Military Review

Sohu told how the Tu-160 on the afterburner left the Japanese F-35

255
Recently, Business Insider magazine called the F-35 fighter one of the worst American developments. This aircraft is very expensive and still has not gotten rid of a lot of flaws. The Air Force and Navy had high hopes for him, but he did not justify them.




According to Sohu, on November 3, F-35A took part in an unpleasant incident. The Russian missile carrier Tu-160 carried out a planned flight over the Sea of ​​Japan, and was accompanied by two fighters. Suddenly, the bomber set the maximum angle of sweep of the wings and turned on the afterburner, trying to break away from the escort.

F-35A tried to catch up with the Russian aircraft, but failed. The huge Tu-160 was still visible on the radar screens, but quickly left the line of sight. Thus, a strategic bomber weighing 110 tons unexpectedly easily got rid of two 13-ton pursuers.

On the VO side, we note that the incident about which Sohu writes confirms one of the characteristic features of supersonic strategic bombers. High flight speed is one of the main means of overcoming air defense. It allows you to quickly reach the line of missile launch or break through air defense zones or escape from fighters.

The results of the recent incident were also affected by the technical characteristics of the equipment. The Russian Tu-160 has a top speed of 2200 km / h. The American F-35 afterburner accelerates only to 1930 km / h and can support this speed for a very limited time.
255 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Thrifty
    Thrifty 7 November 2019 07: 40 New
    179
    It was necessary to open the hangar in flight, and sharply put the carcass on the handbrake lol so that the Japanese flew into the hangar at speed, close the hangar, and take the trophy home to study wassat
    1. 210ox
      210ox 7 November 2019 08: 46 New
      12
      It would not work ... The carcass would have gone to the "police turn" wassat
      1. SETSET
        SETSET 7 November 2019 12: 38 New
        26

        easily leaves the interceptor Lockheed Martin 5th generation
        Everything is simple - F-35 is not a 5th generation aircraft, that’s all said ... This is the case confirmed.
        1. Zhelezyakin
          Zhelezyakin 7 November 2019 13: 14 New
          22
          Well, I won’t say anything about the 5th generation, but the fact that he’s never an interceptor is a fact.
          1. Something
            Something 7 November 2019 13: 35 New
            +7
            ... F-35 is not a 5th generation airplane ...
            Fact - there is a fact, the plane cannot support supersonic cruising speed, without afterburner, on throughout flight. In this case, there was no point in using the F-35 - not an interceptor, for this the United States has the F-22 from subtle ...
            1. Amin_vivec
              Amin_vivec 7 November 2019 14: 47 New
              29
              If his task is to expel the offender, demonstrate to him that he is on the gun, show the seriousness of intentions ... Why does he need stealth? it needs to be painted red))))
              Conclusion: The F-35 was created as a universal aircraft for various tasks ... as a result, we obtained an invisible fighter and an interceptor,
              1. hrych
                hrych 7 November 2019 21: 56 New
                +7
                Quote: Amin_Vivec
                in the end we got a non-invisible under-fighter and under-interceptor,

                Another non-frontal bomber ...
                1. Drёma
                  Drёma 8 November 2019 00: 41 New
                  +5
                  And invisible - because they hide lol
                2. analitik79
                  analitik79 8 November 2019 18: 30 New
                  +3
                  Under plane
              2. Simargl
                Simargl 8 November 2019 15: 33 New
                +2
                Quote: Amin_Vivec
                If his task is to expel the offender, demonstrate to him that he is on target, show the seriousness of intentions ...
                If the "violator" does his business with bоat a faster speed - that is still a task.
              3. The comment was deleted.
              4. Archiniii
                Archiniii 8 November 2019 18: 02 New
                -1
                His task is not to intercept air targets. There is an F-22 for this. F-35 is a front-line bomber, and if half of Europe buys it, then everything is fine with it.
                1. Ehanatone
                  Ehanatone 9 November 2019 00: 07 New
                  +4
                  "The F-35 is a front-line bomber, and if half of Europe buys it, then everything is fine with it."
                  And what do the Europeans have any choice!? ...
              5. 4UMA
                4UMA 9 November 2019 00: 55 New
                +1
                In the wagon! I can do everything, but little by little)
            2. Paranoid50
              Paranoid50 7 November 2019 20: 29 New
              +9
              Quote: Something
              In this case, there was no point in using the F-35 - not an interceptor, for this the United States has the F-22 from subtle ...

              The mattresses have something, but the Japanese don't.
              1. Something
                Something 7 November 2019 20: 50 New
                16
                Quote: Paranoid50
                The mattresses have something, but the Japanese don't.

                Japan has an F-15J fighter for this, having a maximum speed at high altitude: 2655 km / h (M = 2,5).
                1. mister-red
                  mister-red 8 November 2019 00: 18 New
                  +2
                  Question: why then accompany the target with a fighter who cannot stay at least near him? What's the point?
          2. TermNachTer
            TermNachTer 7 November 2019 19: 06 New
            +2
            I apologize to ask - what is it then? Excellence fighter or attack aircraft? News by the way, so-so. Anyone who is even a little interested in aviation issues knows the TTX Tu - 160 and F - 35 well.
          3. Piramidon
            Piramidon 7 November 2019 21: 50 New
            +5
            Quote: Zhelezyakin
            Well, I won’t say anything about the 5th generation, but the fact that he’s never an interceptor is a fact.

            And in general, the Yankes came up with this, purely advertising, division into "generations" for themselves, so that later they would push their super-duper imperfections to partners. The same "five-generation" F-35 will have no chance in front of the same "four-generation" Su-35 in a real battle.
            1. Archiniii
              Archiniii 8 November 2019 18: 04 New
              0
              F-35 - bomber, Su-35 fighter. Let's then compare the samovar with turbofan engines?
              1. Piramidon
                Piramidon 8 November 2019 18: 54 New
                +2
                Quote: Archiniii
                F-35 - bomber, Su-35 fighter. Let's then compare the samovar with turbofan engines?

                The F-35 is a fighter-bomber, not a pure bomber. But, if you are so fussy, you can compare it with the Su-34 (also and-b). It will be the same. I assume your objections to the "weight category", "invisibility", the number of engines and crew members. But I mean that all these "generations" are contrived garbage. There is a concept - combat effectiveness and the generation number does not solve anything here. Pure advertising.hi
                Py.Sy. I now have a smartphone, fig knows what generation, but my very first phone Nokia-3310 is still in working order. As a "dialer", it is no worse than a smartphone. wink
                1. Archiniii
                  Archiniii 13 November 2019 19: 10 New
                  0
                  Quote: Piramidon
                  Quote: Archiniii
                  F-35 - bomber, Su-35 fighter. Let's then compare the samovar with turbofan engines?

                  The F-35 is a fighter-bomber, not a pure bomber. But, if you are so fussy, you can compare it with the Su-34 (also and-b). It will be the same. I assume your objections to the "weight category", "invisibility", the number of engines and crew members. But I mean that all these "generations" are contrived garbage. There is a concept - combat effectiveness and the generation number does not solve anything here. Pure advertising.hi
                  Py.Sy. I now have a smartphone, fig knows what generation, but my very first phone Nokia-3310 is still in working order. As a "dialer", it is no worse than a smartphone. wink

                  Absolute nonsense. The concept of the F-35 is such that its main role is a bomber. BUT (!) In extreme need, they can conduct an air battle. But the bottom line is that he is a fighter by 10-20 percent. For with such performance characteristics it is better to remain silent about his capabilities as a fighter.
        2. Incvizitor
          Incvizitor 7 November 2019 20: 39 New
          +2
          It's simple - the F-35 is not a 5th generation airplane
          Everyone has different requirements for this word, they have 5th and we have a maximum of 4 pulls, as I said.
          We also all say that the new bombers do not need ultra-speed.
    2. neri73-r
      neri73-r 7 November 2019 11: 03 New
      14
      Quote: Thrifty
      It was necessary to open the hangar in flight, and sharply put the carcass on the handbrake lol so that the Japanese flew into the hangar at speed, close the hangar, and take the trophy home to study wassat

      Such a trick can only be done on a Ruslan, to the brink of an IL-76! tongue On the Tu-160 they will not fit in the bomb bay. wassat
      1. Lycan
        Lycan 7 November 2019 18: 28 New
        17
        Part of the wings of the F-35 can be left outside.
      2. tpokorp
        tpokorp 8 November 2019 14: 38 New
        0
        nano-sealant is already being developed
    3. sergejivan
      sergejivan 7 November 2019 14: 19 New
      16
      The mood lifted for the whole day! Thank!!
      1. ltc35
        ltc35 7 November 2019 16: 00 New
        +5
        I heartily cheered! A plus!!
    4. gloomy fox
      gloomy fox 7 November 2019 17: 55 New
      +2
      Hangar? you probably meant the bombers?
    5. Vanek
      Vanek 8 November 2019 03: 10 New
      +4
      Quote: Thrifty
      It was necessary to open the hangar in flight, and sharply put the carcass on the handbrake so that the Japanese flew into the hangar at speed, close the hangar, and take the trophy home for study


      Lean. Yeah. laughing

      hi
    6. Andrey Rybkin
      Andrey Rybkin 8 November 2019 13: 06 New
      +1
      He laughed heartily.
    7. The comment was deleted.
    8. Trawl
      Trawl 8 November 2019 19: 52 New
      0
      It is better to use "Ilya" (Il-76MD), but seriously, this "product" has been studied "up and down", and we have the metal. I have the honor.
    9. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 8 November 2019 22: 17 New
      0
      Maybe they should take a network with them, fly fishing so to speak.
    10. Ehanatone
      Ehanatone 9 November 2019 00: 01 New
      +1
      And in the hangar twist hentai !! ...
      Toda would need to immediately disassemble the guns, otherwise no hangar will pull !!! ...
    11. Piramidon
      Piramidon 13 November 2019 22: 15 New
      -1
      Quote: Thrifty
      It was necessary to open the hangar in flight, and sharply put the carcass on the handbrake lol so that the Japanese flew into the hangar at speed, close the hangar, and take the trophy home to study wassat

