Who needs a generation race in aviation?

85
We can already say with confidence that China has also entered into a fascinating process of measuring how modern aircraft are the fifth or fifth generation.

Who needs a generation race in aviation?




Why this is needed is understandable without equivocation. The steeper the plane (this applies not only to fighters), the easier and more profitable it can be sold.

After all, it’s not without reason that our many media outlets from time to time flourish with headlines like “****** considers the issue of buying Su-57”, “**** is thinking of acquiring Su-57” and so on. Further thought, the matter does not go on yet, but this is still the main administrative resource not involved. Let's see in general how it will come out in the end.

Therefore, the “generationometer” is an important tool in this process.

The whole problem is that we have different devices. And their scales are not graduated in the same way as we would like. Therefore, strange things arise.

For example, the Americans classify their F-15, F-16 and carrier-based F / A-18 aircraft as third-generation fighters. Initially, they were created as part of one strategy, so everything is fine here. It is clear that during such a long service the same F-16 has undergone upgrades so many times since the 1979 of the year that today it is, to put it mildly, a different aircraft.

These modernizations in the USA are referred to the intermediate generation. A sort of "3,5 generation."

Well, the sweet couple F-22 and F-35 - this is the fourth generation.

In general, everything is pretty clear. This is how all NATO countries classify their planes; there, except the USA, there is someone to let them out.

And the same way went, by the way, and China. His J-10 in the PRC belongs to the third generation, and the modifications of the J-10B, which played a lot with visibility plus put radars with AFAR, and the J-10C, which greatly reduced radar visibility and put an optical-radar viewing station, - to the very generation of 3,5.

In principle, it is logical. To make it easier to figure out and compare your planes and those against which you may have to work.

China's policy is such that anything can happen. At least, the Celestial Empire defends its interests in full and quite dignified.

But their inconspicuous multi-role fighter J-20 in China belong to the fourth generation. Following on all indicators.



Why is everything wrong in Russia, it’s hard to say.

But we always had our own path of development, often there, beyond the borders of the incomprehensible. So, according to Russian Feng Shui, all of the aforementioned third and a half generation fighters belong to the fourth, and the fourth to the fifth.

And so our Su-30 is the fourth generation, and the Su-57 becomes the fifth generation fighter.

How many keyboards have already been broken on the topic of the superiority of the Su-57 over the F-35 or vice versa, it is scary to imagine. In fact, the aircraft are of the same class, but, according to this confusing and slurred rating system, Russia is ahead of the United States by a whole generation. By pulling the ears of “their” fourth generation to “our” fifth.

Well, what to do with the Chinese J-16?



J-16 - a new multi-role fighter, recently entered service and little known to the general public. Until. Now, if you take and disassemble it "in the cogs", then it is neither there nor here. That is, it’s definitely not 3,5 according to “their” terminology and not 4 +, if according to ours.

And why not?

And because the Chinese have returned to the old principle of multi-purpose. You must admit that recently the planes were very clearly divided: attack aircraft, fighter-bombers, bombers, fighters for gaining air superiority, interceptors, and so on.

However, the J-16, which is just outrageously similar to the Su-30 (and they are similar, was presented by the Ukrainians), is modernized and fairly modernized.



That's essentially J-16 - a multi-role fighter of a wide range of applications. The Chinese themselves say that yes, the Su-16MKK was taken as the basis for J-30, but the avionics in China were altered so much that J-16 is ahead of the Russian counterpart by a whole generation.

Yes, there is a radar with AFAR there, it is a fact that saddens the Indian military, who have Su-30MKI, who have no AFAR. But the Indian Air Force due to the number of anyone can confuse. As for quality, this is a difficult question, but ...

Nevertheless: where are the J-16 going to be?

And most importantly - is it necessary?

All these generations are not just from the evil one, but nothing more than a marketing move, if you think carefully. Well, what's the difference, how to call Su-30 with letters, 4 + or 4 ++, is it better to fly from this?

No, he’d better not fly. And it will not be worse if you transfer to the category 3 or 3,5. Just because it's Su-30. MKI, MKK, MK2 ...

Professionals know this very well, and they simply do not need these digit classes.

There are some good aircraft such as Su-57 and F-35.





These are really advanced cars with great potential. They can be called the fourth generation, can be called the fifth, can be the sixth. This is not the point.

The essence of the combined performance characteristics of these aircraft, their combat and (especially) operational capabilities and (important!) Prices.

The fact that a supposedly “fifth” generation of Su-57 aircraft did not line up is clear. The plane, as it were, is not produced in such quantities, it is not used (well, except for the demonstration flight in Syria and with Putin), it is not in a hurry to enter the Russian army either.

Conclusion?

The conclusion is simple. So-so airplane, call it the fifth generation, do not call it ... And the people take not the fifth in our opinion, not the fourth in the western, but the reliable and well-known Su-30 and Su-35.



And everything is pretty logical.

The fact that the Americans arranged a magnificent PR campaign for their F-35 and have already released them for more than four hundred is understandable. Need to sell. But they are selling! It is clear that someone (like the Danes) may refuse, but pre-orders and intentions on more than 3 thousands of cars!

And why? But because the plane really flies.

And here, in place of the Yankees, I would simply pour gold on Israel, whose F-35 really fly and carry out combat missions to settle accounts with Hezbollah and Iraq.

What is the difference with whom, most importantly - they fly and perform. And the whole world sees it and votes with a wallet.

But for the Su-57 and J-20 no one is in a hurry. No matter how much they are praised by ours, that by the Chinese, planes do not fly and do not fight.

And as much as you can talk about the fact that "they don’t understand their happiness", still the best advertisement arms - the battle.

