maneuverable fighters, with the help of the far hand in a bunch, powerful radars (lol, whose detection range is longer, another question) and long-range missiles? Propaganda, no more.

              Quote: _Jack_
              The fact that stealth significantly reduces the detection distance of the aircraft is a proven fact. And this is the very advantage - the first saw, the first fired a rocket and dumped. And arguing with that is stupid.

              To see first you need a powerful radar, not stealth. And when this radar "works powerfully" it glows like a Christmas tree. And stealth will not help here.

              Quote: _Jack_
              Just don’t start the old silly stories about the meter range radar and so on and so forth, everything has already been chewed a hundred times - in the first there are none, in the second you can’t launch missiles at them.

              LOL, in the first place they are. Only not in aviation, but in ground-based radars. Secondly, why wouldn’t missiles be aimed at them? How is this related at all? Thirdly, to detect the stealth meter range is not necessary. Here it is not only a range, but also a range.
              1. _Jack_
                _Jack_ 1 November 2017 17: 12 New
                0
                firstly they are. Only not in aviation, but in ground-based radars. Secondly, why wouldn’t missiles be aimed at them? How is this related at all?

                everything, I have no questions for you anymore
                1. Pogrom
                  Pogrom 1 November 2017 17: 14 New
                  0
                  Well, I allow the drain))).
                  PS: study
                  https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Небо_(РЛС)
                2. Muvka
                  Muvka 1 November 2017 19: 01 New
                  0
                  Quote: _Jack_
                  firstly they are. Only not in aviation, but in ground-based radars. Secondly, why wouldn’t missiles be aimed at them? How is this related at all?

                  everything, I have no questions for you anymore

                  And what is the problem of bringing a meter-long radar missile to the area where the plane is lit, and then the GOS on the rocket will find it from a short distance and will already accurately calculate the coordinates. What is the problem with this approach?
                  1. bk316
                    bk316 1 November 2017 20: 09 New
                    +2
                    What is the problem with this approach?

                    Nothing, except in the religious ban of the sect of "invisible witnesses"
                  2. _Jack_
                    _Jack_ 1 November 2017 23: 19 New
                    +2
                    The problem is that
                    bring the meter radar missile
                    where either is not possible. The only meter-range radars that we have (several pieces) of Sky-M are surveillance radars. They cannot lead anyone anywhere, and they can launch a rocket approximately "into the sector" of detection, with the hope that it will capture the target there, which will reduce the probability of a missile falling to a few percent. So air defense will exhaust all ammunition in milk.
                    1. Pogrom
                      Pogrom 1 November 2017 23: 41 New
                      0
                      Below you answered. Do not disgrace anymore)))
          2. NEXUS
            NEXUS 1 November 2017 17: 43 New
            +2
            Quote: PogrOm
            In the Su-57, nobody made a bet on stealth.

            Hmm ... a bad case. And excuse me, why then is the glider exactly like that of the 57th and why is it of composites and with a radio-absorbing coating? Do not enlighten the dark? wassat
            Quote: PogrOm
            She will be worse than a lizard unambiguously.

            Yes, you sho! crying Is it possible to recognize the EPR of the Lizard not from the mattress’s mouth? M. lol
            Before you write such a frank game, well, at least familiarized yourself with the subject of conversation, dear.
            1. Pogrom
              Pogrom 1 November 2017 18: 04 New
              0
              Quote: NEXUS
              Hmm ... a bad case. And excuse me, why then is the glider exactly like that of the 57th and why is it of composites and with a radio-absorbing coating? Do not enlighten the dark?

              Dear, if you want to see what the airplane looks like on which made a bet on stealth, look at the F-117 without a radar. Well, his further fate, in response to the correctness of such a decision. And in the Su-57 measures were taken to reduce visibility. As in the Su-35, MiG-35 and other earlier aircraft. The Su-57 just went further, the form of the glider was worked out with this in mind, the same weapons bays, etc. But, again, these measures NO not worsened LTX quality aircraft. I'll enlightened what about the terms?

              Quote: NEXUS
              Yes, you sho! crying Is it possible to recognize the EPR of the Lizard not from the mattress’s mouth? m. lol

              Purely my IMHO that it will be better at the raptor. The plane itself is slightly smaller, the shape of the air intakes, flat nozzles, all sorts of cloves, etc. Here I will not argue, this is just IMHO. It is interesting to listen to your opinion, due to which the ESR of the SU-57 will be less. Or do you have reliable numbers? Forward))).

              Quote: NEXUS
              Before you write such a frank game, well, at least familiarized yourself with the subject of conversation, dear.

              Well, right now with your answer and see who writes game here and is not familiar with the subject of conversation.)))
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 1 November 2017 18: 42 New
                +2
                Quote: PogrOm
                Dear, if you want to see what the airplane looks like on which you bet on stealth, look at the F-117 without a radar. Well, his further fate, in response to the correctness of such a decision.

                That is, that this is almost the first mass-produced combat aircraft with stealth technology does not bother you at all? lol
                Quote: PogrOm
                And in the Su-57 took measures to reduce visibility

                This is called stealth technology, dear. wassat
                Quote: PogrOm
                As in the Su-35, MiG-35 and other earlier aircraft.