      Hangar!!! by plane!!! - It is something! Well you, man made fun! Do not want to open a garage, warehouse of clothing assets, or a parking lot? fool
  2. anjey
    anjey 7 November 2019 07: 42 New
    37
    Another, of the many, spits in Lockheed Martin, the main thing is to steam and cut down the Salvage and there’s at least a flood, it seems this is the old motto of this company (something similar was with Starfighter) ..
    1. aszzz888
      aszzz888 7 November 2019 07: 55 New
      11
      anjey (Andrey) Today, 07: 42
      +1
      Another, from numerous, spits in Lockheed Martin, the main thing is to steam and cut down Salvage

      You risk being attacked by ... well, you yourself know which side. wink However, like me. Getting ready.
      1. anjey
        anjey 7 November 2019 09: 03 New
        +6
        We are on the sofas and their "professors" are ready for war, it flies itself laughing
        1. aszzz888
          aszzz888 7 November 2019 11: 26 New
          14
          anjey (Andrey) Today, 09: 03
          +5
          We are on the sofas and their "professorship"ready for war,she flies laughing

          If only I could fly! recourse She is on tanks, missiles, UAVs, boats, in trenches, with and without guns ... and wherever she is! wink But basically, of course, in VO. laughing
          1. anjey
            anjey 7 November 2019 11: 33 New
            +5
            If only it didn’t penetrate into our brains and didn’t take control of them, hanging sideways from "noodles" laughing
            1. hydrox
              hydrox 7 November 2019 11: 53 New
              0
              I don’t know how anyone, but I like that the Soviet strategist easily leaves the Lockheed Martin 5th generation interceptor - and I see the danger of how easy it is to lose coast from American weapons of this level.
              And then what is this shameful fighter armed with a slingshot, what ?!
              Or does a pilot throw riffraffies trying to get into the air intake and turn the turbine around? laughing
              1. Signore Tomato
                Signore Tomato 7 November 2019 12: 19 New
                0
                It is clear what, the main and only invention of the Americans - the faksy.
                They are no longer able to invent anything, only to steal - such a breed.
              2. dauria
                dauria 7 November 2019 12: 27 New
                0
                easily leaves the interceptor Lockheed Martin 5th generation


                Actually, not our interceptor, but our fighter-bomber.
                And then - in the same "zone". Tankers, AWACS aircraft and patrols from groups of these creatures. In a real situation, not this, but another group will be directed to the "Carcass". If they find it, drain the water. Even slow-moving ones will be shot down. You can't run afterburner forever, there will be no fuel left for the task. And most likely the museum F-15 will be kept for such museum pieces.
                1. certero
                  certero 7 November 2019 14: 10 New
                  +1
                  You don’t have to run forever. It is enough to complete a combat mission. Which has been demonstrated that, if necessary, you can come off and launch rockets
                  1. dauria
                    dauria 7 November 2019 15: 00 New
                    -15
                    . It is enough to complete a combat mission.


                    Throw - his task is to pour the load. And then let them catch fleas. The missiles have a range of 2000 km, like there is a unique one with 5000 km. Subtract those 500 km range of ground-based systems. It turns out that any bomber, at least them, even ours covers most of the targets, if it reaches 600 km to the enemy. It's not about Japan, its fate is clear without strategists.
                    And here's the trick - you need a long-range air defense zone at a distance of up to 2000 km. They solve this with ships and groups fighter + refueling officer + AWACS aircraft. We decided before the Tu-128, now the MiG-31. And it is necessary to meet already over the North Pole. Can we? They can do something. Meet and graze.
                    And the supersonic on the strategist is archaism from the 70s.
                    1. certero
                      certero 7 November 2019 16: 10 New
                      +5
                      What archaism is it that is written in the post. If at this moment the beginning of the hour H, then the Tu-160 combat mission would be completed. But f-35 is not.
                      1. dauria
                        dauria 7 November 2019 17: 10 New
                        +1
                        At that moment, be the beginning of hour H,


                        Yes, yes ... Exactly .. Only in reality it will be different. The bomber will see that he was spotted. He will even know the bearing. Then it will explode at full speed, as you think. Blindly running through a minefield towards any of the fighter groups. For it alone detects it (most likely it is an AWACS plane), but they are waiting for everything and the locator will turn on only at the turn of their missiles launch. And even general external designation will cost. And all his hope will be only at the jamming station. Ah, yes you can be comforted by the fact that they won’t shoot him from the cannon;
                      2. Ramzaj99
                        Ramzaj99 7 November 2019 19: 02 New
                        +1
                        Quote: dauria
                        Ah, yes you can be comforted by the fact that they will not shoot him from the cannon, he will be able to escape.

                        At hour X, the Strategists will clear the way for fighters. They will not let anyone in to the launch point, after ... how lucky .....
                  2. Captain Pushkin
                    Captain Pushkin 7 November 2019 19: 12 New
                    +2
                    Quote: dauria
                    One must already meet above the North Pole. Can we?

                    The problem is solved (if desired).
                    For example, AWACS based on Tu-95, tankers, and a "flying battery" based on Tu-95 with a stock of air-to-air missiles with a range of 400 km to short-range (self-defense against air-to-air missiles).
                    It is possible to develop a new platform, but the Tu-95 is already available, only the adaptation of existing radars and missiles is required. with appropriate conversion of the aircraft. Many times cheaper than a new one, especially since the speed here is not at all important, the possibility of a long barrage is required.
              3. hydrox
                hydrox 7 November 2019 16: 35 New
                -4
                We are talking about the meeting of the Tu-160 with the Fu-35 :: sl-but, for the strategist, the "fushka" by its function as a fighter will be an interceptor ...
            2. Zhelezyakin
              Zhelezyakin 7 November 2019 13: 16 New
              -5
              A feces with a uranium core should then be, no less.
        2. gurzuf
          gurzuf 7 November 2019 14: 20 New
          -1
          Scho! Swims everywhere? wink
    2. Mar.Tirah
      Mar.Tirah 7 November 2019 09: 33 New
      +4
      Quote: aszzz888
      You risk being attacked by ... well, you yourself know which side.

      Yes, something was delayed. They (the Japanese) will say the grenades of the wrong system. The Americans who need to be planted are those.
      1. Victor_B
        Victor_B 7 November 2019 09: 53 New
        -1
        Quote: Mar. Tira
        Yes, something was delayed.

        No, they’ll write that I didn’t really want to ...
        Why chase him? Kerosene is expensive today!
        Yes, and expensive paint will peel off.
        That's how it flies 100 km, so we slam it with a racket!
      2. neri73-r
        neri73-r 7 November 2019 11: 06 New
        +3
        Quote: Mar. Tira
        They (the Japanese) will say the grenades of the wrong system. The Americans who need to be thrown are the ones.

        Or a "technical failure" as in a fallen rocket from David's sling! wassat
        1. aszzz888
          aszzz888 7 November 2019 11: 34 New
          +3
          neri73-r Today, 11: 06
          +2
          Quote: Mar. Tira
          They (the Japanese) will say the grenades of the wrong system. The Americans who need to be thrown are the ones.

          Or a "technical failure" as in a fallen rocket from David's sling! wassat

          Campaigns were saddened, for the sting had happened to them. wink
      3. aszzz888
        aszzz888 7 November 2019 11: 32 New
        +3
        Mar. Thira (Oleg) Today, 09: 33
        +3
        Quote: aszzz888
        You risk being attacked by ... well, you yourself know which side.

        Yes, something delayed. They say at them (Japanese) grenades of the wrong system. The Americans are those who need to be thrown.

        Mericatos can do EVERYTHING! Including, and their beloved allies to put under the door, and say that it was. And always. And to them, (ipenets) laughing , it remains only to spin in a spin so that some self-made bolide from the neighbors does not arrive, because there is no hope whatsoever for its own air defense. bully
        1. Lelek
          Lelek 7 November 2019 12: 49 New
          0
          Quote: aszzz888
          And they, (Ipenets), will only have to spin in a spin so that some self-made bolide from the neighbors does not fly, because there is no hope whatsoever for their own air defense.

          hi
          However, the japas themselves have a lot of plans, as briefly announced to the media by the Ministry of Defense of Japan. An old song but in a tone higher.
        2. Captain45
          Captain45 8 November 2019 14: 19 New
          0
          Quote: aszzz888
          Including, and their beloved allies to put under the door, and say that it was.

          If you impose, you yourself understand what, under the door to the neighbor, to call and run away it will be an installation, and if you call and take off your pants, shit in front of the neighbor’s eyes it will be a performance. The question is, what did the Tu-160 installation or performance do? lol
  3. NordOst16
    NordOst16 7 November 2019 10: 39 New
    -22
    Oh, come on, they have good designs, too - the same SLB Trident 2 (which we’re on wheels just like Beijing before). P3 Orion spoiled a lot of nerves with our submariner.
    So don’t tell me, the guys there know a lot about high-quality technology, and failure is encountered by everyone
    1. neri73-r
      neri73-r 7 November 2019 11: 07 New
      +4
      Quote: NordOst16
      the same SLBM Trident 2 (up to which we are on wheels on wheels as before Beijing).

      What the hell are these roots from? In what?
      1. NordOst16
        NordOst16 7 November 2019 12: 11 New
        -4
        Accuracy, the ratio of thrown to its own mass.
        1. neri73-r
          neri73-r 7 November 2019 12: 53 New
          0
          Quote: NordOst16
          Accuracy, the ratio of thrown to its own mass.

          Didn’t you read about Sineva?
          German specialists called the Sineva RSM-54 rocket the “masterpiece of marine rocket science.” Advantages -
          high energy mass excellence
          this is for you about the weight to be thrown!
          1. JD1979
            JD1979 7 November 2019 14: 07 New
            -5
            Quote: neri73-r
            Didn’t you read about Sineva?

            Have you read about the cube? The latter has more angles and peaks than a square! Learn to choose the right objects to compare.
            1. neri73-r
              neri73-r 7 November 2019 14: 29 New
              0
              Quote: JD1979
              Quote: neri73-r
              Didn’t you read about Sineva?

              Have you read about the cube? The latter has more angles and peaks than a square! Learn to choose the right objects to compare.

              And what comparison was proposed - the accuracy and weight of the cast weight to its own mass? What am I wrong about? It is easy to say wrong, do you argue or not send me away?
              The upgraded third-generation R-29RM liquid-fuel rocket, created in the USSR, with a lower starting weight, has a similar range and cast mass.
              And what am I wrong ??????? And where is that Beijing to which we walk ...?
              1. JD1979
                JD1979 7 November 2019 15: 20 New
                -3
                Quote: neri73-r
                And what am I wrong ??????? And where is that Beijing to which we walk ...?