And you can say a lot of things.

To summarize, I want to say the following: all these divisions into generations, attempts to give the aircraft some sort of classification 4, 4 +, 4 ++, 5 - it's all just marketing and nothing more.

There are good airplanes, there are medium ones and there is so-so. The first ones are produced in thousands and for many years serve the countries they are armed with (we take the entire line of MiG-29, Su-27, F-15, F-16, Mirages, some were very much so on), and there are some that will be forgotten after a very short amount of time.

And one does not have to go far for an example. Here it is - F-22. In ten years, experts and Wikipedia will remember him.

Actually, all this puzzling division of airplanes into generations is nothing more than an attempt to fill them with a price. So far, only the Americans are getting it. But on the flight and combat characteristics, the digital generation is not reflected in any way.

We do not need digits. We need good airplanes. Modern and high quality. Which will operate with modern weapons and combat systems. Let marketers and couchs fight with numbers.

Based on materials: [leech =] https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/china/2019-10-03/doc-iicezueu9805037.shtml [/ leech].
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

85 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -4
    10 October 2019 05: 25
    "And here, in the place of the Yankees, I would simply give gold to Israel, whose F-35s actually fly and carry out combat missions to settle scores with Hezbollah and Iraq.", Everything is fun with the F-35 until they are shot down, it's just a matter of time. And how are the Moomin trolls, the sun will rise and everyone will see how stupid they are.
    1. -2
      10 October 2019 06: 15
      And how to shoot them down, they are invisible?
      1. -5
        10 October 2019 07: 30
        But we know that there is a gopher, which means he has a cordik, see him or not. There is a good example of this for Yugoslavia, and in Iraq I remember their valnuli. Actually for what to shoot down, you can burn on the ground.
    2. +2
      10 October 2019 06: 16
      Quote: Strashila
      until they get shot down, and it's just a matter of time

      Yes, for every tricky nut there is a threaded bolt.
      1. +2
        10 October 2019 07: 35
        Well, or a sledgehammer with a crowbar.
    3. +6
      10 October 2019 06: 21
      Any aircraft actively used in hostilities will be shot down. The question is when this will happen. In the case of the F-35, this will not happen soon, since in addition to good performance characteristics, it is extremely important for any aircraft to use it competently, and this machine is used by large specialists in the application.
      1. +12
        10 October 2019 07: 54
        In the case of the F-35, this will not happen soon, since in addition to good performance characteristics, it is extremely important for any aircraft to use it competently, and this machine is used by large specialists in the application.

        to release aviation corrected ammunition from the territory of a neighboring state is not an indicator of carrier effectiveness. It is rather an indicator of the cunning and arrogance of the Jews.
        1. -6
          10 October 2019 08: 04
          I would like to know what kind of ammunition can be used to attack targets in the Aleppo region, in the Palmyra region and in the Syrian-Iraqi border, as well as in the southern suburbs of Baghdad, and the skies of which "neighboring state" are used for this?
          1. +9
            10 October 2019 09: 03
            I would like to know what kind of ammunition can be used to attack targets in the Aleppo region, in the Palmyra region and in the Syrian-Iraqi border, as well as in the southern suburbs of Baghdad, and the skies of which "neighboring state" are used for this?

            from Aleppo to the Mediterranean Sea no more than 100km, quite reachable even for the obsolete Have Nap, not to mention Delilah and the like.
            And about Baghdad laughed. Has Iraq got air defense? Or did Iraq suddenly cease to be an American puppet?
            1. -4
              10 October 2019 10: 03
              The first one. From Aleppo to the sea more than 100 km, and these kilometers include the territory of Turkey, which is unlikely to allow the passage of Israeli ammunition over its territory. And the entire route passes over the sea near the detection zone of Russian and Syrian radars. The second one. During the attacks in Aleppo, SDB bombs were used (the wreckage of one of them was found and photographed). The maximum launch range is 120 km at launch from 10 m. That is, the carrier in any case be in the Syrian air defense coverage area.
              Third. Iraq has no air defense, but in order to reach Baghdad, one has to fly through Syria, through the air defense coverage area (which includes the latest Russian systems and Chinese radars, which are also not of the worst quality). In addition, strikes were made on T4 near Palmyra, deep in the rear of Syria, and on the area of ​​the Syrian-Iraqi border, which is also far from the "neighboring state."
              In addition, since when did the territory of Lebanon become a place for Syria in the direction of which there is no fire?
              1. +6
                10 October 2019 10: 18
                through the air defense coverage area (which includes the latest Russian systems and Chinese radars, also not of the worst quality).

                Do not write nonsense sucked from your finger. Russian air defense is fragmented and covers only 4 points on the map of Syria - Khmeimim, Shairat, Tiyas and Tartus. They can pose a threat only in case of attacks on these objects. Syrian air defense is also fragmented and is also located mainly in the west of Syria. The distance of the nearest posts from Baghdad is more than 700km. Israeli aircraft can fly towards Baghdad through Jordan and therefore they need not fear any air defense.
                In addition, since when did the territory of Lebanon become a place for Syria in the direction of which there is no fire?

