Military Review

The updated system of electronic warfare "Himalayas" Su-57 is able to "disarm" the American F-35

106

The Russian Su-57 aircraft is positioned as a fifth-generation fighter, and Russia in this regard is the third country that will put its own generation 5 fighter into service (after the United States and China). Recall that at the moment, the Ministry of Defense has contracted 76 Su-57s, and deliveries should begin this year. The first to go to the army are the Su-57 with the engines of the first stage.


One of the strengths of the new generation Russian fighter is the Himalayas electronic warfare complex. This is an integrated system in the aircraft, which actually performs the function of automated “smart” skin. It is also called the “smart” fuselage.

The Himalaya electronic warfare system itself began to be supplied for integration on the Su-57 back in 2014. During this time, the aircraft and its airborne systems have undergone significant changes in the direction of increasing functionality.

The integrated complex of electronic warfare of a fifth-generation fighter of Russian production has a unique opportunity to actually turn fifth-generation fighters of a potential enemy into generation 4 airplanes. The idea is that the Su-57 electronic warfare system minimizes the "stealth" technology implemented on other fighters. But it is precisely the “stealth” technology abroad that is positioned almost as the main element of fifth-generation fighters.

The EW system of the Su-57 does not have a single area on the fuselage. It is distributed in such a way that it allows to induce interference and protect the aircraft from missiles with homing heads in virtually all angles and projections. Elements of the EW Su-57 are placed not only on the fuselage, but also on the wings. The Himalayan electronic warfare complex, according to some reports, exceeds the effective range of air-to-air missiles in effective use radius, and therefore the missile launched by the enemy will be disoriented by the Russian fighter complex. We can say that the EW complex is able to "disarm" the American F-35 and F-22.

Earlier it was reported that the updated version of the Himalayas will be used to create new-generation Russian-made strike drones. In all likelihood, the Himalayas can also be used as the basis for the electronic security of the Okhotnik UAV.
Photos used:
Sukhoi Corporation
106 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 16 July 2020 13: 50
    +4
    If there is such an option (it would be nice to understand if there was any experience of using it in a real situation) then this is a big plus for the weapons complex ... and most importantly, the enemy should not get a solution ...
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 16 July 2020 14: 09
      +2
      A serious adversary also has the development of a support infrastructure; equipment does not stand still. Who can say that we know all their secrets?
      1. Buffet
        Buffet 16 July 2020 14: 16
        +5
        Israel is moving very seriously in EW. Turks try with their Coral. A couple of years ago, the Americans realized that they also needed electronic warfare, but so far it’s deaf.
        1. rocket757
          rocket757 16 July 2020 14: 38
          +1
          Yankees love, they want to immediately bang super-duper EW.
          These are big troubles, a lot of time and other resources. This option is possible, but whether it is optimal in the current situation is a question.
          And so they can do it. They can just buy ....
          I didn’t fasten them by and large, here .......
          1. APASUS
            APASUS 16 July 2020 15: 42
            +2
            Quote: rocket757
            Yankees love, they want to immediately bang super-duper EW.

            The Yankees make good weapons, do not spare money and effort on advertising, and promotion, but when they bring any weapons as a super-duper.
            1. rocket757
              rocket757 16 July 2020 16: 15
              +5
              They support advertising with other "effective" methods.
              Value for money, they are not always the best, many are not happy with it.
              1. bar
                bar 18 July 2020 07: 53
                +2
                They support advertising with other "effective" methods.

                Colt and a kind word are better than just a kind word :)
                1. rocket757
                  rocket757 18 July 2020 10: 29
                  0
                  Then COLT + ADVERTISING, there is no good word for a long time.
          2. Narak-zempo
            Narak-zempo 17 July 2020 12: 08
            +1
            Quote: rocket757
            I didn’t fasten them by and large, here .......

            Yes, when Vietnam was fast, they fussed pretty quickly with jamming equipment to break the S-75 guidance.
            1. rocket757
              rocket757 17 July 2020 13: 01
              +1
              It was. Like ours, we were finalizing the anti-aircraft complex, as it turned out at that time.
              Everyone starts to move faster when the roasted rooster bites.
        2. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 16 July 2020 14: 52
          -17 qualifying.
          Quote: SHVEDsky_stol
          A couple of years ago, the Americans realized that they also needed electronic warfare, but so far it’s deaf.


