Military Review

Why maneuverability is not important for a new generation fighter - explained the designer of the Chinese J-20

200

The Chinese media published another interview with the chief designer of the new generation J-20 fighters. These aircraft are now actively supplied to the PLA Air Force. Chinese journalists asked the interviewee Yang Wei about how the new generation of Chinese fighters fundamentally differs from the previous generation.


According to the J-20 designer, the fundamental difference is not so much the increased range of combat use and firepower, but the filling in the form of artificial intelligence.

Representing a China Corporation aviation Industry (AVIC) Yang Wei says that agility was a decisive factor in previous generations of fighters.

The chief designer of the J-20 explains why agility is not important:

Now this concept is becoming a thing of the past, as missiles are being developed, within the range of which it is almost impossible for an aircraft to escape from them.

It is noteworthy that Yang Wei talks about "the outdated concept of the importance of super maneuverability" all the time. Earlier in the Chinese media, a similar statement was also made. If this rhetoric comes from the designer of the new generation of Chinese aircraft, then it should be assumed that the same J-20s have big problems with maneuverability.

Yang Wei:

Information has now become a decisive factor as modern fighters focus on getting more information from AFAR radars.

According to the Chinese aircraft designer, new generation fighters reduce the enemy's ability to obtain sufficient amounts of data, including using effective electronic warfare and stealth technologies.

Yang Wei says that for the aircraft of the near future it will be relevant to operate in an integrated network, exchange data in real time, and be able to perform joint operations.

Today in China they say that by 2035 a 6th generation fighter will appear in the country (according to the Chinese classification - the fifth).
200 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Livonetc
    Livonetc 28 July 2020 08: 28 New
    +6
    How tired these infirm are to explain that they say "the grapes are still green."
    And when, nevertheless, they are honored to produce detailed, they will, splashing drool and puffing up their cheeks, claim that this is it, a real super duper.
    1. NIKN
      NIKN 28 July 2020 08: 58 New
      10
      Why maneuverability is not important for a new generation fighter - explained the designer of the Chinese J-20
      By Chinese standards, the most important thing for a 5th generation aircraft is that it is called a 5th generation aircraft, the rest is not important. And that's true, just call the 5th generation aircraft, the 4th generation aircraft and that's it, there is no 5th generation aircraft. laughing
      1. Vladimir16
        Vladimir16 28 July 2020 09: 40 New
        +6
        Why maneuverability is not important for a new generation fighter - explained the designer of the Chinese J-20


        Well, I couldn't, I couldn't. laughing lol wassat
        1. Garant_Solntselikij
          Garant_Solntselikij 28 July 2020 14: 29 New
          -3
          Well, I couldn't, I couldn't

          You could put on the fan, you could laughing
      2. EnGenius
        EnGenius 28 July 2020 10: 31 New
        +1
        It's like India recently announced that the design of a new fifth generation Indian fighter jet has been developed. So let's write "5th generation design"! It is obvious that China tried to neutralize the lack of maneuverability by using a duck-type aerodynamic scheme, because they do not have their own engines with high-pressure shock waves with a good resource. The rudders are also microscopic. Now the statement of the Chinese designer has put everything in its place. The J-20 is a concept for the F-35, which does not provide for maneuverable close combat. The Su-57 is not particularly a competitor.
        1. zwlad
          zwlad 28 July 2020 15: 43 New
          +3
          I can hardly imagine close combat of 5th generation aircraft. what kind of brakes pilots have to be to get so close
      3. businessv
        businessv 29 July 2020 16: 24 New
        0
        Quote: NIKNN
        By Chinese standards, the most important thing for a 5th generation aircraft is that it is called a 5th generation aircraft, the rest is not important.
        Yeah, flies and maneuvers badly, shoots so-so too, but he can change his mind with his unimaginable intellect!
        According to the J-20 designer, the fundamental difference is not so much the increased range of combat use and firepower, but the filling in the form of artificial intelligence.
    2. Piramidon
      Piramidon 28 July 2020 09: 57 New
      +7
      Quote: Livonetc
      How tired these infirm are to explain that they say "the grapes are still green."
      And when, nevertheless, they are honored to produce detailed, they will, splashing drool and puffing up their cheeks, claim that this is it, a real super duper.

      As soon as the Chinese master the production of OVT engines, the role of maneuverability will increase dramatically.
      1. Runoway
        Runoway 28 July 2020 10: 37 New
        0
        Let at least some theater of operations demonstrate the effectiveness of their military-industrial complex, and then boast.
        Although the conveyor supply to the troops, it says that all the same something can
      2. bayard
        bayard 28 July 2020 18: 01 New
        0
        Quote: Piramidon
        As soon as the Chinese master the production of OVT engines, the role of maneuverability will increase dramatically.

        As far as I remember, they have an OVT engine and some of them are installed on the J-10 - a very impressive demonstration was.
        But the J-20 is a heavy aircraft, the AL-31F's thrust is not enough for vigorous maneuvering, its own is not ready, that's the excuse.
        For their engine builders, the difficulty is not OVT, but namely the survivability of the engine blades, their resource and the maximum operating temperatures for them.
    3. VO3A
      VO3A 28 July 2020 10: 38 New
      +3
      produce detailed

      Well, let's clarify: TO PRODUCE LIKE ...
      Let's analyze the simplest variant of using the 5th generation aircraft and the most basic at the same time ... It, being on the front line and remaining unnoticed, provides covert target designation for other aircraft and platforms and controls or controls the battle, if necessary, it joins the battle ... Suddenly , he was noticed, how can he successfully leave the danger zone without super-maneuverability, where he can be shot down? The Chinese are cunning, and the pi_ndos, too ...NEED SUPERMANEUALITY!
      1. Letun
        Letun 28 July 2020 13: 15 New
        +1
        Quote: VO3A
        battle ... Suddenly, he was noticed, how he can successfully leave the danger zone without super-maneuverability, where he can be shot down?

        Turn around in the direction of your territory and leave. Not? Airplanes usually do this.
        1. VO3A
          VO3A 28 July 2020 13: 52 New
          -1
          Yeah, you're escorted, Birch shows, Rita yells, ... and he usually leaves calmly? Leaves this light?
          Was he kidding?
    4. Alexander Sosnitsky
      Alexander Sosnitsky 28 July 2020 11: 02 New
      +1
      The Chinese man is telling the truth. AI is the deciding factor today. And its technical implementation is nothing more than help. All power will now be in wires and full-fledged high-speed information processing
      1. Alexander Sosnitsky
        Alexander Sosnitsky 28 July 2020 11: 03 New
        0
        Brains are never superfluous
      2. VO3A
        VO3A 28 July 2020 11: 32 New
        +2
        There is no AI on planes yet. Do not confuse Automatic Control Systems with advanced capabilities with high speed and huge memory with AI ... All algorithms are provided and the choice of the right one, which corresponds to the situation, is made ... Yes, this choice is made by technology, but within the framework of predetermined programs ... This is not AI ... It can be called: "with AI elements", but no more, and with a big stretch ...
        1. dauria
          dauria 28 July 2020 12: 18 New
          +5
          This is not AI ... It can be called: "with AI elements", but no more


          Don't care what you call it. A simpler idea looks like this - the role of airborne electronic equipment and missile control in combination with low RCS and awareness came to the fore. Or so - the chances in the ring of Valuev and Maria Zakharova will equal the Makarov pistols. And if Zakharova is given AK, and Valuev is PM, then Valuev has no chance on the football field.
          1. VO3A
            VO3A 28 July 2020 12: 25 New
            -1
            A simpler idea looks like this - the role of airborne electronic equipment and missile control in combination with low RCS and awareness came to the fore.

            No, not really ... Using your terminology in 1st place awareness, and on the second, tactics at its base ... The rest is behind, oddly enough ..., but it has a place to be ...
        2. Alexander Sosnitsky
          Alexander Sosnitsky 28 July 2020 20: 45 New
          +1
          I completely agree and therefore I am talking specifically about AI, which is able to fully and ultra-fast navigate an extremely large amount of unreliable problem information. Whoever figured it out first won. The Chinese got it right. And this is something that is capable of generating itself in all situations, and AI is its subspecies, while this is not visible. Therefore, they use algorithmic constructions like IF ... THEN ... ELSE ..., which are made by a person. It is not that
    5. Vicontas
      Vicontas 29 July 2020 19: 09 New
      -1
      As folklore says - "Experience is the criterion of truth." So when J (opa) at number 20 shows real victories in an aerial duel, then we can say - the author was right! And before that - all his words are empty sounds of advertising PR!
  2. Machete
    Machete 28 July 2020 08: 30 New
    +8
    Why then build fighters at all.
    Create some kind of flying missile platform and shoot at the enemy from 100-150 km. You will definitely hit, and the stupid enemy will not do anything for his protection.

    How can you not justify the inability to create a normal melee aircraft.
    Or do they think that they will always be out of sight of the enemy's radars?
    1. novel66
      novel66 28 July 2020 08: 44 New
      +3
      why flying?
      1. Vol4ara
        Vol4ara 28 July 2020 09: 11 New
        0
        Quote: novel xnumx
        why flying?