                Yes, now you are likely to tell us about the aggressive actions of Syria against innocent Israel over the past 5 years. Syria is direct and shells and bombs Lebanon. You can be confused with Israel
                1. -7
                  10 October 2019 10: 42
                  Over the past five years, the Syrian air defense has shelled not only Israel (and even shot down an F-16 fighter over Israeli territory), but also Lebanon, Jordan and even Cyprus. During this time, the north of Israel was repeatedly fired from the territory of Syria, and not only "by mistake" when shells fell on the Golan during the fighting, but also purposefully along Kherson and Lake Kinneret. For which he was just as repeatedly hit on the head.
                  1. +10
                    10 October 2019 10: 51
                    Syrian air defense over the past five years has fired not only on Israeli territory

                    Air defense can not fire at territories. This is not artillery. Air defense strikes on vehicles heavier than air, which threaten the area or object protected by this air defense.
                    (and even shot down an F-16 fighter over Israeli territory)

                    that is, the F-16 white and fluffy Jews grazed peacefully over the territories of Israel, and the vile Syria was horseradish and knocked him down for no reason ....
                    Somewhere I read similar ... but, I remembered, the Grimm brothers had something similar in style of presentation
      2. +3
        10 October 2019 08: 50
        Quote: Zeev Zeev
        In the case of the F-35, this will not happen soon, since in addition to good performance characteristics, it is extremely important for any aircraft to use it competently, and this machine is used by large specialists in the application.
        Specialists should work against specialists. Well, the technique is appropriate. Competent use - is it in a safe zone (stealth), against unarmed (there are no confrontation systems of the corresponding class)?
        1. 0
          10 October 2019 10: 12
          If you really think the Jews are idiots who will fly "with a bare heel on the sword", then I can only sympathize. The times of heroic head-on attacks on prepared air defense positions ended long ago.
          By the way, the "unarmed" Syrians are armed with the entire spectrum of Soviet / Russian air defense systems from ZPU-1 to S-300 inclusive and use data from S-400 radars installed in Khmeimim. So all these systems against the F-35 are not dangerous?
          1. +3
            10 October 2019 11: 13
            Quote: Zeev Zeev
            If you really consider Jews idiots
            Do you want to attribute something to me? Where have I even indirectly claimed this?
            There was the word "surreptitiously." Perhaps, in your alter universe, this is tantamount to "idiotic".
            However, flaunting strikes from a safe zone on practically unarmed (in the absence of proper air defense) is sour.

            Quote: Zeev Zeev
            That is, all these systems against the F-35 are not dangerous?
            If the F-35 were to fly into Syria ... check?
            And in the current application of the F-35 - Avro Lancaster in yellow-orange paint, and hang from the corner reflectors outside - the same result will be.
            1. -2
              10 October 2019 11: 31
              F-35s operate by flying into Syria. And F-16s fly into Syria. And proper air defense (obviously sufficient to destroy the "yellow Lancaster, hung with corner reflectors") there in bulk. Only the F-35 is a slightly different machine, and it is extremely difficult to detect it with radar in general, and with the use of proper equipment, it is almost impossible at all. And this has been verified many times.
              1. 0
                11 October 2019 12: 34
                Quote: Zeev Zeev

                F-35s operate, flown into Syria. And F-16s fly into Syria.
                Do they use weapons in the air defense zone, while being above the territory of Syria is there enough time for an answer? When was this?
            2. -1
              10 October 2019 23: 38
              if you are a child or regardless of age you are a minor d, then yes, the argument for the sly for those like you passes by 1000%, but if you are still an adult, you must understand that the performance of a combat mission with minimizing risks for one’s is a priority for everyone normal military, well, except for those who still give birth to women.
              1. -1
                11 October 2019 12: 27
                Quote: Tatyana14
                if you are a child or regardless of age you are a minor q, then yes the argument is sneaky for those like you pass by 1000%
                Flaunting such actions - is this not a property of minors? I called somewhere to climb on the rampage?
                1. 0
                  12 October 2019 18: 02
                  However, flaunting strikes from a safe zone on practically unarmed (in the absence of proper air defense) is sour.
                  1. 0
                    13 October 2019 01: 47
                    Which of these letters indicates a call to climb on the rampage?
                    Quote: Flaunt
                    To show ostentatious courage, indifference to danger.
                    Boasting to flaunt something, draw something.
                    Only there is no danger, no courage.
          2. +1
            10 October 2019 21: 44
            Syria’s S300 has one division, do you consider this a powerful air defense? If Syria had at least a division equipped with this complex and a couple of regiments of modern fighter aircraft with target aircraft. Here would be a more interesting conversation. And so Syria has only a little, but there is nothing to defend itself, there is no real power.
            1. 0
              10 October 2019 23: 15
              The S-300 in Syria has one division, the Buk-M two divisions, the Pantsir three divisions, the S-200 two divisions, the Wasp three divisions, the Cube four divisions ... But this is still not enough. But if there was such an air defense belt around Damascus, as there was during the USSR around Moscow ...
              1. 0
                11 October 2019 10: 07
                Just little by little, as I said. There are several other divisions C125 and C75. The carapace, wasp are short-range and low-altitude comlexes. It is impossible to organize a continuous air defense zone with this, to reflect a serious raid too.
                1. +1
                  11 October 2019 10: 09
                  Oh really? In Khmeimim air defense is an order of magnitude less.
                  1. 0
                    11 October 2019 12: 33
                    Yes, but one object is guarded there. If someone strikes a target that is twenty thirty kilometers from this base, it will be possible to repulse it vryatli. The curvature of the earth will interfere with the C400, and the shells simply will not reach. The same is with Syrian air defense, only there is also more antediluvian equipment.
                    1. 0
                      11 October 2019 12: 36
                      The S-300 also guards only the IRGC base near Masyaf and the missile plant located there. There are two batteries.
                      1. 0
                        11 October 2019 12: 40
                        I have no idea what protects the C300, but the division turns out to be very liquid if it has only two batteries. In Russia there are four of them.
                      2. 0
                        11 October 2019 12: 59
                        Two batteries from the division are located near Masyaf and their location is known throughout the world.
      3. bar
        0
        10 October 2019 09: 16
        The key question is not so much the "literacy" of the use and skill of specialists, but rather against whom this technique is used. Against the Hezbollah natives, there is not much difference between the F-35 and the F-16. Technique, literacy and skill are manifested only in a real war with a real enemy. Let's hope that this will take a long time to come. In the meantime, yes, you can scratch your own PCS.
        1. -1
          10 October 2019 10: 14
          Mmm. Is the Iranian military covered by Syrian air defense (armed with the entire spectrum of air defense up to and including S-300PMU2) is this not a real enemy?
          1. bar
            +4
            10 October 2019 10: 25
            Iranian military covered by Syrian air defense