                Let's start with understanding the subject of the debate.
                It all started with this:
                Quote: neri73-r
                Quote: NordOst16
                the same SLBM Trident 2 (up to which we are on wheels on wheels as before Beijing).

                What the hell are these roots from? In what?

                If you go back to the origins of rocketry for submarines, then ... the Trident 2 SLBM is the pinnacle of American rocketry for submarines, reached decades ago in the solid propellant rocket missile segment, and Sineva / Liner is the pinnacle of Soviet / Russian rocketry for submarines in the missile segment ... Russian Railways, this is such a parsley. And everything seems to be nothing, but ... there is one big BUT, and it is called "Bulava", a rocket with solid propellant rocket, i.e. a complete analogue of the American, but younger than the trident by 2 years by 20, and the trident 1 by 40, while the throw weight is 1150, against 2800 and 1500 for TP2 and TP1. and worse accuracy. Well, yes, they made it almost half as easy and faster, but this is where the pluses end and questions arise, but what if after a certain number of years it will be necessary to upgrade? You can't increase the weight, the payload, too, the dimensions ... the mines on the boats are on rubber, so they will scratch their turnips, how to pull an owl onto a globe. And boats are being built only for the Bulava ... Dolphins are not eternal and soon there may not be an alternative rocket for the fleet.
                1. neri73-r
                  neri73-r 7 November 2019 15: 28 New
                  +5
                  I did not write anything about the Mace! So you yourself decide on the subject of the dispute! I just challenged this pearl -
                  Oh, come on, they have good designs too - the same SLB Trident 2 (which we’re on wheels just like Beijing before).
                  , which has nothing to do with the time parameters 20 or 40 years ago! In terms of casting weight in relation to weight, there is still no better Sineva and this is an indisputable fact! While the United States is going to Beijing with Triiden 2. But on solid fuel or liquid, and when it was made to me anyway, there was no discussion about it! hi So first, carefully read the posts yourself and learn the message, and then comment.
                  1. JD1979
                    JD1979 7 November 2019 20: 51 New
                    +1
                    Quote: neri73-r
                    I just challenged this pearl -

                    So this pearl meant that in missiles with solid propellant rocket engines (read with the Mace) we are behind. Read the posts yourself. They began to resent and argue without understanding the subject of the dispute. The fact that 54ka is better is indisputable, but it is a different system and the amers have no analogues. And if we have our own rocket with solid propellant rocket engine, which is replacing Sineve, and which is worse in some respects than the American one, are we behind or are we still ahead? Once again, 1150 vs 2800 is how?
                    1. neri73-r
                      neri73-r 7 November 2019 21: 07 New
                      +1
                      I did not argue with you and did not answer you, it was you who entered the correspondence and came up with new parameters such as Mace and fuel for engines. hi
                    2. JD1979
                      JD1979 7 November 2019 23: 36 New
                      -1
                      Quote: neri73-r
                      came up with new parameters such as a mace and fuel for engines.

                      Well, OK. Only I would not call Mace a parameter ... It may be the last argument. hi
        2. NordOst16
          NordOst16 7 November 2019 16: 20 New
          0
          Blue is liquid, while Trident and Mace are solid fuel. Which gives the latter certain advantages. And in solid fuel we lag behind in energy and accuracy, in liquid - in accuracy
          1. neri73-r
            neri73-r 7 November 2019 16: 26 New
            +1
            Quote: NordOst16
            liquid - for accuracy

            So not so Trident2 unique, right?
            Oh, come on, they have good designs, too - the same SLB Trident 2 (which we’re on wheels just like Beijing before). P3 Orion spoiled a lot of nerves with our submariner.
            Here about fuel and no words, but only about the uniqueness that we can not catch up. But it turns out that in the energy sector, US missiles are up to us like before Beijing. Recently, an article was published on a resource about missiles (ICBMs) of China, etc., the table shows that today the United States has already fallen behind us in fuel, both in liquid and in solid. fellow
            1. NordOst16
              NordOst16 7 November 2019 19: 17 New
              0
              Quote: neri73-r
              So not so Trident2 unique, right?

              I made a mistake not indicating that Trident 2 is the best solid-fuel SLBM. And in this regard, we are lagging behind.

              Quote: neri73-r
              But it turns out that in the energy sector, US missiles are up to us like before Beijing.

              In liquid SLBMs - yes, they simply do not have them. But soon (when the dolphins will be withdrawn from service) and we will not.

              Quote: neri73-r
              then the table shows that today the United States has already fallen behind us in fuel, both in liquid and in solid.

              I don’t know where you read this, but so far the USA is leading with its Trident among solid-fuel SLBMs in energy and among all ICBMs in accuracy.
              1. neri73-r
                neri73-r 7 November 2019 22: 10 New
                +1
                Quote: NordOst16
                Trident 2 is the best solid-fuel SLBM. And in this regard, we are lagging behind.

                And what's the difference when something flies on your head, what kind of fuel is it on? For boats, a significant indicator is still the mass of the casting weight, then Sineva wins this! Alas. If purely from the point of view of engineering, then yes, with your clarifications, somewhere you are right.
                1. NordOst16
                  NordOst16 7 November 2019 22: 19 New
                  +2
                  Quote: neri73-r
                  And what's the difference when something flies on your head, what kind of fuel is it on?

                  Big one. Before it falls on someone’s head, it needs to be placed somewhere. The missile most likely will not be used for its intended purpose (I hope), but it will constantly require compliance with storage conditions. And here the solid fuel rockets have the advantage
                  1. Andrey NM
                    Andrey NM 8 November 2019 08: 33 New
                    +1
                    Quote: NordOst16
                    but it will constantly require compliance with storage conditions. And here the solid fuel rockets have the advantage

                    All rockets require compliance with storage conditions. And solid-propellant rockets are no simpler here. Solid fuels are very sensitive to temperature changes. The thrust also depends on the area of ​​combustion of the fuel. If microcracks appear, then the thrust changes, which is practically not regulated. Thrust vector control is a challenge. There you cannot turn the combustion chamber on gimbals, you have to come up with nozzle seals or injection of an inert gas, which you also need to drag on yourself, come up with an anti-nozzle, etc. Cooling of the nozzle cannot be done there. There are still a lot of smut. Moreover, the fuel itself, over time, becomes a blasting one, i.e. may explode on impact. How many arsenals have already taken off in violation of the storage of ammunition and solid-propellant missiles scattered like fireworks around the district. And the characteristics of the specific impulse of thrust and a number of others are lower than those of liquid ones. Therefore, the mass of solid-propellant missiles, with equal characteristics in terms of range and throwable mass, is one and a half to two times greater. Solid propellant missiles theoretically have shorter prelaunch preparation due to the principle of filling the silos. But this issue has already been resolved. Our designers have come up with a dry start for a liquid-propellant rocket. If not for the struggle for cash flows, such a rocket would have flown long ago. "Liquid" rockets have a big drawback - poisonous fuel. This problem was solved by ampulating the rocket during refueling for the entire service life. After being put into service, Sineva did not have a single accident or incident due to the rocket. Liquid components do not lose their properties for more than 50 years. How much more? The thrust on "liquid" is regulated by the supply of components by pumps to the combustion chamber. It should be faster - they served more, slower - they closed the flaps. Directional control - by changing the thrust vector. Simply the nozzle with a combustion chamber on bearings rotates, and that's it. The efficiency is much higher. Accuracy - here the control system is more influenced, and this is electronics, etc. But now we have tightened up on this issue. If there is a lag, then it is small. In general, all these "long-handed" 955 projects were originally planned for liquid-propellant rockets, and if it were not for Urinson and his team, who in the late 90s began to drag the financial blanket over themselves, it would have been.
                  2. NordOst16
                    NordOst16 8 November 2019 10: 32 New
                    -1
                    Well, the Boreas were just planned for solid rockets initially, when they realized that the mastheads of the 941 project are too expensive and large.

                    Yes, solid fuel have these problems, but do not forget that liquid rockets have their own problems in addition to the fact that they have poisonous fuel. Well, at least these missiles have turbopumps that are no less sensitive to shocks than solid fuel and require the same gentle transportation. Further, the rocket body is a thin wall that separates the rocket fuel from the external environment and before starting, before the mine covers are opened, it is necessary to equalize the pressure between the mine and the external environment, as well as to equalize the pressure between the external environment and inside the rocket, so that when start it did not squeeze. In this case, liquid fuel is no less safe than solid because it comes into contact with each other and ignites spontaneously, and in a confined space this leads to an explosion.
                    Not without reason all PGRK have solid fuel rockets for they are less capricious than liquid ones.

                    And according to accuracy, judging by open data, the lag is one and a half times 150-200 meters instead of a little
                    less than 100.
                  3. Andrey NM
                    Andrey NM 8 November 2019 11: 59 New
                    +2
                    Vladislav, how and what is there outside and inside and how everything happens there - I still remember. A turbopump unit is a solid thing. There are such loads during work, many thousands of revolutions. There is a greater danger of hitting a rocket while loading or tearing something off while unloading. And on old rockets such as 4K-10 or 3M-20 (they were on "azukhs") there were also belts of depreciation with shock absorbers. These shock absorbers with the entire belt flew off only if they caught on the lodgment. The main thing is not to get under the "rebound". And to avoid this, the "fighters" run around the product and control every centimeter. A similar thing happened on the boat 667BDR of the project, God forbid, in the late 80s. But there the crew was just tortured, in fact, the people did not sleep for several days, one of the officers did not control the removal of some fasteners, and they broke something during unloading. Nothing exploded. That was a long time ago. And on the first "Begemot" (this was the start of the ammunition load on the submarine 667BDRM of the project) in 1989, due to a design miscalculation, as a result, a product banged in one of the mines, the mine cover was torn off. Missiles in the neighboring mines did not hit. When an oxidizing agent enters the water, nitric acid is formed. With further dissolution in water, a weak acidic environment is obtained, in fact, nitrogen fertilizers. With fuel - yes, there is an ambush ...
                    But when one of the solid-fuel products on the 941 project exploded, the entire deck was driven there, there was a real probability of losing the ship. And if a component can be drained from a "liquid" rocket in an extreme case, then in the case of a "solid" rocket the powder charge cannot be wiped out. One of the main advantages of solid-propellant missiles of all stripes is faster readiness, especially of any "little things" such as MANPADS, ATGMs, etc.
                    Quote: NordOst16
                    Well, the Boreas were just planned for solid rockets initially, when they realized that the mastheads of the 941 project are too expensive and large.