          In the sense? They are one of the leaders in this segment. They have electronic warfare systems from the 60-70s are standard.
          1. Buffet
            Buffet 16 July 2020 15: 48
            +4
            Yes in series, Glower and all things. But in terms of price-quality-power ratio - no, they are behind. We have almost every aircraft and helicopter from the 4th generation equipped with similar systems. We have electronic warfare in all spheres and areas. What about them? I may not know the question too deeply, but as far as I know, they only returned about this topic for about 5 years. We have returned to her since 2006. And finally after 2008. 10 years of difference is a lot for this segment. As far as I know, the F-22 does not have EW, but only the F-35. If something is wrong - correct.
            1. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 16 July 2020 16: 03
              -1
              All US planes come with electronic warfare systems. Google NGJ, ADM-160C, AN / ALQ-211 (V) 9 AIDEWS, EPAWSS, AN / ALQ-135D / M, AN / ALR-94, etc.

              A series of 4-part articles for understanding
              https://topwar.ru/136216-s-shiroko-otkrytymi-glazami-vozdushnaya-radioelektronnaya-borba-chast-4.html
              1. Buffet
                Buffet 16 July 2020 18: 26
                +5
                Even the article says that much of this is just electronic intelligence, plus a set of false targets and not all planes.
                1. Grazdanin
                  Grazdanin 16 July 2020 18: 30
                  -6
                  And what is EW? Radio-technical suppression is only an integral part of electronic warfare. Turning off your cell phone before you go to the post is generally the main part of electronic warfare. :))
                  1. Buffet
                    Buffet 16 July 2020 18: 36
                    +6
                    It seems to me that the essence of this is clear from the name. And setting false thermal goals and identifying threats is a complex of self-defense or protection.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. Buffet
                        Buffet 16 July 2020 19: 34
                        +4
                        Do not confuse soft with warm. In the article, what you originally threw off to me, what Americans equip their aircraft with can only partially be called EW, to the extent that we understand this. That is, these systems can 30-40% from what the Khibiny and the Himalayas really can. Our systems have a wider range of capabilities and functionality. A set of electronic jamming and setting thermal traps are different things, you know? And those systems, judging by their description, are precisely aimed at this at a self-defense complex. At the same time, with us, our systems include electronic intelligence (in part), and self-defense systems against missiles and jamming and electronic warfare. And all in one complex. Excluding heat traps.
                      2. Willywonka
                        Willywonka 16 July 2020 21: 58
                        -12 qualifying.
                        30-40 from what Khibiny can? For starters, you would know if we have at least one serial AFAR, and then you would see why we do not have it. And what is there according to the capabilities of the Khibins? Can I listen?
                      3. Prahlad
                        Prahlad 17 July 2020 15: 32
                        +1
                        So they assembled the Su-57, which unfortunately crashed, and there the afar was ready for the series. We can say that "H036 Squirrel" is the serial afar
                      4. Willywonka
                        Willywonka 20 July 2020 19: 53
                        0
                        Well, all the same .... serial AFAR, it crashed alone, we know that. Where is the series? OK. The conditional West has 1500 boards with AFAR. All 5th generation from China comes with AFAR. We have only one problem with his absence - the high cost, which Belykh spoke about in his time. Again, by the time 1000 F35 we will have a link. The USA will leave the LRIP for serial production this year.
      2. scientist
        scientist 16 July 2020 17: 46
        +7
        Quote: Grazdanin
        All US planes come with EW systems