            Isn't that funny yourself? Small groups of the Iranian military on the territory of the belligerent devastated Syria, covered by ancient air defense with poorly trained personnel, which is also limited by Netanyahu's murky agreements with GDP - is this a "real enemy" for the competent and skillful F-35? And this is a reason to boast of this literacy and skill?
            1. -1
              10 October 2019 10: 36
              "Ancient" S-300, delivered last year, with crews trained by Russian specialists? Ancient "Pantsir-S" with the same crews? Ancient Buk-M2E and Tor-M2E? And this is not to mention other air defense systems, of which there are several hundred.
              1. bar
                +3
                10 October 2019 10: 47
                By today's standard, the ancients, of course. Finding training - what can you teach semi-literate fighters in a short period of time? The basics were taught for sure, but mastery is far from there. Well, "Netanyahu's murky agreements with VVP" do not need to be discounted. It is they who ensure your literate mega-specialists succeed in the fight against the natives. This is not for you to fight the same Turks. And you are not particularly encroaching on the territory of Iran itself, even though it does not have the S-400 yet.
                1. -5
                  10 October 2019 11: 24
                  We have no state of war with Iran, so we will attack its sovereign territory, if not at all. And Iraq and Syria are fighting de jure with us. And in their territory, from the point of view of law, the war for the Independence of Israel of 1948 continues.
                  Now about the preparation of Syrian air defense. S-300 systems have been in service for more than a year, during which time experienced Syrian air defense officers who had served on the S-75/125/200 for years could not lay the foundation, but give full control of all capabilities. Other new air defense systems are in service even more and there was a lot of time to study them.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. 0
                      10 October 2019 12: 39
                      Nuclear center in Iran? And when was he bombed?
                      1. bar
                        0
                        10 October 2019 13: 04
                        Well, call it a cyberattack at Natanz. Does it fundamentally change something? This is not interference in the internal affairs of a country with which you are "not at war"?
                      2. -3
                        10 October 2019 14: 32
                        Cyberattack? Hm. And many Iranians died? More than from shelling of Iranian militants.
                      3. bar
                        +2
                        10 October 2019 14: 34
                        And many Israelis died from shelling of Iranian militants? More than Israeli bombing?
                      4. -2
                        10 October 2019 14: 38
                        We didn't bomb Iran. For now. And Iranian militants have repeatedly fired at Israel. And Iranian proxies like Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad too.
                      5. bar
                        +1
                        10 October 2019 14: 42
                        AND? Do not slip away from the question. What is the ratio of deaths on both sides?
                      6. -2
                        10 October 2019 14: 57
                        No one was killed during the cyber attack. From Iranian missiles in 2006 killed 44 civilians.
                      7. bar
                        +2
                        10 October 2019 15: 19
                        And how many civilians died from Israeli bombs and missiles? Although what I mean. Competent and skilled professionals do not kill civilians ...
                      8. -1
                        10 October 2019 16: 52
                        And how many civilians died from Israeli bombs for all the bombing of Syria?
    4. The comment was deleted.
  2. +1
    10 October 2019 06: 23
    Let marketers and couchs fight with numbers.
    But these tsiferki very much affect tsiferki of the sale amounts!
  3. +5
    10 October 2019 06: 23
    Generational division is understandable, at least in our classification. And I do not consider it pure marketing for the purpose of sale. People always need to be classified in order to understand. And generational division shows the key advantages of some aircraft over others. So I do not agree with the author of the article.
    1. +1
      10 October 2019 06: 46
      The author is right about the game for generations. Each new aircraft should simply be better than the previous one in terms of cost / effectiveness. In principle, the military in the units are only interested in two factors - combat effectiveness and operating conditions. The third, no less important factor - the cost, worries only a narrow circle of people in the leadership of the armed forces.
      1. +2
        10 October 2019 07: 11
        Quote: Sergey Valov
        new plane should be just better than the previous in terms of cost / effectiveness

        We switched from piston engines to jet engines - that's the change of generations. This is not marketing. These are fundamentally new properties. I don't understand the cost / effectiveness criterion until it is shown in numbers. Was the MiG-15 more expensive and more efficient than the MiG-3 and at what time? How much more is the cost? How much more efficient?

        Was there importance in the classification of generations at that time?
        Was it important for marketing?

        This is not for specialists - they already know that. This is not for marketing - experts buy it, but they already know it. This is for ordinary people to make it easier to understand. Why did Mig 1.44 not go into production? So it was obsolete [for example], belonging to the previous generation according to [such and such] criteria. But this can be explained to me like that. But experts already know.

    2. +1
      11 October 2019 05: 44
      Personally, I like this quite revealing picture. The truth is already slightly outdated.

