Export Su-57 on the eve of the premiere

120
A few days later, the next MAKS air show opens. As part of this event, the Russian aviation The industry plans to show some interesting new products. The main premiere of the cabin may be a promising fifth-generation fighter Su-57 in export performance. As it turned out, this version of the project is already ready and can be offered to foreign customers.


Su-57 fighters in flight




Main news


The Rosoboronexport organization, representing the interests of defense enterprises on the international market, announced the Su-57E project and its early premiere 16 in August. In the official press release of the organization announced several shows of modern aviation technology that can attract great attention of specialists and guests of the salon.

The Su-57E multipurpose fighter was developed by Sukhoi Company PJSC, which is part of the United Aircraft Corporation. To date, the aircraft has received the necessary export documentation, which allows us to offer it to potential customers. At the request of foreign partners, a presentation of new equipment can be organized.

Rosoboronexport in its message provided basic information about the Su-57E, but did not go into details. The exact technical appearance and differences from the basic version have not yet been disclosed. Probably, this will happen already during the upcoming salon MAX-2019.

Export history


The Su-57 project puts an end to the protracted stories with the creation of the export version of the Russian aircraft PAK-FA / T-50. This is the second attempt to adapt the initial project to the requirements of sales abroad, and this time there are serious successes. Export aircraft, at least, are ready for demonstration to potential buyers.

Recall, back in 2008, the Russian UAC and the Indian company Hindustan Aeronautics Limited agreed to jointly develop an export version of the T-50 called FGFA (Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft). It was assumed that the FGFA aircraft in the future will go into service with the Indian Air Force, and will also be sold to third countries. Subsequent joint work has repeatedly encountered problems of an organizational and other nature. In the spring of 2018, the Indian side decided to withdraw from the project.

Apparently, India’s refusal to cooperate did not have a fatal effect on the program as a whole. The Sukhoi company continued its work, which resulted in the export version of the fighter in the form of the current Su-57E. Now Russia can offer this equipment to foreign countries and earn on it - unlike India.

Entering the market


Technical features of the export version of Su-57 have not yet been specified, which does not allow us to draw some conclusions. At the same time, one can already try to predict the consequences of the appearance of the Su-57E, as well as to predict its commercial potential and impact on the international market for military aircraft.

The premiere of Su-57E will not go unnoticed. Fifth generation fighters invariably attract the attention of specialists and aviation enthusiasts, and the appearance of any new machine or modification becomes a real event. The export version of the Su-57 is unlikely to be an exception.

It should also be noted that this is not just about a new fighter, but about a car intended for sale to third countries. At the moment, there is only one fifth generation fighter on the international market - the American Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II. The appearance of a second aircraft of this class, available for order, can be considered the most important event on the aircraft market.

The Chinese edition of Sohu interestingly commented on the emerging situation. It notes that the F-35 actually monopolized the international market for next-generation fighters. The advent of the Su-57E will destroy such a monopoly. Lightning will no longer be the only fighter of its kind available to third countries.

Aircraft Queue


Which countries will show real interest in the Su-57E and wish to buy such fighters is a big question. However, there are several characteristic factors that make it possible to present a circle of potential customers. It is curious that these factors are related both to the activities of the Russian aviation industry and to the work of foreign competitors.

Su-57E created by the company "Sukhoi", which occupies a strong position in the market of military aircraft. Hundreds of Su-class fighters and bombers are operated in dozens of foreign countries around the world. The good reputation of such equipment and its manufacturer, as well as the experience of its successful operation, can lead a potential buyer to a real order for Su-57E. Thus, according to optimistic forecasts, sooner or later, almost any country with a fleet of Su-57 or Su-27 aircraft may become a Su-30E customer.

In recent years, there have repeatedly been reports of interest in Su-57 from various foreign countries. The possibility of signing contracts with developing countries of Southeast Asia, South America, etc. was mentioned. The issue of further cooperation with India remains unresolved. This country has left the FGFA program, but still retains interest in fifth-generation fighters. Perhaps in the near future, the Indian Air Force will return to the idea of ​​acquiring an export Su-57.

Competitors and assistants


So far, the only competitor for the Su-57E can be considered the American F-35. At the same time, the US is taking some steps to simplify the sale of Russian equipment. The American side refuses to supply modern technology to a number of "unreliable" or hostile countries. By these actions they are being pushed to purchase military equipment of other states. Russia can take advantage of this circumstance and offer its own aircraft or other equipment. Perhaps such events will contribute to the overall portfolio of orders for Su-57E.


F-35 - the only fifth generation fighters on the international market so far


The already mentioned edition of Sohu gives an example of a possible implementation of such a scheme. Venezuela is hostile to the United States and suffers the consequences of their activities. In the past, it acquired Su-30 fighters from Russia, and in the future, as the economic situation improves, it can purchase Su-57E. Such a technique will be a good tool to counter American aggression.

Proper use of the contradictions between third countries to promote their aircraft can give Russia certain benefits. It is worth noting that similar methods have already been used by our industry. In the past, it was a threat from some states that contributed to the growth of sales of Russian air defense systems.

On the eve of the premiere


Now the Russian aviation industry is preparing a full-scale serial production of Su-57 fighters for its needs. In just a few days, UAC and Sukhoi will show the first Su-57E modification aircraft for foreign customers. Thus, work on the PAK-FA program continues successfully and leads to new positive results.

The plans of the Russian aerospace forces regarding the Su-57 are already known and will be implemented within a few years. The exact prospects for the export of Su-57E are still unknown, but there is every reason for positive forecasts. For several reasons, such equipment will be of interest to foreign customers and should become the subject of new contracts.

In general, a very interesting situation is developing. Full tactical and technical specifications and the entire list of Su-57E features have not yet been published, which does not allow us to evaluate the technical features of the project. With all this, the available data on export plans allow us to make far-reaching and very realistic forecasts.

The first display of the Su-57E fighter will take place next week, and then basic technical information should be disclosed. The premiere of the aircraft will be the occasion for various high-profile statements, including from potential buyers. Thus, even before the end of the upcoming MAKS-2019 air show, very interesting news about the contracts of our industry and the future of the fighter market.
120 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -2
    23 August 2019 18: 11
    The option of having an export Su-57 is certainly pleasing, but what about the promise to provide, first and foremost, the needs of its MO?
    IMHO, first you need to saturate your troops with a new plane, and then ...
    1. +7
      23 August 2019 18: 32
      Quote: Nick
      The option of having an export Su-57 is certainly pleasing, but what about the promise to provide, first and foremost, the needs of its MO?
      IMHO, first you need to saturate your troops with a new plane, and then ...

      to remind the story of T 90? if not for India, there would probably not be it at all ... in short "there is no money, but we hold on", at the expense of export, and they will do it for themselves.
      1. -15
        23 August 2019 18: 34
        Quote: Aerodrome
        to remind the story of T 90? if not for India, there would probably not be it at all ... in short "there is no money, but we hold on", at the expense of export, and they will do it for themselves.