        Moreover, for the United States and other NATO countries, this principle is absolutely natural and does not need advertising. Moreover, during NATO air operations in Iraq and Yugoslavia, these electronic warfare systems proved to be redundant. The power density was such that it jammed the air defense radar along the Black Sea coast despite the large losses due to re-reflection from the ionosphere. At the same time, their main drawback was identified, it is a poor electromagnetic incompatibility with their own shock complexes. I had to choose either to use electronic warfare systems, or systems of fire destruction. For this reason, the development of new electronic warfare systems in the United States slowed down somewhat, or rather transferred these tasks to European companies such as Thales and EADS.
        But in the article itself and the concept of electronic warfare, the Su-57 is surprised by the principle
        EW actually performs the function of automated “smart” skin
        ... And the problem is that if we are talking about countering the enemy's radar and air defense radar, then it is like shouting for hundreds of kilometers that "I am here and waiting for your missiles." It is for this reason that all onboard US electronic warfare systems have 2-3 towed antennas for jamming, which are thrown by an aircraft at a distance of up to 200-300 m. In our aviation, very few people have heard about towed antennas of electronic warfare systems. One reason for this is that most NATO air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles have a multi-band infrared guidance system. It is not clear how the "smart casing" of the Su-57 can counteract such systems. For this there is an optical-electronic complex 101KS "Atoll". But it certainly does not apply to the upholstery.
        On the other hand, perhaps we are talking about a digital APAR with a synthetic aperture for jamming from spatially distributed antennas along the entire plane of the aircraft. This may indeed turn out to be a unique development and "smart casing" that has so far existed only in theory. In this case, direction finding becomes almost impossible.
        1. Hexenmeister
          Hexenmeister 16 July 2020 17: 56
          +1
          On the other hand, perhaps we are talking about a digital AFAR with a synthesized aperture for interfering with spatially distributed antennas along the entire plane of the aircraft.
          Only if these elements are located on the sides, then they will not be able to counteract along the flight axis of the aircraft, and if in the wings, then with the dimensions there in the main three-centimeter range, these will be very weakly directional elements, and in azimuth you will get a decent directional diagram, and in the elevation angle will be "shovel", and instead of a "fist" there will be a "spread palm".
        2. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 16 July 2020 18: 05
          -1
          Hallelujah. Finally, an adequate commentary from which I learned something new.
    2. venik
      venik 16 July 2020 19: 34
      +4
      Quote: Grazdanin
      They are one of the leaders in this segment. They have electronic warfare systems from the 60-70s are standard.

      =======
      About the fact that "leaders" - let me doubt! Why then did they admit not so long ago that in the field of electronic warfare they are seriously lagging behind Russia?
      Second: And you, "Citizen", naively believe that we did not have electronic warfare in the 60s and 70s? Well, you and NAIVE! If not to say more....
      PS Yours faithfully, the former "jacket" of RTV, conscription of 1981! wassat
  2. Insurgent
    Insurgent 16 July 2020 14: 54
    +7
    Quote: SHVEDsky_stol
    Israel is moving very seriously in EW. Turks try with their Coral. A couple of years ago, the Americans realized that they also needed electronic warfare, but so far it’s deaf.

    It is striking that it was the United States and Israel that "spurred" the development of electronic warfare systems in Russia at one time ...

    And very quickly they were catching up ...
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 16 July 2020 15: 10
      -12 qualifying.
      Quote: Insurgent
      very quickly turned out to be catching up

      Why do you think so? As they were ahead of us, they remained.
      1. Insurgent
        Insurgent 16 July 2020 15: 15
        +4
        Quote: Grazdanin
        Why do you think so? As they were ahead of us, they remained.
        Reply

        laughing
        And this is not the only whistle coming from across the ocean yes .
        In the field of electronic warfare, the American army lags behind Russia and China. According to analysts at Breaking Defense, the United States is in second or third place in the field of equipping and using electronic warfare systems.

        The publication cites the words of an expert in the field of weapons Alan Schaffer, who during the AOC Electronic Warfare conference bluntly stated: "We are fighting for the electromagnetic spectrum, and I am not sure that we will win." The analyst also noted that compared to NATO and the United States, Russian electronic warfare systems are "damn good."

        "Unlike the United States in the 1990s, Russia never stopped engaging in electronic warfare. Now they are confident enough in their ability to actively jam GPS during NATO exercises," Shaffer said.


        In full: https://rg.ru/2019/11/05/ssha-priznali-otstavanie-ot-rossii-v-sfere-reb.html
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 16 July 2020 15: 31
          -8
          [quote] Now they are confident enough in their abilities to actively jam GPS during NATO exercises [quote]
          Have you heard of GPS 3 generations? The “expert” from the article is similar too. It is no longer drown. Another satellite Falcon 9 at the beginning of the month brought. All this "whining" is associated with the allocation of money, no more.
        2. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 16 July 2020 15: 44
          -8
          For understanding. Jamming a GPS signal of 1-2 generations is very simple. If an “expert” makes this a success of our radio electronics, then it says that he has nothing to do with radio electronics. I can assemble such a device by going to the radio market. Although cheaper to buy ready-made. Here is the first link that I found www.podavitel.ru/scorp-gps.php
      2. NEXUS
        NEXUS 16 July 2020 18: 00
        +5
        Quote: Grazdanin
        Why do you think so? As they were ahead of us, they remained.