  4. +3
    10 October 2019 07: 19
    It’s only in wartime criteria, estimates of military equipment become clear and understandable !!!
    EFFECTIVE - NOT EFFECTIVE !!!
    Now it’s time for merchants, because there will be a lot of chatter, nonsense, boast!
    Okay, it will do so, if only it doesn’t come to real tests / comparisons!
  5. +4
    10 October 2019 07: 40
    Good and correct article.
    Fighters do not buy advertising from a television store, at least they must fly, but ideally fight.
    Only now does the eye hurt the ritual spit in Ukraine, is it like before, in any dissertation it was necessary to insert a quote from Lenin and the classics of Marxism-Leninism, didn’t they say anything about Ukraine, otherwise they don’t print?
    I don’t know how they managed to buy the Su-30 in Ukraine and where it came from, and, most importantly, why, the Chinese had enough samples. That's what TASS writes about it.

    In total, 1991 Su-2012 / Su-178 family fighters were delivered to China from 27 to 30, including 38 Su-27SK single-seat fighters, 40 Su-27UBK two-seat combat training aircraft, 76 Su-30MKK multi-role fighters and 24 Su-30MK2 fighters.

    But that's not all
    On November 19, 2015 the state corporation "Rostec" announced the conclusion of a contract for the supply of 24 Su-35 fighters to China (China became the first foreign buyer of these aircraft).

    The issue of selling the license for the Su-27 to China in 1996 and the supply to China of hundreds of AL-31F engines in the 2000s, on the basis of which the Chinese made their engine, including for the latest generation aircraft, is a separate topic.
    So the origins of the appearance in China of modern combat aircraft are visible to the naked eye.
    What TASS writes with pride.
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/tass.ru/info/2454199/amp
    And the Chinese are proudly broadcasting that they created modern aviation for themselves over 20 years, modestly omitting what they created on the basis of Soviet technologies, which they generously shared with them in one form or another.
    The Chinese, of course, well done, but what about those who helped them with technology and samples and just about the question will be about competition with Russian Chinese aircraft
    On the world market.....
    1. +8
      10 October 2019 08: 26
      Avior (Sergey) Today, 07: 40
      what they created on the basis of Soviet technologies, which they generously shared with them in one form or another.

      first find out what technology is. To sell an engine (or plane) is not to transfer / sell technology. And what specific technology did they sell? Film air cooling technology? Thermal barrier coating technology? Technology for the location and shape of flame tubes, swirls or nozzles? Technology in the shape and material of the rotor blades or the blades of the turbine straightener apparatus? Hydraulic system technology? Only one engine accounts for several hundred technological components. The production of each requires not only project documentation, but also the ability to obtain materials of the required parameters for resistance to various loads. Judging by the fact that the Chinese are not too advanced in the subject of engines, they tried to copy the technology, but did not get the finished one. You seem to be in the subject. Where did such stereotyped cheers-patriotic statements in the spirit of Lean and Nikomedov come from?
      1. +2
        10 October 2019 09: 07
        Of course, to sell technology, and even better with technological equipment is better for the buyer.
        But the current model is also nothing if the buyer is not completely retarded.
        And the Chinese are clearly not retarded.
        And a few active samples with which you can experiment, for example, insert your own detail and see what will work?
        And if you tighten it like that, what will happen?
        And if you give this detail to destructive research? Will it break? So it's nothing, we still have it.
        And if you sell a few hundred samples, it’s generally wonderful.
        It is possible to conduct parallel studies and copying (and the Chinese, after all, do not primitively copy, make their own, but the fact that the Soviet base is not to go to the grandmother).
        Take a production license? So generally great!

        And do not think that copying a form is difficult.
        This was not a problem in the old days, there was a technology for precision casting of titanium using investment casting, it was used for casting aircraft engine parts.
        And now high-precision metalworking has appeared with the copying of samples.
        After all, the British sold the engines after the war to the USSR (or Mikoyan won the billiard by the famous bike), and not the manufacturing technology.
        And American B-29s in the USSR generally appeared by chance.
        And nothing, copied and creatively developed, then beating the British and Americans.
        Although the post-war technological level of industry was not so hot.

        Do not think that the Chinese will not be able to.

        The fact that they are developing their technology on the basis of Soviet and Russian models is obvious.
    2. 0
      10 October 2019 21: 53
      I think that if the planes were not sold to China then, now we would not have factories in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, and in Irkutsk. Would disappear in the dashing 90s.
  6. +11
    10 October 2019 07: 57
    Where did the author get that in the west f-35 and f-22 are equated to the 4th generation? Maybe he shared a link to the documents, and then on the English-speaking Internet these two planes are for some reason ranked as the 5th generation. Even the manufacturer himself writes that the f-35 is the fifth generation. It is only among the Chinese that inconspicuous aircraft are ranked as 4th generation.
    Message to the author: better preparation is needed and if you say something, then give a link to an article or document.

    PS I understand that the author wanted to convey to readers, but such blunders do not need to be done.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. +2
      10 October 2019 08: 45
      Where did the author get that in the west f-35 and f-22 are equated to the 4th generation? Maybe he shared a link to the documents, and then on the English-speaking Internet these two planes are for some reason ranked as the 5th generation.

      on the "English-speaking Internet" there are still common opinions that there is no civilization beyond the West Quoddy lighthouse, we are drinking vodka with bears in an embrace and playing accordions)) but seriously, the F-22 is definitely an aircraft of the 5th generation, F- 35 - very, very controversial. And what does the manufacturer write - well, to sell this product to him, is it surprising?
      1. +5
        10 October 2019 09: 45
        F-22 is certainly a 5th generation aircraft, the F-35 is very, very controversial. And what does the manufacturer write - well, is it surprising to him to sell this product?