        So it was back in the last century, in a different historical era.
        1. -1
          23 August 2019 18: 55
          The mind cannot understand Russia, the common arshin cannot be measured ......
      2. +5
        23 August 2019 19: 11
        Quote: Aerodrome
        if not for India

        If India did not arrange dances with tambourines around a joint project with the Su-57, then it would also not have been sickly from exporting aircraft. Well, now let them continue to dance ...
      3. -2
        23 August 2019 22: 02
        Yes, remind. This is what a brilliant scheme when in the Russian army T90 300+ units, and in the Indian 1000+ units. And in the end, we don’t need it you give Armata, but for now ride on the T72B. All the time it seems to me that our moon-faced with the team learned to cut budgets well, and unfortunately did not manage to set up production facilities. The guys didn’t show the training manual from behind the hill.
        1. +4
          23 August 2019 22: 15
          Quote: MegaMarcel
          What is this ingenious scheme when in the Russian army Т90 300 + pcs, and in the Indian 1000 + units

          And what's wrong with the "scheme"? Weapons are a high-tech commodity. Oddly enough, they sell it ...

          I don’t understand you, "fighters with a redhead": they sell oil and gas - you shout: "bad, oil needle", they sell weapons, you ... shout again request

          So what's wrong with the "schema"?

          Quote: MegaMarcel
          in the meantime, ride on the T72B

          On the T72B3. You mark there at home - these are very different things laughing

          Quote: MegaMarcel
          Guidance to see the guys from behind the hillock not all showed

          You’d better have updated yours ... otherwise you’ll get burned after all, nipadecki Yes
          1. -4
            23 August 2019 23: 07
            I agree. Finally normal business. Hard workers in the Urals for far from Moscow salaries rivet equipment and assembly kits for the same India, Azhira, etc. Someone receives currency for this technique, and the troops are not the best equipment T72B3. That's right. Why spend money on these tractor drivers. No one will roll back and pay for the supply of the best equipment to the troops in foreign currency. But you ardent propagandists all God's dew. But she came out with SU57. If pr-in T90 was established even during the USSR, then SU57 is not. And from here so-so char-ki, quality and reliability. Well and essno impossibility to produce in commodity quantities.
            1. +6
              23 August 2019 23: 23
              Man, cold-blooded. Nerves are not restored request

              Quote: MegaMarcel
              Someone gets currency for this technique ...

              Budget buddy. From which, by the way, then the money for the state defense order is obtained. The same one, according to which the modified (engine - new, LMS - new ... and tede.) Tank T72B3 goes to the troops, and not only. By the way, the fact that he is "not the best" is what you read on the fence, and smart people believe that he is still enough for the tasks at hand. Something like this.

              Quote: MegaMarcel
              with SU57 zagogulin came out

              We kind of talked about tanks? So, SU-57 is, how to say ... not quite a tank wink

              Quote: MegaMarcel
              har-ki ... pr-dit ... count wah

              Well, you see ... they got excited, they began to stutter ... take care of yourself, my friend laughing
              1. +2
                24 August 2019 09: 44
                Unbiased experts say that the T72 B3 is not the best option. We still have thinking people, and not only "effective" managers expressing only "correct" thoughts and voting like everyone else. If the equipment was supplied by UVZ itself, I would still believe that the money from exports goes where it needs to go, but when Mr. Chemezov is in charge of all the affairs, a friend you know who, then my friends spend more on themselves, and not on Armata, SU57 and other Boomerangs with Kurgan. The Bundes already have a Puma BMP with a 400+ DBM. How many Kurgan troops are there? Right. No one. How poorly your theory works. On the residual principle, I would say it works. For the currency, they are ready to push the best samples to even a potential enemy, and their own will somehow ride on a remotorized technique. Profit gentlemen officers!
                1. +3
                  24 August 2019 10: 46
                  Quote: MegaMarcel
                  That T72 B3 is not the best option say unbiased experts

                  You said that. Specialist in tanks, huh ... buddy, I served at the time at T64B, I saw seventy-two times, and touched it with my hands ... including inside (Taman ... neighbors).

                  You saw the tank only in the picture. We will argue further, or how? wink

                  Quote: MegaMarcel
                  We still have thinking people

                  You, fighters, have no "thinking people". By definition Yes

                  But you have a training manual:

                  Quote: MegaMarcel
                  Mr. Chemezov friend you know who

                  In-in ...

                  Quote: MegaMarcel
                  their own somehow remotorized equipment ride

                  Vo-in ... learn the words. You will succeed, over time. In the meantime - minus mine, if request

                  PS: the technique, if we talk about 72B3, has never been "remotorized". You hit again ... by laughing
                  1. +1
                    24 August 2019 16: 54
                    Quote: Cat Man Null
                    never "remotorized".

                    you're not quite right - the engine is replaced ... hi however, it’s more accurate to call it modernization, which includes remotorization ... wink
                  2. -2
                    24 August 2019 17: 37
                    He served on T64B ... Well, how old are you? And where did you get such slang at such a well-deserved age? Well essno T72 B3 compared with T64B breakthrough. T64B went into the series right at the end of 70x. And why is T72 B3 not remotorized? On the part of the modernized engine changed to a more powerful one. And this is remotorization, not a cap. repairs.
                    1. +4
                      24 August 2019 18: 05
                      Quote: MegaMarcel
                      He served on T64B ... Well, how old are you?

                      Hint (pier for dummies, practically): for example, 4-I Guards named. Andropova began replacing her sixties in 1988 wink

                      Quote: MegaMarcel
                      ... this is remotorization, not cap. repairs...

                      Phew ... how difficult it is with you. Well, why should I teach you - you still don’t swim deeper than Vicki ... Go away from sin, otherwise I’ll hurt you inadvertently laughing
                2. +3
                  24 August 2019 14: 22
                  Quote: MegaMarcel
                  Now the Bundes already have BMP Puma with DBN 400 + units. How many Kurgan troops are there?

                  And why do you need "Kurganets" disease? How did he turn you on so much? And why is he in the troops, especially now? A grenade launcher's dream at the cost of a tank?
                  And why do you need "Armata"? Why now? And in this (raw) form. With "Abrams" and T-72B3 \ T-80 \ T-90 cope without any problems.
                  At the storage bases of thousands of T-72 and T-80. Are they in re-melting? But their upgraded versions will give odds to any competitor and cost many times \ much cheaper.

                  This is a solution to the issues of defense capability with a fair amount of budget savings. Commissioning a T-72B3 company at the price of one "Armata" is a rational, prudent spending of budgetary funds. These are tanks for war, not for parade and PR.

