Military Review

In the sky - Major Gunderson: in the United States showed detailed aerobatics F-22

194

The network discusses the video of piloting an American fifth-generation fighter F-22. We are talking about the publication on the F-22 channel of the Demo Team - a detailed video that was reportedly shot by US Air Force lieutenant Sam Ekholm and presented by Mark Finger.


The video captures the flight, which is performed by Major Josh "Cabo" Gunderson (Josh "Cabo" Gunderson) on the F-22 Raptor during an air show. The aerobatic team, which participates in flights, as it itself reports, is designed to demonstrate the capabilities of the world's first fifth-generation fighter and other aircraft - in different countries of the world.

The aerobatic team is based at the Langley-Eustis base in Hampton (Virginia, USA). For the first time, the piloting of this team of pilots was demonstrated 13 years ago - in March 2007 at the air show, which was held at Tyndall airbase.

Filming shows the "behavior" of not only the aircraft in the air, but also the pilot in the cockpit of the F-22 Raptor.

It is noted that during the performance of aerobatics, the pilot experiences an overload of 9g. The declared radius of the combat turn of the fifth generation fighter. Additionally reported on those weapons that can carry on board an American combat aircraft. We are talking about such weapons as AIM-9, AIM-120, GBU-32, GBU-39, as well as a 20-mm gun.

The rotation of the aircraft around its axis during vertical climb is demonstrated. The American major showed the "barrel", "cobra", the mentioned "combat turn", several other aerobatics.

Users, watching the video, noted Gunderson’s high skill and capabilities of the fifth generation aircraft. In the comments, some Americans, apparently impressed by the video, called the F-22 "the best fighter in the world." In the United States, Gunderson’s officer is often called an “ace” or “master.”

At the same time, it can be noted that everything that an American fifth-generation aircraft does is capable of performing Russian 4th-generation aircraft, for example, the Su-35, without any problems.

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 31 March 2020 09: 55 New
    +8
    At the same time, it can be noted that everything that an American fifth-generation aircraft does is capable of performing Russian 4th-generation aircraft, for example, the Su-35, without any problems.
    but the raptor is hardly noticeable, although no one doubted that the f-22 had everything in order with maneuverability, they would show it all on the f-35
    1. Insurgent
      Insurgent 31 March 2020 10: 02 New
      -10
      Quote: _Ugene_
      but the raptor is hardly noticeable

      The question is - для кого "малозаметный" ?

      Или не факт,что средства ПВО и авиация ВКС брала на "сопровождение" "stels" Ф-22 и Ф-35 ?
      1. _Ugene_
        _Ugene_ 31 March 2020 10: 27 New
        31
        Вопрос - для кого "малозаметный" ?
        да заканчивайте вы уже с этими мантрами о бесполезности технологии стелс, всем адекватным уже давно понятно что преимущества есть, в дальности обнаружения, в проблемах с захватом цели гсн ракет и тд, никто давно уже не говорит о "невидимости" и невозможности обнаружения, но то, что существенное уменьшение эпр и ик сигнатуры значительно уменьшает дальность на которой самолет будет обнаружен бесспорно, а это даёт стелсу зачительно больше пространства для маневра, в том числе возможность поражать некоторые объекты пво не входя в зону обнаружения
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 31 March 2020 10: 41 New
        +7
        Quote: Insurgent
        ВКС брала на "сопровождение" "stels" Ф-22 и Ф-35 ?

        Ну,если вы захотели прослыть эрудированным человеком ,то надо было вам написать не "stels", а "stealth" ! hi
        1. Insurgent
          Insurgent 31 March 2020 10: 53 New
          -2
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Ну,если вы захотели прослыть эрудированным человеком ,то надо было вам написать не "stels", а "stealth" !

          laughing laughing laughing именно "STELS" yes (mistake in writing in words lol ).

          " STELS " - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHMi3Mg910ZgOSlTtyfLceg
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 31 March 2020 11: 32 New
            +3
            Quote: Insurgent
            именно "STELS" ( ошибка в том,что написал прописью ).

            Well then ... to each his own! If you have bikes on your mind ... lol , then STELS ... and if the planes, then STEALTH! wink
      4. Alexey from Perm
        Alexey from Perm 31 March 2020 12: 16 New
        0
        the whole question is from what distance. If they see us from 100 km, and we only from 20 km. Then the winner in such a fight is known in advance.
      5. mvg
        mvg 31 March 2020 13: 05 New
        +3
        брала на "сопровождение" "stels"

        where did I get it, at the most I can’t? are you up to date?
        1. aiden
          aiden 31 March 2020 20: 18 New
          +3

          Well, for example, the su-35 in Syria caught him in the sight
          1. mvg
            mvg April 10 2020 00: 19 New
            0
            caught him in sight

            This is an OLS (optics) and not a radar. And on the show they fly with dipoles .. And the F-35s were both bombed and bombed.
    2. Fantazer911
      Fantazer911 31 March 2020 10: 02 New
      -6
      Yeah, schach, do you want the super prodigy sold in many countries of the world to fall apart in the air? There are no such fools in the USA, they called the F-35 super that's it, everything else is secret, you need to believe in the capabilities of their F-35 since the gentleman said that super, then super hi
    3. Oden280
      Oden280 31 March 2020 10: 10 New
      +2
      What maneuverability? Compared to Su - 35, the cow is creeping.
      1. Nasrat
        Nasrat 31 March 2020 11: 09 New
        +3
        handsome devil ... and menacing ... praise the designers and manufacturers of the United States - a beautiful bird !!!
      2. Alexey from Perm
        Alexey from Perm 31 March 2020 12: 17 New
        0
        Well, you're from evil ...
    4. letinant
      letinant 31 March 2020 10: 24 New
      18
      Quote: _Ugene_
      At the same time, it can be noted that everything that an American fifth-generation aircraft does is capable of performing Russian 4th-generation aircraft, for example, the Su-35, without any problems.
      but the raptor is hardly noticeable, although no one doubted that the f-22 had everything in order with maneuverability, they would show it all on the f-35

      1. By stealth, this site previously had a reprint from an American magazine on military aviation. There, in the article, there are beautiful photographs of the destroyed cover of the aircraft. With such damage to this coating, it glows like a Christmas tree.
      2.Из этого видео вообще трудно сделать вывод о его манёвренности. Всё порезанное, плюс они самостоятельно присваивают названиям фигурам пилотажа. Там есть кадры подписанные "КОБРА", на самом деле это, вертикальная горка с опусканием носа с отрицательными вертикальными перегрузками. А классическая фигура высшего пилотажа "КОБРА ПУГАЧЁВА", это динамическое торможение с отклонением самолёта на 120 град. относительно оси первоначального движения, без изменения высоты.
      And in general, they do not cut video only in three figures, which cannot be performed haphazardly.
      1. Topgun
        Topgun 31 March 2020 10: 56 New
        -5
        Quote: letinant
        1. By stealth, this site previously had a reprint from an American magazine on military aviation. There, in the article, there are beautiful photographs of the destroyed cover of the aircraft. With such damage to this coating, it glows like a Christmas tree.

        Yes, the coating is destroyed, and so what? there is nothing eternal in this world
        "стелс" это целый комплекс мер, форма планера (к примеру уже в этом месте СУ 57 уступает - снизу со своими гондолами он вообще как самолет 4го поколения) фонарь без переплетов, отсеки для ракет, эти элементы никуда не делись? а покрытие можно и заменить? в отличеи от выступающих гондол двигателей...
        1. letinant
          letinant 31 March 2020 11: 39 New
          +8
          Quote: Topgun
          Quote: letinant
          1. By stealth, this site previously had a reprint from an American magazine on military aviation. There, in the article, there are beautiful photographs of the destroyed cover of the aircraft. With such damage to this coating, it glows like a Christmas tree.

          Yes, the coating is destroyed, and so what? there is nothing eternal in this world
          "стелс" это целый комплекс мер, форма планера (к примеру уже в этом месте СУ 57 уступает - снизу со своими гондолами он вообще как самолет 4го поколения) фонарь без переплетов, отсеки для ракет, эти элементы никуда не делись? а покрытие можно и заменить? в отличеи от выступающих гондол двигателей...

          Are you familiar with low visibility technologies? So, I’ve been doing this for a very long time, the EPR of the aircraft is most of all reduced by the coating of the fuselage and wing (paint). That is why if there is a need to carry out maintenance work on the fuselage or wing of the aircraft, rubber mats, special covers (worn on shoes), and gloves strictly designed for work are used. These measures are only for one, DO NOT DAMAGE COVER !!! Also in glazing, a gold thread is used, to quench radar radiation, if not used, the pilot's helmet gives a reflection equal to F-16 (tested on F-117). The gondolas themselves are very easily shielded, but the turbine blades give the light, they are hidden in very cunning air intakes, the shape of which does not allow reflection and it damps there, thereby not giving light.
          1. Topgun
            Topgun 31 March 2020 14: 22 New
            -5
            You claim that you are dealing with stealth, but at the same time, the comment - a selection of news about stealth on this site - nothing more request
            так вот про гондолы которые "легко экранировать", вы бы почитали книжечку советского!!!! инженера из-за которого и пошла вся "стелсовость" - в данном случае гондолы это "лишние поверхности" которые будут отражать, вся суть стелсовости это делать так чтоб в определенных проекциях было минимальное отражение, снизу у СУ с этим "печалька" ибо слишком много поверхностей смотрят в разные стороны!!!!
            keywords - the surface and projection where the signal reflects, that’s the whole point, and the special materials that absorb it are good, they complement and improve great, but whatever material it reflects, it’s primarily IMHO
            1. letinant
              letinant 31 March 2020 14: 36 New
              +4
              Quote: Topgun
              You claim that you are dealing with stealth, but at the same time, the comment - a selection of news about stealth on this site - nothing more request
              так вот про гондолы которые "легко экранировать", вы бы почитали книжечку советского!!!! инженера из-за которого и пошла вся "стелсовость" - в данном случае гондолы это "лишние поверхности" которые будут отражать, вся суть стелсовости это делать так чтоб в определенных проекциях было минимальное отражение, снизу у СУ с этим "печалька" ибо слишком много поверхностей смотрят в разные стороны!!!!
              keywords - the surface and projection where the signal reflects, that’s the whole point, and the special materials that absorb it are good, they complement and improve great, but whatever material it reflects, it’s primarily IMHO

              So, the surface of the air intakes are covered with radar absorbing material (paint). About excerpts from the news, I can enter into a debate with you about the technologies of low radar visibility (that’s what it is called, the engineer you refer to is the name of it). Just tell me in which year the radio-absorbing coating was created in the USSR and the USA. Who is the inventor of this coating in the USSR and the USA. After that I will see if it’s worth further talking with you.
              1. Topgun
                Topgun 31 March 2020 14: 43 New
                -7
                nevertheless, there were the first Germans ...
                Quote: letinant
                After that I will see if it’s worth further talking with you.

                honestly, not much is needed ... because, so far, I have not seen anything from the news from this resource from you ...
                1. letinant
                  letinant 31 March 2020 15: 03 New
                  +6
                  Quote: Topgun
                  nevertheless, there were the first Germans ...
                  Quote: letinant
                  After that I will see if it’s worth further talking with you.

                  honestly, not much is needed ... because, so far, I have not seen anything from the news from this resource from you ...