        Seriously? And the generals in the USA do not think so and say that they are behind us at least 20 years in the topic of REB systems.
        By the way ... now Krasukha is being modernized, and therefore it will become even more effective. There is an opinion that the new Krasukha is capable of not only "crushing" a fighter, but even AWACS.
        Call it, so to my vantage point, the analogue of Kraukha from the USA ...
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 16 July 2020 18: 17
          -10 qualifying.
          Quote: NEXUS
          Call, so on vskidku to me the analogue of Kraukha from the USA


          The Turks KORAL, the United States Crew Duke. If we are talking about ground-based means, list the tired ones.

          Quote: NEXUS
          And the generals in the United States do not think so and say that they are behind us at least 20 years in the topic of REB systems

          Or the words of an incompetent person or an attempt to knock out money. They threw off an interview with an “expert” who credited us with suppressing a GPS signal of 1-2 generations. Anyone who has received a normal radio engineering education will do choke on GPS by going to the radio market.
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 16 July 2020 18: 24
            +5
            Quote: Grazdanin
            The Turks KORAL, the United States Crew Duke. If we are talking about ground-based means, list the tired ones.

            Both complexes are no match for Krasukha-4 from the word at all. The range of Coral is 150 km, that of Krasukha is up to 300 km ... (and this is not a modernized version). But Crew Duke passes only tests and in the troops it is stupidly absent.

            We are talking about the complexes "Leer-3", "Krasukha", "Moscow-1", "Zoo-1" and "Garmon". Their capabilities and tactics of application, deployment in 15 minutes, forced the American military signalmen to admit the superiority of Russian electronic systems.
            1. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 16 July 2020 18: 50
              -13 qualifying.
              They have everything, don’t worry. This is a very simple technology, constant on thoroughly studied physical properties of radio waves. The first electronic suppression was used in 1901 in the United States, since they were the leaders and remained.
    2. Hexenmeister
      Hexenmeister 16 July 2020 20: 47
      -1
      It is striking that it was the United States and Israel that "spurred" the development of electronic warfare systems in Russia at one time ...
      There is probably a contribution of these countries, but one should not forget about the "extremely correct" people in this direction.
  3. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 16 July 2020 15: 50
    -3
    The Americans have long had in the fleet a specialized EW aircraft - the F-18 Growler. Every third or fourth plane in their AG is Groler.

    Containers under the fuselage - EW tools
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 16 July 2020 16: 07
      -9
      For self-defense, on all fighter jets these or those means of electronic warfare are put.
      EA-18 "Growler" This is an offensive weapon for suppressing enemy electronic defense systems.
  4. PSih2097
    PSih2097 16 July 2020 16: 49
    +2
    Quote: SHVEDsky_stol
    A couple of years ago, the Americans realized that they also needed electronic warfare, but so far it’s deaf.

    come on, name the year of appearance of "growler"?
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 16 July 2020 17: 07
      -6
      Growler replaced EA-6. Start of operation of the aircraft in 1971.
      https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_EA-6_Prowler
      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 16 July 2020 17: 33
        +1
        Quote: Grazdanin
        Growler replaced EA-6. Start of operation of the aircraft in 1971.

        and when did we have similar aircraft (excluding A-50) ???
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 16 July 2020 17: 38
          -2
          We already have them. Yak-28PP, Su-24MP, modifications of the Su-34.
          1. PSih2097
            PSih2097 16 July 2020 17: 49
            +1
            Quote: Grazdanin
            We already have them. Yak-28PP, Su-24MP, modifications of the Su-34.

            over the years please ... And not "already", but about "the same", for example, the same EA-18G Growler in 2007 appeared in the series ...
            1. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 16 July 2020 17: 50
              -3
              If you are interested in Google, I indicated the modifications.
              1. PSih2097
                PSih2097 16 July 2020 18: 16
                0
                Quote: Grazdanin
                If you are interested in Google, I indicated the modifications.