                  So change manuals and do not disgrace yourself with such stupid things.
                  If someone just wanted to "cut the budget", they would build just "Armata" and "Kurgantsy". It is for such budget embezzlers that you stand up.
                  1. +3
                    24 August 2019 16: 57
                    Quote: bayard
                    If someone just wanted to "cut the budget", they would build just "Armata" and "Kurgantsy".

                    you are in a polemic - you need to build the latest systems, conduct their military tests, develop tactics of use, and can even break into Syria .... it’s another matter that it’s premature to drive them in large batches ... feel
                    1. -1
                      24 August 2019 19: 44
                      A question of money and opportunity. Something can already be driven if finances allow, something must be treated more wary. In conditions of limited finances, you won’t make much of a fuss. But as they say Moscow was not immediately built.
                  2. -2
                    24 August 2019 17: 54
                    And how can t-72, 80, 90 cope with the Abrams? Poor Leads with a breakdown in 600 mm or Invar with a breakdown in 900 mm?
                    1. -2
                      24 August 2019 19: 44
                      Just for fun, find out what a tank is and what it is used for. Well, for the sake of overall development.
                      1. 0
                        24 August 2019 20: 18
                        The above is about the direct confrontation of the tank against the tank if that. And not their general concept.
                      2. -2
                        24 August 2019 20: 58
                        And according to your "concept", the tanks will stand wall to wall and shoot someone who will break through?
                        https://topwar.ru/23416-analiz-bronirovaniya-tanka-m1a2-sep-abrams.html
                        here it is analyzed in sufficient detail.
                        There is lead2 including a core of depleted uranium, but it seems to be not in the series yet.
                      3. +1
                        24 August 2019 21: 29
                        Come on, here is completely different data https://topwar.ru/159376-tehmash-predstavit-tankovye-bronebojnye-boepripasy-svinec-2-i-mango-m.html
                        Yes, according to the data from the article on your link, how do you take it in the forehead?
                      4. -2
                        24 August 2019 21: 45
                        Quote: TARS
                        Yes, according to the data from the article on your link, how do you take it in the forehead?

                        Cornet?
                        In addition, read about the weak points in the frontal projection.
                        In addition, Lead1 penetrates about 700mm, lead 2 is supposedly 800mm. For the body in the forehead is enough.
                      5. +1
                        24 August 2019 21: 48
                        We are considering in this case the tank against the tank. We will move on to Cornet later.
                        I threw you a link from the 2019 Army with OBPS data, did you decide to lose it?
                        There is written in black and white the penetration of Lead-2 - 600 mm.
                        https://topwar.ru/159376-tehmash-predstavit-tankovye-bronebojnye-boepripasy-svinec-2-i-mango-m.html
                      6. -2
                        24 August 2019 22: 14
                        https://topwar.ru/31337-kineticheskie-snaryady-i-rakety.html
                        black on white
                        "Armor penetration at a distance of 2000 meters along the normal can be estimated respectively as 700 and 800 mm of homogeneous steel."
                        Have you decided to ignore these words?
                      7. +1
                        24 August 2019 22: 20
                        The data from the military exhibition was written to you in black and white, how much and what is breaking through, and you answered someone from the sofa with me. Do you not believe the words of the director of Rostec Group of Companies Sergey Abramov that Lead-2 penetrates 600 mm?
                      8. -3
                        24 August 2019 22: 34
                        Quote: TARS
                        The data from the military exhibition was written to you in black and white, how much and what is breaking through, and you answered someone from the sofa with me.

                        The words from analytics were written to you in black and white, how much and what breaks roughly, and you give me data from some kind of sofa exhibition.
                        Quote: TARS
                        Do you not believe the words of the director of Rostec Group of Companies Sergey Abramov that Lead-2 penetrates 600 mm?

                        No, I do not believe your words. Firstly, lead 2 has different cores, which one was meant there? Secondly 600mm at what angle of armor? Third, at what distance? Thirdly, the data on Lead 2 will be kept secret for a long time and now operate only approximate. I do not know how approximate Sergey Abramov told you.
                        Moreover, these data for different guns will vary. 2a82 uses a larger propellant charge.
                      9. 0
                        24 August 2019 22: 43
                        It’s immediately obvious that you didn’t read the article, it is written in black and white: penetration of Lead-2 is 300 mm, shells are tested on obstacles at an angle of 45 degrees, which gives a thickness of 600 mm. And it is clearly written at a distance of 2000 m. This is official data from the Army 2019 military exhibition, everything is publicly available officially, and you're all talking about some kind of secrecy. And you all poke me an analyst of a certain Andrei Vasiliev, who is that?
                      10. -4
                        24 August 2019 22: 54
                        Quote: TARS
                        This is the official data from the Army 2019 military exhibition, everything is publicly available officially, and you're all talking about some kind of secrecy.

                        Well, since everything is publicly available and everything is official, can you refer to some sort of firing for which these parameters were determined?
                        Regarding secrecy - at one time they also naively talked about the flight range of the Caliber and everywhere the data was published. No less official. And after the actual firing, they had to be quickly corrected and some applicants quickly changed their testimonies.
                        You never answered about the core material. And they ignored my words about different tank guns.
                      11. +1
                        24 August 2019 22: 59
                        The developer officially provided the data at the exhibition, all the media wrote about it, and you all doubt it - without comment. You only see what you want.
                        https://tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/20197241023-yT9Zc.html
                        From the article "For firing such ammunition, smooth-bore guns D-81 (2A26, 2A46M) can be used."
                      12. -2
                        24 August 2019 23: 04
                        Of course I doubt it. Because both the developer and especially the media publish the declared data. Which may differ from the real ones.
                        This is the same as having any safety features to assert that the car meets this safety category. And then it is tested and rated.
                        And the declared data may differ both in one direction and in the other. And this is constantly happening. An example with Caliber I have already given you. It is simply the brightest and so is their sea.
                      13. +1
                        24 August 2019 23: 10
                        In short, I understood your essence, what suits you, then we approve that no, we reject. Yes, if it is an article from one site.
                        https://topwar.ru/31337-kineticheskie-snaryady-i-rakety.html
                        https://topwar.ru/159376-tehmash-predstavit-tankovye-bronebojnye-boepripasy-svinec-2-i-mango-m.html
                      14. -3
                        24 August 2019 23: 34
                        The second is not an article but a piece of news where amazing things are written. :)
                        I will quote now.
                        "A few days before the start of the international military-technical forum" Army-2019 ", structurally part of" Rostec "concern" Techmash "announces preparations for the demonstration of the latest tank ammunition."
                        Can you imagine how many years Lead-2 is the newest? There is nothing in the news about why it is the latest - went to the series, passed some tests, adopted, or what?
                        The Techmash forum will present the 125-mm Lead-2 ammunition and the Mango-M armor-piercing tank prototype. These ammunition are capable of defeating enemy armored vehicles, which even has enhanced dynamic protection. Shells can pierce loopholes and armor of self-propelled guns.