                    The Boryusiks were initially planned for the Bark missile. The complex was almost complete. The first boat was laid down in 1996, and in 1998 Urinson & Co. decided to give the 955 project to the Bulava and began frantically to redesign it. There was a modernization plan for the "Bark" and boats of the 941 project. But with the help of external "friends" this plan was covered with a copper basin. And then the BDRMs were almost lost. Well, one, as a strategic combat unit, they lost, the boat for almost 20 years in the plant was being re-equipped for the carrier of all sorts of loshariks.
                    Well, as it was written on the net, "Bulava" stubbornly did not want to fly until the Makeev Design Bureau was connected to the work. the KB, which was first taken away from the work with the Boreas. I came across a tender on the topic "Bulava" from them several years ago on the Internet. To be honest, it surprised me. For defense orders, the tender, and even in the public domain.
                    Quote: NordOst16
                    150-200 meters instead of just under 100.

                    When the crater from the explosion is more than 200 meters and a depth of under a hundred. This is called chalk it up.
                  4. NordOst16
                    NordOst16 8 November 2019 12: 52 New
                    0
                    As for the seriousness of damage to the 941 project, I will not write anything because I know nothing about it. But both got to repair after that.
                    As I understand it, the main fears are that during the explosion it is possible that components of the fuel and oxidizer can be thrown into a strong housing and then nitric acid, even diluted, could damage the rubber gaskets and penetrate into other compartments. And the fact that equipment is installed on the boat itself that works with fuel components.

                    And with Bark, as I understand it, another ambush came out. Fuel was supposed to be produced at the Pavlograd plant, which remained in Ukraine, and Russian enterprises could only produce fuel with poorer energy characteristics and as a result the rocket turned out to be large and at the same time did not differ in high characteristics. And then they decided to saw a new, lighter rocket. They also probably wanted to reduce the submarine itself or get rid of the possible hump that is on the BRDMs, which should have had a positive effect on stealth.

                    As for the funnel - you exaggerate. If my memory serves me, the probability of a mine being hit by a 475ct warhead with an accuracy of 100 meters is 0,6. So higher accuracy plays a role
    2. Ramzaj99
      Ramzaj99 7 November 2019 19: 11 New
      0
      Quote: NordOst16
      in liquid - for accuracy

      Well, accuracy is also lame.

      Accuracy of a few hundred meters rocket that erases dust cities .... Seriously ?? !!))))
      1. NordOst16
        NordOst16 7 November 2019 19: 19 New
        0
        Yes, seriously, because mines with ICBMs (or other highly protected facilities) are slightly more difficult to destroy than the city. And the extra hundred meters plays a huge role.
        1. sharp-lad
          sharp-lad 7 November 2019 23: 47 New
          0
          Well, what's the point of striking already empty missile silos? what
          1. NordOst16
            NordOst16 8 November 2019 10: 40 New
            -1
            Well then, if you get a little trickier (bring strategic missile carriers closer, launch missiles along a flat path), you can get a significant time gain and ensure that the mines are defeated before the missiles leave them (which nuclear states are very afraid of), as well as command posts , and here accuracy will play a decisive role.
            1. sharp-lad
              sharp-lad 8 November 2019 18: 33 New
              0
              In Russia, unlike the aggressor because of the puddle, the defensive strategy does not provide for a preemptive strike!
            2. NordOst16
              NordOst16 8 November 2019 20: 52 New
              -1
              It is not provided only purely because we do not have the technical capabilities for this. But the lack of opportunity is not at all equivalent to the lack of benefit from this option for the Russian Federation. For this limits our ability to respond to external threats.
            3. sharp-lad
              sharp-lad 8 November 2019 21: 11 New
              0
              It is not provided only purely because the victory will be pyrrhic.
            4. NordOst16
              NordOst16 8 November 2019 21: 25 New
              -1
              Not a fact, far from a fact. And if conflict cannot be avoided, then a preventive strike will give at least a small chance that the damage will not be critical.
  • +5
    +5 7 November 2019 14: 51 New
    +1
    Why is it and by what criteria are we on foot before Trident-2 of 1993? Just do not need about the throwing weight (especially taking into account the fact that the maximum throwing weight of amers does not correspond to the maximum range) with respect to the starting or about 14 never-existing BBs, and without a missile defense system.
    1. NordOst16
      NordOst16 7 November 2019 16: 24 New
      -3
      And for Mace, does the maximum throwing weight correspond to the maximum range (which is also less)?
      Quote: 5-9
      about 14 never existed BBs, and without PCB missile defense.

      Does a mace carry 10 warheads, also, apparently, without an anti-missile defense missile defense system and, apparently, has it also never existed with 10 blocks?
      Well, accuracy is also lame.
  • Andrey Chistyakov
    Andrey Chistyakov 7 November 2019 07: 44 New
    +6
    The song was so popular. "You can't catch us" !!!!!
    1. Ilya_Nsk
      Ilya_Nsk 7 November 2019 08: 38 New
      +1
      "Not gonna get us!" (from)
      1. Andrey Chistyakov
        Andrey Chistyakov 7 November 2019 08: 38 New
        0
        Quote: Ilya_Nsk
        "Not gonna get us!" (from)

        Especially!!!!!
    2. sniperino
      sniperino 7 November 2019 09: 22 New
      +1
      Quote: Andrey Chistyakov
      "You can't catch us"
      If you catch up, you won’t take it!
  • Rostislav
    Rostislav 7 November 2019 07: 44 New
    +2
    Only one inaccuracy - high speed will not help to overcome the air defense zone, the rocket is still faster.
    1. YOUR
      YOUR 7 November 2019 07: 55 New
      30
      This is if they are discovered at the time.
      Just like a little consultation. What are the benefits of CR? It seems to shoot like ducks. The speed is small does not make anti-aircraft maneuvers, but .... At the flight altitude, some 50 meters altitude and the radar already detects it no further than 30 - 35 km, you can’t just launch a rocket the same way. Once a finger on the button and flew native. And figurines, more gyroscopes need to be untwisted, albeit quickly for a few seconds, but all the time, time, time. And yet, there are no countries with a continuous air defense zone. The detection zone is not continuous and not all high-altitude. And most importantly, why would he enter the air defense defeat zone, the main striking weapon for the Tu-160 long-range missiles. He flew closer to the object or the borders of the state and without entering the affected area, or even detection, dumped gifts.
      1. Ilya_Nsk
        Ilya_Nsk 7 November 2019 08: 54 New
        +4
        What kind of missiles are you talking about? The TOP has a reaction time of 8 seconds, the shelling of the CD with artillery systems is considered promising. Gyroscopes are already solid-state, and mechanical ones are started by gas generators in 0,5 seconds. The cornerstone - you are right - detection, by any means, up to acoustic or visual, with an approximate determination of the course. In Yugoslavia, then part of the "Tomahawks" was shot down from small arms, by the fighters, notified in time about the approach of the Kyrgyz Republic to their positions
        1. NordOst16
          NordOst16 7 November 2019 10: 41 New
          -7
          So all the beauty in subsonic CDs is that when they are discovered, it will be too late
      2. Rostislav
        Rostislav 7 November 2019 11: 00 New
        +4
        It's like that. Only in the article:
        High flight speed is one of the main means of overcoming air defense. It allows you to quickly reach the line of missile launch or break through air defense zones or escape from fighters.

        To quickly reach the launch line and leave is not a question. But "High speed ... allows ... to break through the air defense zones" is little true. This is what I wrote.
      3. Good_Anonymous
        Good_Anonymous 7 November 2019 13: 55 New
        -3
        Quote: YOUR
        At a flight altitude of some 50 meters and the radar already detects it no further than 30 - 35 km, you can’t just launch the same rocket


        Aircraft AWACS will find it hundreds of kilometers away.
    2. YOUR
      YOUR 7 November 2019 07: 57 New
      13
      I didn’t finish it. But air defense includes not only air defense systems, there are also fighter interceptors. But for them, such a speed makes the Tu-160 unattainable.
    3. maidan.izrailovich
      maidan.izrailovich 7 November 2019 08: 02 New
      13
      ... high speed will not help to overcome the air defense zone, the rocket is still faster ..

      Overcoming the air defense zone is not a competition with air defense missiles in speed. Speed ​​is one of the factors that matter in overcoming the air defense zone.
    4. Pete mitchell
      Pete mitchell 7 November 2019 08: 22 New
      27
      Quote: Rostislav
      - high speed will not help to overcome the air defense zone ....

      hi in the distant '90 it seems like the Black Jack was shown to amers and they had the opportunity to climb on it. Then there was an article in flightglobal about dating. With regard to speed, the following was written literally: even if the Tu-160 does not have such an advanced electronic warfare as the B-1, thanks to its speed it will "like a knife in butter" enter the air defense system of North America... Then they "liked" him very much.
      Among other things, there is one more nuance - even the war has its own economy: intercepting the Tu-160 is very, very expensive: the outfit of forces is simply unrealistic, and keeping this colossus in readiness is expensive even for the states.
      Good car, handsome ..
    5. Potato
      Potato 7 November 2019 08: 29 New
      +6
      The missile, although faster, but when the target flies very fast, the effective launch range for the target for any missile is reduced significantly. So, for many air defense systems, the launch range does not exceed 100 km, and for such a fast aircraft it will not exceed 15. And, therefore, there will be no sense in these launches.
    6. Guru
      Guru 7 November 2019 08: 37 New
      +4
      It's not about the speed of the missiles, but about how quickly it entered the zone, bombed (launched) and went home. wink At the same time, I remind you that the TU-160 Bomber, and not the interceptor, and most likely it will have to confront the ground defense. Meeting with enemy fighters is the exception rather than regularity.
      1. Potato
        Potato 7 November 2019 08: 59 New
        +2
        Exactly. So intercepting such an aircraft is almost an unrealistic task for wartime. To escort and escort in peacetime for the Japanese Air Force - yes, it is possible.