                C'mon! Seriously? And what measures were taken to reduce the ESR of the SU-35 and MIG-35, if in the condition of the problem it is written in black in Russian that the basis of the gliders is, respectively, the data of the SU-27 and MIG-29? And what is it downplayed there?
                Quote: PogrOm
                The Su-57 just went further, the form of the glider was worked out with this in mind, the same weapons bays, etc.

                But you weren’t at all embarrassed that the shape of gliders in general of 5th generation fighters is very similar to the shape of a pangolin glider? And also does not bother at all that the reduced stealth by the order of such fighters in comparison with the fighters of the previous generation, is there a prerequisite in the requirements for such vehicles?
                Quote: PogrOm
                Purely my IMHO that it will be better at the raptor.

                Well, your IMHA can give you anything. About ..
                Quote: PogrOm
                The plane itself is slightly smaller, the shape of the air intakes, flat nozzles, all sorts of cloves, etc.

                That is, in flight, and especially in the combat mode of maneuvers, altitude changes, etc., the plane (in this case, the pangolin), according to your IMHO, will always be in the most advantageous position in terms of stealth, in relation to the enemy’s radar?
                Further ... and where did we divide the arsenal on the external suspension then? Or does the lizard not need it at all? And with rockets on an external sling, what kind of stealth are we talking about, dear?

                Quote: PogrOm
                It is interesting to listen to your opinion, due to which the ESR of the SU-57 will be less

                The ESR of any aircraft is very variable, due to the fact that the aircraft is not in a static position and is most advantageous to itself in relation to the radar that irradiates it in flight. And the pangolin is no exception.
                Quote: PogrOm
                who writes game here and is not familiar with the subject of conversation.)))

                I have readily outlined what is the manifestation of the game of your IMHI?
                1. Pogrom
                  Pogrom 1 November 2017 19: 13 New
                  0
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  That is, that this is almost the first mass-produced combat aircraft with stealth technology does not bother you at all? lol

                  So what specifically Should I be embarrassed? The fact that he is the first makes him an automatic machine unsuccessful? Please more specifically state your thought.

                  Quote: NEXUS
                  This is called stealth technology, dear.

                  Captain evidence in the thread. I wrote somewhere that in the Su-57 is not isp. stealth technology?
                  No. Well?

                  Quote: NEXUS
                  C'mon! Seriously? And what measures were taken to reduce the ESR of the SU-35 and MIG-35, if in the condition of the problem it is written in black in Russian that the basis of the gliders is, respectively, the data of the SU-27 and MIG-29? And what is it downplayed there?

                  Materials coating. EPR Su-35 less Su-27. And the EPR MIG-35 less MiG-29. Do not believe in google. Stealth is not just a form. Although there are differences in form (although not aimed at stealth).

                  Quote: NEXUS
                  And you were not at all embarrassed that the shape of gliders in general of 5th generation fighters is very similar to the shape of a pangolin glider?

                  So what's next? The similarity of form makes these planes the same? Nope, they have different concepts. Although, in some ways, they are similar.

                  Quote: NEXUS
                  And also does not bother at all that the reduced stealth by the order of such fighters in comparison with the fighters of the previous generation, is there a prerequisite in the requirements for such vehicles?

                  Such a requirement, did not put our designers, in the conditions of complete clogging of horseradish on the aircraft performance characteristics, to reduce its EPR. There was a demand to reduce EPR in comparison with machines of 4 generations, with good performance characteristics. It has been completed. Nobody demanded to make EPR less than raptor's. And so they did. LTX Su is at a level and better than that of a raptor. EPR is better than fours. Raptor ESR is better than drying. Do you disagree with something? Well, go ahead, refute.

                  Quote: NEXUS
                  Well, your IMHA can give you anything. About ..

                  Well, write your IMH, due to which EPR Su is better than a raptor. Although I’m a wang, you won’t be able to do this.

                  Quote: NEXUS
                  That is, in flight, and especially in the combat mode of maneuvers, altitude changes, etc., the plane (in this case, the pangolin), according to your IMHO, will always be in the most advantageous position in terms of stealth, in relation to the enemy’s radar?

                  Do not their words attribute to me. Indicate where specificallywhere I wrote this. And yes, both will change height, maneuver, etc. so ceteris paribus ...

                  Quote: NEXUS
                  Further ... and where did we divide the arsenal on the external suspension then? Or does the lizard not need it at all? And with rockets on an external sling, what kind of stealth are we talking about, dear?

                  Again, why this opus? At both aircraft have external and internal suspensions. I compared cars with weapons in internal suspensions with empty external ones. My IMHO The EPR of the raptor will be less. Prove the converse.

                  Quote: NEXUS
                  The ESR of any aircraft is very variable, due to the fact that the aircraft is not in a static position and is most advantageous to itself in relation to the radar that irradiates it in flight. And the pangolin is no exception.

                  Dear, you are repeating yourself. Again, this is true for both cars.

                  Quote: NEXUS
                  I have readily outlined what is the manifestation of the game of your IMHI?