                        And is the armor of self-propelled guns something requiring breaking through the latest shells? It always seemed to me that self-propelled guns didn’t have such a reservation to withstand tank guns.
                        For firing such ammunition can be used smooth-bore guns D-81 (2A26, 2A46M).

                        Let 2A46M mean the whole series, it just has 2A46M-5 already.
                        But Lead-2, as has been repeatedly described, can be used in 2A82.
                        So the news is still news.
                      15. -1
                        24 August 2019 23: 37
                        And now the funniest !!!
                        Quote: TARS
                        In short, I understood your essence, what suits you, then we approve that no, we reject.

                        But it turns out that it’s actually the opposite. You poked me a lot of posts with the words of Sergey Abramov. Pointing them out as true. OK. But for some reason they themselves took for truth only part of his words. And the rest of the type did not notice, or is there no longer the truth? :)))))
                        Improved technical characteristics of ammunition provide for the destruction of almost the entire range of armored weapons and military equipment of a potential enemy at a distance of more than 2 km.

                        Here they are clearly stated that they ensure the defeat of almost the entire spectrum of armored weapons and military equipment. So what are you worried about Abrams. According to the developer, they are breaking through.
                        You see only what you want to see!
                      16. 0
                        24 August 2019 23: 55
                        All do not lose hope of clinging to a straw?
                        For you, I see "hit" and "destroy" the same concept? For example:
                        1. T-72 was struck from anti-tank systems, the tank was damaged but remained combat ready.
                        2. The T-72 was struck from the ATGM, the tank could not withstand the hit, the ammunition detonated and the tank was destroyed.
                        Feel the difference?
                      17. -2
                        25 August 2019 00: 39
                        This is partly nonsense. you've already replaced concepts so many times, I'm not surprised now. If you write about concepts, then give definitions. Keep your personal reasoning to yourself.
                        How efficient is the tank at least when it is immovable? In case of undermining of the track or breaking off the roller or due to the displacement of the internal elements from the impact.
                        How effective is the tank when jamming the tower and other breakdowns?
                        You at least read what a tank is and its tasks. And then talk about the differences.
                      18. 0
                        25 August 2019 06: 14
                        So say that you have nothing to answer in fact and it is easier to blame the subscriber for the substitution of concepts. Generally a classic of the genre.
                      19. -4
                        25 August 2019 10: 23
                        In addition to trolling, you have arguments, otherwise everything that was referenced turned out to be nonsense and you decided to go down to it.
                      20. +2
                        25 August 2019 10: 39
                        I take off the data from the office. the site of the developer of OBPS Lead-2, - you call it nonsense and accuse me of trolling.
                        You throw off analytics to unknown people and pass it off as truth in the first instance. No comments...
                      21. +2
                        24 August 2019 23: 12
                        For this, you immediately immediately perceive the truth as the analytics of a certain know-how from military observation.
                      22. -4
                        24 August 2019 23: 25
                        I did not take anything for the truth. I just took an article written by a person who understands much more than I did and showed you quotes from it. I personally do not have official data and I have not heard that they would be all the more so for products not at all in service or standing recently. Therefore, I have to refer to the opinions of other people. What is wrong here?
                        What should suit me or not suit me? I'm just trying to oppose your peremptory idea, because I think it is not true. I also refuted several of your deviations from it.
                        And about the data I wrote "presumably", unlike you I leave room for doubt if there is no hard evidence.
                      23. +2
                        24 August 2019 23: 42
                        Do you hear yourself or not? As an argument, you bring an article to unknown people (Andrei Vasiliev - who is this?), The author of this article does not even indicate where he takes this data from, but simply writes from himself that he thinks only. And you present it as truth in the first instance.
                        For the statement of the direct developer of this OBPS, you doubt where the logic is?
                        Here is a link to the developer's site. Who else but him knows the real characteristics of their products?
                        http://tecmash.ru/media/novosti/tekhmash-prodemonstriruet-novye-snaryady-na-armii-2019.html
                      24. -3
                        25 August 2019 00: 34
                        Quote: TARS
                        Do you hear yourself or not? As an argument, you bring an article to unknown people (Andrei Vasiliev - who is this?), The author of this article does not even indicate where he takes this data from, but simply writes from himself that he thinks only. And you present it as truth in the first instance.

                        Another lie! And above I pointed you
                        Quote: Red_Baron
                        And about the data I wrote "presumably", unlike you I leave room for doubt if there is no hard evidence.

                        Why are you lying?
                      25. -5
                        25 August 2019 00: 35
                        Quote: TARS
                        For the statement of the direct developer of this OBPS, you doubt where the logic is?

                        I already wrote on this, you could not even read? And why then argue, urgently take textbooks.
                      26. 5-9
                        +2
                        26 August 2019 15: 44
                        You do not understand a few things:
                        1. 40% of the frontal projection M1 - weakened areas that make their way through anything. And there is also not the frontal and the corners of safe maneuvering, with which the M1 is all rotten.
                        2. The remaining 60% have absolutely and far from everywhere maximum reservations.
                        3. Where, in general, do these mm come from? This is all secret, our tank crews only tell the real figures of their and enemy armor and shells at the Frunze Academy.
                        4. Even if no one is lying, then different methods for evaluating BP. We have much more stringent, we can assume that in our case gives BP 20% lower than in NATO.
                        5. There is a specific projectile with a counted 650 mm RHA, which can penetrate a specific armor barrier of 700 mm RHA and not penetrate another with a counted 600 mm RHA.
                        6. OBPS even from one production series give a spread of +/- 10%. From one.
                        7. How much the tank flies and what will fail even in case of non-penetration is not really known.

                        In general, taking FIG knows where the millimeters are from, and based on this, to draw conclusions - naivety is utter.
                      27. The comment was deleted.
                      28. -1
                        24 August 2019 22: 14
                        As for Cornet, KAZ is at M1A2SepV3, so he won’t do anything to him. Yes, and the size of the tower increased compared to the previous version. There, primenenki in the forehead are almost under 1 meter.
                      29. -2
                        24 August 2019 22: 41
                        That is, in your opinion, if the tank is protected by KAZ, is it invulnerable? It sounds somewhat .... professional.
                        "The latest reports on the SEP v.3 project also mention some strengthening of the booking. The purpose of such improvements is to strengthen the general parameters of the armored hull, with special attention to protection against various explosive devices.

