The NI argues: How many years will the 4th generation fighter last


Leading world powers compete on who will create the most effective means aviation a new generation that is capable of making a real revolution in aerial combat, in counteracting air defense systems, in striking at the enemy’s infrastructure and military equipment. At the moment, only two countries of the world are armed with 5th generation fighters of their own production. This is the USA with F-22 and F-35 and China with J-20. Russia is the third country that is engaged in its own production of this kind of aircraft. But at the moment, the Su-57 was not put into service with the Russian Air Force.


The American magazine The National Interest discusses how much more aircrafts of the 4th generation will serve the air forces of the countries of the world, taking into account the fact that fifth-generation fighters appear in service with an increasing number of countries (including imported American F-35s) .

In his article, Charlie Gao writes that the Su-27, MiG-29, F-15, F-16 and other fourth-generation fighters have a lot of chances to remain in the Air Force of certain countries for at least a couple of decades.

It is noted that, taking into account modernization, these fighters will last until the 2040s, "and possibly longer."

The author of the material reports that the means of computer control, visualization of information, control and tracking of targets significantly increase the resource of aircraft.

From the article:

The development of computer technology also allows aircraft radars to be much more flexible than they were before. In the previous generation, airplanes tended to focus on the ground or air for their radars, while radars lost significant functionality when switching between modes.

The importance of equipping aircraft with radars with AFAR was noted. In addition, the author says that in some cases, the modernization of radars allows relatively efficient operation of 3rd generation aircraft. As an example, the MiG-21.

From the article:
4th generation non-stealth aircraft still occupy a significant place on the battlefield. They are leaving the production line, but still remain in high demand. For example, Russia is building a Su-35 and MiG-35 for foreign customers. There is a possibility that we will see 4th generation aircraft in the sky in the 2050s.
Photos used:
Sukhoi Corporation
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

110 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. maidan.izrailovich 1 January 2020 13: 25 New
    • 10
    • 7
    +3
    But at the moment, the Su-57 was not put into service with the Russian Armed Forces.

    No need to rush.
    We will slowly go down the hill ....
  2. Kibl 1 January 2020 13: 28 New
    • 16
    • 18
    -2
    F 35 is not the fifth generation, but rather 4 -------
    1. Tuk77 1 January 2020 14: 20 New
      • 10
      • 18
      -8
      Is this your personal opinion?
      But even the Russian Vicki for some reason considers the F-35 a 5th generation aircraft.
      Who are you to believe?
      By the way, if we climb into the technical wilds, it turns out that the Su-57 also looks more like a 4 ++ generation.
      1. 30hgsa 1 January 2020 14: 40 New
        • 15
        • 10
        +5
        Russian Wikipedia is written including Ukrainian bots and other inadequacies of any stripes. If you wish, you can now make the F-35 on Wikipedia or an airplane of the 6th or 3rd generation. Link to Wikipedia as a source is generally a patchwork of timeless proportions. It is typical that for the F-35 in Wikia thrust-to-weight ratio is given ... with 50% of fuel :))))) While for the same F-15, the thrust-to-weight ratio (with standard fueling) is determined standardly with a fuel reserve of 6 tons :) ) And why? And because you need to pull the penguin more than one :))
        1. Aerodrome 1 January 2020 14: 49 New
          • 7
          • 4
          +3
          Quote: 30hgsa
          even Russian wiki

          why is she "Russian" then? a large percentage of inadequacy is there, referring to the “wiki” is just like the train station ... wangu. this is the nightingale's favorite pastime of the “bori-wikipedia”.
          1. 30hgsa 1 January 2020 14: 53 New
            • 3
            • 7
            -4
            Well, it would be more correct to say the Russian-language version of the mattress Wikipedia :)
            1. Aerodrome 1 January 2020 14: 53 New
              • 4
              • 3
              +1
              Quote: 30hgsa
              Well, it would be more correct to say the Russian-language version of the mattress Wikipedia :)

              yes there hell understand who scribbles .... drinksI think there is also about the "Belarusian Sea" .. I didn’t recognize it, and I'm afraid to climb there. belay
              1. kit88 1 January 2020 16: 57 New
                • 6
                • 0
                +6
                Comrade above would still turn to Yandex Zen.
                That's where the storehouse of knowledge is! wassat
                drinks
        2. Tuk77 1 January 2020 15: 06 New
          • 3
          • 8
          -5
          Articles on the Russian Wiki can be posted by anyone who does not violate the rules of the portal. Do you, apparently, have developed a strong belief that anyone is exclusively and necessarily Ukrainian? It looks like a mania.
          By the way, for some time now the Russian Wiki is completely controlled by Roskomnadzor. No need to explain what this organization is doing? What is included in its functions?
          Do you want to cast a shadow on ILV? Do you want to say that surveillance does not fulfill its duties, as long as it passes information that unreasonably praises the army of a theoretically probable opponent and defames the Russian armed forces?
          1. Zusul 1 January 2020 15: 36 New
            • 4
            • 3
            +1
            Where did people get so much rubbish in their head ??? Roskomnadzor do not care where anyone praises or scolds anyone, if this does not contradict the law.
        3. TermNachTer 1 January 2020 19: 20 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          So yes, if you pull a hippopotamus, sorry - a penguin, from the swamp by the ears. All means are good, the main thing is that the suckers (buyers) are conducted.
        4. maidan.izrailovich 2 January 2020 04: 48 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          If you wish, you can now make the F-35 on Wikipedia or an airplane of the 6th or 3rd generation. Link to Wikipedia as a source is generally a patchwork of timeless proportions.