                  Similarly, plus a lack of basic knowledge. You own the material very weakly; you cannot give a reasoned answer. By the way I remembered, I wanted to ask a question. Where did you see that I constantly refer to articles, in my opinion referred once, pointing to the photos?
                  1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Lexan
          Lexan 31 March 2020 12: 48 New
          +5
          Quote: Topgun
          ... (for example, already at this point the SU 57 is inferior - from the bottom with its gondolas it is generally like a 4th generation aircraft) a lantern without bindings, rocket compartments, have these elements gone nowhere?

          Topgun (Vasya Pupkin). Is the F-35 USA plane really the 5th generation plane? Following your classification.
      2. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 31 March 2020 15: 40 New
        -10
        Quote: letinant
        классическая фигура высшего пилотажа "КОБРА ПУГАЧЁВА", это динамическое торможение с отклонением самолёта на 120 град. относительно оси первоначального движения, без изменения высоты.

        Вообще-то Кобра не содержит строгих требований к максимальному углу атаки, главное, чтобы он был 90 градусов и более. Постоять "на попе" могут многие самолеты, включая Ф-35 и Ф-22, даже Ф-18, а первыми такое вытворили шведы на Виггенах. Единственное, что российские сушки выполняют маневр четче
        After withdrawal from Cobra, the height of the aircraft is not at all equal to the height of entry into the figure - it can be higher or lower, depending on the specific type of aircraft

        In general, to be measured by techniques that do not have military value is pretty ... boyish. whether
        1. letinant
          letinant 31 March 2020 16: 26 New
          +5
          Quote: Gregory_45
          Quote: letinant
          классическая фигура высшего пилотажа "КОБРА ПУГАЧЁВА", это динамическое торможение с отклонением самолёта на 120 град. относительно оси первоначального движения, без изменения высоты.

          Вообще-то Кобра не содержит строгих требований к максимальному углу атаки, главное, чтобы он был 90 градусов и более. Постоять "на попе" могут многие самолеты, включая Ф-35 и Ф-22, даже Ф-18, а первыми такое вытворили шведы на Виггенах. Единственное, что российские сушки выполняют маневр четче
          After withdrawal from Cobra, the height of the aircraft is not at all equal to the height of entry into the figure - it can be higher or lower, depending on the specific type of aircraft

          In general, to be measured by techniques that do not have military value is pretty ... boyish. whether

          Покажите видео где "вигген" делает "кобру". "кобра Пугачёва" имеет угол более 90 град., иначе получиться вертикальная горка, что и выполнил пилот в видео. А при угле более 90 град. самолёт сбрасывает инерцию, соответственно скорость.
          О ценности манёвров, тот или иной манёвр имеет смысл. "Кобра" при ближнем маневренном бою, может сократить расстояние до противника сзади, при этом ему прийдётся перейти от ракет на пушечное вооружение а это время. Если вообще в идеале, этот манёвр должен привести к тому что, самолёт окажется в задней полусфере противника. Ещё есть манёвр "колокол", он предназначен для срыва сопровождения РЛС противника, так как на многих из них стоит селектор целей и если цель идёт со скоростью ниже какого то порога, происходит, срыв захвата. Это тоже время. Воздушный бой, это секунды.
          1. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 31 March 2020 16: 43 New
            -9
            Quote: letinant
            Покажите видео где "вигген" делает "кобру"

            not Wiggen, Draken 35th. Not the point. There is video on the network

            Quote: letinant
            "кобра Пугачёва" имеет угол более 90 град., иначе получиться вертикальная горка

            нет, не получится. Самолет как бы стоит в воздухе "на попе", не опрокидываясь на спину. На пределе возможностей планера по углу атаки.
            Cobra is not necessarily performed with an angle of more than 120 degrees - these are just your fabrications, based on how Pugachev showed her at the air show

            Quote: letinant
            On the value of maneuvers, this or that maneuver makes sense

            of course it does. Cobra looks great at an air show, but does not carry combat value

            Quote: letinant
            "Кобра" при ближнем маневренном бою, может сократить расстояние до противника сзади, при этом ему прийдётся перейти от ракет на пушечное вооружение а это время. Если вообще в идеале, этот манёвр должен привести к тому что, самолёт окажется в задней полусфере противника. Ещё есть манёвр "колокол", он предназначен для срыва сопровождения РЛС противника, так как на многих из них стоит селектор целей и если цель идёт со скоростью ниже какого то порога, происходит, срыв захвата.

            everything written is rubbish) From beginning to end. Look at the modes the cobra is playing at and understand how much you crawled
            1. dali
              dali 31 March 2020 21: 09 New
              0
              Quote: Gregory_45
              In fact, the Cobra does not contain strict requirements for the maximum angle of attack, the main thing is that it be 90 degrees or more.


              Quote: Gregory_45
              Cobra is not necessarily performed with an angle of more than 120 degrees - these are just your fabrications, based on how Pugachev showed her at the air show


              Actually, they’re not talking about the name of this or that element of the aerobatics, but about the fact that your vaunted raptor cannot do everything that the same SU-35 can do in piloting ...

              And the words of the mattress pilot are just a boast ... therefore, from the fact that you write that Cobra Pugacheva is not Cobra at all, this mattress mattress will not be able to repeat Cobra Pugacheva anyway.

              And physically he will not be able to do this, because the F-22 thrust vector is in only one plane, and the SU-35 has two!
              1. Grigory_45
                Grigory_45 31 March 2020 21: 14 New
                -6
                not responding in detail to each thesis, I will answer in general: you didn’t read my comment, but if you did, you did not understand at all. There is nothing to talk with you about.

                I'm about white, and you're about square. If you want to talk about the square - you are welcome to yourself
                1. dali
                  dali 31 March 2020 21: 19 New
                  -1
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  not responding in detail to each thesis, I will answer in general: you didn’t read my comment, but if you did, you did not understand at all. There is nothing to talk with you about.

                  I'm about white, and you're about square. If you want to talk about the square - you are welcome to yourself

                  We are just talking about the same thing!

                  And when there is nothing to say, they start blah blah blah ... there is something to object to the matter ...
                  1. Grigory_45
                    Grigory_45 31 March 2020 21: 25 New
                    -5
                    Quote: Dali
                    We are just talking about the same thing!

                    completely about different things.
                    I - about what is the aerobatics of the Cobra.
                    You are comparing the Reptor and the Su-35.
                    Yeah, about the same thing)))
                    1. dali
                      dali 31 March 2020 21: 41 New
                      0
                      Quote: Gregory_45
                      completely about different things.
                      I - about what is the aerobatics of the Cobra.
                      You are comparing the Reptor and the Su-35.
                      Yeah, about the same thing)))

                      No need to go aside ... all of your posts in this article are aimed, to one degree or another, at belittling Russian military aircraft ...
                      In Russia, it’s always worse for you — even when you poked your nose at Pugachev’s Cobra, you immediately post that there are no standards, that the mattress has a cobra too.

                      So, city of unknown country, your words are pure demagogy!
                      1. Grigory_45
                        Grigory_45 31 March 2020 21: 50 New
                        -5
                        Quote: Dali
                        all your posts in this article are aimed, to one degree or another, at belittling Russian military aviation ...

                        When you stock up with evidence - you are welcome to a constructive conversation.
                        And empty chimes are not interesting
                      2. dali
                        dali 31 March 2020 21: 58 New
                        -1
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        When you stock up with evidence - you are welcome to a constructive conversation.
                        And empty chimes are not interesting

                        And those. I’m writing this without proof, and not you ... ёёёёёёё and men didn’t even know ...

                        Respectively:
                        When you stock up on evidence ...

                        And I’m not interested in hollow holes.
                      3. Grigory_45
                        Grigory_45 31 March 2020 22: 13 New
                        -3
                        Quote: Dali
                        And those. I write this without proof

                        absolutely right. Not my quote, where I belittle someone. No reasoned opinion (yours), just words.

                        Пы Сы А по факту получается, что это именно вы и вам подобные кидаются уничижительными сравнениями. И самолеты у "матрасников" не той системы, и летать они не умеют, и ваще у них только мультики
                        Лепет уровня яслей "Солнышко" не интересен.

                        Py Py Sy I repeat, if you did not understand the first time: When you stock up with evidence - we ask you to constructive to the conversation.
        2. letinant
          letinant April 1 2020 00: 22 New
          0
          not Wiggen, Draken 35th. Not the point. There is video on the network

          I quote your words:
          Вообще-то Кобра не содержит строгих требований к максимальному углу атаки, главное, чтобы он был 90 градусов и более. Постоять "на попе" могут многие самолеты, включая Ф-35 и Ф-22, даже Ф-18, а первыми такое вытворили шведы на Виггенах. Единственное, что российские сушки выполняют маневр четче
          After withdrawal from Cobra, the height of the aircraft is not at all equal to the height of entry into the figure - it can be higher or lower, depending on the specific type of aircraft

          Ofiget themselves refused their words, at the expense of Wiggen.
          1. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 April 1 2020 08: 19 New
            -3
            Quote: letinant
            Ofiget themselves refused their words, at the expense of Wiggen

            He did not refuse, but merely made an amendment in the type of aircraft. Unlike you, I can admit my mistake and correct it.
            If all this claims to be a comment, then you look very stupid
            1. letinant
              letinant April 1 2020 09: 20 New
              0
              Quote: Gregory_45
              Quote: letinant
              Ofiget themselves refused their words, at the expense of Wiggen

              He did not refuse, but merely made an amendment in the type of aircraft. Unlike you, I can admit my mistake and correct it.
              If all this claims to be a comment, then you look very stupid

              Ссылочку на видео скиньте. Драккен может сделать только вертикальную горку, если он попробует сделать "кобру" произойдёт срыв потока и самолёт завалиться на бок, начнёт пикировать, до момента пока не наберёт скорость при которой сможет продолжить прямолинейный полёт.