                        All other components and assemblies of the M1A2 SEP v.3 tank correspond to the previous SEP v.2 modernization project. Thus, within the framework of the new project, it is proposed to use the existing hull and turret, weapons, power plant, etc. At the same time, some updates to all these units were implied by previous projects of the SEP family. "
                        https://topwar.ru/96507-proekt-modernizacii-tankov-m1a2-sep-v3-ssha.html

                        And once again I suggest you change your mind. Tanks do not stand against each other, shooting to kill. They perform a combat mission. And the defeat of enemy tanks will be carried out by a number of means. And it is not necessary to try to punch him in the forehead. From a strong forehead, tanks do not become invulnerable, American tanks have such a concept of the tank itself and such a grouping of main armor. There are pros and cons to this.
                      30. 0
                        24 August 2019 22: 49
                        At least KAZ gives such chances not weak, Armatu is positioned as "has no analogues in the world" and no one here is embarrassed by this, but here you are immediately at odds - double standards.
                      31. 0
                        24 August 2019 23: 00
                        You see what’s the matter. There is a category of people who often repeat.
                        Quote: TARS
                        as "has no analogues in the world"

                        Trying to catch this and belittle the words of those who said it or from whom they could come. In parallel, trying to spoil information about the product itself. But for most people, all these tricks are just an indicator of a not very big mind.
                        A number of technologies and approaches were listed in Armata, according to which it has no analogues in the world. And this is recognized, including Western publications. But you and your unworthy ironic colleagues understand the matter better. And naturally, this should not bother anyone.

                        Quote: TARS
                        At a minimum, KAZ does not give such weak chances ... and here you are immediately in the counter - double standards. To answer

                        What nonsense? Where did I or someone else say that Armata stands out exactly for KAZ? KAZ can be put on almost any modern tank and not only a tank. Moreover, they already stand on some. And where did I somehow humiliate the installation of KAZ on the Abrams?
                        I consider KAZ a big step forward. With its capabilities, with its limitations. And here you came up with something and attributed to me, just as you criticized Armata. It is very comfortable :)
                      32. +1
                        25 August 2019 10: 20
                        I don’t know about Lead-2, but the Indians already bought Mango
                    2. 0
                      25 August 2019 10: 17
                      Lead, of course, too, and with an index of-2, and Mango, too. And imagine they are enough
              2. 0
                26 August 2019 17: 37
                Here you read the article like that, then you watch the comments, and you see: sensible minus, stupid plus. Everything is clear with the site.
            2. 0
              24 August 2019 07: 56
              Quote: MegaMarcel
              and the troops are not the best equipment T72B3.

              Yes? You seem to stay back in 2015, and now 2019 is running out ... And the T-72B3 model of 2016, this is a completely normal configuration, not the T-90M and Not the T-80U, but quite normal. In any case, in the tank biathlon, the long range of cannon targets was 100 meters farther for them than the Ukrainian T-64s had in their "tank competitions"
        2. -5
          24 August 2019 06: 32
          Yes, remind. What is this ingenious scheme when in the Russian army T90 300+ units, and in the Indian 1000+ units

          With the SU-30, is it somehow different? We supply our troops with the residual principle
          1. -3
            24 August 2019 07: 43
            And you did not notice what kind of truth the uterus is minus here. Wonderful things. There is no better confirmation of our innocence.
            1. -3
              24 August 2019 07: 46
              And you didn’t notice what kind of truth the uterus is here

              And what is there to be surprised, local cheers propagandists are not able to change the truth, only gnashing their teeth minus put
            2. -4
              24 August 2019 19: 46
              And there is no truth. There is another whining of a person who has little idea of ​​what a tank is, what a military-industrial complex is, and so on. But he undertakes to judge everything and ran to a military-themed website with his propaganda whining. Go to the news thread there are a lot of similar ones, you will find a common language.
          2. +2
            24 August 2019 07: 51
            Quote: armata_armata
            We supply our troops with the residual principle

            What is it like? The Su-30 is now one of the most massive fighters of the Russian Aerospace Forces. I would be glad if the rest of the planes were supplied in the same way, "on the leftover" principle. It was just that the Su-35 was "stepping on his heels" strongly.
            1. -2
              24 August 2019 07: 57
              Quote: svp67
              How's that?

              Sergey, hi do not feed.

              People are poorly versed in the subject they are trying to talk about. This was especially amusing:

              Quote: MegaMarcel
              ... while on T72B ride

              That is, the brow is "B", that "B3" - in parallel. From a deep knowledge of materiel, it is obvious laughing
              1. 0
                24 August 2019 19: 32
                Purely technically, if you do not take into account the appearance of a thermal imager and a relic on the sides, nothing has changed as a whole in comparison with the t-72B. The frontal projection is essentially untouched.
            2. -2
              24 August 2019 09: 00
              how? Su-30 is now one of the most popular fighter aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces

              Well, yes, the Indian Air Force 300 units of Su-30, RF Air Force 100 units of Su-30 and this is from 630 issued laughing
              I would be glad if the rest of the planes were supplied in this way, "on a leftover basis."

              There will be no doubt that way good
              ps Hooray, hooray what a supply hi
              1. 0
                24 August 2019 09: 04
                Quote: armata_armata
                Well, yes, the Indian Air Force 300 units of Su-30, RF Air Force 100 units of Su-30 and this is from 630 issued

                Well, how many MiG-21 are still in the Indian Air Force and how many are there in the Russian Air Force, how many Su-34 are there for those MiG-31, Su-35? Announce the entire list
                And if we talk about the history of the Su-30, then it was created as a combat aircraft for export. Well, then Russia had no "desire" to deal with its own air force. So, I don't see anything surprising.
                Let’s remember then how many and who has more T-90
                1. -4
                  24 August 2019 09: 09
                  Well, how many MiG-21 are still in the Indian Air Force and how many are there in the Russian Air Force, how many Su-34 are there for those MiG-31, Su-35? Announce the entire list

                  Oh, the topic is how we translate, it’s not convenient to draw little things about the Su-30, which was exported only after laughing
                  Especially for you, in the Indian Air Force there are more modern Russian-made fighters than in the Russian Air Force (250 operated from 300 Su-30s of India, against 200 Su-30s and Su-35s from the Russian Federation), what hurray is there still a desire to shout?
                  Let’s remember then how many and who has more T-90

                  Already remembered in this thread
                  1. +5
                    24 August 2019 09: 31
                    Quote: armata_armata
                    Especially for you, the Indian Air Force has more modern Russian-made fighters than the Russian Air Force

                    Not true anymore. Most of the Su-30 India assembled at its plant, so they are "Indian" production
                    Quote: armata_armata
                    that cheers there is still a desire to scream

                    You have some kind of strange attitude ... It seems that apart from those voices that are shouting "hurray" in your head, you do not hear anything, and most importantly you do not want to hear.
                    When did India receive the first Su-30s? In 1997. And here, after the failure of the procurement of aircraft, the first large contracts were issued in 2009. For 12 years our aircraft factories have been working for "export" in order to survive.
                    1. -6
                      24 August 2019 09: 36
                      Not true anymore. Most of the Su-30 India assembled at its plant, so they are "Indian" production

                      Of the Indian spare parts and Indian development)) But no, it was all in the Russian Federation, Indian cars can not be said lol
                      When did India receive the first Su-30s? In 1997. And here, after the failure of the procurement of aircraft, the first large contracts were issued in 2009. For 12 years our aircraft factories have been working for "export" in order to survive.