          Yes, really anyone can make a change to Wikipedia. But not so simple. Changes made, if they are not confirmed by any weighty evidence, will be automatically deleted from Wikipedia after a while.
          The hottest debate on Wikipedia is usually on pages related to history. It is most often amended. As for technical or scientific information, as a rule there are no contradictions there.
      2. Ratmir_Ryazan 1 January 2020 15: 10 New
        • 10
        • 2
        +8
        And what in the performance characteristics of the Su-57 does not correspond to the 5th generation?

        The F-35 has a cruising speed like a passenger Boeing - 850 km / h and no supersonic without afterburner.

        It will be hard for the F-35 fighters to work, nor to catch anyone.

        F-35 is more like a stealth bomber.
        1. TermNachTer 1 January 2020 19: 22 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          It must be understood that the 35th is not a very successful continuation of the 117th. By the way, they were recently pulled out of naphthalene - it is not clear why?
          1. opus 1 January 2020 20: 54 New
            • 5
            • 3
            +2
            Quote: TermNachTER
            It must be understood that the 35th is not a very successful continuation of the 117th

            who said / proved / justified it?
            "not very" successful "" ??
            belay
            More than 470 produced on 2019!

            at such a price?
            The same National Interest, allegedly the article we are discussing here, said:
            named the most advanced in the world multirole fighter, which, when fully loaded, can surpass the tactical aircraft of any other country in the world, and the program itself is aboutbottom of the greatest technological advances generations, a program that will ensure air supremacy for the United States and its allies around the world until the middle of the century
            I am.
            5 Reasons the F-35 Keeps Getting Better (And Russia and China Should Worry)

            Five Signs the F-35 Fighter Is a Smashing Success


            Business Insider included the F-35 in the list of the most powerful weapons of the NATO countries
            10 of the most powerful weapons NATO has to take on Putin's Russia


            Quote: TermNachTER
            it is not clear why?

            1.with lenses F. imitates ours (SU-57)
            2. work out measures to counter the detection of Ku-band radar, watch how it "sees" in the cm-, meter range
            =================
            Threat.
            [quote = Author without a name] In NI they argue: How many years will last fighters 4th generation [/ quote]

            Fullback, although a "fighter" -bomber .... however.
            and in NO it is not placed in the topic
            1. TermNachTer 1 January 2020 21: 54 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              I've already written more than once that beautiful digital numbers on a piece of paper or in a computer are one thing, and actual combat operation are two big differences, as they say in Odessa.
              1. opus 2 January 2020 14: 08 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                Quote: TermNachTER
                I've already written more than once that beautiful digital numbers on a piece of paper

                Let's reasonably argue:
                and you and I and 99,99% can only operate on “beautiful tsifirki on a piece of paper” that their “false” about F-35,22,15,18,16,
                that our "truthful" about the Su-35,34, MiG-29,35
                Quote: TermNachTER
                these are two big differences, as they say in Odessa.

                Prove it and all, with facts, it is not necessary about Odessa.
                Their "beautiful" tsifirki confirmed by the number of shot down aircraft, the number of sold / produced.

                Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                Boeing 737 MAKS also made a bunch, 400 are now in the warehouse of the enterprise where they are made.

                This happens. Superjet also does not shine.
                Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                After 2 disasters, more than 300 people who lost their lives due to software defects cannot be sold.

                this too shall pass.
                We thought after the Chernobyl-amb of our nuclear industry + 90s. I remember mocking our Framatome / KWU Nuclear Division and WestinghouseEC, predicting Minatom only dirty work in mining and burial.
                But?
                WestinghouseEC and no longer count, and Areva in such an opera that they themselves do not know how to get out of Finland

                Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                F-117 was also considered a wonderful bomber, before Yugoslavia. And then it turned out that he was not much different from conventional US military aircraft.

                these are silly tales of our town
                count the number of sorties / on the number of la, the number of bombs, the number of goals.
                will be surprised by the super result
                1. TermNachTer 2 January 2020 15: 02 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  You wrote so much and so messy that I understood a little. But if you want facts, then tell me how many real combat aircraft shot down the F - 35?
                  1. opus 2 January 2020 19: 44 New
                    • 2
                    • 1
                    +1
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    You wrote so much and so messy that I understood a little.

                    These are problems of your brain, so do not blame me for being rude.
                    What is "so much" and "chaotic" there, to be honest?
                    No, of course I agree, here:

                    everything is so simple and according to “ours.” The grated cup ...
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    then tell me how many real combat aircraft shot down the F - 35?

                    and why ONLY F-35 taken out of context?
                    can we joke on F-15,16, 18?
                    or maybe we'll see how many F-35,22,15,16,18 shot down the world's best Su-27 and MIG-29?
                    Threat. and you don’t tell me how many “the best-selling“ VuMir ”landed the best S-300xx and S-400 air defense systems on the planet?
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    I've already written more than once that beautiful digital numbers on a piece of paper or in a computer are one thing,

                    I completely agree with this
                    1. TermNachTer 2 January 2020 20: 46 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      You can of course see F - 15, F - 16, F - 18, etc. But this issue must be watched in a complex. When did the above listed airplanes converge in a battle with the MiG - 29, 23 or Su - 27 in a one-on-one battle? Not having support in the form of "Avax" or ground-based radar (EW) or satellite reconnaissance. This option is accepted. About the air defense system. The Soviet (Russian) air defense systems demonstrated their high efficiency in Vietnam. And even in Yugoslavia, when the "stupid" Yugoslav shot down F - 117, because he did not know that it was "invisible."
                      1. opus 2 January 2020 20: 59 New
                        • 2
                        • 1
                        +1
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        When did the above listed airplanes converge in a battle with the MiG - 29, 23 or Su - 27 in a one-on-one battle?