              Если вы имеете ввиду это видео: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMmFy52HdPs. То подпись гласит "Перевёрнутая СУПЕР СТОЙКА", к "кобре" отношение НОЛЬ.
              Please note that in order for the plane not to go vertically upwards, they reduced speed.
              The method of climb with a roll of 15 degrees. As soon as the speed is up to 150 (I do not know the units of measurement, due to the lack of state identification). Vigorously pulled the handle toward himself, the plane pulled its nose up to 45-50 degrees. Due to the lack of sufficient speed (respectively, inertia), the plane could not gain altitude, it lost speed, as evidenced by the missing speed scale on the left of the ILS. As soon as the plane lost speed, the oncoming air stream immediately disappeared (the air cushion holding the plane in the air disappeared), there was a disruption of the flow from the wing. The plane lands on the wing and begins to dive until the free stream is restored.
              This maneuver refers to aerobatics; it is used to teach pilots how to enter and exit a tailspin. It is also used by test pilots to determine the characteristics of the exit from the corkscrew of the test aircraft.
              Indeed, I am ashamed, ashamed of YOU. Awful knowledge of aerodynamics, ignorance of the commented material.
              1. Grigory_45
                Grigory_45 April 1 2020 10: 21 New
                -3
                Quote: letinant
                Discard the link to the video

                https://youtu.be/jqiDEcfSnXs

                Quote: letinant
                Awful knowledge of aerodynamics, ignorance of the commented material.

                alas for you, but ignorance of everything and everything that you are trying in vain to compensate for thoughtless copy-paste from the network is your prerogative hi
      3. NN52
        NN52 31 March 2020 17: 34 New
        +3
        letinant (alexey)

        На видео к статье, "хороший, твёрдый" пилотаж в исполнении лётчика. И не важно, что американского.И не важно, что на Ф 22.
        But there is no 9g in the video either. Max short-term overloads of 6-7g (naturally positive).
        Spent and perfected to the smallest detail aerobatics for demonstrations.
        Well done pilot.
        1. letinant
          letinant April 1 2020 00: 30 New
          0
          Quote: NN52
          letinant (alexey)

          На видео к статье, "хороший, твёрдый" пилотаж в исполнении лётчика. И не важно, что американского.И не важно, что на Ф 22.
          But there is no 9g in the video either. Max short-term overloads of 6-7g (naturally positive).
          Spent and perfected to the smallest detail aerobatics for demonstrations.
          Well done pilot.

          There is no solid aerobatics, Hollywood and solid trim.
  2. Cheerock
    Cheerock 31 March 2020 20: 29 New
    +4
    So I also thought that a cobra is some kind of not a cobra at all.
  • nod739
    nod739 31 March 2020 11: 37 New
    +5
    Where maneuverability is pressed to the raptor, its stealth does not play a role
  • iouris
    iouris 31 March 2020 12: 09 New
    -6
    Quote: _Ugene_
    but the raptor is hardly noticeable

    You cannot demonstrate stealth to the profane. Problem...
  • BREAKTHROUGH READY
    BREAKTHROUGH READY 31 March 2020 12: 10 New
    -2
    although no one doubted that the f-22 with maneuverability is all right
    oh well, about 5-10 years ago, only the lazy did not call it an iron not flying.
    they would show it all on f-35
    after 10 years, they can and will show, in aerodynamics, almost the same “raptor”, but with greater thrust-weight ratio.
    1. dali
      dali 31 March 2020 21: 13 New
      -1
      Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH
      oh well, about 5-10 years ago, only the lazy did not call it an iron not flying.
      What kind of thing is it now? belay

      Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH
      after 10 years, they can and will show, in aerodynamics, almost the same “raptor”, but with greater thrust-weight ratio.
      And after 30 (years, centuries ... etc.) it will fly to the moon ... laughing laughing laughing
  • cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe 31 March 2020 14: 24 New
    0
    Quote: _Ugene_
    they would show it all on f-35

    Come on, you Zelik drown so much for the hegemon that you can’t even calculate the ratio of the weight of the machine to the engine thrust.
  • Professor
    Professor 31 March 2020 10: 01 New
    +9
    Visibility of the cabin by 10 points. good
    1. novel66
      novel66 31 March 2020 10: 11 New
      12
      but you FIG sold! what kind of attitude .... lol
      1. Professor
        Professor 31 March 2020 10: 42 New
        0
        Quote: novel xnumx
        but you FIG sold! what kind of attitude .... lol

        1. The F-35 review is no worse.
        2. F-22 is not exported. To nobody.
        1. novel66
          novel66 31 March 2020 10: 42 New
          11
          and not insulting? special relation to you
          1. Professor
            Professor 31 March 2020 10: 43 New
            0
            Quote: novel xnumx
            and not insulting? special relation to you

            No, it’s not a shame. We did not ask for the F-22.
            1. novel66
              novel66 31 March 2020 10: 44 New
              10
              but the warrior doesn’t think so
              1. Professor
                Professor 31 March 2020 14: 50 New
                0
                Quote: novel xnumx
                but the warrior doesn’t think so

                Does he have evidence that Tzahal requested the F-22?
                1. novel66
                  novel66 31 March 2020 15: 14 New
                  +5
                  no, but he was very unhappy (or it seemed to me)
              2. Grigory_45
                Grigory_45 31 March 2020 15: 42 New
                -6
                Quote: novel xnumx
                but the warrior doesn’t think so

                or you didn’t understand something) F-22 was asked by the Japanese, but was sent by the forest. That's why they initiated their own 5th generation fighter program
    2. KKND
      KKND 31 March 2020 10: 44 New
      +1
      The F-16 is no worse
    3. Altona
      Altona 31 March 2020 14: 01 New
      +2
      Quote: Professor
      Visibility of the cabin by 10 points.

      ____________________
      A good picture is our everything! laughing laughing
      1. Doliva63
        Doliva63 31 March 2020 17: 19 New
        0
        Quote: Altona
        Quote: Professor
        Visibility of the cabin by 10 points.

        ____________________
        A good picture is our everything! laughing laughing

        Didn’t notice how the flashlight glares? He will look at his instruments so overboard at night, it seems to me. And so - yes, the picture is nothing. laughing
  • Altona
    Altona 31 March 2020 10: 01 New
    +4
    So what? All this was done over 20 years ago.
  • rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 31 March 2020 10: 02 New
    10
    As I understand it, this is their answer to the flight of our Su-57? Here you have both an overload of 9g and figures first made by our pilots and named after them, and, as the article correctly noted, on 4-generation airplanes. An excellent pilot, he is excellent in any country.
    1. Insurgent
      Insurgent 31 March 2020 10: 17 New
      +3
      Quote: rotmistr60
      An excellent pilot, he is excellent in any country.

      Pilot + car = key to success.

      Но я хочу перевести тему несколько в иную плоскость. Сугубо "околотехническую".

      Дело в том,что Су-57,постоянно упрекают в отсутствии "двигателей 5-го поколения",причём и от США,КНР и прочих "обладателей машин 5-го поколения".

      Here is the question: How many F-22 or F-35 engines meet the requirements for the 5th generation, and from which parameters these requirements are configured ?

      Ведь двигателисты шутят : "Хороший двигатель и from the fence самолёт сделает" ("С хорошим мотором и забор полетит")...
      1. Pathos
        Pathos 31 March 2020 11: 26 New
        +8
        Yes, they reproach us all their lives laughing On the MiGar 29m, the engines were also initially smoky and the resource was rather weak, only when MiGar saw the adversary thought little about the resource of our engines and gave a sharp tear. In Syria, the Raptor also gave a tear from the Su-35 and didn’t really think that we didn’t have supersound without afterburner laughing And the grenades we have the wrong system laughing
        1. Stas-90
          Stas-90 31 March 2020 13: 12 New
          -12
          Quote: Paphos
          at the sight of MiGar, the adversary thought little about the resource of our engines and sharply gave a tear

          Hooray - hello to the patriots! Is it right that at the sight of Migar everything is loose?
          Over the past 30 years, statistics on the Migars:

          MiG-29
          Victories in aerial battles - 6
          Losses in aerial battles - 18

          MiG-21
          Victories in aerial battles - 240
          Losses in aerial battles - 501

          MiG-23
          Victories in aerial battles -25
          Losses in aerial battles - 102

          MiG-25
          Victories in aerial battles - 8
          Losses in aerial battles - 8

          For comparison:

          Su-27
          Victories in aerial battles - 6
          Losses in aerial battles - 0

          F-16
          Victories in aerial battles - 76
          Losses in aerial battles - 1
          1. Pathos
            Pathos 31 March 2020 13: 48 New
            +5
            Is it really so sad belay , well, enlighten us how dark the victories of the MiG - 15 and who were in their cabs when everything from Sasha’s rained down from the sky in Korea laughing I suppose the North Koreans shot them down with their blasters. Oh, sorry. Slingshots. laughing Yes, and even in Vietnam On migrants 21 x even as something wrong coat No. The 25th as if the interceptor could not be set off. One question. If Western technology and even Chinese is such a super duper Wunderwaffe who is screaming about from each iron, then why can't she do what our people can do?
            1. Stas-90
              Stas-90 31 March 2020 13: 58 New
              -6
              So. We will not take statistics of Farmanov and Ilya Muromets. OK? The war in Korea and Vietnam will also be left to historians. It is not relevant. It's about aircraft in service today.

              К чему ваш посыл "она не умеет делать то что умеют наши"?
              Чего "она" должна уметь, и зачем ей это надо?
              I gave dry numbers that speak for themselves.