                  No, not available. You started loudly, then read my comment and you became sad. Not that attacked))). By clever did not work))). After that, you wrote your vyser, in which attributed I didn’t say anything, didn’t give numbers and did not indicate to me, due to which the Su-57 EPR will be less than that of the raptor. Instead, you entered into lengthy discussions about the “EPR of any aircraft — the value is very variable” as if it were variable from small to large in a raptor and always small in a Su-57. Or, in this way, you prove that the EPR is garbage, because Can't prove that the EPR of the Su-57 is less? SLаmore respected, veryаbo. So what about the question of your favorite game ....)))) Well, you understand, right?)))
                  1. NEXUS
                    NEXUS 1 November 2017 19: 42 New
                    +2
                    Quote: PogrOm
                    And what exactly should confuse me? The fact that he is the first makes him an automatic machine unsuccessful? Please give your thoughts more specifically.

                    This makes at that time the use of stealth technology in military aircraft construction still "raw." The question never came to mind, why is the F-117 black? Because when it came to the mattresses that it wasn’t so inconspicuous and not so elusive, they determined the mode of use of this ashtray only at night. Hence the black color.
                    Quote: PogrOm
                    Materials coating. The EPR of the Su-35 is smaller than the Su-27. And the EPR MIG-35 is smaller than the MiG-29. Do not believe in google. Stealth is not just a form. Although there are differences in form (although not aimed at stealth).

                    Listen, googlofil or wikilub, as there was an EPR of one and a half ten meters, it remained. Materials? What? The reflection angles remained practically unchanged, the engines, namely the nozzles remained the same ... coating? Dear, in order to significantly reduce the EPR of 4th generation fighters, the layer of this coating should be equal to the wavelength that irradiates it. That is, we are talking about a coating thickness of tens of centimeters.
                    Quote: PogrOm
                    Raptor ESR is better than drying. Do you disagree with something? Well, go ahead, refute.

                    He blurted out, and then how the curve will lead. I asked you ..
                    Quote: NEXUS
                    Is it possible to recognize the EPR of the Lizard not from the mattress’s mouth? M.

                    So go ahead! Where are your lizard numbers? M. Only not from the wiki and not from the words of the Americans, which is one and the same. No need to bustle, dear.
                    Quote: PogrOm
                    Dear, you are repeating yourself. Again, this is true for both cars.

                    I'm trying to convey to you one simple thought that your ..
                    Quote: PogrOm
                    My IMHO EPR raptor will be less

                    It’s not worth a damn, from the word at all. And your IMHA is based only on advertising ravings of mattresses, and nothing more.
                    Quote: PogrOm
                    Or, in this way, you prove that the EPR is garbage, because Can't prove that the EPR of the Su-57 is less?

                    And I don’t prove that the EPR of the SU-57 is smaller than that of the pangolin ... it only proves that you read through the stump a deck ... I’m saying that the EPR of the SU-57 is comparable to the EPR of the Raptor. Although stealth technology was not put a priority in the creation of the 57th.
                    Quote: PogrOm
                    Weakly respected, very weak. So what about the question of your favorite game ....)))) Well, you understand, right?)))

                    Of course I understand, dear. wassat I sit and marvel at all this game that you have bred here. So what about Raptor’s EPR figures not from mattress sources? By the way, the representatives of the Sukhoi Design Bureau voiced the EPR figures of 57th-0,3-0,4 m ... while saying that the lizard has about the same figures. Now I want to listen to your opus, about how spaceships plow the expanses of the universe. wassat
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. NEXUS
                        NEXUS 1 November 2017 21: 08 New
                        +2
                        Quote: PogrOm
                        What exactly has changed in stele technology from the moment that then they were raw and now suddenly become super modern. Well, I suppose, maybe a new coating composition was invented, what else besides this?

                        That is, the form (not chopped on a lizard, lightning and Spirit) in comparison with the F-117 does not mean anything at all? Hmm ... a bad case. And why did you cling to the cover, as if it unconditionally solves the issue of stealth then?
                        I wrote about the coating. I’ll google to help you, my love.
                        Quote: PogrOm
                        This is just night camouflage.

                        Seriously? wassat Apparently I'm color blind ... explain then this, wise guy ...

                        While the F-117 was still used during the day.
                        Quote: PogrOm
                        I did not write about the "essential". You came up with this again and put your words to me. I said measures were taken. It (reduction) was achieved, due to the fact that, that. It works.

                        Figures in the studio ... why there was less.
                        Quote: PogrOm
                        It is much larger, but smaller than Su.

                        So where are the numbers, dear Raptor? So far I have been observing just empty arguments about how spaceships plow the expanses of the universe ...
                        Quote: PogrOm
                        You can't prove your point with arguments

                        I did not just prove it to you, but chewed it. And you took and were offended, arguing on lengthy topics about my epaulettes, arguments and so on ...
                        During the visit, the chief designer of the PAK FA T-50 aircraft A. N. Davidenko stated:

                        “The fourth generation aircraft - the Russian Su-27 or the American F-15 - have a reflective surface coefficient that characterizes the radar visibility of the aircraft, within 12 square meters. The F-22 aircraft (fifth-generation American fighter) has 0,3-0,4 sq.m. We have similar visibility requirements. »

                        And now, I consider our dispute settled for several reasons. First, you stupidly don’t hear what they say to you. Second: You do not answer questions, but only verbally. And the third: I’m tired of just writing answers on the floor of the branch, realizing that you still won’t hear them. And therefore, I think our conversation is settled. hi
    2. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 1 November 2017 17: 02 New
      +1
      Su30cm eats the eagle once or twice, but about the raptor, only in close combat.
  9. kaserog
    kaserog 1 November 2017 16: 05 New
    +4
    Quote: okko077
    Maybe he was assigned class 1 in vain?