        And also it should be noted on specific news - like an interceptor - the f35 is a mediocre aircraft.
    7. SSR
      SSR 7 November 2019 09: 02 New
      10
      Quote: Rostislav
      Only one inaccuracy - high speed will not help to overcome the air defense zone

      You correctly noticed - about inaccuracy.
      She is relative)))
      A fighter took off from a military airfield in the Astrakhan region and at 8 o’clock in the morning Israeli air defense locators spotted it in the sky over Tel Aviv. Sirens were turned on in the city, and a link from the modern French Mirage fighter jets went to the plane. The intruder ignored the request to land. [С-BLOCK]

      Unknown board moved twice as fast as the Mirage, and was located at an altitude of 6 thousand feet, which was inaccessible to French cars. Israeli pilots fired rockets on the plane, but they did not achieve the goal. An unknown enemy increased speed and climbed to a height of 6,9 thousand feet. Teasing Israeli air defense, the Soviet pilot made six laps around Tel Aviv. The American Phantoms sent to intercept were also unable to catch him.

      Pilot Alexander Vertievovets was awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union. He made his flight on the MiG-25 with a flight ceiling of 23 kilometers and 3600 km / h. Technical indicators made the machine invulnerable to all the air defense of the world.

      It happened in history and such.
      1. Good_Anonymous
        Good_Anonymous 7 November 2019 15: 33 New
        +2
        Quote: SSR
        was at an altitude of 6 thousand feet, which was inaccessible to French cars.


        6 thousand feet is 1800 meters. Not available for Mirage? What nonsense.
        1. SSR
          SSR 7 November 2019 15: 49 New
          +2
          Quote: Good_Anonymous
          Quote: SSR
          was at an altitude of 6 thousand feet, which was inaccessible to French cars.


          6 thousand feet is 1800 meters. Not available for Mirage? What nonsense.

          Do not swear much, this quote was taken from a reprint and I did not correct it because I did not think that the people would not understand. The original article is 6 and 6,9 thousand feet, which is approximately 18000 thousand meters to 21000 meters 60000 and 69000 thousand feet, which corresponds to the working heights of the MiG-25.
          1. Good_Anonymous
            Good_Anonymous 7 November 2019 15: 51 New
            +1
            Quote: SSR
            In the original article 6 and 6,9 thousand feet, which is approximately 18000 thousand meters


            6000ft * 0.3m = 1800m
      2. sgapich
        sgapich 7 November 2019 15: 48 New
        +1
        Quote: SSR
        Quote: Rostislav
        Only one inaccuracy - high speed will not help to overcome the air defense zone

        You correctly noticed - about inaccuracy.
        She is relative)))
        A fighter took off from a military airfield in the Astrakhan region and at 8 o’clock in the morning Israeli air defense locators spotted it in the sky over Tel Aviv. Sirens were turned on in the city, and a link from the modern French Mirage fighter jets went to the plane. The intruder ignored the request to land. [С-BLOCK]

        The unknown board moved twice as fast as the Mirages, and was at an altitude of 6 thousand feet, which was not available to French cars. Israeli pilots fired rockets on the plane, but they did not achieve the goal. Unknown adversary increased speed and rose to a height of 6,9 thousand feet. Teasing Israeli air defense, the Soviet pilot made six laps around Tel Aviv. The American Phantoms sent to intercept were also unable to catch him.

        Pilot Alexander Vertievovets was awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union. He made his flight on the MiG-25 with a flight ceiling of 23 kilometers and 3600 km / h. Technical indicators made the machine invulnerable to all the air defense of the world.

        It happened in history and such.


        It seems that the above quote is an order of magnitude error. 6 thousand feet = 1829 m., 6,9 thousand feet = 2103 m. To such a height that the Mirages, that the Phantoms would obviously climb without difficulty. hi
        1. SSR
          SSR 7 November 2019 15: 51 New
          0
          Quote: sgapich
          Quote: SSR
          Quote: Rostislav
          Only one inaccuracy - high speed will not help to overcome the air defense zone

          You correctly noticed - about inaccuracy.
          She is relative)))
          A fighter took off from a military airfield in the Astrakhan region and at 8 o’clock in the morning Israeli air defense locators spotted it in the sky over Tel Aviv. Sirens were turned on in the city, and a link from the modern French Mirage fighter jets went to the plane. The intruder ignored the request to land. [С-BLOCK]

          The unknown board moved twice as fast as the Mirages, and was at an altitude of 6 thousand feet, which was not available to French cars. Israeli pilots fired rockets on the plane, but they did not achieve the goal. Unknown adversary increased speed and rose to a height of 6,9 thousand feet. Teasing Israeli air defense, the Soviet pilot made six laps around Tel Aviv. The American Phantoms sent to intercept were also unable to catch him.

          Pilot Alexander Vertievovets was awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union. He made his flight on the MiG-25 with a flight ceiling of 23 kilometers and 3600 km / h. Technical indicators made the machine invulnerable to all the air defense of the world.

          It happened in history and such.


          It seems that the above quote is an order of magnitude error. 6 thousand feet = 1829 m., 6,9 thousand feet = 2103 m. To such a height that the Mirages, that the Phantoms would obviously climb without difficulty. hi

          You noticed everything correctly!
          Some kind of lover of reprint but was afraid of the value of 69000 feet))) and it turns out not 1829 but 18290 and 21030 (approximately).
    8. Do not care
      Do not care 7 November 2019 09: 32 New
      +2
      At the C 400 launcher, the maximum speed in combat position is zero. Does this mean that any plane can leave her rocket?
      1. Potato
        Potato 7 November 2019 11: 08 New
        +6
        No, it doesn’t. A plane can escape from any missile of any air defense system. For example, at a distance of a hundred kilometers from the s400 fire, any modern combat aircraft will be able to leave if it acts competently and its pilot has all the necessary completeness of tactical information. All kinds of stealth bumblebees and at 50 will be able to act quite confidently, for example, at low altitudes.

        But this is all in ideal conditions for a bomber. But in reality, a rocket under the tail can be obtained quite suddenly, flying in a straight line and not suspecting anything)))
    9. PROXOR
      PROXOR 7 November 2019 09: 34 New
      +6
      And you ask yourself: Having 7 X-101 missiles loaded in the drum with a range of 5500 km, will the strategist even approach the enemy’s air defense zone?
      This super speed is needed so that as quickly as possible, on the final leg of the journey, on a combat course, go to the launch area, launch the entire drum and also go away in excess of sound.
    10. sniperino
      sniperino 7 November 2019 09: 34 New
      15
      Quote: Rostislav
      the rocket is still faster.
      The pathos of the article is that a huge strategist makes the fighter of our potential partner light in speed. Why shift the question towards "What's the fastest in the world"? Everyone already knows - it's diarrhea: I didn't have time to think about it and had already done it.
    11. +5
      +5 7 November 2019 09: 51 New
      +4
      Do you mean "to overcome the air defense zone" as a heroic entrance into the zone of reach of the air defense system chtol?
      High speed is just created in order to have time to reach the turn of the missile launch faster than interceptors can reach and quickly hit the road.
    12. Vita vko
      Vita vko 7 November 2019 11: 28 New
      +5
      Quote: Rostislav
      high speed will not help to overcome the air defense zone, the rocket is still faster

      Why Tu-160 enter the air defense zone. In this case, just counted the counteraction to the possibilities of interception, and without the use of electronic warfare systems. In reality, launches will be hundreds of kilometers before possible intercept lines, and the further flight of cruise missiles will be accompanied by powerful active interference from the carrier or one of the modified missiles. With such tactics, no air defense will help.
    13. Elephant
      Elephant 7 November 2019 12: 03 New
      -1
      Quote: Rostislav
      Only one inaccuracy - high speed will not help to overcome the air defense zone, the rocket is still faster.

      All right. Here only hypersound can really help. Well, still partly inconspicuous, setting interference and false targets.
    14. Trawl
      Trawl 8 November 2019 20: 50 New
      0
      Strategic Nuclear Forces - consist of sea, land and air components and each has its own tasks and goals. If speed was the main thing in the air component (I don’t refuse it), then the "Brown" (Tu-95MS) would have been "retired" long ago. Each type of "strategist" solves a different problem. Tu-160 does not need speed for "dyru" - it has a different task. And the "Japanese" fulfilled his task and fulfilled (I must say) with honor. Like our MiG-25 and Su-15TM (later the MiG-31) in the "fight" with the "Drozdy" (SR-71). A professional will not even smile - this is a hard and responsible job. I have the honor.
  • Mikhail m
    Mikhail m 7 November 2019 07: 45 New
    -14
    quickly left line of sight

    From rockets as easy to leave the afterburner? Air defense is, I suspect, not only the F-35. I don’t see any reasons for throwing hats.
    1. Andrey Chistyakov
      Andrey Chistyakov 7 November 2019 07: 49 New
      +9
      Quote: Michael m
      quickly left line of sight

      From rockets as easy to leave the afterburner? Air defense is, I suspect, not only the F-35. I don’t see any reasons for throwing hats.

      Yeah. "F-35" go "just get away" from missiles ?!
      1. Mikhail m
        Mikhail m 7 November 2019 08: 28 New
        +4
        The main thing in my comment is that I don’t see any reasons for throwing hats. And not what you thought. The plane escaped from escort, using the advantage in speed. Full respect to its designers. But this does not mean the same easy departure from air defense in real hostilities.
        1. Andrey Chistyakov
          Andrey Chistyakov 7 November 2019 08: 31 New
          0
          Quote: Michael m
          The main thing in my comment is that I don’t see any reasons for throwing hats. And not what you thought.

          Have you decided? The article does not say a word about missiles.
        2. sniperino
          sniperino 7 November 2019 10: 53 New
          +2
          Quote: Mikhail M
          speed advantage. Full respect to its designers.
          This is the reason for "throwing hats". Or, in your opinion, "full respect" does not imply shouts of "hurray!" and tossing up hats in honor of all who by their labor contributed to the creation of this beautiful, powerful and formidable machine?
      2. Elephant
        Elephant 7 November 2019 12: 08 New
        0
        Quote: Andrey Chistyakov
        Yeah. "F-35" go "just get away" from missiles ?!

        It will go away if it manages to use the terrain, interference or false targets. Another option is the use of appropriate weapons systems against enemy missiles.
    2. maidan.izrailovich
      maidan.izrailovich 7 November 2019 07: 56 New
      12
      From rockets as easy to leave the afterburner?

      You probably know planes easily leaving on afterburner from air defense missiles? No? Then why this stupid question? Have you ever read an article? Who left whom?
      1. Potato
        Potato 7 November 2019 08: 13 New
        +3
        There is one. No, not even 2 planes that can get away from air defense missiles in afterburner. True - a lot depends on the range ...