              You know it is easy and interesting to have a debate with a philosopher, writer, and even a physicist. But it’s very difficult with a mathematician, because 2 * 2 is always 4.
              1. dali
                dali 31 March 2020 20: 39 New
                0
                Quote: Stas-90
                But it’s very difficult with a mathematician, because 2 * 2 is always 4.

                Those. learned to count to four - already a mathematician ?!
                belay laughing

                But does not the respected mathematician want to decipher these figures two or two:
                Where, when, in what conditions ...
                Well ... a respected mathematician, two or two slightly gave out, so to speak, the numbers desired (wet dreams, including independent ones) as valid.
              2. dali
                dali 31 March 2020 20: 51 New
                0
                Quote: Stas-90
                So. We will not take statistics of Farmanov and Ilya Muromets. OK? The war in Korea and Vietnam will also be left to historians. It is not relevant. It's about aircraft in service today.

                Turn on the brain ...
                These statistics specifically confirm that when mattresses are fighting an enemy of equal strength ... the result is corresponding.

                Therefore - write your numbers on toilet paper and use as intended. laughing laughing laughing
                1. Stas-90
                  Stas-90 31 March 2020 23: 36 New
                  -3
                  ABOUT! Dalí! Salvador Domenic Philip Jasint.
                  And I thought you gave it, in the sense of oak. And on those alive.
                  Congratulations.
                  ----
                  I will call you Phil.
                  So that's what Phil. What hangover did I decide that you are the same Dali? Yes, from the same as you mastered my post and found out that two by two turns out to be four winked belay repeat
                  decided to call everyone who knows this great mathematicians. I will tell you the secret that most people on Earth know this and you just joined them (better late than never, really Phil?). But, Phil, once again, you are well done, but to become a mathematician, knowledge of this truth alone is not enough. Alas. request
          2. Altona
            Altona 31 March 2020 13: 59 New
            +6
            Quote: Stas-90
            Over the last 30 years

            -----------------------
            Самолет не вещь в себе, а часть комплекса, включающего наземную составляющую в виде обслуживания, запасных частей, обучения и тренировок пилотов в виде налетанных часов и множество других факторов. За указанный вами временной период у российской боевой авиации имелось некоторое отставание, если учесть период 1992-2003 года. Поэтому не надо выдергивать из контекста "удачную" цифру и соотносить ее только с конструкцией летательного аппарата. Также в вашей статистике идет сравнение аппаратов условно 3 поколения(МиГ-21) с аппаратами 4 поколения(F-16), имеется еще ряд неточностей, которые дают "радужную", но некорректную картинку(условия боев, небоевые потери, квалификация пилотов, уровень наземного обслуживанияи и вообще, кто вылетал из идеальных условий, а кто был в форс-мажоре боевых действий на земле).
            1. Stas-90
              Stas-90 31 March 2020 14: 16 New
              -2
              Statistics are purely combat. Without non-combat losses.
              I can add.
              F-14
              Victories in aerial battles - 135
              Losses in aerial battles - 4
              F-4
              Victories in aerial battles - 306
              Losses in aerial battles - 106
              Here the statistics are probably not for Russian aviation. Africa, BV ...

              And of course. The plane is part of the complex, etc., etc.
              To dig up a garden is also a complex of measures. But you need to take the best shovel in the market, if possible.
              1. bang
                bang 31 March 2020 20: 30 New
                +1
                To dig up a garden is also a complex of measures. But you need to take the best shovel in the market, if possible.
                A shovel, of course, is important. But if she falls into the hands of a girl, then even a shovel of the best girl will not dig up much.
            2. Stas-90
              Stas-90 31 March 2020 14: 37 New
              -2
              И кстати действительно "радужная" статистика выглядит вот так:
              F-15
              Victories in aerial battles - 103
              Losses in aerial battles - 0

              But this is really not entirely correct. It is clear here that in most cases, US fliers sat in the cabins. And behind the wheel of all MiGs are the natives of third countries.
              1. Altona
                Altona 31 March 2020 15: 35 New
                +4
                Quote: Stas-90
                But this is really not entirely correct.

                ----------------------------
                Снова возвращусь к своему тезису "самолет не вещь в себе". Какими данными пользовались противники, если учесть подавляющее преимущество США в средствах обнаружения-самолеты Хокай и АВАКС, спутниковые системы, наземные радарные комплексы? Каков уровень обслуживания самолетов и средств поражения на оных? Какой версии исполнения были стороны столкновения-начального уровня или 4+++?
              2. dali
                dali 31 March 2020 20: 44 New
                0
                Quote: Stas-90

                И кстати действительно "радужная" статистика выглядит вот так:

                And again ... But does not the respected mathematician want to decipher these figures two or two:
                Where, when, in what conditions ...
                Well ... a respected mathematician, two or two slightly gave out, so to speak, the numbers desired (wet dreams, including independent ones) as valid.
                1. Stas-90
                  Stas-90 31 March 2020 23: 50 New
                  -2
                  Filya, have you been banned by Google?
                  All info is in the public domain. Or should you submit a report for each figure? So here textarea is not enough to write all this. Do you know how much information is to decrypt all these numbers? And why do I need this? Sam, Phil, yourself.
          3. gemini
            gemini April 1 2020 13: 03 New
            0
            Lies, Mig -29 -5 losses in Iraq and 6 in Yugoslavia. Losses of F-16-5 in Iraq and about 10 in Yugoslavia (and maybe more). Americans and Jews very carefully hide their losses.
      2. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 31 March 2020 15: 59 New
        -5
        Quote: Insurgent
        Су-57,постоянно упрекают в отсутствии "двигателей 5-го поколения"

        in the absence of engines of the second stage (the characteristics of the machine under which they were laid). These are very different things, because everything else that you wrote does not make sense.
        In general, you often substitute something written by someone written by yourself and start a debate. Intentionally?

        Quote: Insurgent
        How much do the F-22 or F-35 engines meet the requirements

        match. It’s hard to compete with the United States in the aircraft engine industry. Just look at the traction and resource of their motors and compare with analogues - it will become a little clearer))
        By the way, the Reptor initially had engines of almost 16 tons of thrust, only the Su-57 received comparable thrust.
    2. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 31 March 2020 15: 46 New
      -7
      Quote: rotmistr60
      and figures first made by our pilots

      Are you sure for the first time at all, or for the first time in public? Different things, don’t you?
      1. dali
        dali 31 March 2020 21: 25 New
        0
        Quote: Gregory_45
        Are you sure for the first time at all, or for the first time in public? Different things, don’t you?

        The facts of our pilots have long been on the video ...
        And where are the facts of your mattresses? Let them show it in public, otherwise they will become modest ... laughing laughing laughing
        1. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 31 March 2020 21: 44 New
          -5
          Quote: Dali
          your mattress covers

          Who are your mattresses?

          Quote: Dali
          Let them show in public

          they showed you. You want more - a network to help you. Spend time really, not sitting here and scribbling comments

          As for the first Cobras, they were made by the Swedes on the Saab-35 Draken (first by chance, and then began to practice) back in the late 1950s. Not very impressive and beautiful, but they did. Not for prying eyes.

          In public - yes, for the first time this was done by Soviet pilots. In 1989 in Le Bourget
          1. dali
            dali 31 March 2020 21: 51 New
            -1
            Quote: Gregory_45
            they showed you. You want more - a network to help you. Spend time really, not sitting here and scribbling comments

            What they showed ... edited cropped video, with aerobatics deficiencies laughing

            Quote: Gregory_45
            As for the first Cobras, they were made by the Swedes on the Saab-35 Draken (first by chance, and then began to practice) back in the late 1950s. Not very impressive and beautiful, but they did. Not for prying eyes.

            Well yes, beautifully they can only in Hollywood laughing
            Well, and as always, evidence in the studio ... but for now it's blah blah blah

            Quote: Gregory_45
            Who are your mattresses?

            Guess three times ... laughing
            1. Grigory_45
              Grigory_45 31 March 2020 22: 08 New
              -4
              Quote: Dali
              What they showed ... edited cropped video, with aerobatics deficiencies

              this is your subjective unproven opinion. And it’s not interesting to me

              Do you, young man, have something reasoned and worthy of a dispute to me? If not, don’t take the time
              1. dali
                dali 31 March 2020 22: 09 New
                -2
                Quote: Gregory_45
                this is your subjective unproven opinion. And it’s not interesting to me

                Why then do you answer all the time ?! belay laughing
  • askort154
    askort154 31 March 2020 10: 06 New
    +9
    Users, watching the video, noted Gunderson’s high skill and capabilities of the fifth generation aircraft.

    That's it - a movie in modern computer processing. In short - a cartoon.
    Пусть посмотрят реальные "выкрутасы" Су-35 на различных шоу. Хотя бы в Индии, там от взлёта до посадки снято всё в "живую". По настоящему - дух захватывает.
    А это так, дешёвый рекламный ролик "утюга". yes
    1. Mouse
      Mouse 31 March 2020 10: 34 New
      +6
      The advertisement is engine of the trade... yes
      1. Avior
        Avior 31 March 2020 11: 14 New
        +2
        F-22 is not only not sold to anyone, but is no longer available.
        where does the trade?
        1. dali
          dali 31 March 2020 21: 33 New
          -1
          Quote: Avior
          F-22 is not only not sold to anyone, but is no longer available.
          where does the trade?

          Well, you really need to tell how you can advertise anything to me, even if it’s somehow inconvenient ...