                      True, but stop, and didn’t you shout that the army is being supplied with us not according to the residual principle, but here it turns out they didn’t be supplied with survival, that’s wonderful feel
                      You have some kind of strange attitude ... It seems that apart from those voices that are shouting "hurray" in your head, you do not hear anything, and most importantly you do not want to hear.

                      You are my glitch, did not know, did not know laughing
                      1. +2
                        24 August 2019 09: 44
                        Quote: armata_armata
                        From Indian spare parts and Indian development))

                        Partly yes. Not only that, India and Israeli spare parts and modernization developments apply ...
                        Quote: armata_armata
                        but didn’t you shout that the army is not being supplied with us according to the residual principle, but here it turns out they didn’t be supplied with survival, that’s wonderful

                        You are strange ... First, where and when did I "shout" something to you? Where have we already communicated in person? Or are you trying to pass off what you want as valid?
                        Secondly, I will now say that the army is now being supplied, far from the "leftover principle," but that does not mean that it has always been supplied this way. There in my baht there were a dozen T-72Bs with English inscriptions on banners, you think India refused to buy a batch of T-72Bs in the USSR and they were put into the army, so I had to run and scream at every corner that everything was gone ? And is this the same "residual principle"?
                        Quote: armata_armata
                        You are my glitch, did not know, did not know

                        And judging by your comments that I'm not alone ...
                      2. -6
                        24 August 2019 09: 52
                        You are strange ... First of all, where and when did I "shout" something to you? Where have we already communicated in person? Or are you trying to wishful thinking?

                        Went inside out lol
                        Secondly, I will now say that the army is now being supplied, far from the "leftover principle"

                        Yes, therefore, in India there are more Russian fighters than in the Russian Federation itself. good
                        but this does not mean that it has always been supplied like this. There’s a dozen T-72Bs in my baht with English inscriptions on banners, think India somehow refused to buy a T-72B batch in the USSR and they were put into the army, so I had to run and yell at every corner that everything was gone ?
                        And is this the same "residual principle"?

                        About a super example, the Kremlin bot makes a statement that the USSR army was supplied on a residual basis, since it placed its tanks in the troops, and did not resell to the left customer, but interesting news opens laughing
                        And judging by your comments that I'm not alone ...

                        Yes, a couple of little things that shout in every topic, too, does not exist))
                        Although after that enchanting nonsense about the USSR that you wrote here, I’m not sure of anything ...
                      3. The comment was deleted.
                      4. The comment was deleted.
                      5. The comment was deleted.
                      6. The comment was deleted.
                      7. -1
                        24 August 2019 17: 01
                        Quote: armata_armata
                        Yes, therefore, in India there are more Russian fighters than in the Russian Federation itself.

                        and what's wrong with that? bully if it’s not a secret, do you have data on how many aircraft are needed and what types for the Russian Air Force?
                      8. -3
                        24 August 2019 19: 58
                        It is strange why the whiners and all-crawlers, when the arguments end, begin to label, be rude. Inflamed, they begin to nudge and misinterpret everything and everyone. If such hatred of people for the country to the state, then what is there to do? Faster run to where there are no Kremlin boats and where everyone cries in unison like you.
                        It is worth the mourners get together small and supportive of each other with exposures, it is better to bypass such a bunch. There, even by the fact that they themselves write, they can’t answer, not only in logic, at least.
                        as the leader and buyer of such people, a certain A Navalny, said - "and you don't reflect, you spread."
                        truth-tellers, such truth-tellers ...
                        I especially like this naive stupid passage - the Ural men in the caves of Mordor forge tanks without seeing light and salaries, not like in Moscow. It immediately stank of this nationalism ... in the Urals there are not such people and in Siberia they are not, they are all different nations and they have nothing in common. And again, the early fighters with the regime are recalled, only this is strange they have already abandoned this project, and those who have slower brains work completely use the old training manual.
                        You can take any statements whiners and immediately watch Russophobian programs even long-standing, our friends, truth-seekers and others. Everything exactly as it says there. I even stopped wondering.
                  2. +1
                    25 August 2019 04: 02
                    In fact, everything is true, but lingo rudeness, because minus
                  3. -1
                    28 August 2019 13: 06
                    Quote: armata_armata
                    in the Indian Air Force there are more modern Russian-made fighters, more than in the Russian Air Force (250 operated from 300 su-30 India, against 200 su-30 and su-35 from the Russian Federation), what cheers do you still want to shout?

                    Why do we think so strange? Or is Su-27, which is in service with the Russian Air Force in terms of combat capabilities, somewhat inferior to the Indian Su-30? On avionics, weapons, performance characteristics?
                    Indian Su-30 perform the same functions as those in service with the Russian Federation Su-27 (all modifications including SM), Su-30СМ, Su-34, Su-35. In addition, the entry into the troops of the Su-30СМ, Su-34 and Su-35 continues and will continue. Moreover, the Su-30 is selected as the main m \ f fighter for the Russian Navy, which means they will be built for a long time to come.
              2. -1
                25 August 2019 10: 29
                And then you take into account the Su-34 and Su-35.
          3. +2
            24 August 2019 13: 24
            If not for India, then there would be no Su-30 at all. With the money from the sale of India, they brought it to mind and began to supply it to their army. This is bad? There is another way, throw off your pensions and salaries.
      4. +1
        30 August 2019 11: 11
        Quote: Aerodrome
        Quote: Nick
        The option of having an export Su-57 is certainly pleasing, but what about the promise to provide, first and foremost, the needs of its MO?
        IMHO, first you need to saturate your troops with a new plane, and then ...

        to remind the story of T 90? if not for India, there would probably not be it at all ... in short "there is no money, but we hold on", at the expense of export, and they will do it for themselves.

        Dear, as far as I understand, you do not quite understand how money is distributed from the export of military equipment, do you really believe that you sold T 90 or Su 57 and that money goes for the construction of such equipment for your Moscow region ?!
    2. +1
      23 August 2019 19: 08
      Quote: Nick
      The option of having an export Su-57 is certainly pleasing, but what about the promise to provide, first and foremost, the needs of its MO?
      IMHO, first you need to saturate your troops with a new plane, and then ...

      It does not interfere. Moreover, the contract for the supply of Su-57 for the Russian Air Force is already there.
    3. +1
      23 August 2019 19: 13
      but how does one prevent the other? Factories will do as much as they order. Moscow Region plans its purchases for years to come. this, in fact, does not intersect with export at all .MO is the same customer as anyone else who wants to.
      1. +2
        23 August 2019 19: 16
        Quote: 1976AG
        It does not interfere. Moreover, the contract for the supply of Su-57 for the Russian Air Force is already there.