        This is moment 31 and moment 25. For example, Israeli hoki were useless against the 25th. Like fighter aircraft)

        Another fastest and most difficult aircraft to hit is the sr71. But they have already flown off.
      2. +5
        +5 7 November 2019 10: 01 New
        +1
        When firing after the MiG-31 at maximum speed at 20 km altitude, the Patriot can only hit if it launches rockets when it is directly above his head.
        In any case, for any air defense system there is a mass of areas of heights, speeds and directions inside its Murzilian radius of action, when the aircraft stupidly manages to leave the affected area or maneuvers the SAM.
    3. Potato
      Potato 7 November 2019 08: 03 New
      17
      And he’ll leave the missiles. At maximum speed, he flies faster than many fighters. Most often, missile launches on it, if any (if the interceptor can catch it), will be followed up. And the effective launch range in this situation, even for the most modern and powerful missiles of our opponents - the latest modifications of aim120 - is not more than 15-20 km. Then there is simply not enough energy)))

      Plus, at 160m, like a big plane, there is a powerful reb station. Plus, he carries out his attacks at a range sometimes exceeding the radius of the combat use of enemy fighter aircraft.

      All together gives him very high chances of successfully reaching the line of attack and using his weapons, as well as safely returning home with the active opposition of the enemy’s air defense forces. Including the most modern fighter aircraft.

      The aircraft is unsurpassed so far and is not in the least outdated.
    4. Souchastnik
      Souchastnik 7 November 2019 09: 30 New
      +2
      From rockets as easy to leave the afterburner? Air defense is, I suspect, not only the F-35.

      In the United States, air defense is the basis of aviation. ZRV they are less numerous, at times. And they have no continuous air defense either. So you can draw conclusions.
    5. +5
      +5 7 November 2019 09: 57 New
      +1
      Do you know how the range of missiles when shooting to catch up changes? That they specifically created the R-27TE with a Murzilo range of 130 km but with a GOS with a capture range of 20-30 kilometers in order to be in the tail coming out of the battle with the F-15 afterburner, because they were afraid that the R-27T with a Murzilo range of 65 km stupidly not catching up or energy is not enough to maneuver?
      1. Potato
        Potato 7 November 2019 10: 58 New
        +2
        I know. I must say that the R27et missile is large and powerful, and it can catch f15 at the afterburner and at the exit from the attack from 15 and 20 km. The lancing split nozzles with tongues of flame of 10 meters for her - that’s it))) traps on their background like a star’s day)))
    6. dmmyak40
      dmmyak40 7 November 2019 10: 09 New
      +2
      And no one says that the Tu-160 will definitely leave the missiles. It’s just that with its speed on the afterburner, the chances of missiles, especially on overtaking courses, will drop sharply. And from the launch of a rocket from 5-10 km, no strategic afterburner will save.
  • Angelo Provolone
    Angelo Provolone 7 November 2019 07: 45 New
    24
    Made in USSR
  • mvg
    mvg 7 November 2019 07: 50 New
    -30
    weighing 110 tons unexpectedly easily got rid of two 13-ton pursuers

    When they write such nonsense, it's not even funny.
    1. Vladimir16
      Vladimir16 7 November 2019 07: 57 New
      18
      Then cry.

      Feel better? laughing
      1. mvg
        mvg 7 November 2019 08: 05 New
        +7
        Che is not very. Tu-160, takeoff weight 250+ tons, F-35 about 28+ tons. Why write heresy? Outspoken. Even Sohu will not write this, this is the level of rambler.
        1. +5
          +5 7 November 2019 10: 02 New
          +2
          It is about the dry mass both here and there ... therefore - correctly. Replace with 250 for 28 - what will change?
          1. mvg
            mvg 7 November 2019 17: 22 New
            +2
            It's about dry weight

            How many years I live, I have not heard dry planes fly ... sad without weapons, kerosene and fuels and lubricants. And you have to take a couple of missiles with you. Like the F-35, fly dry to intercept? This is in the sense of threatening to threaten from the cockpit?
            The author took from Vicky the weight of an empty plane, and this news is not from Sokhu. Some kind of teenager, "newsman" of the topvar
  • aszzz888
    aszzz888 7 November 2019 07: 52 New
    11
    Recently, Business Insider magazine called the F-35 fighter one of the worst American developments.

    Correctly named.
    F-35A tried to catch up with the Russian aircraft, but failed.

    Well, it will begin! Fans of this block of iron will start to make excuses, and look for reasons - from improper refueling and improper tailwind, to the fake edition of Sohu. laughing
    1. Andrey Chistyakov
      Andrey Chistyakov 7 November 2019 07: 54 New
      +6
      Quote: aszzz888
      Recently, Business Insider magazine called the F-35 fighter one of the worst American developments.

      Correctly named.
      F-35A tried to catch up with the Russian aircraft, but failed.

      Well, it will begin! Fans of this block of iron will start to make excuses, and look for reasons - from improper refueling and improper tailwind, to the fake edition of Sohu. laughing

      Not at all. They will write that F-35 was not made for these purposes.
      1. aszzz888
        aszzz888 7 November 2019 07: 57 New
        +6
        Andrey Chistyakov (Andrey Chistyakov) Today, 07: 54
        Not at all. They will write that F-35 was not made for these purposes.

        Andrew, hi ! Definitely, the reasons will be awful! wink
    2. knn54
      knn54 7 November 2019 08: 23 New
      +2
      Sheriff, they just need to say, warn.
      1. aszzz888
        aszzz888 7 November 2019 11: 41 New
        -2
        knn54 (Nikolai) Today, 08: 23
        +2
        Sheriff, they just need to say, warn.

        Yes. In general, as always, the flyer will be made extreme - he confused the gas pedal with the brake, and the wunderwaffe-35 is the most advanced in the whole world. "What is there in the world, in the entire Universe!" wink Nicholas, hi !
  • Potato
    Potato 7 November 2019 07: 54 New
    +7
    The Tu160 is still a hurricane machine, and with its characteristics it will be effective for a long time) Soviet aviation designers were a genius and, and almost every plane of them is a masterpiece of design ideas.

    Another reason, by the way, is to make the pack supersonic!
    1. +5
      +5 7 November 2019 10: 05 New
      -2
      They weren’t geniuses, they didn’t come up with the Tu-160 concept ... the Americans came up with it much earlier than ours, but they couldn’t realize it in the form of B-1A (but they made it completely different, smaller and simpler, B-1B), and ours - they could !!!! No geniuses needed, professionals needed ...
      1. anykin
        anykin 7 November 2019 11: 40 New
        +2
        The way from concept to iron is of course nonsense. Americans did not engage in this nonsense?)
        1. +5
          +5 7 November 2019 14: 53 New
          0
          Of course they began ... but the stone flower did not come out even after a year of study.
  • novel66
    novel66 7 November 2019 07: 54 New
    +5
    I will allow myself to quote from "bumbarash" .. "- My bullet will catch up with anyone, - answered the sentry."
    1. Leopold
      Leopold 7 November 2019 08: 42 New
      +3
      Roma hi But it seems to me that the F-35 has nothing to do with it. wink
      1. novel66
        novel66 7 November 2019 11: 23 New
        +3
        in this context, of course, he did not notice him ...
  • Zeev Zeev
    Zeev Zeev 7 November 2019 07: 58 New
    -23
    The Tu-160 missile is unlikely to leave. Therefore, by the way, the airplane designers got down from the idea of ​​increasing speed, because the means of destruction are still faster than the airplane.
    1. loki565
      loki565 7 November 2019 08: 59 New
      +3
      The missile launch distance depends on the speed of the target, so in a training battle Mig 25 (afterburner) in the oncoming course was hit from 100km on a dagon with 10km. (about)
      1. Zeev Zeev
        Zeev Zeev 7 November 2019 09: 16 New
        -16
        In a real battle in 1981, the MiG-25 was shot down on a catch-up course by the Israeli F-7 AIM-15 rocket.
        1. dmmyak40
          dmmyak40 7 November 2019 10: 12 New
          +1
          Start distance and start direction? Or the main thing is that an Israeli plane shot down an MiG-25?
          1. Zeev Zeev
            Zeev Zeev 7 November 2019 10: 30 New
            -2
            You can search, but as far as I remember, shmalnuli side to side from back to bottom from a distance of 20-25 km.
            1. dmmyak40
              dmmyak40 7 November 2019 11: 50 New
              +1
              This is not the longest starting distance. Given that the MiG was on top and the launch conditions were close to ideal, there is nothing surprising.
              1. Zeev Zeev
                Zeev Zeev 7 November 2019 11: 52 New
                0
                Of course there is nothing surprising. Properly planned operation.
                1. dmmyak40
                  dmmyak40 7 November 2019 11: 56 New
                  +1
                  If the Tu-160 doesn’t leave the missile, then why in Israel create towed false targets for missiles and actively advertise them?
                  1. Zeev Zeev
                    Zeev Zeev 7 November 2019 12: 14 New
                    -2
                    Because a false target should distract the SAM missile or from an enemy’s aircraft. With the Tu-160, these are in no way connected.
                    1. dmmyak40
                      dmmyak40 7 November 2019 23: 11 New
                      0
                      I did not understand: what prevents the Tu-160 from installing a similar system? We’ll have more places in it than in a fighter.
                      1. Zeev Zeev
                        Zeev Zeev 7 November 2019 23: 24 New
                        +1
                        The absence of such systems in Russia interferes.
                      2. dmmyak40
                        dmmyak40 8 November 2019 00: 54 New
                        0
                        This is the main obstacle.
          2. +5
            +5 7 November 2019 14: 56 New
            +1
            20-25 km ... in 1981 ... yes on the MiG-25 yes BACK-LOWER ????
            Javrei tales, in general, BVR defeats only began to be found in 1991, and Sparrow stupidly doesn’t have enough energy to catch 25 km from behind, from below
            1. Pete mitchell
              Pete mitchell 7 November 2019 16: 56 New
              +1
              Quote: 5-9
              20-25 km ... in 1981 ... yes on MiG-25 yes BACK-BOTTOM

              I join - source in the studio please. Known for intercepting the 25th F-15th from a voiced range, but it was carried out in the teaching staff with very competent guidance: -15 was silent and did not flash until it was brought into the optimal launch zone.
              25th catch-up - source in the studio
              1. Zeev Zeev
                Zeev Zeev 7 November 2019 17: 33 New
                -1
                So this is the case. F-15 jumped out from behind a mountain range and shot down
                1. Pete mitchell
                  Pete mitchell 7 November 2019 20: 18 New
                  0
                  In this case, you are mistaken: this interception was in the teaching staff, aka in the front hemisphere. Good guidance, competent control using all the features: when the F-15 turned on the radar and showed up, the MiG-25 did not have time - the F-15 worked faster.
                  1. Zeev Zeev
                    Zeev Zeev 7 November 2019 20: 29 New
                    -1
                    Not if my memory does not fail me. When the MiG chased the F-15 "bait", the second missile and warmed it up.
                    1. Pete mitchell
                      Pete mitchell 9 November 2019 00: 58 New
                      0
                      To that in history we are looking for a darkness of examples. But we don’t write stories, but here's how they say in the wiki: On February 13, 1981, the Syrian MiG-4 took off to intercept two Israeli scouts RF-25C. As the interceptor approached, the Phantoms turned back and used electronic warfare equipment. A minute later, an F-15 fighter appeared from the interference cloud in the lower hemisphere (the MiG-25 had limitations in detection in the lower hemisphere). At this moment, the Syrian pilot received strong noise interference on the radio and he did not hear the command from the ground to the lapel. At an oncoming approach from a distance of 25 kilometers, the F-15, manned by Benny Zinker, launched the AIM-7F missile and shot down the MiG-25. So there was the first in the history of air battles counter missile attack.