          Or you fool decided to pretend ... I will say bluntly - it did not work !!! laughing
  • novel66
    novel66 31 March 2020 10: 09 New
    +3
    everything that an American fifth-generation aircraft does is capable of performing Russian 4th-generation aircraft, for example, the Su-35, without any problems.

    but not vice versa!
    although the pilot, of course, well done, it’s a pity that the enemy!
  • tlauicol
    tlauicol 31 March 2020 10: 18 New
    -14
    controlled flight at a speed of 135km / h Su35 can?
    1. gurzuf
      gurzuf 31 March 2020 10: 32 New
      +8
      So SU and at 0 speeds in the air are controlled.
      1. KKND
        KKND 31 March 2020 10: 35 New
        -3
        The only possible control at 0 for the aircraft is the thrust vector for both f-22 and Su-35.
        1. andranick
          andranick 31 March 2020 10: 59 New
          10
          Only in the F-22 it is controlled in one plane, in contrast to the full thrust vector control in the Su-35. But formally, yes, we manage.
        2. askort154
          askort154 31 March 2020 11: 18 New
          +7
          KKND .... The only possible control at 0 for the aircraft is the thrust vector for both f-22 and Su-35 it has

          Cannot F-22 compete in maneuverability with the Su-35, for one reason.
          On the F-22, engines with a flat nozzle, so his thrust vector is controlled only in the vertical plane. On the Su-35 engines with
          "круглым" соплом , у него вектор тяги отклоняется в любой плоскости, дифференциально (асимметричное отклонение). К тому же, двигатель с плоским соплом, теряет 10-15% тяги , при маневре. Так что, не зря авиа-специалисты, называют Су-35 самым маневренным самолётом. Хотя, первым самолёт с асимметричным отклонением вектора тяги стал Су-27
          in 1989 city
          А "прозрачность" фонаря кабины лётчика, никаким образом не влияет на маневренность самолёта, как здесь некоторые "эксперты" нагадали.
          1. KKND
            KKND 31 March 2020 11: 30 New
            -5
            Why did you write this? A plane at zero speed in air can only be controlled by a thrust vector. This is a case of spheroconins in a vacuum. What is your cart for ?.
            Quote: askort154
            А "прозрачность" фонаря кабины лётчика, никаким образом не влияет на маневренность самолёта, как здесь некоторые "эксперты" нагадали.

            Can you see where it is written in the comments here?
            1. askort154
              askort154 31 March 2020 11: 53 New
              +3
              KKND .... What is your cart for ?.

              Witty to shine. good
              Can you see where it is written in the comments here?
              Тема про маневренность, а один товарищ , восхитился "прозрачностью".
              This does not apply to you.
              But in general. I wrote my comment here not per audience
              по аэродинамике, а максимально доступным языком.изложил свою точку зрения, обобщённо. Мне смешно, как вы напряглись, и стали с полной аэродинамической выкладкой, доказывать, что "земля круглая".
              Если хотите не "пиариться" крутым "теоретиком", а действительно подискутировать со мной по аэродинамике - прошу в "личку". hi
      2. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 31 March 2020 16: 02 New
        -8
        Quote: gurzuf
        So SU and at 0 speeds in the air are controlled.

        the plane at 0 speed is fundamentally uncontrollable
    2. cherkas.oe
      cherkas.oe 31 March 2020 14: 36 New
      0
      Quote: Tlauicol
      Su35 maybe?
      - Maybe.
      So drown for pindocov that you may begin fever
  • KKND
    KKND 31 March 2020 10: 20 New
    -1
    Сказки и реклама для обывателей эти ролики что в США что в России на авиа салонах, на глаз тяжело оценить сколько скорости самолет теряет. Летчики, в первую очередь, под маневренностью подразумевают возможность устоявшихся маневров, т.е. при маневрах самолет должен как можно меньше терять сумму потенциальной и кинетической энергии, за счет мощных двигателей, малого момента инерции ЛА и других факторов. И здесь у F-22 полный швах, да двигатели очень мощные, но это очень большой и тяжелый самолет, практически аналог нашего МиГ-25. Момент инерции будет гигантский, нужно считать конечно, но для высокоманевренного боя F-16 гораздо лучше должен быть, с прикидкой на "глазок". Скорее всего F-22 в первую очередь полагается на то что его будет невозможно будет найти радаром или радийная ГСН его не возьмет. Ну и от ракеты в случаи чего уйти ему полегче будет чем нашим МиГ-25\31.
  • svp67
    svp67 31 March 2020 10: 23 New
    +3
    It’s beautiful and spectacular, but the glazing of the lantern is so clean, without bindings, visibility, as if you are standing on top of a mountain ...
  • Flawless
    Flawless 31 March 2020 10: 26 New
    +1
    But all this looks like computer graphics against the background of a fighter, not a single shell, although there are clouds in the sky, and they don’t show such tricks on air showers. On the dryers of the 4th generation, the Pugachev cobra was shown for a long time by ordinary pilots, and for some reason the amers needed an ace for this. Once an American pilot tried to portray her on a dryer bought on the outskirts and crashed. So this is most likely cartoons
  • Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 31 March 2020 10: 28 New
    0
    That's what amused me
    На видео запечатлён полёт, который выполняется майором Джошем «Кабо» Гундерсоном (Josh "Cabo" Gunderson) на F-22 Raptor во время авиашоу.

    If the United States is a country of emigrants from all over Europe and the whole world, then why do representatives of the political and military elites, all commanders, all officers carry British names and surnames Gunderson-Anderson
    1. the Saint
      the Saint 31 March 2020 11: 11 New
      0
      Quote: Santa Fe
      all commanders, all officers bear British names and surnames Gunderson-Anderson

      So that they do not have thieving billionaires with general epaulettes, like Khalilov Abdukhalimovich Arslanovs and other Ruslan Tsalikovs.
      1. dali
        dali 31 March 2020 22: 04 New
        -4
        Quote: el Santo
        So that they do not have thieving billionaires with general epaulettes, like Khalilov Abdukhalimovich Arslanovs and other Ruslan Tsalikovs.

        They don’t have a type ... laughing
    2. Avior
      Avior 31 March 2020 13: 37 New
      0
      all officers carry British first and last names

      from surname Gunderson for three kilometers rushing Swedish-Norwegian origin smile
      1. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe April 1 2020 01: 14 New
        0
        rushing Swedish-Norwegian origin

        Yes, damn two

        Old British last name
        What should be the officer of the Air Force, who was entrusted with piloting the F-22

        evidence
        1. Avior
          Avior April 1 2020 07: 35 New
          0
          On a screen of unknown origin it is written that in Britain the surname looked like Gundred or Gundri in the 12-13th century and then the screen breaks off
          Maybe the link should be given, and not a screenshot of a piece?
          I don't know what this should prove
          Real Gundersons
          https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Гундерсон,_Якоб
          https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Гундерсон,_Роберт_С.
          In works of art, too, is often found
          The Swedes Gunderson brothers lost to Jack Dawson and his friend Titanic tickets, for example smile
          1. Santa Fe
            Santa Fe April 1 2020 10: 18 New
            0
            https://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Gunderson

            As for the other Gundersons
            Given the specifics of the issue (the officer piloting the F-22) and the caste system of American society, I still think the noble Anglo-Saxon origin
            1. Avior
              Avior April 1 2020 10: 58 New
              0
              actually there is a failure and Roland and Anna Gundersons suddenly appear already in the 17th century, and what kind of connection with the Gundreds is incomprehensible
              but noble, so noble, I will not argue smile
  • Cresta999
    Cresta999 31 March 2020 10: 35 New
    0
    At the same time, it can be noted that everything that an American fifth-generation aircraft does is capable of performing Russian 4th-generation aircraft without any problems - for example, the Su-35

    Is this such a clumsy attempt to justify the fact that we have 5th generation fighters?
    1. gurzuf
      gurzuf 31 March 2020 10: 44 New
      +1
      Yeah! And the author of the article is the hand of the Kremlin wink
    2. dali
      dali 31 March 2020 22: 08 New
      -3
      This type of invisibility will not be needed at all soon ...
  • Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 31 March 2020 10: 43 New
    +2
    Quote: _Ugene_
    At the same time, it can be noted that everything that an American fifth-generation aircraft does is capable of performing Russian 4th-generation aircraft, for example, the Su-35, without any problems.
    but the raptor is hardly noticeable, although no one doubted that the f-22 had everything in order with maneuverability, they would show it all on the f-35

    Малозаметный только при подсветке со стороны АВАКСОМ, работая самому в режиме радиомолчания. У него есть пассивный АФАР локатор? Свалить АВАКС, который горит на экранах как новогодняя ёлка, и сотня этих "невидимок" вынуждена будет работать в активном режиме, что нарисует их как обычные, но по цене в десять раз меньшей, и лучше вооружённых.
    1. KKND
      KKND 31 March 2020 10: 48 New
      -6
      Господин специалист, расскажите поподробнее как F-22 "нарисует" как "обычные" если он будет светить своей РЛС? А то прям новое слово в военном деле открыли, поделитесь с обывателями.
    2. Avior
      Avior 31 March 2020 11: 19 New
      0
      Does he have a passive AFAR locator?

      именно у Ф-22 есть. и не просто "пассивный локатор"
      A very advanced RTR station, 30 sensor antennas around the perimeter, and very expensive
      Instead, the F-35 made a full-spherical optical viewing system.
      In addition, the F-22 radar has an LPI mode.
      1. Lexan
        Lexan 31 March 2020 12: 29 New
        0
        Quote: Avior
        именно у Ф-22 есть. и не просто "пассивный локатор"

        Avior, tell us about the miracle radar F-22! I would like to know its parameters, and why it is better than our radars.
        Quote: Avior
        A very advanced RTR station, 30 sensor antennas around the perimeter, and very expensive

        I would like to know about the range of this monster and the possibility of targeting for guidance.
        Quote: Avior
        In addition, the F-22 radar has an LPI mode.

        What is this mode? Range of work in this mode and the possibility of target indication. Only a request to you, do not write false information from Wikipedia.
        1. Avior
          Avior 31 March 2020 13: 26 New
          +1
          I did not seem to write about the possibilities, only about the presence of all this, it is not clear why you require details from me ?.
          And you turn right here.
          https://www.northropgrumman.com/
          or here
          https://www.raytheon.com/
          If you convincingly explain why you need this information, they will tell everyone there, and even swear that this is true smile
          Well, if they don’t tell, you can here
          https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-22-avionics.htm
          But I would not trust this source as the first smile
          hi
          1. Lexan
            Lexan 31 March 2020 14: 07 New
            +1
            Avior (Sergey), on the sites you specify, one advertising chatter. The parameters of their products, USA, do not give. Can you guess what the F-22 ESR is? Or believe that the instrumental range of the F-22 is 525 km. hi
            1. Avior
              Avior 31 March 2020 14: 51 New
              -2
              And you are directly to them, without complexes smile
              this one can know, for example
              https://www.northropgrumman.com/who-we-are/leadership/janis-pamiljans/
              Janis G. Pamiljans
              Corporate Vice President and President
              Northrop Grumman Aeronautics Systems

              Janis Pamiljans is corporate vice president and president of Northrop Grumman's Aeronautics Systems sector, a premier provider of military aircraft, autonomous systems, aerospace structures and next-generation solutions.
              smile
              here they are, darlings smile
              https://www.northropgrumman.com/leadership/#elt
              And about whether I believe it or not, then, in my opinion, this is fundamentally the incorrect formulation of the question.
              It can be believed in God or not.
              And in this matter one can only assume with one degree or another degree of reliability
              hi
    3. Korax71
      Korax71 31 March 2020 11: 25 New
      0
      It remains only to dump Avax laughing Do not tell me, but many of them managed to land in a conflict?
      1. Doliva63
        Doliva63 31 March 2020 17: 38 New
        0
        Quote: Korax71
        It remains only to dump Avax laughing Do not tell me, but many of them managed to land in a conflict?