        Is the answer not obvious?
        1. novel66
          novel66 28 July 2020 10: 56 New
          +4
          no, if it doesn't fly, then they can't shoot it down and kerosene is not needed and there is no need to teach pilots
          1. Vol4ara
            Vol4ara 28 July 2020 11: 29 New
            +1
            Quote: novel xnumx
            no, if it doesn't fly, then they can't shoot it down and kerosene is not needed and there is no need to teach pilots

            And it does not move and if it is stationary, then its location is known and destroy it - a great range of possibilities - from saboteurs to artillery and they cannot shoot it down, but they can destroy it, and the pilots do not need to be trained, but the maintenance personnel must be trained and kerosene is not needed, but needed diesel and radio horizon is limited by hills and other obstacles, and even if it is a mobile complex, then for 1000 km you will never throw it in 1,5 hours
        2. pavelty
          pavelty 28 July 2020 14: 49 New
          +1
          Here the answer is simple, who was the first to discover, launched a rocket, which is the best he won ... it was and will be)
    2. Pereira
      Pereira 28 July 2020 08: 45 New
      -1
      Be careful, colleague.
      I have suggested similar solutions for both air and sea more than once. But every time the retrogrades fiercely minus me.
      1. antivirus
        antivirus 28 July 2020 08: 56 New
        +3
        cyclists are to blame for everything ..

        and supporters of the construction of 7x70 t VI aircraft carriers
      2. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 28 July 2020 09: 53 New
        0
        Quote: Pereira

        I have suggested similar solutions for both air and sea more than once. But every time the retrogrades fiercely minus me.

        It's so simple that the United States has been using such things for a long time, UAVs are called smile
    3. Vol4ara
      Vol4ara 28 July 2020 09: 10 New
      +1
      Quote: Machete
      Why then build fighters at all.
      Create some kind of flying missile platform and shoot at the enemy from 100-150 km. You will definitely hit, and the stupid enemy will not do anything for his protection.

      How can you not justify the inability to create a normal melee aircraft.
      Or do they think that they will always be out of sight of the enemy's radars?

      We did it already, f 35
      1. Ka-52
        Ka-52 28 July 2020 09: 37 New
        0
        We did it already, f 35

        The F-35 is not a melee aircraft. By the way, if you throw out all the American manuals, then the concept of the F-35 is generally difficult to define. Hence his problems
        1. Vol4ara
          Vol4ara 28 July 2020 10: 28 New
          +1
          Quote: Ka-52
          We did it already, f 35

          The F-35 is not a melee aircraft. By the way, if you throw out all the American manuals, then the concept of the F-35 is generally difficult to define. Hence his problems

          Melee is not, but the launch platform is
          1. Ka-52
            Ka-52 28 July 2020 11: 17 New
            0
            Melee is not, but the launch platform is

            then tell me what he is to the marines? I say that the Yankees have been wise with the concept.
            1. Vol4ara
              Vol4ara 28 July 2020 11: 32 New
              +2
              Quote: Ka-52
              Melee is not, but the launch platform is

              then tell me what he is to the marines? I say that the Yankees have been wise with the concept.

              To counter the aviation, which will resist the Marines during the landing of the assault, and if it is a banana country and the air defense and aviation are suppressed, then to work on ground targets during the landing of the Marine assault.
              1. Ka-52
                Ka-52 28 July 2020 11: 41 New
                +2
                To counter the aviation, which will resist the Marines during the landing of the assault, and if it is a banana country and the air defense and aviation are suppressed, then to work on ground targets during the landing of the Marine assault.

                This is clear. But just understand the thought that as a fighter, the F-35 is not enough to gain air superiority over the battlefield. And as a shock one, it is oversupplied. That is, the problem lies in the attempt to unify. When the Americans made target machines, they did great. As soon as they began to baptize the priest with the hippo, miracles like the F-16 and F-35 went
    4. Pereira
      Pereira 28 July 2020 09: 33 New
      +3
      Or do they think that they will always be out of sight of the enemy's radars?


      This is exactly how they are going. Whether they can or not is another question. But they are going.
    5. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 28 July 2020 09: 51 New
      -1
      Quote: Machete
      Create some kind of flying missile platform and shoot at the enemy from 100-150 km

      Remove the pilot from there, add quasi AI, the ability to accompany and protect the manned aircraft, oh yes, it's the same: https://topwar.ru/173434-vvs-ssha-podveli-itogi-tendera-na-sozdanie-bespilotnogo-vedomogo.html
      1. Ka-52
        Ka-52 28 July 2020 09: 58 New
        0
        Remove the pilot from there, add quasi AI, the ability to accompany and protect the manned aircraft, oh yes, it's the same: https://topwar.ru/173434-vvs-ssha-podveli-itogi-tendera-na-sozdanie-bespilotnogo-vedomogo.html

        laughed at the ability to "protect" the pilot. This can only be believed by those who think that the planes of the attacking group will attack in formation, like infantry during the Napoleonic wars. laughing
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 28 July 2020 10: 06 New
          -1
          False targets, radar emitter, MSDM missiles - any of these words are familiar? smile
          1. Ka-52
            Ka-52 28 July 2020 11: 20 New
            +2
            False targets, radar emitter, MSDM missiles - any of these words are familiar? smile

            very familiar and even from practice. But you seem to be driven only by the desire to protect your beloved Americans, trying to stun me with an advertising booklet XQ-58 laughing even without trying to comprehend the situation in terms of objectivity
            1. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 28 July 2020 14: 56 New
              0
              Quote: Ka-52
              trying to knock me out with an XQ-58 promotional booklet

              I'm not trying, I am giving an example of new and old technologies that, when used on a UAV, will qualitatively increase the capabilities. The XQ-58 is one of dozens of possible slaves. The reduction in size with the increase in the power of computing systems and the development of software allow today to replace a person in most operations. Technically, it is already possible to make an unmanned fighter that will fight on an equal footing. But it is still too expensive, quasi AI needs to be trained, moral and ethical restrictions. Creating slaves will create a reasonable compromise, where the man and the fighter are the center of decision-making, and the slaves are executors. Removing some of the equipment and weapons outside the fighter will increase stealth, range, quantity and quality of weapons.
    6. Piramidon
      Piramidon 28 July 2020 10: 49 New
      +2
      Quote: Machete
      Create some kind of flying missile platform and shoot at the enemy from 100-150 km.

      The tactics of using strategic aviation is moving towards this. No one is going to stupidly break through air defense systems on some kind of supersonic. It is not for nothing that the PAK DA is planned to be subsonic, and it is too early to write off the Tu-95, rather than a platform. The missile range is increasing rapidly. It can be expected that soon it will not be necessary to fly far at all, but to strike while being over your territory.
    7. VO3A
      VO3A 28 July 2020 11: 08 New
      0
      Sorry, but you have no idea about the 5th generation aircraft and the need for its use, and the features of modern war ... There is not a war with partisans, but a war with a real enemy, which is armed with modern, high-tech equipment, combined into systems, which are controlled and carry out target designation and transmission of information in real time ... And which are fought with the help of electronic warfare systems, space and other systems ..
    8. Grits
      Grits 28 July 2020 14: 43 New
      0
      Quote: Machete
      Why then build fighters at all.
      Create some kind of flying missile platform and shoot at the enemy from 100-150 km.

      I propose to go further. Why create a flying platform? she is also maneuverable, and this, it turns out, is not at all important. Let it be just a platform. With powerful radar, with AI, with stealth system. Stands quietly on the ground and shoots.
      1. telobezumnoe
        telobezumnoe 28 July 2020 20: 39 New
        0
        I'm also wondering if you can raise the radar on some stratospheric balloon and place the launchers anywhere
  3. 501Legion
    501Legion 28 July 2020 08: 31 New
    +7
    they explained simply. "maneuverability is not the main thing because our aircraft do not have it"
    1. VO3A
      VO3A 28 July 2020 11: 19 New
      +6
      For decades, the Americans have been developing tactical techniques that practically exclude close maneuverable combat for aviation ... And here the point is not so much that their aircraft are inferior in this indicator ... The fact is that in close maneuver combat there are large losses on both sides and they are impossible avoid ... Even with the overwhelming superiority of amers in the number of aircraft, they cannot make such losses, it is expensive and does not suit them .... Pathological glorification of the superiority of our aircraft by pseudo-patriots in super-maneuverability, based on the stupidity and limitations of the latter ... fly to close combat, you need to go through the distances of long-range and medium combat and survive, and most importantly, there must be a desire of the enemy to wage such a battle ... Pi_ndos have no such desire and is not expected, right up to leaving the plane at the slightest danger ...
      1. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 28 July 2020 11: 53 New
        +1
        Quote: VO3A
        And here the point is not so much that their aircraft are inferior in this indicator.