                Quote: Grazdanin
                Yak-28PP, Su-24MP, modifications of the Su-34.

                two of them are more or less modern - 24/34 ... then how many of them are in total in relation to (in proportion to NATO / RF, EU / RF) the same NATO or the EU?
                And yes, I was a little mistaken, I had to start with "Prowler" ...
                1. Grazdanin
                  Grazdanin 16 July 2020 18: 24
                  -3
                  The question of quantity is the second question)) we have almost everything, but always the question of quantity :)
  • Grazdanin
    Grazdanin 16 July 2020 14: 18
    -5
    Full of information in open sources. The development of such systems involved all progressive countries. The same Turks on the purchased C400 most likely checked their AIDEW electronic warfare system installed on F16. https://topwar.ru/116560-voyna-v-efire-chast-2.html
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 16 July 2020 14: 43
      -1
      Now it’s not possible to develop all the electronic components of its armed forces, it’s like signing up for a loss in advance.
    2. rocket757
      rocket757 16 July 2020 14: 43
      +2
      Now it’s not possible to develop all the electronic components of its armed forces, it’s like signing up for a loss in advance.
  • orionvitt
    orionvitt 16 July 2020 15: 45
    +4
    Quote: rocket757
    Who can say that we know all their secrets?

    And who can say that we know not only them, but all their secrets? We, couch experts, only have to do how to reason, relying on information from open sources. But it is not always correct.
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 16 July 2020 16: 19
      +3
      There are always big / small secrets for a small company. This is normal, as it should be.
  • VO3A
    VO3A 16 July 2020 20: 07
    -2
    Why know their secrets? Here are the electronic warfare systems, they are struggling with what is ... And if the radars are turned off, then they are not fighting anything ... Then optical equipment comes first ... And here we are no longer ahead of everyone .. And who told you. that the enemy will highlight your plane? An empty UAV will illuminate you and transfer the target designation to another aircraft ... Information systems, data exchange, multi-channel positioning and reconnaissance systems are already working here, and here we are there ... Do not rely on EW like a magic wand !!!
  • Andrey.AN
    Andrey.AN 16 July 2020 20: 52
    +1
    you don’t need to know all the secrets, if your station muffles the signal from the rocket at the receiver, then the rocket is further on its own, for example, in the mountains with a good echo it can even return it to a boomerang back. Three quarters of the world coast are mountainous, and the continental parts are not flat land, such as air targets for hundreds of kilometers are not visible, and this and so getting into close combat is very likely, also a crazy echo echo.
  • Vol4ara
    Vol4ara 16 July 2020 15: 23
    +1
    "The electronic warfare of the Su-57 of the new modification minimizes the stealth technology implemented on other fighters."

    The author tell me how the reb affects the stealth coverage of the aircraft and how does it increase the likelihood of its detection at a given distance?

    "The Himalayas electronic warfare system, according to some sources, exceeds the range of launching air-to-air missiles in terms of effective use radius."

    What is air-to-air range?
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 16 July 2020 19: 42
      +2
      The most long-range "V-V" in the United States is the AIM-120 with a maximum range of 180 km - we have not heard about others ...
      1. Vol4ara
        Vol4ara 17 July 2020 00: 04
        0
        Quote: hydrox
        The most long-range "V-V" in the United States is the AIM-120 with a maximum range of 180 km - we have not heard about others ...

        True, but what does it have to do with it ...
        1. hydrox
          hydrox 17 July 2020 13: 22
          +1
          Your question is my answer ...
      2. 5-9
        5-9 17 July 2020 09: 03
        0
        Oga, as soon as we think of counting the range not according to the one on which it is possible to bring down something, but along the ballistic trajectory and indicate it in the Murzilka, then everything will change .... and from the enemy missiles, the Meteor best flies to a long range .. .
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 17 July 2020 09: 55
          +1
          According to air defense systems, we generally consider the far boundary of the affected area, and this is not even equal to the maximum launch range.
  • Buffet
    Buffet 16 July 2020 13: 50
    0
    Thanks to Xilinx and Texas Instruments for this! (American companies)
  • Grazdanin
    Grazdanin 16 July 2020 14: 04
    -11 qualifying.
    The integrated complex of electronic warfare of a fifth-generation fighter of Russian production has a unique opportunity to actually turn fifth-generation fighters of a potential enemy into generation 4 airplanes. The idea is that the Su-57 electronic warfare system minimizes the "stealth" technology implemented on other fighters.