        Yes, I also wanted to say that AWACS have not yet been shot down, but the question is - who tried the thread? At sea, when Aegis is beneath it, or whatever it is that can intercept a rocket, probably. But where is the thread in the middle lane of Europope, how long will it last?
        1. Korax71
          Korax71 31 March 2020 19: 00 New
          +1
          Rare missiles reach the middle of Europe laughing in fact, purely theoretically, the same c400 can detect it with 600 km, and hit it with 400, well, in any case, it’s stated so. The integrated Avtax RTR system can detect radio emission from 500 km. I don’t think that they will approach a distance of certain defeat request а если хотите профессионального мнения,то это лучше у Сергея Линника(Бонго) спросить.у него есть хороший цикл статей "авиация ДРЛО"
          1. Doliva63
            Doliva63 31 March 2020 19: 25 New
            0
            Quote: Korax71
            Rare missiles reach the middle of Europe laughing in fact, purely theoretically, the same c400 can detect it with 600 km, and hit it with 400, well, in any case, it’s stated so. The integrated Avtax RTR system can detect radio emission from 500 km. I don’t think that they will approach a distance of certain defeat request а если хотите профессионального мнения,то это лучше у Сергея Линника(Бонго) спросить.у него есть хороший цикл статей "авиация ДРЛО"

            But what, Poland, Belarus, Russia do not fall into the middle zone of Europe, or what? I only about it drinks
  • dzvero
    dzvero 31 March 2020 10: 47 New
    +4
    From the history of the American aircraft industry ...
    With the F-104, the Americans showed that if the engine is powerful, then the wing, in principle, is not needed.
    With F-117 they proved that if the computers are good, then aerodynamics can not bother.
    With the F-22 they proved that the price of quality can be unbearable, and presentations are much cheaper.
    With the F-35, it turned out that nature could not be fooled by presentations ...
  • usr01
    usr01 31 March 2020 10: 49 New
    +3
    Все это показывали "Стрижи" в Сочи (на формуле-1)... только группой wink
  • Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 31 March 2020 10: 56 New
    +1
    Quote: KKND
    Господин специалист, расскажите поподробнее как F-22 "нарисует" как "обычные" если он будет светить своей РЛС? А то прям новое слово в военном деле открыли, поделитесь с обывателями.

    Господину неучу не известно, что РЛС, в активном режиме излучает радиосигнал, который для противника является ПРЯМЫМ, сам получая ОТРАЖЁННЫЙ. Поскольку в школу он не ходил, поэтому он не знает, что прямой сильнее отражённого в квадрат расстояния между ними. Поэтому, его заметно гораздо лучше, чем видит сам аэроплан. И, уж совсем бестолочь не знает, что простые радиолюбители с приёмниками и с антеннами с характеристикой в виде кардиоиды легко пеленгуют работающую станцию. Находя в соревнованиях за короткий промежуток 10 "лис"- радиопередатчиков, замаскированных на местности в кустах.
    1. KKND
      KKND 31 March 2020 11: 04 New
      -3
      Well, even the words we know are direction finding. Only now the bearing of the radar of the enemy, both aliens and their own, does not give the distance from the word at all and is very rude. On American STRs about + - an hour at our + -10 degrees. Bearing does not launch its rocket. What is the next word to remember? Radio triangulation? Spoiler: Again by wassat
  • Vasyan1971
    Vasyan1971 31 March 2020 11: 02 New
    -1
    designed to demonstrate the capabilities of the world's first fifth-generation fighter and other aircraft - in different countries of the world.

    And what's the point, if no one can ever afford it? Even the Americans themselves, if you suddenly need to increase the park? A possible modernization in 5 years?
  • Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 31 March 2020 11: 07 New
    +1
    Quote: KKND
    Well, even the words we know are direction finding. Only now the bearing of the radar of the enemy, both aliens and their own, does not give the distance from the word at all and is very rude. On American STRs about + - an hour at our + -10 degrees. Bearing does not launch its rocket. What is the next word to remember? Radio triangulation? Spoiler: Again by wassat

    And not only triangulation. There are many detection methods, and not just in the radio range.

    Is it because the penguins withdrew their airplanes from Turkey when our missile defense systems appeared in Syria?
    Is it not far from sin? And suddenly their whole concept of war from around the corner will crumble, and the airplanes sold to the allies will crumble back? With complaints and fraud allegations?
    1. KKND
      KKND 31 March 2020 11: 12 New
      -4
      In fact, if f-22 turns on the radar, it will only be displayed on the STR of an enemy aircraft or an air defense radar, according to these data, you can’t launch a missile. It is necessary to catch it either with your radar or OLS, or grandfather in the eye from a gun. All.
  • Artemy Morozov
    Artemy Morozov 31 March 2020 11: 07 New
    +2
    You want to say that I believe this thread ?! Air shows can only undoubtedly show the real capabilities of the aircraft. About F22 I don’t remember anything worthwhile.
    1. Doliva63
      Doliva63 31 March 2020 17: 56 New
      0
      Quote: Artemy Morozov
      You want to say that I believe this thread ?! Air shows can only undoubtedly show the real capabilities of the aircraft. About F22 I don’t remember anything worthwhile.

      The minus is not mine, but I note that the real capabilities of the aircraft can only show combat use in the face of serious anti-deception.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 31 March 2020 11: 13 New
    +4
    The prototype of the Su-35 20 years ago in Farnborough showed it all.
  • Vasyan1971
    Vasyan1971 31 March 2020 11: 21 New
    +2
    Американский майор показал "бочку", "кобру", упомянутый "боевой разворот"

    Насчёт "бочки" и "упомянутого "боевого разворота" ничего сказать не могу, но насчёт "кобры" имею сомнения.
    Люди! Неужели на ролике - "Кобра Пугачёва"?
    This is catching up.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dbsfAL_TkAc
  • A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 31 March 2020 11: 26 New
    +2
    The article is about the F-22, but the comments continue to mention the F-35 ...
    Yes, more than 35 pieces have already become very bad F-500s, and the production of very good Su-57s, unfortunately, stalled in 2017 on 10 prototypes of which not everyone is able to fly into the air ...
    We have heard stories about the launch of the Su-57 in a series for about three years, but things are still there.

    While there is no way to see how the good planes do, let's see how the bad ones do. (There are captions. Can be translated into Russian.)
  • Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 31 March 2020 11: 29 New
    +1
    Quote: Avior
    Does he have a passive AFAR locator?

    именно у Ф-22 есть. и не просто "пассивный локатор"
    A very advanced RTR station, 30 sensor antennas around the perimeter, and very expensive
    Instead, the F-35 made a full-spherical optical viewing system.
    In addition, the F-22 radar has an LPI mode.

    No one compares it with the iron of the Korean War. The machine is complex, it is difficult to dump it. But, she will be a serious enemy only over OUR territory. As an interceptor of strategists and warheads, it is not suitable. Moreover, having such high-speed beater, and with such a radius of their own flight.
    1. Avior
      Avior 31 March 2020 12: 16 New
      0
      They do not need a strategic interceptor.
      and the more so the interceptor of warheads, there are none at all, the speed is not the same for warheads to intercept them by plane
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. Avior
          Avior 31 March 2020 13: 13 New
          0
          air superiority fighter, partially multi-functional fighter
          Strategists have become very specific in their application, their long-term niche in nuclear war has been with SLBMs and other BRs.
          When using their long-range missiles, he can intercept strategists if they have at least the launch line in their area of ​​operation.
          The situation is similar with strategists and with the use of free-falling bombs.
          But the same thing can be said about the MiG 31.
    2. Lexan
      Lexan 31 March 2020 12: 41 New
      0
      Quote: Victor March 47
      The machine is complex, it is difficult to dump it. But, she will be a serious enemy only over OUR territory.

      The devil is not so terrible as he is painted! He has plenty of flaws.
  • sanik2020
    sanik2020 31 March 2020 11: 40 New
    0
    If this is advertising, then they themselves do not sell f-22 to anyone?
    If they want to scare, is the coronavirus worse?
    And the fact that they have been operating this aircraft a long time ago, to their advantage.
    While everyone else is only creating the fifth generation, the Americans, having extensive experience in operation, are improving it.
    Chasing them is useless, because truly breakthrough ideas are needed.
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 31 March 2020 16: 14 New
      -4
      But why do they create aerobatic teams? Spend an open part of an air show? Make films about pilots and their cars? You generally do not take into account the popularization of service in the Air Force? Influence on patriotism, so that young people, sick of heaven, go to serve them. Only grandmothers and horror stories on your mind?
  • ZVS
    ZVS 31 March 2020 12: 42 New
    +5
    Ничего особенного. А "кобра" это, когда угол составляет не 90*, а 120*
    Far from them even before the piloting of our Su-27, I'm not talking about the Su-35 or Su-57.
    This is never done to Americans
    1. iouris
      iouris 31 March 2020 14: 00 New
      -1
      У них своя "кобра". В верхней точке манёвра типа "горка" на очень низкой скорости (порядка 150 км/ч) с отрицательной перегрузкой самолёт переходит в пикирование при этом самолёт сохраняет управляемость. Вертикальная развёртка траектории напоминает кобру в боевой стойке.
      1. ZVS
        ZVS April 1 2020 10: 53 New
        +1
        That's exactly what reminds, and does not copy, the stand of the cobra.
        https://media.realitatea.net/multimedia/image/201612/full/cobra_003_60252200.jpg
    2. Alex_You
      Alex_You 31 March 2020 14: 15 New
      0
      What's the use? Here, although the hornet does not spin, it carries a minimum of a ton on its wings:
    3. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 31 March 2020 16: 15 New
      -7
      Quote: SU
      А "кобра" это, когда угол составляет не 90*, а 120*

      cobra - this is when the angle is equal to or more than 90 degrees.
      1. dali
        dali 31 March 2020 22: 26 New
        -2
        Have you seen how the cobra holds its head - it's 90 * ?!