                        1999 year
                        Two MiGs took off the air bases of Nish Yugoslavia.
                        The first was damaged from the Dutch F-16 Fighting Falcon fighter, and the second, piloted by the Yugoslav pilot Major Ilio Arizanov, was shot down and shot down by the F-15 piloted by Rodriguez.
                        Avax - was not, numerical superiority was not.
                        Threat and this is not about AWACS.
                        In war there are no duels on skewers (like D "artanyans in the Musketeers)
                        I will keep silent about the battles of Israel (the Air Force) against all Arabs.
                        on Moments and vulnerabilities - I must say a separate "thank you" to Tolkachev Adolf ...
                        However, again: it is not sensible that there would be such gifts from the Lokhid / Boeing from their engineers.


                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        About the air defense system. The Soviet (Russian) air defense systems demonstrated their high efficiency in Vietnam. And even in Yugoslavia, when the "stupid" Yugoslav shot down F - 117,

                        I should not talk about air defense and about ZRS- this is my VUS. I can tell more.
                      2. TermNachTer 2 January 2020 23: 04 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        I can’t laugh, dear - but did all sorts of things work for these F-16s? Toes will not be enough, even when they run out of hands. And the Avaxs, and satellite intelligence, and ground-based radars and RTR (EW) from Italy. And still do not know what. I think that during these “twinks” NATO heroes knew when only engines were launched in caponiers. And if you are a part of ZRV, then explain to a stupid specialist, if the S-75 fell a "phantom", why the S-300 does not fill up the "needle"? What are the fundamental differences?
                      3. TermNachTer 2 January 2020 23: 08 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        R. S. Who pointed the Dutchman with his funny radar? F - 15 immediately after takeoff, in Italy, spotted the “instant” and “took for escort”? Do not tell me, my VUS is completely different, but I taught physics in a Soviet school.
                      4. opus 2 January 2020 23: 20 New
                        • 2
                        • 1
                        +1
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        I can’t laugh, dear

                        Well, laugh ... what is it here.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Toes will not be enough, even when they run out of hands.

                        let's specifically, on the occasion that I brought. Fingers are not necessary, just the facts.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        RTR (EW) from Italy.

                        So RTR or EW? As far as I know, the Yugoslavs did not bomb Italy. EW then why is there "from Italy"?
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        then explain to the stupid specialist, if the S-75 fell a "phantom", why does the S-300 fail the "needle"? What are the fundamental differences?

                        Yes, there is nothing, if from the point of view of the general definition of air defense systems, and 5ka should have been paired with 300

                        Only the S-300 didn’t bring down the F-15!
                        and the S-75x already has a technical limit of F-4 / SR-71 and height

                        and heights not lower than 100-150 m.

                        You swam away from the topic
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        I've already written more than once that beautiful numbers on a piece of paper or in a computer

                        Well, I'm talking about the same (about the S-300 and the Mig-29)
                        You, like that one of the sect of Au-semery .... (as they are there) they lie, but ours are not.
                        Well, it’s not worth Solovyov / Kiselev here
                      5. TermNachTer 2 January 2020 23: 31 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        And where did they fly to bomb Yugoslavia? From Japan or the USA? Is Italy not a member of NATO? Italian aircraft did not participate in attacks on Yugoslavia? Let's not "turn on the fool"
                      6. TermNachTer 2 January 2020 23: 35 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        PS I remember the name of the Italian air base for twenty years - Aviano. What prevents RTR standing in Italy, especially in the northeastern regions, from working in Yugoslavia? And from there to interfere with electronic warfare.
                      7. opus 3 January 2020 18: 23 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Let's not "turn on the fool"

                        Let's. we read ATTENTIVELY
                        Quote: opus
                        So rtr or electronic warfare? As far as I know, the Yugoslavs did not bomb Italy. EW then why there "from Italy"?"


                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        What prevents RTR standing in Italy, especially in the northeastern regions, from working in Yugoslavia?

                        RTR does not interfere
                        EW - it makes no sense, maybe, the law of inverse squares - and who has not canceled it.
                        And who will they jam?
                        From Italy, from
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        I remember the Talian airbase - Aviano.

                        taking off from Nis?
                      8. TermNachTer 3 January 2020 18: 38 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        As far as I remember, the south took off from Nis, but those who bombed the south from Aviano. The jamming jammer could also take off from Aviano. So, comparisons are incorrect.
                      9. TermNachTer 3 January 2020 18: 40 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        PS There are a lot of things you can drown out - even from Italy. Communication for example.
                      10. opus 3 January 2020 20: 00 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        PS There are a lot of things you can drown out - even from Italy. Communication for example.

                        poor Kaliningrad enclave.
  • Ratmir_Ryazan 2 January 2020 11: 10 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    more than 470 produced for 2019


    Boeing 737 MAKS also made a bunch, 400 are now in the warehouse of the enterprise where they are made. After 2 disasters, more than 300 people who lost their lives due to software defects cannot be sold.

    F-117 was also considered a wonderful bomber, before Yugoslavia. And then it turned out that he was not much different from conventional US military aircraft.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Nikolay Ivanov_5 1 January 2020 16: 17 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: Tuk77
    Is this your personal opinion?
    But even the Russian Vicki for some reason considers the F-35 a 5th generation aircraft.
    Who are you to believe?
    By the way, if we climb into the technical wilds, it turns out that the Su-57 also looks more like a 4 ++ generation.