    exactly - you need to assign - a pilot of the 1st class of the Air Forces (air sofas)
    1. okko077
      okko077 1 November 2017 16: 27 New
      +2
      Airborne Forces leave for yourself .... I have the qualification of "Master" .... and access to open and repair several types of systems from manufacturers ... according to the flight terminology "Sniper" only in technical terms ....
      1. bk316
        bk316 1 November 2017 20: 17 New
        +2
        only in technical terms .... [

        You yourself are not funny?
        It’s about the same as a rank 6 thunderbolt (there is such a specialty) and will say to a surgeon of high qualification “maybe you were assigned it in vain”. And then how, he splendidly grinds scalpels.
        Or, as an electronic equipment installer, he will criticize a programmer - how can he solder a resistor on his mother, and a programmer may very well not laughing
        By the way, in the days not so distant, so in 83, when I was studying as a programmer (back in school) I passed the installation test. So the person who took the standings of NOTHING, that is, did not know ANYTHING about programming.
  10. Corsair0304
    Corsair0304 1 November 2017 16: 07 New
    +2
    Not a pilot, it’s somehow difficult for me to judge .. But as for the DVB - isn't there a radar on the Su-30 that sees everything and everyone at a distance far from the distance of a probable adversary? Somewhere this thing slipped if my memory serves me. Even if there will be tracking and target designation of the DLRO aircraft - how many of these target indicators? At the same time, for sure, we also have something against the `` shot-fled '' against the Supostatovsky from a long distance. At what distance will our radar detect an attacking missile? How many rockets does our pilot have enough health and nerves? That is the question. And in the "dog dump" ours will prevail.
  11. Romanenko
    Romanenko 1 November 2017 16: 08 New
    +2
    Somehow not very convincing, almost like in the old joke about the Armenian radio:
    Question - Why are Armenians better than Georgians?
    Answer - Than Georgians!
    Well and repeatedly read by different authors - in fact, the term "low height" is illiterate, usually "low height" is used. At the same time, the reference to the fact that someone said there who gave the interview is rather weak. And your head and the knowledge of a publicist for what?
    And the rest of the article is informative and informative - I learned that there is our Su-30 SM and the American Eagle F-15.
    So what is Su better "than F-15"
  12. Krasnodar
    Krasnodar 1 November 2017 16: 22 New
    0
    Whose pilots are better prepared will win. (In the case of Ф - 15).
    With F 22 there will be no close combat.
    1. shans2
      shans2 1 November 2017 16: 32 New
      0
      now is not the time of World War II, decides avionics, electronic warfare and weapons ...
      1. purple
        purple 1 November 2017 16: 51 New
        0
        your pilot doesn’t solve anything at all?
  13. gurzuf
    gurzuf 1 November 2017 16: 28 New
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    "This conclusion was made by the deputy commander of an aerobatic aerobatic team
    "Swifts" in 2004-2006, the military pilot of the 1st class Vladlen Rusanov "////

    Swifts, with all due respect to their skills, can hardly be called combat pilots. It’s more like acrobats.
    For some reason, they think that real air battles consist of spectacular ones for the audience.
    somersaults in the air.
    In fact, aerial combat, starting in the 80s, came down mainly to shelling
    enemy aircraft with medium-range explosive missiles. Previously noticed, earlier shot.
    In addition to the sequence of conventional bends at transonic speed, no aerobatics was required.
    Even tailings were almost never used.

    Good to you Jews! You know everything for everyone! laughing
  14. Charik
    Charik 1 November 2017 16: 28 New
    0
    Vidos from Dima Rogozin is impressive. Aerobatics Su-35C / Su-35S (Flanker-E)
    Dmitry Rogozin
  15. Nait
    Nait 1 November 2017 16: 29 New
    0
    Quote: LSA57
    but at the same time one complex managed to ground one unit of "invisibility" with the help of a microwave

    Do not throw hats, you don’t write that before this this invisibility is hundreds,
    if not thousands of times she did her job with impunity.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 1 November 2017 17: 02 New
      +2
      Quote: Nait
      that before this invisibility of hundreds,
      if not thousands of times she did her job with impunity.

      In what conditions and against which adversary can one find out? Particularly interesting is the moment which ground and air complexes opposed this miracle of aircraft construction.
  16. Charik
    Charik 1 November 2017 16: 33 New
    0
    in my opinion they are the penis of a man with their 22and 35
  17. Nait
    Nait 1 November 2017 16: 34 New
    0
    Quote: Egorovich
    So far, only theoretical battles are going on between these aircraft (Su-35, 30 and F-22), so you can argue before hiccups. Only practical, not computer battles can determine the fittest.

    By the way, were there even SU27 in this practice?
    1. Pogrom
      Pogrom 1 November 2017 16: 44 New
      +3
      There were training between the Su-27 and F-15 in USA in the early 90s. Su-27 complete victory. There were two training sessions of the Indian Su-30s against the Americans. Two victories of the Indians, with a restriction for the Indians on the part of the Amers (Americans used AWACS Indians no). Also, the Indians won training on their Su-30 against rafals. This is what I heard, Maybe something else was ...
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 1 November 2017 19: 07 New
        +2
        Quote: PogrOm
        There were training between the Su-27 and F-15 in USA in the early 90s. Su-27 complete victory. There were two training sessions of the Indian Su-30s against the Americans. Two victories of the Indians, with a restriction for the Indians on the part of the Amers (Americans used AWACS Indians no). Also, the Indians won training on their Su-30 against rafals. This is what I heard, Maybe something else was ...