        Quote: carstorm 11
        but how does one prevent the other? Factories will do as much as they order.

        There is also the concept of production capacity.
      2. +2
        23 August 2019 19: 37
        Factories will do as much as they can, not how much they order. All sadness in this, we are not Union
        1. AAK
          0
          24 August 2019 00: 02
          God forbid, our pilots fly on the next "superplanned" ...
        2. 0
          24 August 2019 17: 02
          Quote: Oleg2003
          Factories will do as much as they can, not how much they order.

          there is such a thing as increasing production capacities, factories go for it in the presence of steady demand ... wink This is how a new plant for the production of S-400 was recently built. hi
    4. +1
      23 August 2019 19: 16
      Apparently part of the sale, and part of the MO will purchase on the money from the sale.
      1. +2
        23 August 2019 21: 19
        Quote: Chaldon48
        Apparently part of the sale, and part of the MO will purchase on the money from the sale.

        I agree, perhaps it was with the expectation of future sales that we managed to reduce the cost for our Air Force.
        In any case, the more they manufacture, the faster they eliminate all the shortcomings, lick the car to the ideal.

        And then, look at the dry close, interesting. I will move out.
      2. -1
        24 August 2019 14: 26
        Right. The Chinese will buy one squadron for review.
        And with this money they will build one squadron for the VKS.
        1. +1
          25 August 2019 00: 39
          So you did not sell any aircraft to China. None. Even those that the older brother forbade to do, did not sell
    5. +4
      24 August 2019 00: 02
      You nick write
      IMHO, first you need to saturate your troops with a new plane, and then ...

      —- The cycle of presenting the exported airborne missile defense to potential customers, their assessment, testing .... decision making ... measured in years if not five years ...
      —- Therefore, the process of exporting weapons and military equipment naturally begins as early as possible and do in parallel with the delivery of domestic aircraft.
      —- Of course, export should not be to the detriment of the NECESSARY QUANTITATIVE DELIVERY of the Armed Forces of Russia.
      1. -2
        24 August 2019 09: 25
        Well, well, then the whole question is in the “necessary” quantity.

        There is an opinion that for local wars and frightening planes and parterre ships once a week we have a VKS and so are more than enough.
    6. 0
      27 August 2019 02: 44
      Quote: Nick
      The option of having an export Su-57 is certainly pleasing, but what about the promise to provide, first and foremost, the needs of its MO?
      IMHO, first you need to saturate your troops with a new plane, and then ...

      Don’t worry so much, and .... there aren’t so many people who are able to buy 5 generations of mega-spin for 150-200 lyam (the Chinese took 100 lyam each for su35). They still need to find. Those who, for everything else, are not even afraid of Amer’s sanctions.
  2. -2
    23 August 2019 18: 55
    The concept of low visibility and the ability to work in a network structure is necessary for offensive operations or "pirate raids" on a not very protected enemy!
    For defense, inclusion in the structure of air defense, you need, in a little different!
    I don’t know how much the real, claimed, corresponds to the aircraft is positioned quite universal ..... so we need to convince potential customers of this !!!
    Let's see in short.
  3. -2
    23 August 2019 19: 06
    Venezuela is hostile to the United States and suffers the consequences of their activities. In the past, it acquired Su-30 fighters from Russia, and in the future, as the economic situation improves, it can purchase the Su-57E

    As the economic situation improves, speak? Oh well... No.
    There, the government has the same "effective managers" as ours, so the economic situation is not expected to improve.
    Regarding the export of Su-57E ... The main thing is not to sell to China and the Turks, although, most likely, they can be sold to them in the first place. The former will take apart the cogs and implement the technologies in their J-20, the latter will merge the technology to NATO partners.
    1. +3
      23 August 2019 19: 17
      I will tell you so about China. I have good friends working for several years in the south. took an apartment in a new house. and so, everything broke in it in 4 years. even the toilet. so let them take it apart.
      1. -3
        23 August 2019 22: 05
        Truth? And I have launched the iPad launched in China for the second year and nothing.
        1. 0
          24 August 2019 20: 02
          Truth? But nothing that it was developed far from China, far from Chinese in technology, and not based on inventions either. It was produced on lines developed not by China, and by standards and requirements not by China. It was not brought to the market by China and does not provide orders and development either.
          But do glamorous iPhones think differently?
      2. +2
        24 August 2019 05: 55
        Quote: carstorm 11
        I have good friends

        Quote: carstorm 11
        everything broke in 4 years. even the toilet

        Either you or your friends lie. I have lived in China for a very long time. Things break down in China no more often than in Russia, in which many things, including (probably) your computer, are made in China.
        Quote: carstorm 11
        so let them take apart

        Su-27, Su-30, Su-33, S-300, S-400, IL-76 have already been dismantled. The result is known.
        1. -2
          24 August 2019 20: 05
          Quote: Tibidokh
          Either you or your friends lie. I have lived in China for a very long time. Things break down in China no more often than in Russia, in which many things, including (probably) your computer, are made in China.

          Things in China are different. How much to pay. This is the trick. You can buy the same product for $ 2 and you can for 20. Absolutely the same thing. But it will work accordingly for its money. This has been encountered many times. From the beginning of the 2000s to the present day.
          1. 0
            25 August 2019 05: 42
            Quote: Red_Baron
            buy the same product for $ 2 and you can for 20

            You need to deal with government procurement. wink
            1. 0
              25 August 2019 10: 25
              I also engaged in procurement, though not state. I understand what you are hinting at, but I came across public procurement and personally accepted, though it was not under my own responsibility and registered the purchased. Largely there is not what you think.
              1. +1
                25 August 2019 11: 05
                Quote: Red_Baron
                I understand what you are hinting at.

                But it was a joke of humor. feel I didn’t hint at anything, I'm sorry if I touched something. hi
                Quote: Red_Baron
                Largely there is not what you think

                Few faced with 223 and 44 Federal Laws. And there was a mess there. However, as elsewhere ...
                1. 0
                  25 August 2019 11: 21
                  And forgive me if it happened harshly. It’s just that it’s customary for us to hang up labels, if government purchases, it means cutting and theft. And really it happens. It would be foolish to deny. But now everything is pretty transparent and can be tracked, moreover, all documents pass through the Accounts Chamber in the end.
                  I was thinking about how to reorganize this business - we need to hire an army of people who will carefully review each order at the planning level and find the best offer, as they say individual work :)))) I’m ironic
                  1. +1
                    27 August 2019 13: 33
                    Quote: Red_Baron
                    And forgive me if it happened harshly.