    This is when the Russian Wikipedia appeared? So I thought Wikipedia’s headquarters is in San Francisco.
  • Aqr009 1 January 2020 16: 31 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    But even the Russian Vicki for some reason considers the F-35 a 5th generation aircraft.
    Who are you to believe?

    It is believed that the F-35 is not a plane, but a helicopter, but this is not yet accurate.
    1. Aibolit 2 January 2020 02: 39 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      good
      Goal of the season!
  • tomket 2 January 2020 01: 45 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Tuk77
    But even the Russian Vicki for some reason considers the F-35 a 5th generation aircraft.
    Who are you to believe?

    One of the main criteria of the 5th generation is cruising supersonic. On f-35 it is not. Checkmate.
  • GKS 2111 1 January 2020 13: 31 New
    • 12
    • 3
    +9
    The National Interest magazine argues
    Syrian Observatory for Human Rights
    British scientists think what they think.
    People! I want to wish you to think with your own head in the New Year! Health to you and your families !!! Happy New Year, people !!!
    1. Vitaly gusin 1 January 2020 14: 05 New
      • 1
      • 8
      -7
      Quote: GKS 2111
      People! I want to wish you to think with your own head in the New Year! Health to you and your families !!! Happy New Year, people !!!

      JOIN YOUR WISHES!
      Please tell me from what sources you want to receive information.
      For example, this suits you, then you can continue:
      "Retired US Army General Harry North, now top manager for Lockheed Martin, the manufacturer of the F-35 stealth aircraft, visited Israel, where he discussed with pilots and the Israeli Air Force the flight characteristics of Adir aircraft."
      1. Aerodrome 1 January 2020 15: 07 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        Quote: Vitaly Gusin
        JOIN YOUR WISHES!
        Please tell me from what sources you want to receive information.

        just not from "vital goose" ... hi there ... the State Department and the anb ...
        1. Vitaly gusin 1 January 2020 18: 18 New
          • 1
          • 6
          -5
          Quote: Aerodrome
          just not from "vital goose" ... hi there ... the State Department and the anb ...

          Here's how to hide his head in the sand and shout from there: "WE were born to make a fairy tale come true"
          You in modern life will not help.
          You can not read, you can put another 1000 minuses to mine -40 000 does not affect how and time will turn them into pluses.
          So, to our sheep:
          "US Army retired general Harry North, now top manager for Lockheed Martin, the manufacturer of the F-35 stealth aircraft, has visited Israel.
          He was interested in two main questions.
          1. Familiarization with the changes made by Israel to the on-board system F-35, turning the plane into a monster. We are talking about the F-35I Adir installed on the Israeli Air Force aircraft surveillance and countermeasure system for electronic warfare. And he received an answer why the Russian airborne forces decided to replace the S-400 with the S-500 and why the SU-57 left Syria a few days later.
          The pilots told North that, after the changes were made, the F-35 aircraft allowed them to carry out their tasks almost unhindered, without fear of the S-300 and S-400 air defense actions.
          Such an advantage, as they say the Israeli Air Force pilots, had only dreamed of before.
          2. He was also interested in the possible delivery of aircraft of this modification for the third squadron of the Israeli Air Force, but did not receive an answer. the leadership of the air force does not have a unanimous opinion on the need to purchase a new batch of F-35 aircraft.
          A number of senior Israeli Air Force officers give preference to the F-15X due to the fact that this aircraft is capable of traveling a long distance with a lot of cargo on board, including hypersonic air-to-air missiles. And for the fulfillment of the tasks, the number of F-35s is considered sufficient and two squadrons.
          1. Aibolit 2 January 2020 02: 43 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Enchanting!
            The minus did not set you, and indeed, not only to you.
            But your nonsense inspires and causes a rash of my brain.
            I want to ask:
            * What are you drinking?
            * How much is this “what”?
            * Is it harmful to health?
            From SW.
            1. Vitaly gusin 2 January 2020 08: 29 New
              • 0
              • 4
              -4
              Quote: Aibolit
              brain flurry

              H.
              As soon as this state passes and you can read, not only what you like, but also LEAD OUT what really happens, and not on Kesel TV, then I’ll talk with you.
              Quote: Aibolit
              * What are you drinking?
              * How much is this “what”?
              * Is it harmful to health?

              This will not help you get out of your state, we are all over again.
    2. tomket 2 January 2020 01: 48 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: GKS 2111
      Syrian Observatory for Human Rights
      British scientists think what they think.

      I’m thinking, can I launch my band or something ... Kolkhoz Svetly Put issued a rating of the most powerful economies in the world .... Kolkhoz Svetly Put predicted the collapse of bitcoin ... Kolkhoz Svetly Put allowed the world crisis after 2020 ...
  • evgenii67 1 January 2020 13: 32 New
    • 7
    • 4
    +3
    There is no need to be an expert in order to understand that 4th generation aircraft will continue to be in service in the majority of the countries of the world after the 50th year. If until this time there is no mega crisis, or a major war, then the USA will completely and partially China switch to the 5th generation, the rest will have several dozen, in the case of Russia, a maximum of about two hundred.
    1. Vadivak 1 January 2020 13: 41 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Quote: evgenii67
      If until this time there is no mega crisis, or a big war,,

      And if there is no breakthrough in technology.
      1. Aerodrome 1 January 2020 15: 09 New
        • 5
        • 2
        +3
        Quote: Vadivak
        Quote: evgenii67
        If until this time there is no mega crisis, or a big war,,

        And if there is no breakthrough in technology.

        we have a "ten years of victories" ...
        1. Vadivak 1 January 2020 16: 43 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: Aerodrome
          we have a "ten years of victories" ...