        F15 and F16 with thrust vector control flew thousands of hours in test flights. It is not a problem for them to launch a super-maneuverable fighter into series.
        Quote: VO3A
        Even with the overwhelming superiority of amers in the number of aircraft,

        We also need to teach pilots to fly these planes. And so the training goes on for 10 years, with super-maneuverability up to 15-20 years, the period will increase
        1. VO3A
          VO3A 28 July 2020 11: 55 New
          -2
          Read better .. For you.
          To reach close combat, you need to go through the distances of long-range and medium combat and survive, and most importantly, the enemy must have a desire to wage such a battle ... Pi_ndos have no such desire and is not expected,
          1. Grazdanin
            Grazdanin 28 July 2020 12: 09 New
            +2
            So I don't argue with that, I added information to your message. They created a super-maneuverable melee aircraft, but it does not fit into their concept. They have no desire to lose people and have no opportunity to train the required number of pilots for such a fight.
            Learning complexity is usually shown in parentheses in these equations. It is accepted as an axiom that all our pilots are of the level of Russian knights and swifts. To put it mildly, not so. Regular combat pilots will perform standard maneuvers; only a few will be able to use 100% super maneuverability.
            1. VO3A
              VO3A 28 July 2020 12: 16 New
              -2
              I recently saw a video with a training battle of the Indonesian Su-35s against the American F18s ... It shows how the Su-35 pilots use the super-maneuverability capabilities due to the rotary nozzle to turn the aircraft onto the aiming line ... By the way, from 3 battles in Indonesian pilots won 2 ...
              1. Grazdanin
                Grazdanin 28 July 2020 12: 30 New
                +1
                The fact that F1 won 18 time (which FA-18, by the way?) Is very bad. If Hornet, then it has long been discontinued, if SuperHornet, then it is more relevant. In any case, it is a fighter-bomber and attack aircraft, unlike the Su35, which is a multipurpose super-maneuverable air superiority fighter with a controlled thrust vector of the 4 ++ generation.
                1. VO3A
                  VO3A 28 July 2020 12: 34 New
                  -1
                  Again controversial statements! Both are multipurpose aircraft ... It doesn't even need to be proven ...
                  1. Grazdanin
                    Grazdanin 28 July 2020 12: 42 New
                    +1
                    Of course they are multipurpose (do other fighters now?), But there are basic roles, in the abbreviation "FA" it is already laid down. Su-34 is also a multipurpose fighter-bomber.
                    1. VO3A
                      VO3A 28 July 2020 13: 45 New
                      -1
                      This is nonsense ... Su-34 is a front-line bomber, where you can walk in the cockpit ... It is made on the basis of the Su-27, and teapots shout about the IBA ... And there are few of them at all, but the Su-24M survives, and on the sea, 15 years later, Hephaestus began to put it ... It could be neighing, but for some reason it's sad ...
                      1. Grazdanin
                        Grazdanin 28 July 2020 14: 02 New
                        0
                        Why? The Su-34 is officially a multipurpose fighter-bomber, but it has some of the functions of the Su24, it replaces but is not limited to it. FA18 also replaced the A-7E Corsair.
                        Let's see what the manufacturer's official website says about the Su-34:
                        The Su-34 fighter-bomber is designed to engage ground, surface and air targets, infrastructure facilities covered by air defense means and located at considerable distances from the home airfield, with fire and information countermeasures by the enemy, day and night in simple and difficult meteorological conditions, using unguided and guided airborne weapons, as well as for performing air reconnaissance tasks.

                        https://www.sukhoi.org/products/samolety/254/
            2. Ka-52
              Ka-52 28 July 2020 13: 05 New
              0
              Regular frontline pilots will perform standard maneuvers,

              I wonder where the fireballs come from? What is your specialty in VUS? How much plaque and on what?
              super-maneuverability is 100% able to use only a few.

              it is certainly forgivable for an amateur to confuse combat maneuvering and unique FPPs. Aerial acrobatics, leading only to the loss of energy by a combat aircraft, is not needed in battle from the word at all. You don't need to be able to do Cobra or Bell. You need to be able to perform a hammerhead, slide, combat turn, ranversman, etc. Super-maneuverability (not in the Wikipedia sense) allows you to change the spatial position as efficiently as possible without significant loss of energy. It is this ability that Russian aircraft provide. And this is their plus
              1. Grazdanin
                Grazdanin 28 July 2020 13: 33 New
                +1
                I have a VUS - 121000, so mistakes in "flight" terms are pleading for me, you are right.
  4. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 28 July 2020 08: 35 New
    +7
    And the grapes are green ... the fox said in their hearts. I still don’t understand how the J-20 with AL-31 engines can be considered the 5th generation, but our 57th with the "product 117" is not? It's just PR, and nothing else ...
    1. Ross xnumx
      Ross xnumx 28 July 2020 09: 05 New
      +2
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      It's just PR, and nothing else ...

      The engine reminder is more than apt ...
      And all their polemics are not just PR, but malicious "PR" ... lol
    2. sg7s
      sg7s 28 July 2020 09: 52 New
      0
      They also have 41M, but they cannot copy the blades of the KND in any way (they have been busy for five years) ... In general, the Chinese guys - well done - was somehow, ordered a line of small-section rental .. Is it there - do you need to make a moon? No question, which one - a square, blue, side hole? Two months, the price is such and such (however, then the price grows in a geometric progression), but all your miscalculations are YOURS ... I spied on another plant (traveled a lot) another layout (the length of the workshop decreases by 70 meters), announced - they They didn’t turn their ears away - we’ll do, they say, you didn’t tell us ... In general, the people are specific, the food, however, is full of g ...
    3. VO3A
      VO3A 28 July 2020 11: 50 New
      -2
      I should have learned better math ..
      A prerequisite for a 5th generation aircraft is the ability to maintain supersonic speed for a long time without afterburner ... And if the proposed theater of military operations is small and the aircraft are not intended to be used for attack and "establishing democracy" in remote countries .. Is this option possible? However, given the size of Russia and China, this tactical option does not work. Especially for Russia, with a scanty, or rather ridiculous, number of new planes ... If China rivets thousands of planes, why should they overcome super-long distances?
      Not quite, or rather not PR ...
  5. Shuttle
    Shuttle 28 July 2020 08: 36 New
    +1
    This Yang Wei cannot "get super-maneuverability grapes", and therefore convinces himself and others that "the grapes are green."
    laughing
    1. Vol4ara
      Vol4ara 28 July 2020 09: 13 New
      +2
      Quote: Shuttle
      This Yang Wei cannot "get super-maneuverability grapes", and therefore convinces himself and others that "the grapes are green."
      laughing

      25 mentions of grapes in one article, do you have one manual there or what?
      1. Shuttle
        Shuttle 28 July 2020 17: 51 New
        0
        Quote: Vol4ara
        Quote: Shuttle
        This Yang Wei cannot "get super-maneuverability grapes", and therefore convinces himself and others that "the grapes are green."
        laughing

        25 mentions of grapes in one article, do you have one manual there or what?

        Not. It's just that not all Chukchi writers are Chukchi readers. Here are repeated. And the image with grapes really matches the theme very closely. Everything is very simple and without manuals.
  6. sav
    sav 28 July 2020 08: 37 New
    20
    If you cannot achieve any characteristics, you can simply say that they are not relevant lol
    1. Vol4ara
      Vol4ara 28 July 2020 09: 13 New
      0
      Quote: sav
      If you cannot achieve any characteristics, you can simply say that they are not relevant lol

      Yes, or they are really not relevant
  7. APASUS
    APASUS 28 July 2020 08: 41 New
    +1
    The chief designer of the J-20 explains why agility is not important:

    Now this concept is becoming a thing of the past, as missiles are being developed, within the range of which it is almost impossible for an aircraft to escape from them.

    China seems to level all its technical shortcomings of 5th generation cars with super rockets?
  8. Revolver
    Revolver 28 July 2020 08: 54 New
    +3
    Let at least 4 generations make a normal motor first.
    1. Vol4ara
      Vol4ara 28 July 2020 09: 14 New
      -3
      Quote: Nagan
      Let at least 4 generations make a normal motor first.

      Is there a motor for a moped?
  9. HAM
    HAM 28 July 2020 09: 16 New
    +1
    "Information has now become a decisive factor as modern fighters focused on receiving more information using radars with AFAR ..... "----- so these are no longer fighters, but something like avaks ..

    That is, "modern fighters" should die smart ...
    Well, they received a lot of information, and could not defend themselves or escape from the enemy's missile ...
    Clumsy, but informed ..
    Nobody says that information is not needed ........ but good should be with fists ...
  10. Doccor18
    Doccor18 28 July 2020 09: 17 New
    +1
    Why maneuverability is not important for a new generation fighter - explained the designer of the Chinese J-20

    Because it is not on the Chinese fighter ...
    And the glider does not allow, and domestic engines do not pull. So they decided that it was not the main thing ...
    And if they allowed the opportunity, the Chinese shouted to the whole world that their plane is the most maneuverable and this is the main thing ...
    1. c2020
      c2020 28 July 2020 09: 20 New
      -2
      Let at least 4 generations make a normal motor first.