                      We were given a more advanced version of events in the system, but I think this one will do as well
  • Souchastnik
    Souchastnik 7 November 2019 09: 36 New
    +2
    Therefore, by the way, the airplane designers got down from the idea of ​​increasing speed

    Well, and body armor can be pierced with a grenade launcher. This does not mean that we must abandon attempts to confront the enemy. The winner is the one who knows the strengths of his weapon and the weaknesses of the enemy, and better all the characteristics laughing And competently and skillfully can use their knowledge. And in combination with high morale this is a hell of a mixture.
  • Zhan
    Zhan 7 November 2019 07: 59 New
    +7
    hi
    Good morning everyone... smile
    It seems that our strategies have decided to drive into the wallets with the Japanese .. smile
    And so, nice ... Met, spent ... Respect however ... smile
    I think they saluted each other, waved their hands, and see you soon ... smile
  • jovanni
    jovanni 7 November 2019 08: 00 New
    +3
    The results of the recent incident were also affected by the technical characteristics of the equipment. The Russian Tu-160 has a top speed of 2200 km / h.

    Well, when designing a promising bomber, it was decided not to lean on this indicator. In my amateurish opinion, unfortunately ...
    1. aszzz888
      aszzz888 7 November 2019 08: 08 New
      +3
      Jovanni (Evgenevgen) Today, 08: 00
      0
      The results of the recent incident were also affected by the technical characteristics of the equipment. The Russian Tu-160 has a top speed of 2200 km / h.

      Well, when designing a promising bomber, it was decided not to lean on this indicator.

      Do you already have the performance characteristics of the "promising bomber"? request
      1. Good_Anonymous
        Good_Anonymous 7 November 2019 15: 54 New
        +1
        Quote: aszzz888

        Do you already have the performance characteristics of the "promising bomber"? request


        Do you know that he is a subsonic "flying wing"?
  • Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov 7 November 2019 08: 04 New
    10
    Calmly, comrades, the F-35 was designed to fight against countries without air defense, with aviation at a speed not exceeding 100 km / h, and the absence of any resistance from the ground. That you really cling to a good technique? All US enterprises are involved, the budget is well cut, the NATO partners are working well
    1. aszzz888
      aszzz888 7 November 2019 11: 44 New
      -1
      Dmitry Potapov (Dmitry Potapov) Today, 08: 04
      10
      Calmly, comrades, the F-35 was designed to fight against countries without air defense, with aviation at a speed not exceeding 100km / h, with the absence of any opposition from the ground.

      But how, with spears and arrows from the ground, then why do that? wink
  • askort154
    askort154 7 November 2019 08: 05 New
    13
    F-35A tried to catch up with the Russian aircraft, but failed.

    This episode is an excellent psychological test for pilots and those and others.
    Men have in their blood the passion of "who is who", it does not matter - on a horse, car or airplane. And the pilot is gambling in the square. I'm sorry for the Japanese pilots. Looking at the tail of the outgoing TU, their "narrow-eyed" belay ! yes And we drinks
  • Naz
    Naz 7 November 2019 08: 19 New
    17
    Happy November 7th! Hooray comrades!
    1. Elephant
      Elephant 7 November 2019 12: 17 New
      +5

      All a Happy Holiday!
  • lopuhan2006
    lopuhan2006 7 November 2019 08: 22 New
    +1
    Quote: mvg
    weighing 110 tons unexpectedly easily got rid of two 13-ton pursuers

    When they write such nonsense, it's not even funny.

    And what are the cons? Or didn’t the frenzied mind understand for the unreliability of the take-off weight of both?
    1. ender
      ender 7 November 2019 09: 02 New
      +2
      And what are the cons?


      "Rumata waited until the next one was sent into the corridor (he was a famous fishmonger, he was assigned five rods without kissing for an unenthusiastic way of thinking) (c)
  • impostor
    impostor 7 November 2019 08: 22 New
    +3
    this is definitely an offset!
  • kit88
    kit88 7 November 2019 08: 22 New
    14
    And what kind of penguin scumbag sent to intercept? They found an air defense fighter, they are not able to catch a bomber. The next time you need to turn on a bend in the tail of the invisible laughing so that the whole world is amused enough.
  • lopuhan2006
    lopuhan2006 7 November 2019 08: 24 New
    -1
    Quote: Vladimir16
    Then cry.

    Feel better? laughing

    Reminded about the scale from Mowgli ..... Also looked under the tail.
    1. Tzar
      Tzar 7 November 2019 08: 33 New
      +9
      "Whimper-whimper, you ... vfy ... you are lying, the f-35 is the best car in the world, everyone buys it, they stand in line! He bombed Syria up and down, and the S-400 does not see it, and in He flew Iran, looked through the window to Khamenei, and no one saw it, because he is invisible! "
  • Jack O'Neill
    Jack O'Neill 7 November 2019 08: 55 New
    -7
    F-35A fighter-bomber, not interceptor. If F-15J were in his place, then they would have caught up. Even F-4J would catch up, because - an interceptor.
    It’s strange to read, because everything is very clear ...
    1. Mestny
      Mestny 7 November 2019 09: 24 New
      +2
      If grandmother knew that - she would be a grandfather.
      1. Jack O'Neill
        Jack O'Neill 7 November 2019 11: 42 New
        +1
        If grandmother knew that - she would be a grandfather.

        As if ale, Lightning should not intercept such goals, this is not his main task.
        With the same success, I can write that the MiG-23ML cannot catch up with the SR-71.
    2. GELEZNII_KAPUT
      GELEZNII_KAPUT 7 November 2019 10: 01 New
      +5
      F-35A fighter-bomber, not interceptor. If F-15J were in his place, then they would have caught up. Even F-4J would catch up, because - an interceptor.
      It’s strange to read, because everything is very clear ...

      And if it were not TU-160, but MiG-31, then these two penguins frostbitten would feed the fish for a long time! wassat
      1. Jack O'Neill
        Jack O'Neill 7 November 2019 11: 44 New
        +2
        And if it was not TU-160, but MiG-31, then these two frosted penguins would feed the fish for a long time! wassat

        If grandmother knew that - she would be a grandfather.
        1. GELEZNII_KAPUT
          GELEZNII_KAPUT 7 November 2019 11: 53 New
          +1
          And if it was not TU-160, but MiG-31, then these two frosted penguins would feed the fish for a long time! wassat

          If grandmother knew that - she would be a grandfather.

          And I'm talking about the same thing! laughing
    3. +5
      +5 7 November 2019 10: 07 New
      +1
      Yes, it’s clear that everyone who is more or less in the subject ... The tsimes is that the F-15s are not eternal, and the F-22s are only 170 instead of 700 F-15s ... they are barely enough for NORAD
  • Kaw
    Kaw 7 November 2019 09: 03 New
    +1
    The Russian Tu-160 has a speed of up to 2200 km / h. The American F-35 afterburner accelerates only to 1930 km / h and can maintain such a speed for a very limited time.

    But can the Tu-160 maintain such speed for a long time?
  • 7,62h54
    7,62h54 7 November 2019 09: 05 New
    +3
    The mass of Tu160 is 260 tons, the weight of F35A is 26 tons.
  • lopuhan2006
    lopuhan2006 7 November 2019 09: 13 New
    0
    Quote: ender
    And what are the cons?


    "Rumata waited until the next one was sent into the corridor (he was a famous fishmonger, he was assigned five rods without kissing for an unenthusiastic way of thinking) (c)

    But Rumata ended with a massacre)
    1. ender
      ender 7 November 2019 09: 25 New
      -1
      waiting for banned for extremism

      They came to the palace ... They found him there.

      - How?

      “Well ... he was sleeping.” And all around ... also ... lay ... Some were sleeping, and some ... so ... Don Rab was found there too ..
  • PROXOR
    PROXOR 7 November 2019 09: 30 New
    +2
    Well, who else will argue about the uselessness of supersonic sound for a new bomb carrier.
    1. ender
      ender 7 November 2019 09: 42 New
      0
      and supersonic needed. but, in real conditions, they will be intercepted by the F-15
      1. PROXOR
        PROXOR 7 November 2019 09: 53 New
        +5
        For the Fu-15, the time of even constant readyness at the limit of the distance is not enough to have time to fly up and go to the area where our Swans have already worked.
        I'm translating. While the Fu-15 takes off, until it gains altitude and speed, until it enters the area from where the TUSHKS worked out, their trace will already be cold.
        1. ender
          ender 7 November 2019 10: 46 New
          +3
          this is if White moves first. In any case, the Japanese lesson. even routine interceptions need to be taken seriously
          1. PROXOR
            PROXOR 7 November 2019 10: 52 New
            +2
            Bold PLUS! Yes, even if the swans are not the first ones, then ours will think about how to remove the FU-15 while the Swans go to the launch area.
    2. Good_Anonymous
      Good_Anonymous 7 November 2019 14: 05 New
      +1
      Quote: PROXOR
      Well, who else will argue about the uselessness of supersonic sound for a new bomb carrier.