          Are you talking about the public domain?
  • Basarev 1 January 2020 13: 33 New
    • 10
    • 4
    +6
    Only one thing is bad: fifth-generation fighters are prohibitively expensive. They are simply afraid to seriously apply them - financial costs will be simply gigantic, and reputational ones will be even greater. This is called the battleship effect. Perhaps it is more correct to create new fourth-generation fighters from scratch? Or even the third, new MiG-21 analogues, in case of a very serious war, with losses from the regiment, inexpensive, easy to learn and suitable for truly mass production. Such is the flying Kalashnikov.
    1. Pessimist22 1 January 2020 13: 59 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      Yes, I saw MiG 21 serving the Soviet Union, 40 years have passed, they still fly, really a legend.
    2. dauria 1 January 2020 14: 02 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      inexpensive, easy to learn and suitable for truly mass production.


      Already looming like this. His brain is still not enough, but it is fixable for a dozen years. It seems that this is a coup in tactics. And even exchanging an anti-aircraft missile - an unmanned strike aircraft is quite equal.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Alexey Sommer 1 January 2020 14: 12 New
        • 3
        • 5
        -2
        The hunter is better.
        1. dauria 1 January 2020 14: 14 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          The hunter is better.

          Worse, better question. But the fact that this is the future of front-line aviation is no longer a question, but a fact.
          1. Alexey Sommer 1 January 2020 14: 18 New
            • 0
            • 6
            -6
            And Russia is a leader in the concept of mixed use of manned and unmanned in conjunction. We were the first to show it.
            1. dauria 1 January 2020 14: 24 New
              • 5
              • 4
              +1
              And Russia is a leader in the concept of mixed use of manned and unmanned in conjunction.


              Of course, the Russian elephants are the most-most. Of course. I want to be proud of Russia. And she has something to be proud of. But just not bragging that we are "ahead of the rest"
          2. Vadivak 1 January 2020 16: 45 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            Quote: dauria
            But the fact that this is the future of front-line aviation is no longer a question, but a fact.

            Not a fact, interference, takeover, viruses ....... their name is legion
            1. alexmach 1 January 2020 22: 53 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              What else is control interception if it is autonomous. What other interference.
      4. Good_Anonymous 1 January 2020 16: 40 New
        • 1
        • 3
        -2
        Quote: dauria
        And even exchanging an anti-aircraft missile - an unmanned attack aircraft is quite equal.


        Equal in what parameters? Odig only the engine of a modern aircraft is more expensive than missiles.
    3. Good_Anonymous 1 January 2020 16: 39 New
      • 2
      • 3
      -1
      Quote: Basarev
      Only one thing is bad: fifth-generation fighters are prohibitively expensive


      The F-35s are no more expensive than the new F-15s and not much more expensive than the Rafales.
    4. alexmach 1 January 2020 22: 51 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      in case of a very serious war, with losses from the regiment, inexpensive, easy to learn and suitable for truly mass production

      And develop cloning technology for growing low-cost pilots.
  • Well done 1 January 2020 13: 37 New
    • 0
    • 6
    -6
    T-34 is still a formidable car. This is "by the way." Cars like SU-27 (glider) will be in demand for many more years. 50 ... 70 ... So far, there will be potential targets for them. Computers will not replace us soon. A reliable car - what could be better ?!
    1. Vadivak 1 January 2020 16: 47 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Welldone
      T-34 is still a formidable car.

      Watching for whom and how much.
  • Zaurbek 1 January 2020 13: 46 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Yes, they can stand still until the 2100th .... the systems will be updated .... the radars will be that stealth see that is not stealth.
    1. Alexey Sommer 1 January 2020 14: 16 New
      • 4
      • 3
      +1
      They can stand in the museum at least until 5100, and it’s unlikely to fly.
      There is no arguing against physics. No one has yet canceled metal fatigue. Resource glider is not eternal.
      Mig 21, by the way the last one was released in 1985, this is to why then they are still in operation.
      1. Zaurbek 1 January 2020 14: 31 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        I mean their further release and modernization.
  • Aaron Zawi 1 January 2020 14: 01 New
    • 8
    • 5
    +3
    Quote: Basarev
    Only one thing is bad: fifth-generation fighters are prohibitively expensive. They are simply afraid to seriously apply them - financial costs will be simply gigantic, and reputational ones will be even greater. This is called the battleship effect. Perhaps it is more correct to create new fourth-generation fighters from scratch? Or even the third, new MiG-21 analogues, in case of a very serious war, with losses from the regiment, inexpensive, easy to learn and suitable for truly mass production. Such is the flying Kalashnikov.

    Why is it too expensive? The F-35A is already worth $ 80 million. Not more expensive than the latest modifications of the F-16V with AFAR and much cheaper than the F-15XS.


    In 2019, 134 F-35 aircraft of all modifications were delivered, while in 2018 only 91 aircraft were delivered.
    In 2020, Lockheed Martin plans to supply 141 F-35 aircraft, and continue to increase its production by 2023 inclusive.
    The average cost of manufacturing the F-35A in 2019 was $ 77,9 million. More than 1400 suppliers from 47 US states and Puerto Rico are engaged in production, the program provides about 220 thousand jobs in the United States.
    To date, 490 F-35 aircraft are in operation around the world, which have flown for more than 240 thousand hours. 975 pilots and 8585 ground personnel were trained. At four operators, F-35 aircraft took part in the hostilities.