        In total, there have been at least 13 exercises since 2004, in which our SU-27s and Su-30s met with European and mattress modern fighters. Moreover, not only the Indians conducted such exercises, but also the Malaysians, too.
  18. Warrior-80
    Warrior-80 1 November 2017 16: 38 New
    0
    The advantage will be on the one on whose theater the battlefield will take place, if on ours, then there will be target designations from both air and land, support for air defense and interceptors
    1. _Jack_
      _Jack_ 1 November 2017 16: 46 New
      +1
      When aviation is at war in its purest form, there will no longer be any target designation from air and land or air defense support. To do this, they have a couple of thousand axes and strike drones, and until they all destroy them, the aircraft will not fight - the Americans will not fight in such situations, only if the advantage is 10 to 1, then they are heroes. But if a mass attack with axes goes, then tryndets all because we have to use nuclear weapons and they will respond in their own way. So, the business will not get to the point and no one will know who is cooler than the Su-35 or F-22.
      1. purple
        purple 1 November 2017 16: 54 New
        0
        a couple of thousand axes .... in order to launch as many carriers as possible, and place them close enough to our borders ... Do you think we have fools in headquarters sitting to allow this?
        It's all fantasy
        1. _Jack_
          _Jack_ 1 November 2017 17: 05 New
          0
          They can launch most of them from ships, for this they use universal launch containers. And there are plenty of NATO land bases around our country. So they will launch without problems.
          and place them close enough to our borders
          and why, do you know the radius of axes?
          1. bk316
            bk316 1 November 2017 20: 25 New
            +2
            They can launch most of them from ships, for this they use universal launch containers. And there are plenty of NATO land bases around our country. So they will run without problems

            Well, now, let's count how many ships you need to pull without blah blah what would be in a salvo give out 2 thousand axes on the European theater.
            1. _Jack_
              _Jack_ 1 November 2017 20: 35 New
              0
              everything has long been counted -
              In the US Navy, SLCM carriers are 7 types of ships.
              1. SS "Ohio" type (4 units) - up to 154 SLCMs in each in special mines (instead of mines for SLBMs).
              2. Virginia-type submarines (9 units, a total of 30-40 will be built) - each with 12 SLCMs in special mines, up to 38 can, along with torpedoes and ASM Harpoon, be part of the ammunition intended for firing through torpedo tubes.
              3. Submarines of the Sivulf type (3 units) - for each up to 50 SLCMs as part of the ammunition fired through TA.
              4. Los Angeles-type submarines (42 units + 1 in reserve, are gradually being withdrawn from the Navy) - each has 12 SLCMs in special mines (for 31 submarines) and up to 37 as part of the ammunition fired through TA.
              5. Cruisers of the Ticonderoga type (22 units) - each with up to 122 SLCMs in 2 air defense missile systems Mk41.
              6. Destroyers of the "Orly Burke" type (60 units, will be 75 or 99) - up to 90 SLCMs in 2 ATC Mk41 on the first 28 ships, up to 96 on the next.
              7. Destroyers of the Zamvolt type (3 will be built) - on each of them up to 80 SLCMs in 2 UVK Mk57.

              In total, the U.S. Navy has approximately 2,5-2,8 thousand SLCM, first of all - the last modification of the "Tactical Tomahawk" (361 were recently ordered).

              And these are only sea-based axes - about 3 thousand.
          2. NEXUS
            NEXUS 1 November 2017 20: 32 New
            +2
            Quote: _Jack_
            They can launch most of them from ships, for this they use universal launch containers. And there are plenty of NATO land bases around our country. So they will launch without problems.

            In order to provide a sufficiently dense salvo with axes from ships, mattresses will need to concentrate the ship’s strike group in a certain direction, which is probably not seen by the blind. Further ... the radius of the axes is up to 2500 km (BGM-109A when launching from a surface ship 2500 km) ... which means that the carriers of these missiles should be as close to our shores as possible in order to suppress our layered air defense and missile defense.
            At the same time, due to the fact that the US fleet is a large part of the mattress missile defense, the question arises: What then will happen to the US coast if most of the shock ships of the mattress are on our coast? In other words, with such movement of the US shock ships, the coast of the mattresses will be exposed to our strategic nuclear forces, as well as carriers of Caliber, Onyx, X-102, etc. with nuclear warheads.
            So what is there ...?
            Quote: _Jack_
            So they will launch without problems.

            At the same time, we do not forget that the ax of the Kyrgyz Republic is subsonic, and while it will hobble to the target, we will answer three hundred times, even with smoke breaks.
            1. _Jack_
              _Jack_ 1 November 2017 20: 51 New
              0
              so there’s nothing to answer globally except for nuclear weapons, we have too few calibers, etc., as I said - in the event of a massive attack with axes, the nuclear apocalypse is provided
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 1 November 2017 21: 14 New
                +2
                Quote: _Jack_
                so there’s nothing to answer globally except for nuclear weapons, we have too few calibers, etc., as I said - in the event of a massive attack with axes, the nuclear apocalypse is provided

                But how else can one respond to a massive missile strike? And where does our Caliber? You read our defense doctrine and the US military doctrine and compare.
                1. _Jack_
                  _Jack_ 1 November 2017 23: 08 New
                  0
                  In other words, with such a movement of the US strike ships, the coasts of mattresses will be exposed to our strategic nuclear forces, as well as carriers of Caliber, Onyx

                  And where does our Caliber?