                    Fine! drinks
                    Quote: Red_Baron
                    you need to hire an army of people who will carefully review each order

                    At this point I breathed air full chest ... prepared to print ... angry
                    Quote: Red_Baron
                    I am ironic

                    Exhaled ... the dispute is canceled ... hi
      3. +1
        24 August 2019 06: 15
        Quote: carstorm 11
        even the toilet

        Are the offal in the toilet exactly Chinese? And then he worked at one enterprise, there they collected these giblets several thousand a day. I can’t even imagine how much. Maybe they are the most? wassat
    2. +2
      27 August 2019 03: 06
      Quote: Tibidokh
      The main thing is not to sell to China and the Turks

      there is no one else, if it is given to others on credit for prestige, perhaps.
  4. 0
    23 August 2019 19: 08
    Actually, the Su-57 is an analogue of the F-22, and not the F-35 at all. A completely different concept and a different plane.
    In other words, the Russian offer is truly unique.
    1. -5
      23 August 2019 22: 09
      Than? That for countries like India it is expensive, but for countries like China it is needed only for technology copying? Who else can buy it? Ankara? Or will it sell in installments for 100 years, followed by parting of debts?
    2. -5
      24 August 2019 20: 03
      Quote: certero
      Actually, the Su-57 is an analogue of the F-22, and not the F-35

      Today, the Su-57 is an exhibition exhibit that does not have engines, radars, or 5th generation weapons. The Chinese are already openly laughing at our attempts to call it a new fighter.
      1. +1
        25 August 2019 10: 36
        Saxahorse Yesterday, 20:03
        And generally flies on wood.
        And the Chinese, as always, simultaneously laugh and buy
        1. -3
          25 August 2019 20: 11
          Quote: sivuch
          And generally flies on wood.

          And there is. On firewood actually. If anyone has not noticed, the Su-57 is behind the schedule by 10 years. Even if they manage to bring it to mind, this is the car of yesterday.
          1. 0
            26 August 2019 07: 26
            Saxahorse Yesterday, 20:11
            And there is. On firewood actually. If anyone has not noticed, the Su-57 is behind the schedule by 10 years. Even if they manage to bring it to mind, this is the car of yesterday.

            yeah, the F-22 sawed for 20 years, something in 2005 was not heard the cries of the Americans that it was already outdated at the time of operation. Boltology again
      2. 0
        26 August 2019 07: 23
        Saxahorse August 24, 2019 20:03 pm
        Today, the Su-57 is an exhibition exhibit that does not have engines, radars, or 5th generation weapons. The Chinese are already openly laughing at our attempts to call it a new fighter.

        don't get excited you again. And so everyone is aware that yours won. The F-35 is the best fighter in the world, the American army is invincible, and the Russian gas station. Amen
  5. +1
    23 August 2019 19: 58
    Whoever says anything, but our aircraft designers and everyone involved in the development of the Su-57 are great fellows and real patriots. In the "saints" of the 90s, they did not give up and did not fall over the hillock, but continued to work for the good of the Motherland. And now they are working hard on fine-tuning a promising aircraft. If foreign orders come in, and they should be received, it will be possible to quickly get rid of "childhood diseases". As a result, with the money allocated by the Ministry of Defense for the purchase of "dryers", we will not receive a "raw", but an already finished combat fighter. Who will be worse from this? I answer: to our "unfriendly partners".))
  6. -1
    23 August 2019 21: 51
    They didn’t put it into service yet, but they were about to push for export. This commander-in-chief is completely bad with the personnel. Some Potemkin villages are being built. Even Indians do not want to work with such people. Friend Erjep is finally handsome. The C400 hasn’t received everything yet, but already to the question whose Crimea Crimea was issued by the owner, certainly not Russian. From this is an ally. In the morning he and Ami, on their own, at lunch, but in the evening he wants to have a bite with the Russian autocrat.
    1. +1
      24 August 2019 09: 11
      Where did you see allies in Russia. Even not so long ago, Vietnam was beaten by the USA and not finished off only thanks to the USSR, it is already watching with interest and cooperating with the USA.
    2. -1
      24 August 2019 20: 06
      You have already written so many nonsense and everything is numb to you, so what offended you so much, poor fellow?
  7. -2
    23 August 2019 22: 19
    Just do not sell yellow, at least 10 years !!!!!
  8. 0
    23 August 2019 22: 29
    He is healthy again ... They themselves didn’t take them into service, but they prepared to sell them for export. We ourselves are not tired of stepping on the same rake?
    1. 0
      24 August 2019 05: 37
      The point here is not only in aircraft as such, but also in machine tools and other high-tech equipment for their production. This equipment is available in Russia either in insufficient quantity or is already very outdated, and it has to be "procured" for replacement through intermediaries. Everything costs a lot of money, and sometimes it's not just about money.
    2. -3
      24 August 2019 22: 26
      You write nonsense. And I understand that any words will not be relevant for you, because you do not have knowledge, and fantasy is more important. But I will write anyway. The release of some products is relevant in terms of price, mass production, manufacturability only in a series. If this is a complex product where a large number of different parts are produced separately, it is still complicated. The money allocated for production goes not only to production, but also to set up or manufacture lines, their subsequent modernization, purchase of equipment, and so on. Ensuring the immediate purchase of a large series is not so simple. This is a lot of money. Which is not always there. But without mastering the production it is difficult to wait for manufacturability and cost reduction. Or fill the line from time to time in small batches. As a way out for complex and expensive production this is a commercial production. In different forms it happens. This is an export model.
      Also, they wrote excellently above that export preparation should be done very well in advance, since contracts and other things have been prepared for years.
      So there are two options. One for which the talkers advocate is production only for themselves. This will be in small batches and most likely not regularly. The budget is not rubber, and it is still necessary to produce and purchase a lot of things, including in the military sphere. And the second option, which they always follow, is that same commercial production - for the civilian sphere or for export. Orders from these directions will help fill the lines and take their work when there are no orders from the Moscow Region. And production, the state, and so on will receive money, give jobs, improve manufacturability, and that's all along the chain.
  9. 0
    24 August 2019 08: 06
    supply will probably be "unpainted". I mean, without a radio absorbing / scattering coating.
  10. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  11. +1
    25 August 2019 03: 26
    How can you pour so much water into such a short information message.! ...
  12. 0
    29 August 2019 07: 06
    Of course, it is necessary to sell modern equipment, but not everything and not everyone. For example, air defense systems, electronic warfare systems, etc., cannot be sold to countries such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, and many other US allies, even in the export version. And countries with a neutral orientation such as Vietnam, Indonesia and many others can, but not for debt, not for palm oil, not for dollars and other candy wrappers, but for gold, copper, uranium and other strategic metals and raw materials (oil, etc.). P.).
  13. 0
    1 September 2019 19: 54
    Once again, this inappropriate comparison of completely DIFFERENT Su-57 and F-35 aircraft is striking.
    All they have in common is the same 'stealth', and nothing more!
    Fundamentally different layouts.
    No zhezh! We will compare the hatchback with a sedan ... fool