        You urgently need to check your eyesight !!! laughing
        1. dali
          dali April 4 2020 01: 50 New
          +1
          laughing laughing laughing
          5 minuses - already 5 unknown citizens need to check their eyesight !!!
      2. ZVS
        ZVS April 1 2020 11: 03 New
        +2
        Не говори глупость. Именно угол в 120* является фигурой "кобра". Спроси у любого летчика.
        Пенд_осы пытались сделать "кобру" на F-14. Поставили его на угол в 70*, а сняли с ракурса в оду четверть с задней полусфер и получился визуально угол 90*. Ни один самолет у пенд_осов не способен делать "кобру" в силу аэродинамических особенностей.
        1. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 April 1 2020 11: 22 New
          -6
          Quote: SU
          Именно угол в 120* является фигурой "кобра"

          at 119 is no longer?
          It’s you nonsense here.
          1. ZVS
            ZVS April 1 2020 14: 38 New
            +2
            Глупость ты городишь, утверждая, что в 90* это уже "кобра". Послушай наших испытателей, тогда не будешь чушь нести.
            1. Grigory_45
              Grigory_45 April 1 2020 18: 34 New
              -3
              So 119 degrees is considered or out of range and is no longer a cobra?
              1. ZVS
                ZVS April 2 2020 12: 01 New
                0
                When performing the "cobra" the plane sharply lifts its nose, up to throwing it back, but at the same time preserves the previous direction of flight. Thus, the aircraft reaches angles of attack of more than 90 degrees: for the Su-27 - 110 °, for the Su-37 - up to 180 ° (that is, the Su-37 can fly with its tail forward). Then the plane returns to normal flight mode with virtually no loss of altitude.
                1. Grigory_45
                  Grigory_45 April 2 2020 14: 18 New
                  -2
                  So you agreed with what I said
                  Quote: SU
                  When performing the "cobra" the plane sharply rises up its nose, until it is thrown back, but at the same time maintains the previous direction of flight. In this way, the plane reaches angles of attack greater than 90 degrees


                  Was it worth arguing?
                  1. ZVS
                    ZVS April 3 2020 11: 09 New
                    +1
                    А это чье утверждение "кобра - это когда угол равен или более 90 градусов"? Так считается "коброй" угол меньше 110 градусов? )))) была-ли "коброй" фигура, которую сделал Гундерсон? ))))))) А если внимательно посмотреть, то угла-то в 90 градусов и нет у него. Съемки велись с передней полусферы, но и этот трюк киношников не дал ожидаемого эффекта в 90 градусов. Угол, всего-то 80 градусов.
                    1. Grigory_45
                      Grigory_45 April 3 2020 12: 35 New
                      -2
                      Quote: SU
                      А это чье утверждение "кобра - это когда угол равен или более 90 градусов"?

                      my. And you argued with him, although in the end you wrote a comment that fully corresponded to my words
                      Quote: Gregory_45
                      In fact, the Cobra does not contain strict requirements for the maximum angle of attack, the main thing is that it be 90 degrees or more

                      Quote: SU
                      "кобра" это, когда угол составляет не 90*, а 120*

                      Quote: SU
                      When performing the "cobra" the plane sharply lifts its nose, up to throwing it back, but at the same time preserves the previous direction of flight. Thus, the plane reaches angles of attack greater than 90 degrees
  • Radikal
    Radikal 31 March 2020 13: 18 New
    -3
    The view from the solid lamp is excellent. sad
    1. Doliva63
      Doliva63 31 March 2020 18: 07 New
      +1
      Quote: Radikal
      The view from the solid lamp is excellent. sad

      And why is it when his tactics are built on the early detection and destruction? laughing
      And if we are talking about close combat, then why does he need stealth coverage? And it's not a fact that in the BVB it is something better than our good old Soviet Su-27s in their new modifications.
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 April 1 2020 11: 49 New
        -4
        Quote: Doliva63
        Quote: Radikal
        The view from the solid lamp is excellent. sad

        And why is it when his tactics are built on the early detection and destruction? laughing
        And if we are talking about close combat, then why does he need stealth coverage? .

        for the fact that the aircraft is ready for both DVB and BVB - can not guess ?. Among other things, there are such modes as take-off and landing, you did not know?

        And now I really want to listen to comments about the Russian stealth fighter with the same chic flashlight. He will not need him either?
        1. Doliva63
          Doliva63 April 1 2020 18: 20 New
          +1
          Quote: Gregory_45
          Quote: Doliva63
          Quote: Radikal
          The view from the solid lamp is excellent. sad

          And why is it when his tactics are built on the early detection and destruction? laughing
          And if we are talking about close combat, then why does he need stealth coverage? .

          for the fact that the aircraft is ready for both DVB and BVB - can not guess ?. Among other things, there are such modes as take-off and landing, you did not know?

          And now I really want to listen to comments about the Russian stealth fighter with the same chic flashlight. He will not need him either?


          Никак не догадаться, ибо готов он к чему-то или нет, только война может показать. А в "режиме как взлёт и посадка" обзор у наших недостаточный, что ли? Последние, кто этим страдал, помнится, Су-7 и Ту-22 были. Что касается "российского стелс-истребителя", я его изнутри не видел, ничего сказать не могу.
          1. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 April 1 2020 18: 38 New
            -3
            Quote: Doliva63
            is he ready for something or not, only war can show

            The raptor flies no worse than the F-16 or the Needle. Moreover, it has UVT. Draw conclusions

            Quote: Doliva63
            Что касается "российского стелс-истребителя", я его изнутри не видел, ничего сказать не могу.

            I'm about a hypothetical plane. What do you say if it will have the same chic flashlight? In my opinion, the question was formulated very clearly, and you are just fooling around avoiding an uncomfortable answer
            1. Doliva63
              Doliva63 April 3 2020 19: 33 New
              0
              Quote: Gregory_45
              Quote: Doliva63
              is he ready for something or not, only war can show

              The raptor flies no worse than the F-16 or the Needle. Moreover, it has UVT. Draw conclusions

              Quote: Doliva63
              Что касается "российского стелс-истребителя", я его изнутри не видел, ничего сказать не могу.

              I'm about a hypothetical plane. What do you say if it will have the same chic flashlight? In my opinion, the question was formulated very clearly, and you are just fooling around avoiding an uncomfortable answer

              Well, about a hypothetical plane and reasoning - hypothetical, I'm not strong at them. But do you remember the story of the MiG-25 when there were problems with the flashlight? I mean, what they’ll do, maybe not the best lantern in the world, but just the one you need. In any case, they did in the Union. Predict anything in the Russian Federation, alas, at a hypothetical level, this is not mine. And fool around, please leave for yourself hi
              1. Grigory_45
                Grigory_45 April 3 2020 19: 42 New
                -1
                Quote: Doliva63
                maybe not the best lantern in the world, but it’s the one that

                one that can. At PAK FA they wanted a non-binding flashlight, but it all ended with what we see. In general, as it turned out, so far it is beyond the power of any country (even on the F-22 and F-35, the flashlight consists of 2 sections)
                The tear-free flashlight is also small, but a contribution to the overall stealth of the aircraft, plus an excellent overview
                1. Doliva63
                  Doliva63 April 3 2020 19: 44 New
                  0
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  Quote: Doliva63
                  maybe not the best lantern in the world, but it’s the one that

                  one that can. At PAK FA they wanted a non-binding flashlight, but it all ended with what we see. In general, as it turned out, so far it is beyond the power of any country (even on the F-22 and F-35, the flashlight consists of 2 sections)
                  The tear-free flashlight is also small, but a contribution to the overall stealth of the aircraft, plus an excellent overview

                  The yankee-free lantern, it seems, was still doing in the war, no? Well, I already expressed my doubts about the current military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation.
                  1. Grigory_45
                    Grigory_45 April 3 2020 19: 49 New
                    -1
                    Quote: Doliva63
                    The yankee-free lantern, it seems, was still being done in the war, wasn’t it?

                    not) Maybe show at least one car with this miracle? Maybe I missed something)

                    If you're talking about the late Mustangs and Thunderbolts - then yes, they have a hefty drop that provides excellent side-to-side visibility, but the front section with bulletproof glass is still present.
                    1. Doliva63
                      Doliva63 April 3 2020 20: 00 New
                      +1
                      Эта "передняя секция с бронестеклом", однако, штука небесполезная. Помнится, на Су-17М2 дважды пригодилась: от очереди из автомата при рулении в зоне АЭ и от осколков бомб ведущего, когда ведомый высоту и дистанцию нарушил. Я тогда в Объективном контроле служил, как говорится, видел своими глазами laughing
          2. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 April 1 2020 18: 41 New
            -2
            Уверен, любой летчик-истребитель хотел бы иметь такой обзор. А вы исходите критикой лишь оттого, что данная "стекляшка" стоит на американской машине.
            1. Doliva63
              Doliva63 April 3 2020 19: 35 New
              0
              Quote: Gregory_45
              Уверен, любой летчик-истребитель хотел бы иметь такой обзор. А вы исходите критикой лишь оттого, что данная "стекляшка" стоит на американской машине.

              If you did this to me, then I did not criticize him, I only noted that it was glaring - even in the afternoon it reflects the elements of the cabin, but how is it with this night, I wonder?
              1. Grigory_45
                Grigory_45 April 3 2020 19: 44 New
                -1
                Quote: Doliva63
                If you are this to me, then I did not criticize him

                well then ..)
                Quote: Doliva63
                Quote: Radikal
                The view from the solid lamp is excellent.