      Just about everything. Bomb carriers do not play catch-up with fighter-bombers. In a real situation, missiles would catch him.
      1. PROXOR
        PROXOR 7 November 2019 15: 34 New
        +1
        Yeah. And the bomb carrier will stand and wait until it launches a rocket. Or even more interesting. It will be purposeful to climb into the zone of effective interception.
        1. Good_Anonymous
          Good_Anonymous 7 November 2019 15: 48 New
          0
          I don’t know what he will be waiting for and where he will climb, but no one makes modern bombers fast.
          1. sharp-lad
            sharp-lad 8 November 2019 00: 20 New
            0
            But what about F 35 - a fighter - a bomber? In the designation, the word bomber is and speed exceeding sound is also present. smile
            1. Good_Anonymous
              Good_Anonymous 8 November 2019 05: 17 New
              +1
              Quote: sharp-lad
              But what about F 35 - a fighter - a bomber?


              And the F-35 is not a bomber.
              1. sharp-lad
                sharp-lad 8 November 2019 18: 30 New
                0
                And not a fighter, and not a scout, and not 5 generation!
                1. Good_Anonymous
                  Good_Anonymous 8 November 2019 19: 29 New
                  0
                  Quote: sharp-lad
                  And not a fighter, and not a scout, and not 5 generation!


                  ... and not a plane!
                  1. sharp-lad
                    sharp-lad 8 November 2019 19: 38 New
                    0
                    However, the aircraft, but does not meet the requirements of the Americans themselves to the development of competitors.
  • lopuhan2006
    lopuhan2006 7 November 2019 09: 31 New
    -1
    Quote: ender
    waiting for banned for extremism

    They came to the palace ... They found him there.

    - How?

    “Well ... he was sleeping.” And all around ... also ... lay ... Some were sleeping, and some ... so ... Don Rab was found there too ..

    Nooo, they’ll probably write to Don Quixote .... After all, the Earth is flat, a man is from a monkey, the retirement age of 70 years is completely normal ....
  • Operator
    Operator 7 November 2019 09: 44 New
    +5
    110 and 13 tons - Sohu, however laughing
  • +5
    +5 7 November 2019 09: 48 New
    -2
    Hahaha ... and here recently a footcloth was laid out on the floor of War and Peace stating that the Tu-160 with M = 2,2 was not needed and how good the V-1B with ridiculous M = 1,3 with cast-iron bongs, with which they were good and subsonic B-52 and B-2 :))))
  • savage1976
    savage1976 7 November 2019 09: 49 New
    0
    The maximum take-off weight and mass of the aircraft are different characteristics actually. This is so for those who do not catch up. Empty and without weapons and fuel, the Tu-160 weighs 110 tons, F-35 13 tons. Information is correct. But stupid let them put the minuses further from their stupidity.
    1. kit88
      kit88 7 November 2019 17: 40 New
      +5
      And if we take into account that WEIGHT is power and it is measured in Newtons, not kilograms, then it will be more difficult to find stupid people than it seems.
  • Gust
    Gust 7 November 2019 09: 57 New
    +4
    In the correct concept of using the Tu-160, speed is definitely an advantage. Quick exit to the line of attack, launch and quick escape from interception. And rapprochement with interceptors at an effective launch distance is the wrong application of the complex. And the penguin was in a deliberately losing situation, where its stealth and awareness do not play any role. Its speed qualities do not allow an effective interception of such targets.
    In short, all postebalsya - samurai stealthily intercept bombers at close range, and those on afterburner leave such "interceptors".
  • rocket757
    rocket757 7 November 2019 09: 59 New
    +3
    F-35A tried to catch up with the Russian aircraft, but failed. The huge Tu-160 was still visible on the radar screens, but quickly left the line of sight.

    "Penguin" is not like a hound, an interceptor ... he has his own "merits", an average wagon, at least for now.
    When / if they create the necessary technical infrastructure for him, then let's see what this "pepelats" really is. Nothing has been proven yet, nothing has been disproved yet, a BIG EXPERIMENT is in progress ... with elements of a big business of swindle, however!
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Good_Anonymous
      Good_Anonymous 7 November 2019 15: 18 New
      0
      Quote: rocket757
      "penguin" as if not a hound


      F-35 is the hound smile



      And she needed a greyhound:

      1. rocket757
        rocket757 7 November 2019 18: 09 New
        0
        Without a greyhound, which can be imagined as an interceptor ....
        And the hounds ... there are too many of them, they are different.
        We will not go into the cynology ... the Polish hound is certainly pretty, but the topic is not about that.
        F-35, an expensive experiment and quite a commercial project, which has not yet been completed in any way. He will not be a great flyer, and the rest is not yet clear. Let's wait and see.
        1. Good_Anonymous
          Good_Anonymous 7 November 2019 19: 39 New
          +2
          Quote: rocket757
          He will not become a great flyer


          Can you give an example of a "great flyer"? The same Il-2 flew like an iron.
          1. sharp-lad
            sharp-lad 8 November 2019 00: 26 New
            0
            So I "ironed" it for glory! The surviving representatives of the Nazi-German troops will not let you lie.
  • Krev
    Krev 7 November 2019 09: 59 New
    +2
    Quote: Guru
    In this case, I recall that the TU-160 Bomber, not an interceptor

    For you, perhaps only - yes ...
    And for those who understand, it’s "supersonic strategic missile bomber"
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 7 November 2019 10: 56 New
    +2
    What is new here? F-35 was not conceived as an interceptor and is not it.
    For intercepts and gaining dominance in the air, there are other, faster aircraft.
  • yehat
    yehat 7 November 2019 11: 02 New
    0
    f-35 is not an interceptor.
    why troll this car for functions that were not even intended?
  • L-39NG
    L-39NG 7 November 2019 11: 26 New
    +3
    In a real situation, God forbid, of course, the air defense system will be like a multi-layer cake in both height and azimuth. They will not take off from one airport for interception, and they will not play catch-up. But the Tu-160 does not make sense to enter the enemy’s air defense zone. Those will hunt for missiles. If they can.
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 7 November 2019 11: 45 New
    -1
    And what did you want, while the Japs pulled the katana out of its scabbard, the Russians and the trace went cold. lol
  • Tarasios
    Tarasios 7 November 2019 12: 17 New
    -1
    fifth generation, they said, f35 are the coolest, they said ...;)
  • Tolik_74
    Tolik_74 7 November 2019 12: 30 New
    +1
    In a nutshell, the white swan bent down in full on all the vaunted mattress aviation companies, Boeing, Lockheed, and put the entire "exclusive" nation in the pose of a crustacean
  • Tarasios
    Tarasios 7 November 2019 12: 45 New
    +1
    just the pilot remembered that the iron forgot to turn off;)
  • Dembel77
    Dembel77 7 November 2019 13: 36 New
    +1
    Here such, guys, the White Swan, in 1981 was released by the great power which was called the USSR! This is if someone does not know. Here is a good legacy for you. Live, rejoice for us, what technique they did, that the vaunted Amerikosovskie f35 are in full ...
  • Chaldon48
    Chaldon48 7 November 2019 14: 08 New
    -1
    He also turned on the EW, the hawk seemed to have clawed!
  • certero
    certero 7 November 2019 14: 18 New
    +1
    After such news, as I recall, how many Tu-160 in Ukraine were cut ...
    The post, by the way, is a very good illustration to those who say that the bomber does not need high speed, why. let them be subsonic.
  • Vanych
    Vanych 7 November 2019 15: 34 New
    0
    now amer .. we will begin to make excuses again - then they got a nail in the wheel, then a black raven flew over the road lol
  • Maks1995
    Maks1995 7 November 2019 15: 37 New
    0
    Found something to brag about. Alas, IMHO, this is for housewives ...
    It is clear that the F35 is not intended to intercept ....

    And if he does not live up to expectations, then why do they rivet them? Already 400 done and do not stop?
    And how many Tu-160? Su 57?
    1. sharp-lad
      sharp-lad 8 November 2019 00: 29 New
      0
      And how many of these 4 hundred are on full alert?
      1. Maks1995
        Maks1995 8 November 2019 10: 55 New
        0
        But FIG knows - I'm not that special.
        But LIKE, "in full combat readiness" to bring anyone especially in peacetime is not necessary.
        Look, all sorts of Indians and Asians, too, endlessly complain that they either do not have spare parts for MIG, then everything broke down at SU ...
        Only Shoigu has everything in good%.
        1. sharp-lad
          sharp-lad 8 November 2019 18: 37 New
          0
          But LIKE, "in full combat readiness" to bring anyone especially in peacetime is not necessary.
          ??? ... Can't the enemy attack without warning? what
          1. Maks1995
            Maks1995 11 November 2019 10: 13 New
            0
            Uh .... Iranians will secretly cross the ocean and suddenly attack aircraft with their aircraft ???
  • Binder
    Binder 7 November 2019 17: 33 New
    +2
    Fake - 100 pounds !!! Moreover, the fake is incompetent - the title says that the F-35s were Japanese, but in the text they already belonged to the US Air Force. As satirist M. Zhvanetsky used to say - "It is necessary to be more careful!" lol
  • NF68
    NF68 7 November 2019 18: 13 New
    0
    So a strategic bomber weighing 110 tons


    110 tons is the weight of the "empty" Tu-160. And without fuel, any plane cannot fly. So the weight of the Tu-160 during the departure from the F-35 was much higher than 110 tons.
  • grigorii
    grigorii 7 November 2019 18: 31 New
    0
    Well done. Wiped the nose of these bastards.
  • 1536
    1536 7 November 2019 19: 06 New
    0
    This incident underscores the idea that modern weapons systems are never weapons for war. First of all, these are technologies and breakthrough know-how, promising R&D, etc. things that can be profitably sold and made a profit. Probably one cannot do without a “cut”, but if our “economists” in 1990-K didn’t destroy the defense industry in the bud, where were we now? But even the remnants of former technologies and equipment are a formidable force that can stop any aggressor. Even the Japanese.
  • bessonov932
    bessonov932 7 November 2019 20: 04 New
    -1
    Until there is a real air battle, and sooner or later it will be, all our letters confirm only the genius of the inventor of the alphabet.
  • Nitarius
    Nitarius 8 November 2019 05: 38 New
    0
    ))) you just had to put the pedals better in the F-35))) so that the pilots would spin if that .. when there wasn’t enough thrust)))