      Before kicking the Chinese, you need to at least learn how to make 5th generation engines in Russia. There are no large series of 5th generation engines in Russia. So, in reality, in fact, there is not a single engine of the 5th generation. But the Chinese are just great. They are not engaged in chatter, but in business.
      1. Herman 4223
        Herman 4223 28 July 2020 10: 02 New
        +2
        And who has a fifth generation engine in that case?
        In the product of thirty, the main highlight is the variable degree of double contour, no one has this, like a third contour should appear.
        For the f35, this is only in development, the current f35 / 22 engine has no fundamental differences from the al-41, which is put on the su-35/57.
      2. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 11: 50 New
        +1
        Quote: c2020
        So, in reality, in fact, there is not a single engine of the 5th generation.


        But in reality, product 30 ALREADY flies .... The Chinese do not even have an engine comparable in performance with the Al-31FP or Al-31F-M1 in the series
  11. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 28 July 2020 09: 21 New
    +2
    we cannot achieve the maneuverability of Russian aviation equipment ... well, for this we will pretend that it is not important ... the excuse is so-so ...
    maneuverability is a good plus in combination with stealth ... and for a fighter in general ...
  12. BARKAS
    BARKAS 28 July 2020 09: 22 New
    +2
    Now this concept is becoming a thing of the past, as missiles are being developed, within the range of which it is almost impossible for an aircraft to escape from them.
    Of course, it is impossible in the absence of the necessary maneuverability to contradict themselves.
    1. c2020
      c2020 28 July 2020 09: 30 New
      0
      Now this concept is becoming a thing of the past, as missiles are being developed, within the range of which it is almost impossible for an aircraft to escape from them.
      Certainly impossible in the absence of the necessary maneuverability ...

      Even with agility, you won't get anywhere with hypersonic weapons.
      1. BARKAS
        BARKAS 28 July 2020 09: 40 New
        +1
        Where he is hypersonic, the Chinese do not even mention him there, they will make an aircraft faster than such a rocket.
    2. Ka-52
      Ka-52 28 July 2020 09: 40 New
      +3
      Now this concept is becoming a thing of the past, as missiles are being developed, within the range of which it is almost impossible for an aircraft to escape from them.

      naive to think so. Rather, those who believe the booklet statements, but taking into account at least the results of modeling modern combat, think so. Not to mention field tests.
  13. Maks1995
    Maks1995 28 July 2020 09: 29 New
    -1
    In fact, the designer is right, no matter how he gets caught.
    The Chinese are confidently catching up in technology, lagging behind so far, but this will not last long.

    Super-maneuverability was on the ceiling of past generations, and for the sake of stealth, stealth and other things, it was clearly necessary to sacrifice it and speed.
    But new tasks came - passive sensors, knowing electronics, controlling the drone, communicating with the base so that it does not shine itself, stealth.

    So right, right ...
    1. mark2
      mark2 28 July 2020 09: 53 New
      +2
      Super-maneuverability was on the ceiling of past generations, and for the sake of stealth, stealth and other things, it was clearly necessary to sacrifice it and speed.

      What are you talking about! ... The main requirements for the 5th generation fighters are stealth, super-maneuverability and supersonic flight without the use of afterburner.
      The United States and China, despite the fact that on this site it is believed that these countries have risen in some technologies above Mount Olympus, they still cannot fulfill all the requirements for the 5th generation. Therefore, they are beginning to reshape these requirements. What is easier, right? If you can't keep your promise, give it up.
    2. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 28 July 2020 09: 59 New
      0
      Super maneuverability is available at low speeds of 0,5-0,6 M, it is enough to launch 2 modern missiles with a time delay, while the fighter twists somersaults against one second easily knocks down. There is also a big question for the pilot's class, you still need to be able to make complex maneuvers.
      1. lucul
        lucul 28 July 2020 10: 35 New
        0
        Super maneuverability is available at low speeds of 0,5-0,6 M, it is enough to launch 2 modern missiles with a time delay, while the fighter twists somersaults against one second easily knocks down.

        Ay well done)))
        Could you remind me how many missiles are on board the plane? ))) And how long does it take to re-fly (checking the stealth coverage)? ))) And I will remind you - for American stealth fighters, the second flight is only after 72 !!! hours)))
        In terms of maneuverability, any maneuvering of the aircraft reduces the range of the rocket, and the more intense the maneuvering, the more significantly the range of the rocket decreases, especially when its fuel burns out))))
        1. Maks1995
          Maks1995 29 July 2020 08: 57 New
          0
          In fact (there were also articles and comments with data), super-maneuverability is effective up to 500-700 km / h (at an air show), over 700 the air flow already begins to interfere a lot, and at supersonic everything can fall apart. There, and the usual, supposedly, automation limits.

          I've never seen a video, like someone doing something special about supersonic sound.

          And to slow down in front of the rocket to let it cool in the turn ... IMHO, she will thank, in her own way ...
  14. gridasov
    gridasov 28 July 2020 09: 29 New
    +3
    Maneuverability is an important part of highly efficient flight technology. In other words, you cannot fly effectively without owning high maneuverability technologies. By the way, the Chinese, too, are developing technologies for controlled flows, not plane control.
  15. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 28 July 2020 09: 31 New
    +2
    It remains to explain to the pilot that when a rocket flies at him, he does not need super-maneuverability and he should be happy that the designer did not provide for this function. Interestingly, does the designer know that the rocket, after running out of fuel, flies like a brick, gradually losing speed, which sharply reduces its maneuverability and ability to shoot down a maneuvering aircraft? And the designer also needs to explain that "invisibility" is achieved by the electronic warfare system, which, at the same time, prevent missiles from shooting down the plane.
    I would put it more simply: we do not have the corresponding engines, and at the same time the pilots capable of withstanding 9G, so there is no super-maneuverability. We would understand and forgive.
  16. Ka-52
    Ka-52 28 July 2020 09: 51 New
    0
    It is noteworthy that Yang Wei talks about "the outdated concept of the importance of super maneuverability" all the time. Earlier in the Chinese media, a similar statement was also made. If this rhetoric comes from the designer of the new generation of Chinese aircraft, then it should be assumed that the same J-20s have big problems with maneuverability.

    For those who believe in the exclusive dominance of the concept of ranged combat and the withering away of the close one with all its maneuverability, it would be good to recall the training battles that took place sometime in the early 80s, in which the F-14 participated on the one hand, and the T-38 ( training version F-5). So, despite the overwhelming advantage of the F-14 in avionics, frail Tigers at half (!) cases, they found a way to get close to the enemy and imposed close maneuvering combat.
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 28 July 2020 10: 28 New
      -3
      The 80s ended over 30 years ago. All these tales about training fights are marketing in nature. If there is a link to a reliable source with detailed information and analytics about the results of the battle, throw it off, we will read it with pleasure.
      1. Ka-52
        Ka-52 28 July 2020 10: 38 New
        +1
        The 80s ended over 30 years ago. All these tales about training battles are marketing in nature.

        the wheel was invented at the end of the 80th millennium BC. uh, but I think you periodically put your butt on a self-propelled cart, rolling on such a dense invention. It’s bad that you didn’t learn how to analyze what you read, because the very principle of comparison didn’t reach you. The problem is not 14xE, but the fact that the F-5 radar was so much more advanced than the F-81 radar that even the difference between AN / APG-011 and HXNUMXM is even less.
        All these tales about training battles are marketing in nature.

        semi-natural modeling and even more revealing than all your reasoning based on booklet information.
      2. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 11: 56 New
        0
        The ZVO was detailed ...
  17. rocket757
    rocket757 28 July 2020 09: 51 New
    +1
    To make the apparatus higher, faster, smarter, stealthier, more maneuverable ... in short, more dangerous for the enemy in all respects, the task is not trivial!
    In the meantime, what is, and not what you want.
  18. LMN
    LMN 28 July 2020 09: 54 New
    +1
    What is the effective radius of modern B-B missiles?
    1. c2020
      c2020 28 July 2020 10: 01 New
      -3
      What is the effective radius of modern B-B missiles?

      It is enough to ignore the super-maneuverability.
      1. LMN
        LMN 28 July 2020 10: 06 New
        0
        No options?
        1. c2020
          c2020 28 July 2020 10: 11 New
          -1
          No chance.
          1. LMN
            LMN 28 July 2020 10: 15 New
            +1
            Give up?
    2. Ka-52
      Ka-52 28 July 2020 10: 15 New
      0
      What is the effective radius of modern B-B missiles?

      there is no such thing. There is a maximum range. It is most often used by booklet experts. In the format of a real battle, there will be too many factors that can affect the missile's ability to hit the target: target speed, target's vector of movement in relation to the attacking missile, how actively the target is maneuvering, the altitude of the missile and target, etc.
      1. LMN
        LMN 28 July 2020 10: 18 New
        +1
        Okay, I'll rephrase the question.
        How long can a B-B missile fly without changing its speed?
        1. Ka-52
          Ka-52 28 July 2020 10: 28 New
          0
          How long can a B-B missile fly without changing its speed?

          the rocket engine works on average for 6-10 seconds, then it flies by inertia. The range of its flight (booklet) is known. If the target is low-speed and not maneuvering (for example, B-52 or A-50), then the missile's energy can be saved over a longer flight distance. If the target maneuvers, then the rocket will lose energy to compensate for the trajectory. In general, a rocket with a speed of V = 4M in the acceleration section can fly 0,7-0,8M in the final flight section.
          1. LMN
            LMN 28 July 2020 10: 35 New
            0
            That is, the duration of the flight of the aircraft and the speed are higher than that of the long-range missile V-V?
            1. Ka-52
              Ka-52 28 July 2020 10: 53 New
              0
              That is, the duration of the flight of the aircraft and the speed are higher than that of the long-range missile V-V?