                  Actually, there’s nothing to argue about, technically they can throw us with thousands of US axes, but in practice it’s the same as starting a nuclear war, so it’s unlikely
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. _Jack_
          _Jack_ 1 November 2017 17: 21 New
          0
          When there is essentially nothing to answer, make a smart face and say "I'm disappointed." It’s true that they can tell you in response - “Analytics of a student of the 3rd grade of high school. And I tried to have a serious conversation with you ...”
          1. Pogrom
            Pogrom 1 November 2017 17: 25 New
            0
            What can be answered essentially by the Persian, who begins to write about axes and nuclear weapons in the topic of aviation? Well, let's not do machines. There is nuclear weapons. I say, the level of thinking of the seventh grader. I essentially wrote to you above. What did you answer me? "I have no more questions." Well, then do not write nonsense then. You do not understand the topic from the word in general.
            1. _Jack_
              _Jack_ 1 November 2017 17: 28 New
              0
              judging by what you write you not only
              do not understand the topic from the word at all
              so also noodles on the ears per kilogram on each side, our MO like you very successfully hangs it
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. _Jack_
                  _Jack_ 1 November 2017 17: 39 New
                  0
                  ok, ok, you don’t worry laughing
                  1. Pogrom
                    Pogrom 1 November 2017 17: 43 New
                    0
                    Yes, I’m calm. It's good that you understand who you are and do not argue)))
                    1. _Jack_
                      _Jack_ 1 November 2017 19: 50 New
                      0
                      It’s useless to argue with people like you, you don’t understand basic things, and you won’t get a stench
                      1. The comment was deleted.
  19. Normal ok
    Normal ok 1 November 2017 16: 44 New
    +3
    how F-15 and F-22 are inferior to the Russian Su-30СМ

    Yes, everything is simple. The fact that F-15 and F-22 are hellish, and our Su-30СМ are holy Orthodox.
    1. _Jack_
      _Jack_ 1 November 2017 17: 13 New
      +1
      that's for sure laughing
  20. Wolka
    Wolka 1 November 2017 17: 06 New
    0
    all is said, comments are superfluous ...
  21. Maz
    Maz 1 November 2017 17: 16 New
    +1
    Quote: voyaka uh
    "and from what vegetable, do you think that the opponent of the 30th will notice earlier?" ///

    With a very simple vegetable called EPR. In the Su-30 (Su-27 glider) it is very large,
    in modern 4th generation aircraft, it is smaller, in the 5th generation - by orders of magnitude less.
    And the second is radar. This is not the most powerful feature of the Su-30.
    In general, the Su-30 must strive for daytime close combat with visual contact with the enemy. And then the Swifts aces will win. At long-medium distances and at night, Su- shines nothing good.

    It was the Americans who recommended their pilots to tick if the Su30 is in the air and in no case enter into a confrontation in Syria. Or at least try to take a more advantageous position in the air, noooo - immediately bring down to the base. How are the Germans? "Akhtung, Akhtung, Pokryshkin in the air!"
  22. Andrey Panov
    Andrey Panov 1 November 2017 17: 31 New
    +1
    Are you arguing about who will shout whom? It is enough to analyze the Syrian experience, and everything will be clear. There, after all, not only su24 fly. There are no fools in the General Staff, and they don’t see sharp gestures, they even rush 57. Does that even mean anything?
  23. Shkodnick
    Shkodnick 1 November 2017 17: 37 New
    0
    Quote: Rushnairfors
    F15- in terms of maneuverability, capabilities of the RLPK- will definitely hit, by the composition of armaments- they are approximately equal, but in the sum of su30 it wins. F22 has the best invisibility characteristics and a powerful RLPK, therefore, in the DVB the Su30 will lose, at medium distances the capabilities will be approximately equal, well, in close combat there is no fighter that would compare with the su30cm (except for su35)