    What is it like? Integrated Magic Wand or Hotabych Beard Cover?
    1. Buffet
      Buffet 16 July 2020 14: 18
      +3
      It is said harshly, I agree. But for sofa experts will do. But that is not the point. There is just a response interference that suppresses most of the radio signals on the enemy’s aircraft.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 16 July 2020 14: 06
    +1
    Interesnaya struggle / fuss in the information field is on.
    In principle, it’s better than in real life.
    One thing is clear, the smarter the technology becomes, the more requirements there are for the support infrastructure being created and for ensuring the combat process.
    Everything is logical, now it’s just a fighter, it becomes an element, an object of support in a complex system ... everything goes to that.
    In this aspect, anyone who is late can very regret it.
  • A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 16 July 2020 14: 11
    -4
    missile launched by the enemy will be disoriented by the Russian fighter complex

    High-quality electronic warfare systems are capable of catching up with interference in all ranges, heat traps will deceive infra-trail guidance, etc. However, what about the pattern recognition system? Missiles of the latest modifications "recognize" enemy aircraft from any angle.
    Fake plywood superstructures and an extra smoking pipe will not save the situation.
    1. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 16 July 2020 14: 31
      0
      Are you talking about an optical guidance system? They are not very common in explosive missiles.
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 16 July 2020 14: 41
        -4
        Quote: Herman 4223
        Are you talking about an optical guidance system? They are not very common in explosive missiles.

        You already have outdated data. hi
        1. Herman 4223
          Herman 4223 16 July 2020 15: 48
          +4
          You have AIM-9B in the photo, with an infrared aiming head. A missile from the 50s. It seems she had problems with visibility and interference.
      2. Avior
        Avior 16 July 2020 21: 45
        -1
        In melee missiles, they are more likely the standard.
        Modern versions with matrix heads
    2. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 16 July 2020 14: 46
      -9
      In the struggle of the sword and shield, the sword will always triumph. The development of microelectronics provides great opportunities, you need to remove a person from the affected area. UAV escort of fighters, in my opinion, the most promising direction.
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 16 July 2020 18: 18
        0
        Shield can seriously weaken the blow. Or direct him into the void.
        However, there is one extremely murky story of the 70s that I can’t adequately explain - I'm talking about fighting at sea during the Arab-Israeli wars.
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 16 July 2020 18: 22
          -5
          When did Israel bomb the US Electronic Intelligence Vehicle? So the United States was against the fact that Israel would occupy the Sinai, and the IDF was just preparing a strike and so as not to burn from preparation, they destroyed that ship completely "accidentally"
          1. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 16 July 2020 18: 23
            0
            No, I'm talking about boat battles. Probably read from both sides?
            1. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 16 July 2020 18: 33
              -5
              Slipping. Using surprise and electronic jamming systems, Israeli boats sank the ships of the Syrians.
              1. Cyril G ...
                Cyril G ... 16 July 2020 19: 28
                -1
                Here are a few questions for you ... To think about.
                - whether the Arabs had P-15s with TGSN, the Indians definitely had.
                - Did the ARGSN P-15 capture boats in general? They originally planned to shoot at surface warships and vehicles. On EM missiles were induced. This was proved by Jews and Pakistanis. And what about the guidance of RCC on boats in the 60s and early 70s ...
                - Volleys of the Arabs, whether they were aimed at the detachments of boat Israelis or radar operators were mistaken and the boats worked for false purposes.
                - Did the Jews set false goals?
                - The Jews interfered with the ARGSN P-15 with the work of jammers almost soldered on their knees (according to rumors) and the launch of missiles with dipoles. How many anti-ship missiles each time approached the boats of Israel.
                1. Avior
                  Avior 16 July 2020 21: 47
                  0
                  Boats clearly captured
                  On May 13, 1970, an Israeli trawler Orit with a displacement of 183 tons was sunk by an Egyptian boat 70P, fishing in the al-Bardawil lagoon. Killed 4 crew members.
                  1. Cyril G ...
                    Cyril G ... 16 July 2020 21: 48
                    0
                    Yeah thanks. Something completely flew out of the head ...
                2. forpost
                  forpost 17 July 2020 09: 13
                  -1
                  I don’t know about on my knee, I read that their helicopters depicted a large surface target, then hid behind the line of the radio horizon.
      2. Herman 4223
        Herman 4223 16 July 2020 19: 18
        +2
        The sword will always win, but whose question is. Who has both a sword and a shield to survive and defeat more chances.
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 16 July 2020 19: 21
          -3

          You can continue the allegory smile
          1. Herman 4223
            Herman 4223 16 July 2020 19: 45
            +1
            It’s possible that the main thing is that the shield is large and strong, the sword is long and sharp, and the enemy with the machine gun did not know where you are drinks
    3. figwam
      figwam 16 July 2020 15: 04
      +6
      Quote: A. Privalov
      However, what about the pattern recognition system?