              I didn't quite understand the question
              1. LMN
                LMN 28 July 2020 10: 56 New
                -1
                Does a modern fighter fly faster and longer than a BB missile?
                1. Ka-52
                  Ka-52 28 July 2020 11: 07 New
                  +1
                  Does a modern fighter fly faster and longer than a BB missile?

                  longer, but not faster. But that is not the question. In general, alphabetically, all attack tactics are divided into 4 phases:
                  1) Exit to the line of interception. 2) For a distracting group - a maneuver in order to provoke the enemy to approach and turn on their radars, electronic warfare, etc. For the strike group - a maneuver in order to enter the zone of use of weapons in terms of range and overload. 3) Launching their own missiles and evading or disrupting guidance from enemy missiles. 4) Maneuver in order to get out of the zone of application of enemy missiles in terms of range, altitude and overload.
                  so at the last stage, energetic maneuvering and the speed of evading attacking missiles are important, because the range of destruction in pursuit of explosive missiles is much less than on a collision course
                  1. LMN
                    LMN 28 July 2020 11: 11 New
                    0
                    Thanks for the detailed answer.

                    But ... the Su-35, for example, can get away from modern B-B missiles?
                    1. Ka-52
                      Ka-52 28 July 2020 11: 15 New
                      +2
                      But ... the Su-35, for example, can get away from modern B-B missiles?

                      any plane can leave. Each combination has its own chances of being hit by yourself or hitting the enemy. Depending on the above factors.
                      1. LMN
                        LMN 28 July 2020 11: 18 New
                        0
                        Yes, I was sure.
                        I wanted confirmation yes

                        Thank you drinks
      2. c2020
        c2020 28 July 2020 10: 19 New
        0
        Give up?

        Kick out all the so-called "effective managers" from aviation.
    3. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 12: 02 New
      +1
      In air battles, dealing with tactical aircraft ?! Halve the declared maximum launch range. Judging by the real cases of effective use of the AiM-7F in the first Iraq and the AiM-120, then the real effective launch range of the RVV SD is no more than 0.3 ... 0.4 x Dpuska max.
      Source col.Higby. Ariel combat bwr
  19. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 28 July 2020 10: 18 New
    -2
    In order to activate the rotary nozzles, the aircraft must be decelerated to 0.5-0.6 MAX. This moment is tracked by the enemy. And at this moment, the fighter is caught and attacked with missiles.
    Super-maneuverability can be very helpful in one-on-one combat, but in collective combat, its role decreases.
    1. c2020
      c2020 28 July 2020 10: 26 New
      -1
      Super-maneuverability can be very helpful in one-on-one combat ...

      And the modern air enemy will not let you get close. Will launch a rocket almost from over the horizon and calmly fly away for breakfast. So fight one-on-one with a hypersonic missile. There is no chance. None.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 28 July 2020 10: 32 New
        +2
        You are missing one point. Look to the future. A clash of two fifth-generation stealth aircraft.
        Let's say J-20 versus F-35.
        1) They will not see each other from the distance of launching a long-range explosive missile
        2) The radar of the released explosive missile will not be able to capture the enemy's stealth aircraft.
        Therefore, the two stealths will inevitably have to converge.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 12: 07 New
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh

          1) They will not see each other from the distance of launching a long-range explosive missile
          2) The radar of the released explosive missile will not be able to capture the enemy's stealth aircraft.
          Therefore, the two stealths will inevitably have to converge.


          item 1 is correct.
          Item 2 is not true. ARGSN will capture the target, however, the question is from what range, respectively, it is necessary for the RVV SD / BD to reach the target for radio correction and figuratively poke his nose.
          Item 3 is correct.
    2. Ka-52
      Ka-52 28 July 2020 10: 31 New
      +1
      In order to use the rotary nozzles, the aircraft must be slowed down to 0.5-0.6

      what nonsense, no offense. Tell the F-22 to turn at what speed does it enter? And is he using deflectable nozzles at this point?
      Super-maneuverability can be very helpful in one-on-one combat, but in collective combat, its role decreases. [Quote] [/ quote]
      yes where did you get that?
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 28 July 2020 10: 42 New
        0
        1) If you turn the nozzles at a speed of 0.9 MAX, the plane will lose control. How to sharply turn the steering wheel of a car at high speed. Physics.
        2) About collective battle. The Americans divide their fighters in battle into several groups. There are "beaters" and there are "arrows". And there are coordinating observers. Is it clearer? wink
        1. Ka-52
          Ka-52 28 July 2020 10: 50 New
          +1
          If you turn the nozzles at a speed of 0.9 MAX, the plane will lose control. How to turn the steering wheel of a car at high speed. Physics.

          nothing like this. The raptor, when entering the set turn, uses the OBT to achieve the roll performance. In this case, this happens at high angles of attack.
          2) About collective battle. The Americans divide their fighters in battle into several groups. There are "beaters" and there are "arrows". And there are coordinating observers. Is it clearer?

          clearer what? what have you just described a typical breakdown into attack and cover groups? So this is the capital ABC of BU tactics
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 28 July 2020 10: 55 New
            -1
            I have described strictly what I have described. As you understood it - already your problem.
            The covering group exists, but does not fight at all, is not included in this scheme.
            1. Ka-52
              Ka-52 28 July 2020 11: 10 New
              +1
              I have described strictly what I have described. As you understood it - already your problem.

              we read above what I wrote to another commenter:
              Ka-52 (Andrey) 7 Today, 11:07
              Does a modern fighter fly faster and longer than a BB missile?


              longer, but not faster. But that is not the question. In general, alphabetically, all attack tactics are divided into 4 phases:
              1) Exit to the line of interception. 2) For a distracting group - a maneuver in order to provoke the enemy to approach and turn on their radars, electronic warfare, etc. For the strike group - a maneuver in order to enter the zone of use of weapons in terms of range and overload. 3) Launching their own missiles and evading or disrupting guidance from enemy missiles. 4) Maneuver in order to get out of the zone of application of enemy missiles in terms of range, altitude and overload.
              so at the last stage, energetic maneuvering and the speed of evading attacking missiles are important, because the range of destruction in pursuit of explosive missiles is much less than on a collision course
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 28 July 2020 11: 16 New
                0
                You described the Russian scheme, I - the American one. It differs from the Russian one. And it was practiced on the regular international exercises Red Flag. Against Indian Su-30s, in particular.
                And against whom are the Russian air combat schemes being practiced in the exercises? With yourself, according to the academic alphabet, which they themselves invented?
                1. Ka-52
                  Ka-52 28 July 2020 11: 35 New
                  +1
                  And against whom are the Russian air combat schemes being practiced in the exercises? With yourself, according to the academic alphabet, which they themselves invented?

                  just don't need stupid irony. Command and control tactics are based on the entire experience of air combat, from the Korean War to the battles over Iraq. Someone else's experience is also an experience. And what was practiced in various international exercises - too. In addition, modern modeling allows you to create any picture of the battlefield and choose the best scenario. And you apparently only allow you and your allies to have analytical thinking. And here we only drink vodka with bears and play balalaikas
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 28 July 2020 11: 50 New
                    0
                    You just react very categorically to new information: "rubbish", "alphabet".
                    And everyone's alphabet is different, and they change quickly. Very, very fast. In Israel, for example, NATO pilots fly to Blue Flag every year to learn our new alphabets. And I think the Korean War, or the Six-Day War, is no longer relevant.
                    1. Ka-52
                      Ka-52 28 July 2020 12: 11 New
                      0
                      And everyone's alphabet is different, and they change quickly.

                      the alphabets or fundamental principles of airborne formation generally differ little among Russians, Americans or Israelis. The nuances are in the details. The role of aircraft flight performance and the concept of WB management plays a role here.
                      And I think the Korean War, or the Six-Day War, is no longer relevant.

                      not true. Everything is useful for analyzing the enemy's actions in a given situation. And you look too narrow
                      1. Grazdanin
                        Grazdanin 28 July 2020 13: 18 New
                        +1
                        Since the beginning of the XNUMXs, another technical revolution has taken place. Many do not see it because we are in it. New technologies provide new opportunities. The one who first applies them in practice will receive an advantage. The fate of Nokia and Apple as a modern example. Examples from military history wagon and small cart.
    3. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 28 July 2020 10: 52 New
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      the plane must slow down to 0.5-0.6 MAX. This moment is tracked by the enemy. And at this moment, the fighter is caught and attacked with missiles.