    1. Thrifty 1 January 2020 15: 19 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Aron, happy new years to you hi (according to our and your calendar)! I only have one question for you - is the price for f35 indicated for you if there is an engine on it, or without it? ?? Once again with the holidays! !! hi hi
      1. Aaron Zawi 1 January 2020 16: 24 New
        • 2
        • 3
        -1
        Quote: Thrifty
        Aron, happy new years to you hi (according to our and your calendar)! I only have one question for you - is the price for f35 indicated for you if there is an engine on it, or without it? ?? Once again with the holidays! !! hi hi

        But I don’t know. We generally have very complicated contracts for the purchase of equipment. They include many years of service, return purchases of LM products from our industry, the supply of simulators, etc.
      2. Avior 1 January 2020 16: 30 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        Even if without an engine, it’s still cheaper than the same Rafale or Eurofighter
        Cheaper f-35 in the manufacturing process
        It was expensive f-22
      3. voyaka uh 1 January 2020 17: 42 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Israel receives a price of 110 million with an engine.
        The Pentagon receives at a price of 80 million with an engine.
        1. Zaurbek 2 January 2020 12: 00 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Both that and that for the American money.
  • Ratmir_Ryazan 1 January 2020 14: 04 New
    • 1
    • 9
    -8
    Russia needs the Su-57 in two versions - an interceptor and a scout.

    The first one is as it is now, a hunter with a powerful radar, long range, over-the-counter superfluous, etc.

    The second should become a scout, it is necessary to minimize its EPR and thermal signature due to more composites, a special radio-absorbing coating, even if this affects its maneuverability and speed.
    1. Zaurbek 1 January 2020 14: 33 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      The 5th generation is doing this so that it would be both a full-fledged interceptor and fighter and could attack land and sea targets
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan 1 January 2020 14: 54 New
        • 3
        • 9
        -6
        Only the Su-57 is clearly losing in stealth. This is his flaw.
    2. Ratmir_Ryazan 1 January 2020 15: 03 New
      • 5
      • 6
      -1
      What are the minuses instructed?

      Are you sure that the Su-57 is good at everything?

      And here I am. And the version of the Su-57 with a bias towards less noticeability would clearly not hurt us.

      By the way, it would be possible to make it a single-engine one, it would reduce the thermal signature, and maneuverability and speed for the stealth are more likely an opposite parameter, a special radio-absorbing coating on the F-35 limits its speed in any case.
      1. alexmach 1 January 2020 22: 56 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        What are the minuses instructed?

        Only the Su-57 is clearly losing in stealth. This is his flaw.

        Where does the information about its stealth come from? Yes, you can guess something there in appearance, but not the fact that these guesses will be truly reliable.
        1. Ratmir_Ryazan 2 January 2020 11: 06 New
          • 0
          • 3
          -3
          Where does the information about its inconspicuousness come from? Yes, something can be guessed there in appearance


          Low visibility of the aircraft is achieved both by the shape of the aircraft, and by the materials from which it is made, and by the coating.

          If the glider of the Su-57 is almost the same as that of its competitors, then everything was done with the materials and coating according to the residual principle, otherwise it would get the same speed and maneuverability restrictions as the F-35 or the cost like the F-22.

          There is no radio-absorbing coating on the Su-57, as on all of our other aircraft.

          In fact, the Su-57 is an improved Su-35, the only difference is that it has a glider design that is more optimal for stealth and missiles are hidden in the internal compartments.

          I think that even the French Rafal has less EPR than our Su-57, for the reason that there are more composites in the design of the airframe.

          We need a Su-57 as a reconnaissance version, even if it is not so fast, but in order to sneak up on a target and strike at it, just a little noticeability may be more relevant than speed.
          1. alexmach 2 January 2020 11: 17 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Well, you know, if you can somehow judge the design of the airframe with the naked eye and criticize the suspension points of the cockpit lantern or the placement of engines there, then the coverage is all guesses and nothing more.
            1. Ratmir_Ryazan 2 January 2020 11: 35 New
              • 0
              • 2
              -2
              Well, you know, if you can somehow judge the design of the airframe with the naked eye and criticize the suspension points of the cockpit lantern or the placement of engines there, then the coverage is all guesses and nothing more.


              Well, you still say that on our aircraft radar absorbing coating is so inconspicuous that it is not visible))).

              Take a look at all the airplanes that are coated with radar, that the USA, that China !!!

              On the Su-57, coating for stealth is camouflage, but this does not reduce the EPR in any way.

              And on the American F-117/22/35, Chinese J-20/31 do not apply any camouflage, there is a special coating.

              Not only that, the United States is applying a radar absorbing coating to old planes and this gives a positive moment in reducing ESR.