        Do not measure the generation of their performance characteristics and then everything will fall into place. We and the United States are the 5th generation, because we went through 5 stages of changing the platform of manned jet aircraft, which naturally to some extent dragged along with the improvement of performance and performance characteristics (although how to look at it of course). China started later, therefore, what they were given to produce on their own (thanks to the USSR) for them is the 1st generation, and for us and the United States the second is all. And the pluses are a matter of religion, we so designate that the base platform with an index of 4 with new qualities is redone, in the USA it is customary to add indices to MK. Therefore, if after MiG-23 we had not MiG-29, but Su-57, then it would be of the 4th generation. And if after it, in turn, the MiG-29 had already appeared, then it would have been the fifth.
        1. +3
          10 October 2019 10: 09
          Do not measure the generation of their performance characteristics and then everything will fall into place. We and the United States are the 5th generation, because we went through 5 stages of changing the platform of manned jet aircraft,

          it is possible to measure by generations, because This allows you to determine how close the combat aircraft is close to the most realistic concept of performing combat missions by aviation. Each generation of combat aircraft was created and modernized in connection with the specifics of these tasks, as well as the growth of requirements imposed in connection with these tasks. It is this link that determines generational affiliation, and not a purely platform change. Otherwise, it is equivalent to talk about a person’s age only by his height.
          1. +3
            10 October 2019 11: 24
            can be measured by generations

            So I didn’t say that it’s impossible, I say don’t measure the generation as they try to do on the performance and performance characteristics of machines.
            Each generation of combat aircraft was created and modernized in connection with the specifics of these tasks.
            That's right. By a platform, I mean just a certain basic state of a particular type of weaponry, which is designed to solve the tasks of stopping threats defined during a given period of time (the existence of a platform). Threats evolve, and after them the platform evolves, but as soon as the threats degenerate into a new state, when the simple evolution of the platform is no longer able to adequately stop these threats, the platform also has to be changed. So the platform in this case is the generation 1,2,3,4,5 - e, etc., pluses and indices ala MK2 - this is the evolution of the platform.
            Otherwise, it is equivalent to talk about a person’s age only by his height.
            I wrote above that you misunderstood me (or rather, I did not disclose what I meant by the platform). But you are just trying to measure the F-35 on this basis, and it’s just the evolution of the F-22, i.e. fifth generation evolutionary state. And the fact that his LTH does not say a little worse that he is not a representative of the 5th generation. In many ways, it is better than the F-22 and precisely in those components that were the reason for the change of the 4th generation platform to the 5th.
            1. 0
              10 October 2019 12: 00
              measure F-35 on this basis, and it’s just the evolution of F-22, i.e. fifth generation evolutionary state. And the fact that his LTH does not say a little worse that he is not a representative of the 5th generation. In many ways, it is better than the F-22 and precisely in those components that were the reason for the change of the 4th generation platform to the 5th.

              F35 is not the evolution of the Raptor, but a truncated version of it, supplemented by improvements that appeared at the time of R&D on F35. Its only possible advantage is unification in 3 components (possible because unification gives an advantage only in production and service, but in terms of performance characteristics specialization is always better). In all other respects, the F-35 is only a faded shadow of its predecessor.
              1. +1
                10 October 2019 12: 53
                F35 Not Raptor Evolution

                In many ways, it is better than the F-22 and it is in those components, which were the reason for the change of the 4th generation platform to the 5th.

                but according to the performance characteristics for the tasks to be solved, specialization is always better

                With one caveat: if it acts autonomously within the framework of its highly specialized task (and even with the development of technology this basic thesis may become obsolete). But the 5th generation is already network-centric fighting and it doesn’t matter who the operator of the F-35 or F-22 weapons is, since the VCU will direct the explosive in this concept, and they will hide and attack from - from a corner and in an extreme case, act autonomously. In addition, the AWACSOM for the F-35th may also be F-22 itself. The Su-57 also follows the same path, it can lead heavy UAVs in its link (most likely smile ), work on data exclusively from AWACS, etc. The F-22 was designed with this concept in mind, and it is more vividly reflected in the F-35. Reduced in certain performance characteristics, but strengthened within the framework of the new concept of war. This is the same as with a human being, once we were stronger, faster, we had more developed instincts, but over time we lost muscles and intuition, but gained brains. If we are brought together in battle, the former "muscle" and the current "smart" who will win? who is better in battle?
                1. +1
                  10 October 2019 13: 03
                  Truncated in certain performance characteristics, but reinforced in the framework of the new concept of war

                  there is no need to promote the American concept here. She has already made her eyes callous from any experts and not so much. Despite the fact that 99% of these "experts" did not even think about the mechanics of air combat.
                  1. +1
                    10 October 2019 13: 22
                    there is no need to propagate the American concept.