      Modern rockets can do this trick on their own. Technology already allows it. 2-4 missiles themselves will distribute and perform the roles of "beater" and "shooter"
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 28 July 2020 10: 57 New
        0
        This is still in development and has never been tested in real life.
      2. Ka-52
        Ka-52 28 July 2020 11: 12 New
        +1
        Modern rockets can do this trick on their own. Technology already allows it. 2-4 missiles themselves will distribute and perform the roles of "beater" and "shooter"

        well, if anti-ship missiles shoot at planes laughing
  20. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 28 July 2020 10: 28 New
    0
    For an air superiority fighter, I think everything is important and "brains" and missiles and its maneuverability. And if it is also a strike aircraft, then it is a "stealth". On light aircraft, you can sacrifice something.
    1. c2020
      c2020 28 July 2020 10: 35 New
      -1
      For an air superiority fighter, I think everything matters ...

      First of all, air superiority is provided by the 5th generation aircraft engine. Only the USA has large series of 5th generation engines. All the rest have only props so far.
      1. Sergey Kulikov_3
        Sergey Kulikov_3 28 July 2020 15: 27 New
        0
        And how can a 5x engine help a penguin? Maybe the F35 will be able to go supersonic without afterburner and surprise everyone with a colorful show? And who convinced you that they had the 5th generation engine !? Over there, the Chinese fly stealth on engines from our 3rd generation, it's strange, isn't it?
  21. ZVS
    ZVS 28 July 2020 10: 46 New
    0
    Chinese designers are simply not able to create aerodynamic masterpieces - there is no school that Russian designers have, so they twist as they can
    1. c2020
      c2020 28 July 2020 10: 49 New
      -2
      Chinese designers are simply not able to create aerodynamic masterpieces - there is no school that Russian designers have ...

      Most of the Chinese designers are from the Soviet school. It is much stronger than the modern Russian one.
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 12: 11 New
        +1
        And that is why a rather ridiculous scheme has been chosen for the Jian-20 stealth fighter. They were simply not offered another ... There was no choice.
  22. malyvalv
    malyvalv 28 July 2020 11: 00 New
    0
    for aircraft of the near future, the opportunity to operate in an integrated network, exchange data in real time will be relevant


    Oh well. The network can be spoiled easily by means of electronic warfare and other anti-satellite and anti-radar means. This will be done first. And then what will this clumsy plane do?
    1. c2020
      c2020 28 July 2020 11: 05 New
      -1
      And then what will this clumsy plane do?

      He will do the most important and most correct thing - to launch rockets from over the horizon. Many guidance systems are deeply indifferent to "electronic warfare and other anti-satellite and anti-radar equipment."
      1. malyvalv
        malyvalv 28 July 2020 11: 21 New
        +1
        And where will target designation come from over the horizon? Forget about satellites right away, about constantly operating AWACS type radars too. This will get wet first. Well, they will launch a cloud of missiles into the white light as a pretty penny, so what? If many guidance systems are indifferent to electronic warfare, then why do they do it at all?
        The truth about agility and network centricity is as usual in the middle. You need this and that and also speed. A clumsy aircraft is as easy to catch as an aircraft without modern avionics.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 29 July 2020 06: 16 New
          0
          Target designation - AWACS. They now have radar with AFAR, they record the sources of radar radiation in the passive mode. From colossal distances (1000+ km) at high altitude, which makes it possible to safely direct strike aircraft (stealthy or 4 generations flying below the radio horizon) at the air defense missile system. In the event of serious collisions, turning on the radar on the latter can be quite dangerous. It is best to keep the driver at a safe distance.
          The AWACS planes themselves are covered with fighters, that is, the task of destroying it is not so simple and inevitably involves losses.
          1. malyvalv
            malyvalv 29 July 2020 22: 54 New
            0
            They now have radar with AFAR, they record the sources of radar radiation in the passive mode. From colossal distances (1000+ km) at high altitude

            In passive mode? For 1000 km? Oh well. There is no need to tell fairy tales. By the way, in order to direct the plane to the target, it must somehow send a signal. Here, too, with the passive mode, the difficulty.
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 30 July 2020 02: 58 New
              -1
              Let me give you an example.
              You are in absolute darkness. (The stars and the sun went out). And you ransack the space around with a lantern, figuring out who flies where. From time to time you see flying objects. But, the light reflected from them is much weaker than the stream that you send into the darkness. And your lantern can be seen much further than you can see. It becomes possible to determine your coordinates, transmit them (via encrypted communication) to attack aircraft flying below the radio horizon with anti-radar missiles. Which release them roughly in your direction. Dozens, if necessary.
              1. malyvalv
                malyvalv 30 July 2020 11: 37 New
                0
                This is a good example, and I myself give it regularly to those who claim that the F-35 will see the SU-35 earlier because of some fright because it has a better radar.
                But the fact is that both sides will try to suppress the enemy's radar. And with the help of passive intelligence and active and sabotage and a lot of things and how. And sooner or later, the radar network is degrading. As I wrote earlier, the question of what to do for a clumsy aircraft when it no longer has network support, and the SU-35 continues to fly in the sky.
                1. Cyril G ...
                  Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 12: 20 New
                  0
                  Quote: malyvalv
                  This is a good example, and I myself give it regularly to those who claim that the F-35 will see the SU-35 earlier because of some fright because it has a better radar.
                  But the fact is that both sides will try to suppress the enemy's radar. And with the help of passive intelligence and active and sabotage and a lot of things and how. And sooner or later, the radar network is degrading. As I wrote earlier, the question of what to do for a clumsy aircraft when it no longer has network support, and the SU-35 continues to fly in the sky.


                  The statesmen assumed that the operating mode of the LPI radar with AFAR would allow the enemy to irradiate with impunity. Well, in general, this did not happen. Patched Pastel in the period 2012-2014, and that's it ...
                  1. 3danimal
                    3danimal 30 July 2020 22: 25 New
                    0
                    And Pastel detected the F-22, which irradiated it with their radar in LPI mode? Or at the test site, with its own analogue of the radar?
                    Again, what prevented the AN / APG-77 regimes from germinating over the years? You must always assume that your opponent is not completely stupid. request
                    1. Cyril G ...
                      Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 22: 42 New
                      0
                      In order not to carry heresy, you must at least understand the laws of physics. To detect the plane, it is necessary to send a certain amount of energy to it. To understand that you are being irradiated by the 77th station, for this it is quite enough to count and analyze this incoming energy. Therefore, the idea of ​​AlPiaI was originally stillborn. And he steers in relation to those boards that are either hopelessly outdated, or even do not take into account the likelihood of such a battle.
                      1. 3danimal
                        3danimal 31 July 2020 00: 28 New
                        0
                        So the question is valid: was the operation of the 77th radar station checked in this mode?
                      2. Cyril G ...
                        Cyril G ... 31 July 2020 08: 15 New
                        0
                        Have you decided to argue with the laws of physics or what?
                      3. 3danimal
                        3danimal 31 July 2020 17: 14 New
                        0
                        So no. Your words sound: fixed, based on some ideas about the AN / APG-77 operating modes, in theory, radiation should be detected.
                      4. Cyril G ...
                        Cyril G ... 31 July 2020 17: 20 New
                        0
                        Quote: 3danimal
                        So no.


                        It means yes. The fact that you do not know the principles of radar does not change the situation. Nor does the 77th station make a magical artifact. To get a mark, the target must be irradiated, so that the mark appears on the radar screen, the signal strength must be strong enough. FSE.
                        Next is the question of analyzing the recorded EMC.
                      5. 3danimal
                        3danimal 31 July 2020 18: 02 New
                        0
                        Ok, in theory it should work. I understand how this happens (and you rush to conclusions and labeling). The question was about testing with a real APG-77 station.
                      6. Cyril G ...
                        Cyril G ... 31 July 2020 18: 08 New
                        0
                        Quote: 3danimal
                        The question was about testing with a real APG-77 station.

                        I wonder who will seriously answer your question?
                        Let me answer any question regarding the naval Wasp-MA, or weapons in service.
                        But even to serious questions regarding the filling and the radio-technical part of the Dagger air defense system, for example, I will not answer. An internal censor won't allow it. Regarding LPI, there are no miracles, I repeat. An attempt to cheat fate. But quite possible for old equipment. For a modern station, this is already nonsense.
  • Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 28 July 2020 11: 17 New
    0
    Just because the Chinese cannot achieve the same maneuverability as in Russia because of the engines, first of all, they explain the reason in their own way ...
    1. c2020
      c2020 28 July 2020 11: 22 New
      -1
      Simply because the Chinese cannot achieve the same maneuverability as Russia because of the engines, first of all ...