              But this coating has a drawback - it limits the maximum speed of the aircraft. That's why the F-35’s cruising speed is only 850 km / h (the F-16’s cruising speed of Mach 0,93 = 1116 km / h)
  • Operator 1 January 2020 14: 04 New
    • 5
    • 9
    -4
    "Charlie Gao writes that the Su-27" - they have all such suckers as Gao, or through one: "Su-35 - no, I don’t know" laughing
    1. Alexey Sommer 1 January 2020 14: 21 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      Sorry!
      What are you talking about?
  • UVB
    UVB 1 January 2020 14: 17 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    In addition, the author says that in some cases, the modernization of radars allows relatively efficient operation of 3rd generation aircraft. As an example, the MiG-21.
    In fact, the MiG-21 is a 2nd generation fighter, the 3rd generation is a MiG-23.
  • Yang yangov 1 January 2020 14: 22 New
    • 8
    • 2
    +6
    handsome men. 4 generations will be in demand for a long time. not everyone has printing presses

  • knn54 1 January 2020 14: 32 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    I was always confused by multifunctionality. "Stealth" should perform functions (and not additional options), at least. three different in tasks (respectively, TTD) aircraft. So the "4 ----". still fight, given, for example, the appearance of ROFAR
    1. V.I.P. 1 January 2020 14: 54 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Yes, now AFAR is just starting to put on Typhoon, Grippen, F-15 ..... I don’t even speak about Russian combat aircraft, when and on what carriers ..... and you are ROFAR. After 20 years, the lights can be put on an aircraft))
      1. knn54 1 January 2020 15: 15 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        In Syria, the Su-57 flew with a prototype AFAR. On the export version of the MiG-35 AFAR will also be put
        In Turkey, F-16 multi-role fighters were equipped with AFAR radars.
        About 20 years according to ROFAR. obviously got excited.
        1. Zaurbek 1 January 2020 16: 07 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Here in the next 20 years, AFAR would go over and it would already be nice.
        2. V.I.P. 2 January 2020 09: 59 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          What does the export have to do with it?))) I immediately clarified that Russian combat aircraft ... And the export T-90s have air conditioners that Russian tankers can only see on television. Now the equipment is exported better than itself.
    2. Avior 1 January 2020 16: 33 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Unfortunately, it is not yet possible to say about Rofar that he has already appeared
      In any case, no one saw him.
      While
      hi
  • certero 1 January 2020 14: 48 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Already, it is absolutely clear that the future belongs to autonomous unmanned vehicles.
    And all these generations are the notions of journalists.
    1. Ratmir_Ryazan 1 January 2020 14: 57 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      All these autonomous vehicles under the conditions of interference will turn into scrap metal or will be able to fly talc on a given route, without maneuvers, which will make them easy prey for enemy fighters.
      1. 8200 1 January 2020 17: 03 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        With the development of artificial intelligence technologies, control for drones becomes not critical. The drone can already perform quite complex tasks without communication with the base, including dodging an attack, various maneuvers and prioritizing targets.
        In a battle with a fighter, the outcome for one drone is obvious, but if there are 10 times more drones than fighters, then most likely the goal will be achieved.
        1. Ratmir_Ryazan 2 January 2020 11: 21 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          In a battle with a fighter, the outcome for one drone is obvious, but if there are 10 times more drones than fighters


          In battle, decisions must be made instantly; you cannot put everything into the program.

          Iran recently flunked the American drone RQ-4 Global Hawk, which costs 150-200 million dollars with one rocket.

          How much will an unmanned fighter stuffed with electronics and a powerful computer cost? I doubt very much that they will be able to do a lot and they will somehow be able to compete with a person.

          This is all fantastic, but now we need to think about real things.

          But in reality we need a fighter-interceptor (hunter) that will have a powerful radar and long-range missiles and a large combat radius, as well as a reconnaissance aircraft with strike capabilities.

          It may be the Hunter UAV that is being prepared for the function of a reconnaissance aircraft, but I still think that a manned version is also needed - a small, single-engine, with minimal EPR and the ability to use high-precision weapons.
      2. Good_Anonymous 1 January 2020 17: 07 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
        All these autonomous cars in the conditions of interference will turn into scrap metal or will be able to fly talc on a given route, without maneuvers


        So it will be with remotely piloted machines. Autonomous (when they appear) in the worst case, lose contact with the database, but continue to complete the task.
      3. certero 1 January 2020 17: 31 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        I wonder why manned vehicles can fly in the presence of interference? Just an autonomous fighter or bomber can maneuver with more overload and fly on any route. And it will be cheaper. And most importantly, it can be sent to such missions where the pilot is sorry.
        1. Oyo Sarkazmi 1 January 2020 18: 04 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: certero
          I wonder why manned vehicles can fly in the presence of interference?

          They have a more developed and versatile brain. Literally. It works with a noise-resistant paper card, and target recognition is faster, and resistant to electromagnetic counteraction. And for service requires only a cook in the dining room.
          1. Good_Anonymous 1 January 2020 18: 30 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Oyo Sarkazmi
            It works with a noise-resistant paper card


            A pack of Belomor flies, yeah.
          2. iuocsfyu 1 January 2020 20: 36 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            Quote: Oyo Sarkazmi
            They have a more developed and versatile brain. Literally. It works with a noise-resistant paper card, and target recognition is faster, and resistant to electromagnetic counteraction. And for service requires only a cook in the dining room.

            - for maintenance, he needs an ejection seat, life support systems, a toilet, and a special place the volume of which cannot be reduced, load limits, constant physical training to maintain readiness, constant flight training to confirm skills, and a limited service life.

            - AI doesn’t need to catapult, ensure vital functions, don’t need a toilet - it can work endlessly, it doesn’t need a volume exceeding the size of an iPhone, it doesn’t need to limit loads, it doesn’t need physical trainings, it doesn’t need flight trainings, and it never forgets, doesn’t age, doesn’t age refuses to carry out the order, and reacts to an ever faster person. The main thing is that you can’t improve a person, AI improves constantly.