                    I do not advocate, but state the facts and reinforce with these facts my point of view about both generations and evolution. Since we were talking about the F-35 and F-22, then we had to talk about the American concept. These are the realities of today. Our Armed Forces follow the same path, can the concepts of development of our Armed Forces be promoted? smile
              2. 0
                10 October 2019 22: 00
                The f-35 appeared an important feature that the f-22 did not have.
                This OLS is a full-spherical review with the output of the picture on the helmet of the pilot’s helmet, and the same full-spherical NSC.
                It gives huge advantages in melee, expanding its borders.
            2. +3
              10 October 2019 13: 35
              It seems to me that new generations did not arise so much with a change in the specifics of fighter missions.
              Rather, each new generation made it possible to solve previous problems at a completely new level, i.e. Generations of fighters can be divided not only according to the technical characteristics of airplanes, but according to the technology of their use, and this, in my opinion, is the criterion for classifying fighters as a generation.
              The first generation - cannon fighters with much better, compared to piston, speed and rate of climb. It is relatively easy to catch up and tail into a piston aircraft. Aim and shoot have the old way.
              The second generation is the biggest leap in generations of fighter jets. The swept wing (supersonic), the first radars are mainly help in detecting the enemy with poor visibility, but most importantly - guided missiles. Aiming has become incomparably simpler, the need to keep the nose of the fighter on target is gone. The distance of opening fire to the target increased from hundreds of meters to kilometers.
              The third generation - a further increase in speed, in the region of 2M. But the main thing - the range of the radar and missiles allows, it would seem, to avoid close air combat (BVB) in general. The battle is conducted beyond visibility, at any location of the fighter relative to the target, including in its front hemisphere, on the opposite courses.
              The fourth generation - this generation, it seems, really arose due to a change in previous tasks. Vietnam and the Middle East showed that the BVB did not go down in history, and the third generation in it was not very strong. In this generation, for the first time, speed does not increase. But thanks to the unstable aerodynamic design, EMF, integrated layout, increased thrust-to-weight ratio, maneuverability has dramatically improved. Those. over-maneuverability is rather a distinguishing feature of the fourth generation, rather than the fifth. Well, the new avionics also contributed to this. Air combat can be conducted at any distance with anyone.
              Fifth generation - new technologies for long-range air combat. Reducing the EPR by two-three-four (?) Orders, the network capabilities of managing and receiving information - allow you to detect the enemy at a distance three to five-ten times less than he is you. I saw, released everything that I brought in my belly, turned around - and home, and the enemy flew out of nowhere.
              Everything is subjective, of course, in a Chaynikovsky way.
              1. 0
                10 October 2019 14: 13
                It seems to me that new generations did not arise so much with a change in the specifics of fighter missions.
                The specificity of tasks is precisely the consequence of the change and evolution of threats on the one hand. On the other hand, I wrote specifically about the specifics of the tasks to stop threats - this is, in principle, expressed in a short phrase, what you painted. If you have guns, but I have radars and missiles, then this is a threat to you. You need the same means, but to put all this on board the 2nd generation is either difficult and you get a cuto, or not at all possible, and then you move to the next generation in accordance with new tasks (if there is such an opportunity, of course smile ).
                1. 0
                  10 October 2019 15: 34
                  Yes, I did not write to argue with you. In the end, the reasoning that came first - a chicken or an egg - is probably verbal casuistry.
                  It’s just interesting how to divide fighters into generations correctly, and whether this or that separate technical "gadget" installed on them affects the transition of fighters from one to another.
                  That is, for example, will there be a Su-57 without a new engine, but brought by other parameters, the fifth generation? Or is the F-35 right in the fifth in all military-technical sources? The J-20 - apparently, neither super-maneuverability, nor super cruise, nor EPR is 4 orders of magnitude smaller than usual, why do the Chinese so confidently attribute it to the fifth generation, is a 10-100-fold (gross) reduction in EPR? Can the Su-35 reach the fifth? etc.
                  1. 0
                    11 October 2019 07: 08
                    It’s just interesting how to divide fighters into generations correctly, and whether this or that separate technical "gadget" installed on them affects the transition of fighters from one to another.
                    If it is possible to put it on board and it will fulfill its task, it is simply evolution within the framework of this generation of machines. But if it is impossible to deliver it, but it is very necessary and at the same time to preserve all that was before it, then here it is already necessary to strain and do the work of a breakthrough.
                    That is, for example, will there be a Su-57 without a new engine, but brought by other parameters, the fifth generation?
                    It will be of course. If you mean that without this engine of the second stage there will be no afterburning supersonic, then this is a fifth-generation criterion invented as well as super-maneuverability however. The 5th generation is intelligence, long arms, secrecy, cooperative work with other types of aircraft (a single information field), a link integrator (including for UAVs), multifunctionality.
                    Or is it right that F-35 is attributed to the fifth in all military-technical sources
                    Why not? It is the evolution of the F-22, it does not solve any new special problems, just within the framework of the fifth generation concept, which the Americans have defined for itself, it does everything better than the F-22.
                    The J-20 - apparently, neither super-maneuverability, nor super-cruise, nor EPR is 4 orders of magnitude smaller than usual, why the Chinese are so confident in relating it to the fifth generation
                    They classify it as 4th according to their classification. And as I wrote above, maneuverability and super cruise to the 5th generation as criteria are far-fetched.
                    Can the Su-35 reach the fifth?

                    Theoretically, yes, but not at the modern world level of science and technology.
          2. bar
            +1
            10 October 2019 14: 00
            you can measure by generations, because This allows you to determine how close the combat aircraft is close to the most realistic concept of performing combat missions by aviation.

            It is possible to measure by generations when a _quality_ leap in characteristics is achieved. For example, radars with AFAR, "stealth" technologies, super-maneuverability, network centricity. The next leap will be if the Su-57 really learns to fight in tandem with the same Hunter UAV. This will be the topic good
      2. +1
        10 October 2019 11: 00
        on the "English-speaking Internet" there are still common opinions that there is no civilization beyond the West Quoddy lighthouse, here we are with bears, we hug vodka and play harmonica ))