                And why is it when his tactics are built on the early detection and destruction?
                And if we are talking about close combat, then why does he need stealth coverage?
                1. Doliva63
                  Doliva63 April 3 2020 19: 49 New
                  0
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  Quote: Doliva63
                  If you are this to me, then I did not criticize him

                  well then ..)
                  Quote: Doliva63
                  Quote: Radikal
                  The view from the solid lamp is excellent.

                  And why is it when his tactics are built on the early detection and destruction?
                  And if we are talking about close combat, then why does he need stealth coverage?

                  And where am I criticizing the lantern? laughing
                  1. Grigory_45
                    Grigory_45 April 3 2020 19: 52 New
                    -1
                    Quote: Doliva63
                    And where am I criticizing the lantern?

                    criticize the need for excellent visibility for the fighter, and it is provided by the design of the flashlight
      2. ZVS
        ZVS April 2 2020 12: 03 New
        +1
        In the BVB, he will lose as much as the Su-27. WB training was conducted with the Indians, they lose the Su-30MKI
  • Alex_You
    Alex_You 31 March 2020 14: 09 New
    0
    Maneuverable Su-37 except biplanes, and even that is unlikely.
  • Operator
    Operator 31 March 2020 14: 19 New
    -4
    What is the use of discussing the performance characteristics of an aircraft that has long been discontinued, factory lines dismantled, and production cooperation destroyed bully
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 31 March 2020 16: 18 New
      -6
      Quote: Operator
      What is the use of discussing the performance characteristics of an aircraft that has long been discontinued, factory lines dismantled, and production cooperation destroyed

      what is the use then to discuss biplanes? Or Golden Eagle S-37, for example?
      1. dali
        dali 31 March 2020 22: 32 New
        -1
        Quote: Gregory_45
        what is the use then to discuss biplanes? Or Golden Eagle S-37, for example?

        Just here it makes no sense to consider the LTX F-22, because This article boasts otmaksofoshoplennoe and has no relation to the consideration of the LTX F-22. And in general, it is difficult to consider LTH, which are not in reality.
  • Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 31 March 2020 15: 05 New
    +2
    Quote: Radikal
    The view from the solid lamp is excellent. sad

    Visual review is no longer critically important now. It is important to see a couple of hundred kilometers, and most certainly the first. Although, of course, when there is no interference in the form of iron structures above the head, it makes it comfortable.
  • Prisoner
    Prisoner 31 March 2020 15: 14 New
    0
    It seems the mattresses with their fifth generation are moving on to defense. However, these attempts do not look very convincing. what Is the colossus trying to stand on clay feet? Oh well.
  • muham
    muham 31 March 2020 15: 35 New
    -3
    Why removed from production and why removed from production. They took it off because they foresaw that for all this time something opposing to him would not appear. When did he start flying? In 2005? What about the days? That one and that.
  • KJIETyc
    KJIETyc 31 March 2020 16: 37 New
    +1
    Quote: _Ugene_
    At the same time, it can be noted that everything that an American fifth-generation aircraft does is capable of performing Russian 4th-generation aircraft, for example, the Su-35, without any problems.
    but the raptor is hardly noticeable, although no one doubted that the f-22 had everything in order with maneuverability, they would show it all on the f-35

    The penguin is a dump, and the raptor is a really good plane, but with its cost you can’t fight on it.
  • KJIETyc
    KJIETyc 31 March 2020 16: 45 New
    0
    Quote: KKND
    In fact, if f-22 turns on the radar, it will only be displayed on the STR of an enemy aircraft or an air defense radar, according to these data, you can’t launch a missile. It is necessary to catch it either with your radar or OLS, or grandfather in the eye from a gun. All.

    А каким рлс или олс противорадиолокационные ракеты ловят свои цели? Чем "включенная" рлс раптора отличается от других рлс ? Я честно говоря с дивана не очень различаю.
    1. KKND
      KKND 31 March 2020 17: 20 New
      -1
      Anti-radar missiles fundamentally cannot be aimed at moving targets (radars). Sometimes, in addition to the radiation receiver, they add their own radar or thermal imager in order to at least slightly smooth out this limitation. Why the problem of pointing the PRR to the moving radar signals is not solved, I do not know.
  • sledak
    sledak 31 March 2020 16: 53 New
    +3
    I’m not even an amateur in this, so I probably waited in vain for more from the video ...

    NOT IMPRESSIVE.

    Ps It seemed to me or the reaction of the F-22 to the RUS is somehow belated, as far as I saw our response is faster, I could be wrong.

    Pps A coders at Gunderson sluggish.
    1. dali
      dali 31 March 2020 22: 34 New
      0
      Quote: sledak
      Pps A coders at Gunderson sluggish.

      He forgot to use Viagra ... laughing
  • Radikal
    Radikal 31 March 2020 18: 26 New
    -1
    Quote: Doliva63
    Quote: Radikal
    The view from the solid lamp is excellent. sad

    And why is it when his tactics are built on the early detection and destruction? laughing
    And if we are talking about close combat, then why does he need stealth coverage? And it's not a fact that in the BVB it is something better than our good old Soviet Su-27s in their new modifications.

    That is, a good review in close combat, and even in conditions, for example, poor visibility does not play any role for you? winked
    1. Doliva63
      Doliva63 April 1 2020 18: 23 New
      0
      Quote: Radikal
      Quote: Doliva63
      Quote: Radikal
      The view from the solid lamp is excellent. sad

      And why is it when his tactics are built on the early detection and destruction? laughing
      And if we are talking about close combat, then why does he need stealth coverage? And it's not a fact that in the BVB it is something better than our good old Soviet Su-27s in their new modifications.

      That is, a good review in close combat, and even in conditions, for example, poor visibility does not play any role for you? winked

      Yeah I do not mind. drinks Just how can a good view in fog help, for example? what
  • impostor
    impostor 31 March 2020 19: 57 New
    +2
    As soon as the Avakov land, the dinosaur will turn on the radar and most likely Gunderson’s hands will reach the Faberge, to the cherished levers between the legs. As they say, I see a white line in the sky
  • Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 31 March 2020 20: 15 New
    0
    So, what is next ? Well, twists, twirls .. How can this help him in a real battle?
  • Gadzilla
    Gadzilla 31 March 2020 20: 16 New
    +4
    A miserable likeness of the SU-35 maneuvers (4 generations)
  • Gado
    Gado 31 March 2020 21: 06 New
    +2
    Something awkward looks, the Su-35S performs all these elements much faster.
  • lvov_aleksey
    lvov_aleksey 31 March 2020 22: 03 New
    +1
    I did not see the lower heights, this video did not show me anything
  • lvov_aleksey
    lvov_aleksey 31 March 2020 22: 06 New
    +1
    Quote: Radikal
    Quote: Doliva63
    Quote: Radikal
    The view from the solid lamp is excellent. sad

    And why is it when his tactics are built on the early detection and destruction? laughing
    And if we are talking about close combat, then why does he need stealth coverage? And it's not a fact that in the BVB it is something better than our good old Soviet Su-27s in their new modifications.

    That is, a good review in close combat, and even in conditions, for example, poor visibility does not play any role for you? winked

    did you notice a close view, there are no clouds, somewhere at an altitude of 9000 meters? I would have such a review ...
    ps in cloudless weather, 9000 can easily turn into 1000.
  • Sarkazm
    Sarkazm April 1 2020 19: 09 New
    -3
    Прекрасный самолет, просто как самолет опуская его назначение и функции. Как не крути F-22 ЛУЧШИЙ на сегодняшний день истребитель и именно как истребитель завоевания превосходства в воздухе, он единственный в своем роде 5-го поколения. Все же наши споры и "баталии" по поводу F-22 и вообще малозаметности, напоминают гаражные споры владельцев Запорожцев и Москвичей о последней модели BMW.
    Our Su-57 will not achieve the qualities and characteristics of the F-22 in any way, it makes no sense to compare or argue, there are two reasons for this and they are on the surface. Firstly, we have neither that kind of money, nor technologies, and secondly, we don’t have such a task. Let me remind you, the Americans and those who were forced to curtail the production of the F-22 due to its high cost. Our Su-57 is also not cheap by our standards and in relation to our capabilities. And in this we will also follow in the footsteps of the Americans most likely, having launched a hundred and a half Su-57s we will most likely develop, if not already developing, a cheaper and lighter fighter. Perhaps this was discussed in the news about the work of the MiG on a new fighter.

    Well, it will be a great success if, taking into account the developing economic crisis in general and in our country in particular, we will be able to completely re-equip our units from Su-27 to at least Su-35 and produce the quantity of Su-57 already ordered by the MO.
    1. dali
      dali April 4 2020 01: 52 New
      +1
      Quote: Sarkazm
      Do not twist the F-22 the BEST fighter to date, and it’s like a fighter for gaining air superiority


      Well, they would say one of the best ..

      Maybe you immediately move to mattress to live ...
  • ZVS
    ZVS April 4 2020 13: 45 New
    +1
    Quote: Gregory_45

    my. And you argued with him, although in the end you wrote a comment that fully corresponded to my words
    Ни в коем случае я не соглашался с вами, так как впервые сделанная "кобра" на Су-27 с углом 110 градусов была определена, как фигура пилотажа. А посему отсчет идет только от 110 градусов. Пен_д_осы и на F-14, только тогда для визуального обмана они снимали под 3/4 в ЗПС. На самом-же деле фигура получилась с углом менее 80 градусов.
    Quote: Gregory_45
    In fact, the Cobra does not contain strict requirements for the maximum angle of attack, the main thing is that it be 90 degrees or more
    Outright lies. A priori, the angle created by the Su-27 when performing the first such figure, i.e. 100 and more degrees. And nowhere is a 90 degree angle mentioned.
    Do not twist ... sing like a walking girl. Managed, along with Gundarsen, so sit and be silent. laughing
  • Sarkazm
    Sarkazm April 7 2020 19: 53 New
    0
    Quote: Dali
    Quote: Sarkazm
    Do not twist the F-22 the BEST fighter to date, and it’s like a fighter for gaining air superiority


    Well, they would say one of the best ..

    Maybe you immediately move to mattress to live ...
    Why should I go to mattress? It’s easier than demagogues and all dissatisfied cheers-patriots to send a Kyle to wave to a place where even in the summer it’s cold in a coat, parasites are still not able to do anything more, and make efforts not just to get the best, worst, but AT ALL we have a 6th generation fighter .