      Russia has "maneuverability". It does not have 5th generation engines.
      1. c2020
        c2020 28 July 2020 11: 36 New
        -1
        And where will target designation come from over the horizon?

        When did the USSR destroy target designation? Did one of the stinkiest missiles take off to defend the USSR? So target designation issues are solved as easy as shelling pears. No problem with targeting.
      2. Victor Tsenin
        Victor Tsenin 28 July 2020 11: 37 New
        0
        The PRC does not have them either. We will appear in the near future, unlike.
      3. The comment was deleted.
  • Jack O'Neill
    Jack O'Neill 28 July 2020 11: 34 New
    0
    Well, in general, yes, maneuverability is far from the main thing. Speed, altitude, and armament were always the key.
  • Victor Tsenin
    Victor Tsenin 28 July 2020 11: 36 New
    +1
    Maneuverability for a fighter will never be superfluous, no matter what Mr. Wei says.
    > the radius of action of which it is almost impossible for an aircraft to get away from them.
    This was generally amazing, the development of defensive lasers, mini-anti-missiles, the improvement of on-board electronic warfare systems, no, they did not hear.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 28 July 2020 15: 43 New
      +1
      If the explosive missile has already approached the plane and captured it with its optical seeker, then there is little chance of escape ...
      1) defensive lasers are still bulky and heavy for a fighter. They are put on transporters.
      2) mini anti-missiles are still in development. Not the fact that it will work.
      3) Electronic warfare against optics is useless.
      1. Victor Tsenin
        Victor Tsenin 28 July 2020 16: 08 New
        0
        Keyword so far)
        While the medium / long-range missile is approaching, electronic warfare is working. As far as we know, the IC GOS is already successfully hitting self-defense BC, and the fight against optics is not far off.
        I see no reasons for the failure of anti-missile missiles in the foreseeable future.
        We will succeed.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 29 July 2020 04: 22 New
          0
          IR GOS are on melee missiles (R-73m, AIM-9x) with a deflected thrust vector and an overload of 50-60g. If they let her go, you are shot down.
          Lasers "working" on missiles will not appear on fighters for another 10 years, IMHO.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 29 July 2020 16: 12 New
            0
            For now, this is a hanging container. And it's not all-round, of course.
            Protects the rear lower hemisphere of transport workers, other large
            aircraft and helicopters.
          2. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 08: 32 New
            0
            In the first Iraqi targets, they hit about 60% of the issued RVV from the IKSN from the MNF
      2. 3danimal
        3danimal 29 July 2020 06: 26 New
        0
        By the way, the Su-27/30/35 has a significant advantage in close air combat with missiles with IR seeker. This is a helmet-mounted target designation system (NSC) "Shchel-ZUM". Seen at work at DCS, a dangerous thing. Allows you to attack the target before it appears on the HUD simply by looking at it.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 29 July 2020 16: 10 New
          0
          Su- effective in close combat, no doubt about it.
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 29 July 2020 19: 40 New
            0
            The pilot on the Su-27m (without OVT) won 2/3 close missile battles against the F-22 (!) In DCS. All thanks to the NSC. Some kind of cheating request
            A DAS was created for the F-35, which has even more functionality. But other aircraft (F-16, F-15, F-18, F-22) remain vulnerable. It is necessary to create and implement such systems.
            I wonder if there are analogs for Israeli fighters? With avionics, everything is fine.
  • 123456789
    123456789 28 July 2020 11: 54 New
    -1
    Yang Wei says that for the aircraft of the near future it will be relevant to operate in an integrated network, exchange data in real time, and be able to perform joint operations.

    the ability to fly will not be relevant for aircraft of the near future
    Quote: Piramidon
    It can be expected that soon it will not be necessary to fly far at all, but to strike while being over your territory.

    It can be expected that soon it will not be necessary to fly (far) at all, but to strike blows, being on (e) his territory (s) and
  • Gloomy skeptic
    Gloomy skeptic 28 July 2020 14: 50 New
    -1
    Again, the "victory" of Chinese engineering, though still on paper with the "latest" concepts of the fifth generation.
    If the third and fourth generation of aircraft are purchased from Russia, then what kind of fifth generation of Chinese production are we talking about ???
    Although they already "flew" to the Moon, they gathered to Mars, but they have already conceived the sixth generation, although they do not really have the fourth one, well, just like in a joke:
    - Daughter, which handkerchief are you already washing?
    - Fifth, mom!
    - Have you washed four already?
    - No, Mom, I wash from the fifth start!
    1. c2020
      c2020 28 July 2020 15: 38 New
      -3
      Again the "victory" of Chinese engineering ...

      Where are the victories of Russian engineering? Name. The salaries of Russian engineers today are like those of janitors and cleaners. 5th generation of engines and fighters will wipers and cleaners do you? "Handkerchiefs" of the 3rd and 4th generation are the maximum that can be sold to the Chinese. However, soon they will stop buying these "handkerchiefs" too ... They will fill the market with their analogues. 20 yuan per bundle.
      1. Gloomy skeptic
        Gloomy skeptic 28 July 2020 16: 00 New
        -1
        Russian engineering thought is everywhere. The simplest example is cars. Now only completely mossy ignoramuses buy a foreign car because of complete ignorance of the country's car market, and then, when the foreign trough does not even withstand the warranty period, they go and whine from their own dementia.
        But I don't see Chinese thought, I don't see it at all. Which product is Chinese in principle? I don't know that, I don't know at all. And ersatz people do not need to rivet the mind, not at all. Yes, and it’s impossible to see buyers of "advanced" Chinese weapons and equipment, although Somalia or Cameroon are certainly authoritative countries, they only buy "the most" advanced, that is, Chinese.
        About the salaries of defense industry specialists from where infa, from "jellyfish"? If you do not know the topic of conversation, then do not flutter your tongue. Chinese military thought has to develop for a couple of centuries up to today's defense industry in Russia, if not more.
        1. Zeev
          Zeev zeev 28 July 2020 16: 25 New
          +1

          Cameroon is of course authoritative countries, they only buy the "most" advanced, that is, Chinese.

          Don't touch Cameroon. This country does not just buy Chinese weapons.
          1. Gloomy skeptic
            Gloomy skeptic 29 July 2020 13: 08 New
            0
            I'm sorry, I'll fix it, I mean Mozambique.
        2. 3danimal
          3danimal 28 July 2020 17: 08 New
          0
          Interesting. When it comes to American companies, they start to say that production is often in China. And not a word about engineering thought smile
        3. 3danimal
          3danimal 4 August 2020 16: 25 New
          0
          Now only completely mossy ignoramuses buy a foreign car due to complete ignorance of the automobile market of countries

          There are 2/3 of such ignoramuses in Russia. I know many experienced motorists, they prefer Korean, Japanese, German.
  • agoran
    agoran 28 July 2020 16: 38 New
    0
    Well, the Chinese can say whatever.
    But they are not able to make turbine blades with a long resource.
    There are many parameters, you don't need to tell about the fairy tale from the Zvezda factory?
    1. c2020
      c2020 28 July 2020 17: 39 New
      -2
      Russian engineering thought is everywhere. The simplest example is cars.

      Well, who does not know about the main Russian automobile achievement - "Yo-mobile"! You gave a great example!

      About the salaries of defense specialists from where infa

      The most objective sources of information are job advertisements for engineers. The Moscow janitor gets more and more.

      Well, the Chinese can say whatever.
      But they are not able to make turbine blades with a long resource.

      The long-life turbine blade is always the most critical part of an aircraft engine. And where, then, are the 5th generation Russian aircraft engines, if Russia is able to make such blades? Where, then, are the Russian power turbines of high power with a resource of hundreds of thousands of hours? Where? In Karaganda?
      1. Ka-52
        Ka-52 29 July 2020 04: 50 New
        +1
        Well, who does not know about the main Russian automobile achievement - "Yo-mobile"! You gave a great example!

        always amazed at a person's ability to write nonsense without even trying to think before writing. Yo-mobile is a personal PR project of oligarch Prokhorov, who bought a used line somewhere in Asia or in Europe and was thinking of releasing his own concept. I calculated the economy and realized that the project was unprofitable. So I turned it up. What does "Russian engineering thought" have to do with it?
        The most objective sources of information are job advertisements for engineers. The Moscow janitor gets more and more.

        crazy lies. Maybe Somewhere and somehow, but I know how things are with the salary in our UEC.
        The long-life turbine blade is always the most critical part of an aircraft engine. And where, then, are the 5th generation Russian aircraft engines, if Russia is able to make such blades?

        for all the propals from the couch I will inform you that 5th generation aircraft engines do not exist. There is no such classification. There is a “thirty” engine for the Su-57, which is undergoing final testing phases. Everyone has problems with the blades, not only the Russian manufacturer. There are two components: thrust and resource. If you increase traction, the resource falls, and vice versa. The main task is to select the optimal one and fit into the customer's technical requirements.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 29 July 2020 19: 30 New
          0
          Everyone has problems with the blades, not only the Russian manufacturer. There are two components: thrust and resource. If you increase traction, the resource falls, and vice versa.