        And we drink vodka with bears ...
        Now every self-respecting family should have a bear. So check and checkmate.)
    3. +6
      10 October 2019 09: 14
      Where did the author get that in the west f-35 and f-22 are equated to the 4th generation?
      And he took it from the air, because he writes his "inventions" on a topic that he does not understand from the word at all, only water and there is not even any attempt to figure out why airplanes are divided into generations and why we already have the fifth and the United States, and PRC only 4th (and this is not because they are trying to stand out like that)
      Maybe he shared a link to the documents, and then on the English-speaking Internet these two planes are for some reason ranked as the 5th generation.
      Yes, what are the English-speaking Internet?
      Products webpage:
      https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/f-35.html
      Click on the button that says Visit f35.com
      Or immediately from HERE (I wrote a chain from the site that there were no questions, that the page was official):
      https://www.f35.com/about
      We read and ... oh miracle !!! The manufacturer does not even know that the Fy-35 is, according to the Americans, the 4th generation ...
      The F-35 Lightning II is a 5th generation fighter, combining advanced stealth with fighter speed and agility, fully fused sensor information, network-enabled operations and advanced sustainment. Three variants of the F-35 will replace the A-10 and F-16 for the US Air Force, the F / A-18 for the US Navy, the F / A-18 and AV-8B Harrier for the US Marine Corps , and a variety of fighters for at least ten other countries
  7. +1
    10 October 2019 08: 29
    Novel, when you write about "ratings" like https://topwar.ru/162972-boevye-samolety-sravnenija-korsar-protiv-adskogo-koshaka.html, do not forget about these words of yours:
    We do not need digits. We need good airplanes. Modern and high quality. Which will operate with modern weapons and combat systems. Let marketers and couchs fight with numbers.
  8. 0
    10 October 2019 08: 54
    Not long remained manned generations.
    A clear future for drones.
    The battle of technologies and resources will continue (in all forms of the concept of resource).
    And just as artificial intelligence really goes into circulation, so there will be no need for operators of individual UAVs, there will remain operator-controllers of UAV groups formed for specific tasks.
  9. -1
    10 October 2019 10: 18
    The "race of generations" is necessary for amateurs and their hillers, as it replaces the real understanding of long performance characteristics with one or two numbers.
  10. -2
    10 October 2019 10: 56
    At first I didn’t even understand what Roman was writing) I disagree with him in many respects, but here I go straight to the point, I never understood what criteria are used to determine the generation of airplanes ... and why this is necessary
  11. 0
    10 October 2019 12: 32
    The main thing for our military is not to say that there are 4 generation aircraft, otherwise they will not understand Roman
  12. +3
    10 October 2019 14: 03
    Why this is needed is understandable without equivocation. The steeper the plane (this applies not only to fighters), the easier and more profitable it can be sold.
    The main thing is confidence in the voice. That’s clear - that’s all. Really incomprehensible. Well?
    In fact, such a term as the "generation of jet fighters" appeared twenty-five years ago. It was introduced into circulation by the Australians from the Air Force Development Center to determine the main technological stages in the history of the evolution of jet fighters.
    After that, the "division of generations" was handled by US Air Force historian Hallion, Aerospaceweb site, Air Force magazine, writer Jim Winchester.
    Lockheed Martin proposed the fifth generation for its F-22 and F-35, arguing that no one has anything like it, and Saab modestly attributed their Gripen to the sixth generation, as it has no equal price / quality ratio. And only the Chinese stand apart with four generations.
    At present, for aircraft in service (therefore, the table does not include the Su-57), the "division of generations" according to the main versions looks like this.
  13. +1
    10 October 2019 16: 08
    all this puzzling division of airplanes into generations is nothing more than an attempt to fill them with a price. So far, only Americans

    But what about the pre-order penguin ???
    Did he fly, fought before the formation of the main pool of orders?
    half stuck at the development stage.
    I think the author of the article has poorly thought out his argument.
    They obviously did not attract so many buyers by advertising the penguin.
  14. -1
    10 October 2019 17: 16
    I'm not a big fan of invisible planes. Rather the opposite is true. I have only read (many times) that this concept is also very conditional and relative.
    So ....
    If the invisible pilot receives a signal (and there is such a system on every plane, a long, long time ago; in the Russian Federation, it seems, under the name "Birch") about the irradiation of his invisible radar (oh, God! even this will be ENOUGH "for tonsils" for a stealth pilot (worth hundreds of millions of greens) to want a seabass in horror ... Piercing all the same smart-ass marketers ...
    1. 0
      10 October 2019 22: 05
      Radar exposure and "radar detected" are very different things, far from the same thing.
      1. 0
        11 October 2019 16: 25
        Well, you know better ...
  15. 0
    11 October 2019 06: 22
    What nonsense set?
    For example:
    For example, the Americans classify their F-15, F-16 and carrier-based F / A-18 aircraft as third-generation fighters. Initially, they were created as part of one strategy, so everything is fine here. It is clear that during such a long service the same F-16 has undergone upgrades so many times since the 1979 of the year that today it is, to put it mildly, a different aircraft.

    These modernizations in the USA are referred to the intermediate generation. A sort of "3,5 generation."

    The complete untruth. Fighters of the 3rd generation Americans simply stepped over (not quite, the F / B-111 still came out, though only in the bomber version), immediately switched to the 4th.

    Well, the sweet couple F-22 and F-35 - this is the fourth generation.

    Check it out. We go to the official site of F-35 (https://www.f35.com/about/capabilities) and read there:
    The F-35 Lightning II is referred to as a 5th generation fighter, combining advanced stealth capabilities with fighter aircraft speed and agility, fully-fused sensor information, network-enabled operations and advanced logistics and sustainment.

    Wow, they consider it completely different from what the author ascribed to them.
  16. 0
    16 October 2019 15: 44
    The author, the Israelis fly and bomb on the F-16. They tried to fly to bomb the Fu-35, but they were immediately taken for escort. And that’s all, the fairy tale immediately ended .. And there are also electronic warfare systems that burn the avionics of the Fu-35 for a couple of thousand kilometers from the target .. There is an OTRK and not only ...
  17. 0
    13 December 2019 21: 28
    Again pop music from Roma ....

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"