      Well, if the rocket is suppressed from the moment of launch, then it will not reach visual contact with the aircraft.
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 16 July 2020 15: 11
        -5
        Quote: figvam
        Well, if the rocket is suppressed from the moment of launch, then it will not reach visual contact with the aircraft.

        Usually, suppression occurs in most frequencies and in all directions. No one will specifically suppress a specific missile, but here, all sorts of surprises may occur. hi
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 16 July 2020 15: 35
          -7
          Quote: A. Privalov
          most frequencies and in all directions

          This requires Avax. Do not put on a fighter.
        2. Hexenmeister
          Hexenmeister 16 July 2020 17: 37
          +2
          No one will suppress a specific rocket
          For on-board electronic warfare systems, the priority of actions was always determined. If there are no free resources, and a new signal appears related to aiming weapons on board, then the opposition of some "surveillance" radar will be abandoned, and the released resources will be transferred to counter the missile, since it directly threatens the safety of the board.
      2. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 16 July 2020 16: 15
        -5
        Quote: figvam
        Well, if the rocket from the moment of launch will be suppressed

        a rocket will be sent towards the suppression source.
    4. hydrox
      hydrox 16 July 2020 19: 45
      +1
      For identification, these missiles still need to be approached, and the electronic warfare of the defending aircraft does not allow this.
    5. Vlad.by
      Vlad.by 16 July 2020 22: 45
      +5
      Excuse me, did you hear anything about signal processing algorithms? It is even theoretically an order of magnitude more difficult to recognize the target’s image by the reflected signal from a relatively low-power AGSN missile than to create this “illusion” of a spherical horse in a vacuum at completely different azimuths and elevation angles from a much more powerful aircraft suppression station. And the line with two AGSN will figure out how many legs that horse has ...
      And in greenhouse conditions, without counteracting electronic warfare, eyelashes from pilots will soon be able to count, yes.
  • Klingon
    Klingon 16 July 2020 14: 17
    +4
    Well, now the Su-57 has already become 2 steps closer to the Klingon "Bird of Prey" wassat
  • Maks1995
    Maks1995 16 July 2020 14: 31
    -6
    And, empty peremoga ... The range is not written, except for "exceeds the missile launch range." Why is it paired with stealth. In general, for blondes ...
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 16 July 2020 14: 40
    -10 qualifying.
    The Yankees collected their penguins for more than half a thousand, the Chinese massively launched their pseudo-fifth generation airborne warfare, and only in Russia the townsfolk are fed noodles to their ears, which airplanes will receive in the amount of 74 aircraft! Maybe to speed up production and thereby increase the order for the T50 (while it’s not in the series, it’s not yet Su57!). And then they fed it with fairy tales about what the troops have been waiting for since 2013, according to the oath of the country's top.
  • A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 16 July 2020 14: 43
    -8
    Recall that at the moment, the Ministry of Defense has contracted 76 Su-57

    Beautiful word - "contracted" wassat
    Apparently, we are talking about the very purchase by the Russian Ministry of Defense of 76 Su-57 fighters, which should go into service of three aviation regiments by 2028?
    Over 8 (eight!) Years, electronic warfare systems will advance so much that all of today's tricks like “smart” skinning and “smart” fuselage will turn out to be sweet baby talk. hi
    1. yfast
      yfast 16 July 2020 19: 00
      -1
      Redo on the go. And in general, you just need to believe, as in the matrix, that the weapon of your country is the coolest.
    2. Vlad.by
      Vlad.by 16 July 2020 23: 05
      +6
      I remember in 2008 there was a lot of “squealing” from the fact that Russia would never saturate the Su-34 troops. Like a contract for 32 cars that are not accepted for service - this is about nothing. Yes, and production capacity is not enough to produce even these 32's.
      In the 14th, they adopted it after comprehensive tests, in the 20th they were already more than 120 in the army. And there were enough workers not only on the Su-34, but also on the Su-30 and Su-35, and on the modernization of the Su-27, and on export contracts ...
      So, do not worry - it will be necessary - they will also build 300 Su-57s.
      Question - why? The same 35th in the near foreseeable future is quite capable of resisting typhoons, penguins, and even, oh God, the raptors themselves.
      There is still enough time to debug new aircraft, new engines, new elements of “smart skin”.
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 16 July 2020 14: 47
    +8
    It seems to me that in the wake of all kinds of rumors, scandals and other conversations about the lagging behind of our Armed Forces, our Darkest is preparing many different surprises that are unpleasant for our "partners".
  • Alexey from Perm
    Alexey from Perm 16 July 2020 14: 49
    -3
    don't say gop- until you jump
  • 5-9
    5-9 16 July 2020 15: 14
    +7
    EW, especially modern for the current moment, is such a thing about which no one knows anything for sure, and if it does, it won’t say ... here you can believe, depending on personal preferences, in exactly the opposite things ...