    But what about the 35th moment, 29m moment with ov
    1. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 1 November 2017 18: 32 New
      +1
      And this “guy” hasn’t performed yet, except for the show, so it's too early to talk about him, I hope that Mig35 will be a very worthy airplane, I have a long-standing love for Mig, I flew 29th year at the school
  24. chidoryan
    chidoryan 1 November 2017 18: 50 New
    +1
    Twenty-five again. Unparalleled super-maneuverable. And if you ask the mattress pilot, what will he say? Yes, yes, he says sho f-22 will break any Russian Chinese European pepelats like a hot-water bottle. Every sandpiper ...
  25. Gale
    Gale 1 November 2017 19: 17 New
    +1
    if already the su-30th surpasses the f-15 and f-22, then imagine what the unrivaled su-57 will do with the adversaries?
    this one wunderwafle will pack f-22 in batches, I’m silent about f-35, I drank this plane altogether, judging by the fact that I read about this device here, then su25 will work ..
    the Yankees hopelessly behind in aviation, since the Russian 4th generation is better than the 5th American, the USSR did not even dream of this)
    1. NN52
      NN52 1 November 2017 19: 51 New
      +8
      Dear, have you made a mistake with your knowledge?
      Lavrov spoke of such ...
    2. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 1 November 2017 20: 20 New
      +2
      Gale (or Galya) did you normally read comments? Or are you buh? Where did they write about the fact that the su30cm will work unconditionally f22? In close combat, the chances are not bad, in other cases, the raptor is almost guaranteed to crust the breadcrumbs. But about the 4th generation - su30cm echoes and f15 and f16 and other other super duper EF. I have no doubt. The main thing is that the "gasket" between the steering wheel and the seat is normal.
  26. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  27. IQ12NHJ21az
    IQ12NHJ21az 1 November 2017 21: 06 New
    0
    In the carnage! Who is better? Well, for our "drying" it is more or less known, in Syria it proved to be in the work on the ground, although no one will tell exactly the characteristics of the on-board electronics! And the Americans about their "raptor" - too. True, Americans love to exaggerate their performance characteristics - advertising however, and ours, according to the Soviet habit, underestimate, distort data - secrecy. The "Raptor" is not invisible - it is hardly noticeable for American radars, as even the Indians refuse to show how "see" the "drying". Conclusion - there is nothing to argue about, the pilot expressed his opinion and "FSE".
  28. _Jack_
    _Jack_ 1 November 2017 21: 08 New
    +2
    Pogrom,
    To argue with those who, in all seriousness, believe that a meter range radar is a "stealth killer" is stupid - learn the materiel
    1. Pogrom
      Pogrom 1 November 2017 21: 14 New
      0
      Quote: _Jack_
      Meter radar is a "stealth killer"

      Where did I write this? Nowhere. I just wrote that they exist, and you were sure of the opposite. Well, then why your chatter? Do not want to argue, stall, do not force yourself. Lalka, who is unaware of the existence of a meter range radar, will teach me a mate part. It’s ridiculous.
      1. _Jack_
        _Jack_ 1 November 2017 21: 18 New
        +1
        You wrote not only that they exist, but that they can direct air defense missiles at a target, here is a quote
        LOL, in the first place they are. Only not in aviation, but in ground-based radars. Secondly, why wouldn’t missiles be aimed at them? How is this related at all?

        what I wrote about earlier - teach materiel better than cluttering forums with nonsense
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Pogrom
          Pogrom 1 November 2017 21: 48 New
          0
          Quote: _Jack_
          You wrote not only that they exist, but that they can direct air defense missiles at a target, here is a quote
          LOL, in the first place they are. Only not in aviation, but in ground-based radars. Secondly, why wouldn’t missiles be aimed at them? How is this related at all?

          what I wrote about earlier - teach materiel better than cluttering forums with nonsense

          I am not an anti-aircraft gunner and not a radio operator. The radar does not capture the target, captures an air defense system or one of the components. Did you want to squeeze it out of yourself? Answer then what will hinder the capture of the target backlit radar meter range. Go ahead, baby.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. Shahno
                Shahno 1 November 2017 23: 11 New
                0
                Well, finally reached the main point.
              2. Shahno
                Shahno 1 November 2017 23: 19 New
                0
                What is the probability of hitting a target with a missile with a WIGOS? And what effect does indirect radiation scattering and absorption technology have on this, what maneuverability, what means of eb when using a disruption of capture.
                1. Pogrom
                  Pogrom 1 November 2017 23: 25 New
                  0
                  Let me guess, in your opinion zero?)))) By the way, the heads are not only with WIGOS.
                  1. Shahno
                    Shahno 1 November 2017 23: 35 New
                    0
                    Of course not zero. There are combined GOS. Options ignition with thermal imagers. Stealth reduces the likelihood of defeat by 20-30 percent. Nothing more.
                    1. Pogrom
                      Pogrom 1 November 2017 23: 43 New
                      0
                      20-30%? Where do these numbers come from and for what year are they relevant? With honest American trials? Sorry, but air defense systems are improving faster than stealth technology.
                      1. Shahno
                        Shahno 2 November 2017 00: 03 New
                        0
                        Participated in discussions on "Red Flag 17-3". From the side of the Israeli contractor. By all accounts, the effect of stealth on efficiency has turned out somewhere like this.
              3. The comment was deleted.
                1. The comment was deleted.
          2. _Jack_
            _Jack_ 1 November 2017 22: 48 New
            0
            So think now F-22, F-35 have an advantage over 4th generation aircraft or not
            1. Pogrom
              Pogrom 1 November 2017 23: 06 New
              0
              Before specifically which planes are 4 generations (they are different) and what is the advantage of writing. I’ll also fight on you)))
            2. SergF123
              SergF123 2 November 2017 17: 50 New
              0
              only one thing - they fly faster to the ground as trash!))) But seriously, these are not 5th generation airplanes, judging by the stated requirements for 5th generation airplanes)))
  29. The comment was deleted.
  30. Pogrom
    Pogrom 1 November 2017 21: 36 New
    0
    NEXUS,

    Quote: NEXUS
    That is, the form (not chopped on a lizard, lightning and Spirit) in comparison with the F-117 does not mean anything at all? Hmm ... a bad case. And why did you cling to the cover, as if it unconditionally solves the issue of stealth then?