          The creators of the F-135 and F-119 succeeded.
          1. Ka-52
            Ka-52 30 July 2020 04: 37 New
            0
            The creators of the F-135 and F-119 succeeded.

            managed what? more specifically.
      2. 3danimal
        3danimal 29 July 2020 04: 57 New
        0
        High power turbines are a good example. That is why Siemens is being bought.
        1. c2020
          c2020 29 July 2020 07: 36 New
          -3
          Yo-mobile is a personal PR project

          Who cares about it? Big money is down the drain ... Do you have a lot of extra money? Well then, share with the engineers. And to burn millions in order to keep warm - you don't need much mind. Such is the engineering thought.

          ... I know how things are with the salary in our UEC

          And I know how things are in your UEC. In your UEC, a salary of 50-70 thousand rubles is considered good. And in fact, a salary of at least $ 5000 should be considered good for the UEC. Calculate the course and immediately understand the truth of life. You are our optimist.

          There are two components: thrust and resource

          And I naively thought that there are much more components ... Congratulations! You need to go straight to "effective managers".

          That is why Siemens is being bought

          Absolutely.
          1. Ka-52
            Ka-52 29 July 2020 14: 25 New
            0
            Who cares about it? Big money - down the drain ...

            I have little interest in private capital money. Prokhorov can buy a yacht, maybe the plant is his business and his business. If the state invested budgetary funds in such a project and it went bankrupt, then I would then have a different opinion. And so I do not understand your whining about this.
            And I know how things are in your UEC. In your UEC, a salary of 50-70 thousand rubles is considered good.

            salary of 70 thousand rubles. considered good in most of the Russian Federation. And not all specialists receive $ 60 thousand a year, even in the USA, don't sound.
            And I naively thought that there are much more components.

            Well, you never know. First, learn not to approach a cow with experience, and only then talk about milk yield
            You need to go straight to "effective managers".

            Call Viktor Anatolyevich, I'm only "for" laughing
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 29 July 2020 19: 27 New
              0
              salary of 70 thousand rubles. considered good in most of the Russian Federation. And not all specialists receive $ 60 thousand a year, even in the USA, don't sound.

              View the world map from a brain drain / gain perspective.
              1. Ka-52
                Ka-52 30 July 2020 04: 42 New
                0
                View the world map from a brain drain / gain perspective.

                well looked? So what?
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 30 July 2020 22: 28 New
                  0
                  A "good" salary of 60 thousand somehow does not really hold our "brains" request
              2. c2020
                c2020 30 July 2020 09: 37 New
                -2
                well looked? So what?

                And then your advice to you. I quote:

                First, learn not to approach a cow with experience, and only then talk about milk yield

                .
                1. Ka-52
                  Ka-52 30 July 2020 11: 06 New
                  0
                  And then your advice to you. I quote:

                  disrespectful, you have a normal dialogue. And then something went into a puddle and now write your recommendations with an air of superiority.
                  What did you want to say with your card? That brains drain? Well drain away. People are always looking for a place where they feel comfortable. Whether because of money, because of the political position, because of the climate. Someone really gets there an opportunity for development. And someone just joins the ranks of local dependents and competes with Arabs and blacks for social benefits and cheap income. The world is too big to be judged by one criterion. My friend lives in Austria, works in a British company engaged in design in aircraft construction - the Managing Director is French, half of the employees are from 3 countries of the world (Russia, Ukraine, India, Indonesia, etc.), the other half generally works remotely. The devil only knows in what countries. Something is not heard in their network of hysterics about the brain drain
              3. Cyril G ...
                Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 10: 34 New
                0
                The main task of the United States today is not to accept the draining "brains", but to stimulate emigrants to import money into the United States. And yes, out of a thousand flowing "brains", one or two lucky ones find work in their specialty, those who plan to live on stolen goods there until they are remembered, the rest work as loaders, taxis, truck drivers, nurses, farms, etc. And having a salary THERE 2500 USD, you will still live from paycheck to paycheck.
                1. c2020
                  c2020 30 July 2020 10: 55 New
                  0
                  live paycheck to paycheck

                  Living from paycheck to paycheck is normal. 300 million citizens of the USSR lived like this for 70 years and raised several magnificent, healthy, intellectual generations. Living and surviving are not the same thing. On a salary of 50 thousand rubles today you can only survive, and not develop the best aircraft in the world. It makes no sense to wait for world discoveries from goners. All their thoughts are constantly busy with food. And living in the USA on $ 2500 is quite possible, and even eat sweets.
                  1. Cyril G ...
                    Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 11: 05 New
                    0
                    Quote: c2020
                    Today you can only survive on a salary of 50 thousand rubles,


                    Don't lie so brazenly, but !!!! Where do you live?
                    1. c2020
                      c2020 30 July 2020 11: 46 New
                      0
                      disrespectful, you have a normal dialogue

                      Normal - does that mean with your flawed, street vocabulary?
                      Here is your vocabulary (see above):
                      dope
                      whining
                      do not sound
                      experience
                      didn’t
                      heck
                      etc.

                      I will forward Kirill G's question to you ...
                      Where do you live?

                      A case not in the slums of Gilyarovsky? Normal you are our ...
                      .
                      1. Ka-52
                        Ka-52 31 July 2020 05: 08 New
                        0
                        Normal you are our ...

                        thank God it’s not yours. I am a normal, reasonable person, unlike "your"
                        But in fact, a salary of at least $ 5000 should be considered good.

                        And living in the USA on $ 2500 is quite possible, and even eat sweets.

                        how rates plummet for an "adequate" American amateur laughing laughing laughing 2 times in one day.
                    2. 3danimal
                      3danimal 30 July 2020 22: 32 New
                      0
                      If we take into account that the scientist is paid for housing and insurance for honey (and you meant their high cost), then $ 2500 for "pocket money" looks quite competitive. The products are the same as in Moscow, but the technology and electronics are 10-20% cheaper.
                      1. Cyril G ...
                        Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 22: 44 New
                        0
                        Quote: 3danimal
                        the scientist is paid for housing and honey insurance (and you meant their high cost)


                        Well, who told you such garbage? The percentage of such people is vanishingly small.
                      2. 3danimal
                        3danimal 31 July 2020 00: 30 New
                        0
                        Direct analogy with their army. Free housing in the barracks or the amount covering the rent (the higher the rank, the more). And the best insurance, for a nominal fee.
                        "It's good to be rich and healthy .."
                      3. 3danimal
                        3danimal 31 July 2020 03: 13 New
                        0
                        By the way, insurance is paid for (a significant part of it) by most companies. And there are enough of those who provide housing.
                  2. Ka-52
                    Ka-52 31 July 2020 05: 06 New
                    0
                    Where do you live?

                    This is what Moscow or St. Petersburg office plankton. Intoxicated, but loving to talk about "the aspirations of the common people."
                    1. c2020
                      c2020 31 July 2020 07: 39 New
                      0
                      I am a normal, reasonable person

                      You are obviously flattering yourself. A normal sane person uses different vocabulary. Here with these:
                      do not sound
                      experience
                      didn’t

                      your own aspirations smell foul, to say the least, stink. So do not cling to the "common people". As Stanislavsky said - I don't believe!
                    2. Ka-52
                      Ka-52 31 July 2020 08: 22 New
                      0
                      do not sound

                      a normal person would have said more frankly and stronger to your outright lies
                      "First, learn to approach the cow not with experience, and only then talk about milk yield"

                      this is common village wisdom. And in the village live ordinary people who are alien to your metropolitan hypocrisy in half with lies
                      spat into a puddle

                      Well, in the usual lexicon there is such an expression that characterizes a person who blurted out some kind of nonsense out of place.
                      So do not cling to the "common people"


                      Well, yes, you can see tenacious people in cities - ordinary people, but we, who can communicate with neighbors from the window through the fence - we are not laughing
                    3. Cyril G ...
                      Cyril G ... 31 July 2020 09: 57 New
                      0
                      The marker here is specific - "Today you can only survive on a salary of 50 thousand rubles ...." (p.)
                      Moscow is not the whole of Russia.
                    4. c2020
                      c2020 2 August 2020 10: 16 New
                      0
                      to your outright lies

                      You are lying.
                      village wisdom

                      You characterized yourself, Ka-52... That is why Tu, Il, Yak and other magnificent Soviet brands are no longer produced in large series in Russia. Today, aviation is dominated by charlatans - "effective managers" and "village wise men".
                      we can communicate with neighbors through the fence

                      It's very good that you are behind the fence. As long as this is so, the Russian aviation still has chances. And the maneuverability of fighters should be discussed without you, village sages, with your "cows", "milkings", "running into a puddle" and "oops".
  • 3danimal
    3danimal 4 August 2020 16: 28 New
    0
    The most objective sources of information are job advertisements for engineers. The Moscow janitor gets more and more.

    Perhaps the management believes that an engineer (in the defense industry, Roscosmos), like a teacher, is a vocation request
    And then some people look at the brain drain map and wonder.