    By the way, why is the 5th generation khetet? Because black and angular and so they said?
    Fy-35 also as-without cruising supersonic ...
  • Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 16 July 2020 17: 17
    +3
    Sadness. again to finish the Penguin Americans. This will be the 2021st version of the Penguin ...
    1. Willywonka
      Willywonka 16 July 2020 22: 23
      -5
      we would .... be silent and at least make a link by the time they have 1000.
  • senima56
    senima56 16 July 2020 17: 36
    -1
    When will the SU-57 finally go to the Army? So after all, you can endlessly "update, refine, improve, test, etc." And the money is flowing ...
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 16 July 2020 19: 57
      0
      Quote: senima56
      And the money is flowing ....

      Would you like to lead this trend? tongue
      1. senima56
        senima56 16 July 2020 22: 29
        -3
        I would like the new equipment to enter the Army, and not be in single copies for display at parades and exhibitions!
    2. 5-9
      5-9 17 July 2020 09: 06
      +1
      Never to the Army .... but to the VKS - right on the way ...
  • Bez 310
    Bez 310 16 July 2020 18: 52
    -4
    It is a pity that the Su-57 is not in the army ...
    And we will hear tales about him more than once.
  • Jack O'Neill
    Jack O'Neill 16 July 2020 19: 23
    -5
    The point is that the Su-57 electronic warfare system of the new modification minimizes the "stealth" technology implemented on other fighters

    Does the geometry of the glider change?

    The Su-57 electronic warfare system does not have a single fuselage section. It is distributed in such a way that it allows jamming and protecting the aircraft from missiles with homing heads in virtually all angles and projections.

    The Himalayas electronic warfare system, according to some sources, exceeds the range of launching air-to-air missiles in terms of effective use, and therefore a missile already launched by the enemy will be disoriented by the Russian fighter's complex.

    And what is the power of the "Himalayas" that, for example, have such a strong impact over a hundred kilometers?
    And yes, the rocket can target the source of interference if we are talking about AMRAAM.

    Even some kind of addiction ...
  • tech3030
    tech3030 17 July 2020 16: 32
    0
    Many words, few planes ... We are waiting!
  • stankow
    stankow 18 July 2020 13: 30
    0
    Quote: scientist
    jammed air defense radars along the Black Sea coast despite large losses due to re-reflection from the ionosphere

    Airborne radios operate in the range of decimeter, centimeter and millimeter waves. Some ground-based radars are in the meter wavelength range. None of these 4 bands are reflected from the ionosphere. So there can be no talk of any jamming.
  • Cresta999
    Cresta999 20 July 2020 12: 45
    0
    The integrated complex of electronic warfare of a fifth-generation fighter of Russian production has a unique opportunity to actually turn fifth-generation fighters of a potential enemy into generation 4 airplanes. The idea is that the Su-57 electronic warfare system minimizes the "stealth" technology implemented on other fighters

    - It feels like a child was writing. Explain to anyone how the electronic warfare system can affect the "stealth" technology ?! Do I have a dissonance when reading?
    But it is precisely the "stealth" technology that is positioned abroad almost as the main element of the fifth generation fighters.

    - And we have not?
    The Himalayas electronic warfare system, according to some sources, exceeds the range of launching air-to-air missiles in terms of effective use, and therefore a missile already launched by the enemy will be disoriented by the Russian fighter's complex. We can say that the electronic warfare complex is capable of "disarming" the American F-35 and F-22.

    - Exceeds the launch range of which missiles? Long range? Average? Small? How can this system counteract missiles that are aimed at a source of interference?
    . To the same, absolutely illiterate. Where are the moderators?