    Well, then what? What do you tell me specifically trying to prove? Are you capable of giving your thoughts some sort of harmony, or not? Or have you already forgotten what the argument was about? Again:
    F117 is a plane in which fully a bet was made on stealth (which was a mistake). Raptar to a lesser extent, but also stealth (they did not forget about LTX). Drying is even smaller, but also stealth (LTX headed, stealth to the heap). According to the latter, it can be said that in it used technology stealth but no bet was placed on them. ALL. Can you argue with these without getting into lengthy discussions about camouflage and so on?

    Quote: NEXUS
    Seriously? Apparently I'm color blind ... explain then this, wise guy ...

    Tests, prototype, non-combat aircraft, flying laboratory, not painted, etc. Enough? It’s not necessary to be a smart guy, you just don’t have to be a fool who believes in stories. Well, about the black B2, SR-71 and y-2, not a word. There, too, at the last moment repainted? The drain is protected, in short.

    Quote: NEXUS
    Figures in the studio ... why there was less.

    Google, I'm not your mom. You believe that all this was drank and the coating and materials did not help, your problems. You do not know how to include logic, your problems. You do not know the mat part and do not know how to use the search, your problems.

    Quote: NEXUS
    So where are the numbers, dear Raptor? So far I have been observing just empty arguments about how spaceships plow the expanses of the universe ...

    Yes, I already wrote, buy glasses. Not more than 03-04 for a raptor. And here is where your link is to 03-04 for Pak fa, let's not be shy.

    Quote: NEXUS
    I did not just prove it to you, but chewed it. And you took and were offended, arguing on lengthy topics about my epaulettes, arguments and so on ...

    What did you prove to me? You claimed that the EPR dry is less than a raptor. Bring at least one link to it. Though one argument due to what. All you have is a statement by Poghosyan. And you don’t have an opinion at all. And boast about it. It’s ridiculous.

    Quote: NEXUS
    And now, I consider our dispute settled for several reasons. First, you stupidly don’t hear what they say to you. Second: You do not answer questions, but only verbally. And the third: I’m tired of just writing answers on the floor of the branch, realizing that you still won’t hear them. And therefore, I think our conversation is settled.

    Our dispute is over because you merged. We walked, walked in a circle with their "arguments" and decided that it’s enough to disgrace ourselves. I understand that they didn’t run into that, in principle, correctly, in your place I would have acted as well, said which opponent is bad and went into the sunset. Well, nothing, maybe remember my nickname and next time you better get ready. References - zero, arguments too. Here, boh Pagasyan said, and I believe him. Kindergarten.
    1. NN52
      NN52 1 November 2017 21: 44 New
      +7
      Well, you bitten guys ...
      You won’t find the truth anyway ....
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. NN52
          NN52 1 November 2017 22: 26 New
          +7
          And I clarify, only the thunder guys can clarify the truth ..
  31. Pogrom
    Pogrom 2 November 2017 00: 13 New
    0
    Quote: Shahno
    Participated in discussions on "Red Flag 17-3". From the side of the Israeli contractor. By all accounts, the effect of stealth on efficiency has turned out somewhere like this.

    Well, I can't argue with these. But then again. SAMs are different. On the flag, Americans trained with their SAM and airplanes, as I understand it.
    1. Shahno
      Shahno 2 November 2017 00: 34 New
      0
      Not only. There were also trophy ones.
      1. Pogrom
        Pogrom 2 November 2017 00: 43 New
        0
        And which ones?
  32. Sands Careers General
    Sands Careers General 2 November 2017 11: 03 New
    +4
    Modern American planes are trash.
    1. SergF123
      SergF123 2 November 2017 17: 48 New
      0
      Comparing with Russian, Chinese and French - maybe ..... the rest would have mastered the core throwing technology perfectly)
  33. SergF123
    SergF123 2 November 2017 17: 46 New
    0
    F-15 competitor MiG-29))) but not a heavy SU-30 fighter, which, incidentally, is more than F-15 more than maneuverable!)) F-22, in fact, is an excellent machine, it must be admitted, but not 5- of the first generation, judging by the requests of the same inventors of the requirements for the 5th generation aircraft!))))
    1. Sanichsan
      Sanichsan 3 November 2017 14: 13 New
      +1
      Quote: SergF123
      F-22, actually a great car, it must be admitted, but not the 5th generation, judging by the requests of the same inventors of the requirements for the 5th generation aircraft!))))

      and here is an interesting detail. if you go to the wiki and read an article about a 5th generation fighter, you will find that in Russian and in English these articles differ greatly in the composition of the requirements.
      so the Americans have made a 5th generation fighter for themselves, they just have such requirements for the 5th generation. bully
      and Russia has not yet made a 5th generation fighter, and even the SU-57 is not a fact that it will reach the Russian 5th generation by requirements.
      clear what is it about? F-22 is a 5th generation fighter only for Americans, for Russians a maximum of 4+ wink
  34. SergF123
    SergF123 2 November 2017 17: 58 New
    +1
    I watched the film "Stealth"!)))) I really liked how their planes in melee cut our "Crackers"))) I thought, thought and understood, in order to hide my weakness, you need to "qualitatively draw" your advantage in Hollywood!)))) So to say that we won’t do it, then we’ll fantasize !!!)) For example, we’ll fly to the moon!)