            Combat AI has long surpassed any pilots. Once and forever.
            I have cited this article so many times, and still, there is surely someone who does not know about it.
            https://nplus1.ru/news/2016/06/29/Daisy-Bell

            - The entire development of this AI cost 200 thousand dollars. It fits in a box the size of a credit card and value total 35 dollars. And it was in 2016, and since then it has only been improved. Regarding the autonomy of decision-making during the assignment, he was already smarter than a good half of the commentators of VO.
            1. Oyo Sarkazmi 1 January 2020 20: 44 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              A box is nothing, service is everything. Electricians, programmers, map encoders, terrain modelers, satellite navigation - EVERY unmanned aircraft for after-flight service. Moreover, this is in addition to those who serve the manned flight - refuellers, gunsmiths, mechanics. This is not a pack of Belomor to give out.
              1. iuocsfyu 1 January 2020 20: 58 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Quote: Oyo Sarkazmi
                Electricians, programmers, map encoders, terrain modelers, satellite navigation - EVERY unmanned aircraft for after-flight service.
                - From which side does all this not be necessary in an ordinary airplane? Each manned aircraft needs much more pre and post-flight service. Moreover, for unmanned vehicles, the requirements for the reliability of mechanisms are incomparably smaller than for manned ones; the piece of iron will endure more than a man.
                Programmers are needed at the initial training stage, and at the improvement stage. After that, self-learning AI is a finished product, the readiness of which is immediate and unlimited, unlike the pilot.

                Quote: Oyo Sarkazmi
                Box is nothing

                Just the box is all. Just compare the cost of the box, $ 35, with the cost of the cheapest person.

                Read the article.
          3. certero 1 January 2020 21: 05 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Oyo Sarkazmi
            They have a more developed and versatile brain. Literally. It works with a noise-free paper card,

            What other tales tell?
            Without all the electronic things in a modern airplane, a pilot cannot do anything. And he receives basic information from various sources - external.
            The pilot has to be taught for a long, long time at least 6-7 years. The robot once trained and copy.
            An unmanned aircraft will be lighter by about 2 tons since life support systems for a weak human body are not needed.
            However, everything has long been known. Modern passenger aircraft could fly without pilots tomorrow. But who will allow it? So far, only psychologically, passengers are not ready for this. But the military does not have such a template. And most importantly, Russia can be ahead of everyone here because our algorithms have always been at the highest level.
            1. Oyo Sarkazmi 1 January 2020 22: 08 New
              • 0
              • 2
              -2
              Quote: certero
              To teach a "pilot" has a long, long time at least 6-7 years.

              And to program a pilot with experience in 6-10 years, any crap can, yeah. 737 MAX showed an example of programming based on theoretical estimates.
  • Uncle Izya 1 January 2020 15: 08 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    Probably the afar itself will cost more than the Mig-21
    1. missuris 2 January 2020 18: 47 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      yes not really expensive a couple of kk $
  • svp67 1 January 2020 15: 43 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Russia is the third country that is engaged in its own production of this kind of aircraft.
    Well, having started the development of such an aircraft at least second, already the third ... in the same way and in general you can be late for everything
    1. kit88 1 January 2020 17: 51 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      But in my opinion, not everything is so bad. And “partners” need to sprinkle ashes on their heads because of missed opportunities.
      We have a lag, but not a critical one. Despite all our state disasters, we took our fifth generation into the air with 13 years behind. / For comparison, in the fourth generation, the Su-27 took off five years after the F-15 / It seems to be a long time, but they still do not have the 6th generation, which means we will be lagging behind in the coming years.
      But what “partners” have been doing for the last thirty years in terms of innovations is a big question.
      The raptor took off back in 1997. And from that time they drank the Penguin. Nobody understands what it is and what it is eaten with - whether it's the 4+ generation, or the 6th, but certainly not the 5th.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • rocket757 1 January 2020 16: 53 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Interestingly, is this a technique designed before so good, or is something wrong with new products?
  • Holsten 1 January 2020 18: 35 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    It is hard to imagine what the sixth generation will be like, but even with it the fourth planes will be relevant.
  • certero 1 January 2020 21: 28 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: iuocsfyu
    The entire development of this AI cost 200 thousand dollars. It fits in a box the size of a credit card and costs only $ 35. AND

    Although I am completely for autonomous planes, here we are talking about only one aspect of combat activity - simulating close air combat - dog fightng
    1. iuocsfyu 1 January 2020 21: 40 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Quote: certero
      Although I am completely for autonomous planes, here we are talking about only one aspect of combat activity - simulating close air combat - dog fightng

      - No. It's about AI capable of tactically leading the battle. Not just dogfight. Perhaps because dogfight is considered a distinctive advantage of Russian aircraft, the Russian translation summarized the original with an emphasis on close combat.

      Quote from the original (there is a link):
      In fact, ALPHA can take in the entirety of sensor data, organize it, create a complete mapping of a combat scenario and make or change combat decisions for a flight of four fighter aircraft in less than a millisecond. Basically, the AI ​​is so fast that it could consider and coordinate the best tactical plan and precise responses, within a dynamic environment, over 250 times faster than ALPHA's human opponents could blink.

      https://magazine.uc.edu/editors_picks/recent_features/alpha.html
  • Rusj 1 January 2020 21: 29 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    predator plane
  • iouris 4 January 2020 00: 15 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: “There is (is) a probability that ...” End of quote.
    This is already a classic. The authors use this expression without understanding its meaninglessness and demonstrate either illiteracy or negligence. It should be said: “It is possible (probably) ...” “It is very possible (very likely) ...” or, on the contrary, “Very unlikely. In the extreme case:“ It can be, although it is unlikely. ”