Military Review

The su-57's dominance in long-range aerial combat is questionable. Critical disadvantages of air-to-air ammunition

110

After reading in detail the material recently published in the news section of our military-analytical portal "Military Review" "The F-22 fighter will be able to detect the Su-57 only after entering the zone of destruction of its missiles", you involuntarily come to the conclusion that not all domestic and foreign military experts and journalists have the talent for detailed comparison of the critical technical parameters of on-board radio-electronic equipment, as well as missile armament of multifunctional fighters of transitional ("4 ++") and 5th generations. As a result, the final comparative reviews of the combat capabilities of tactical aviation The Russian Aerospace Forces and the US Air Force, in the tasks of gaining air superiority and long-range interception, often appear before the eyes of the audience in an extremely superficial and sometimes biased execution.


In particular, in the above material, the author completely and completely focused the attention of observers on such an electrodynamic parameter of the 5th generation Su-57 multifunctional fighter as an effective scattering surface / effective reflecting surface (EPR / EOC), the design coefficient of which for this machine is about 0,3 , 57 sq. m. Having presented this EPR coefficient as the primary criterion for the dominance of the promising Su-22 fighter in a hypothetical long-range air battle with the US Air Force F-57A multipurpose stealth fighter, the expert completely neglected the analysis of the tactical and technical parameters of guided air combat missiles as already adapted for use in systems armament control (SUV) of the Su-XNUMX and Raptor fighters, as well as those at the R&D stage with the upcoming hardware and software integration into the ammunition of these vehicles.

High performance characteristics of air-to-air missiles are a key criterion for gaining and maintaining dominance in long-range air battles, which ordinary military experts overlook


Indeed, having AN / APG-77 multi-mode airborne AFAR radars with a target detection range with an EPR of 3 sq. m (equivalent to the Su-35S fighter with missile and bomb "equipment" on the hardpoints) only about 270 km, F-22A fighters will be able to detect subtle Su-57 at a distance of no more than 153-160 km, confidently entering the interception radius of long-range guided missiles air-to-air class R-37M / RVV-BD (Product 610M), as well as more advanced interceptors Product 180, the upcoming integration of which into the ammunition of combatant Su-57 became known during the international military-technical forum Army-2019 ". Indeed, according to the most objective and accurate domestic military-technical information and reference publications missilery.info (IS "Rocket Technique") and militaryrussia.ru, as well as competent sources in the state machine-building design bureau "Vympel", the range of promising ultra-long-range URVB R -37M and "Product 180" will be 280-300 and 170-180 km, respectively.

Meanwhile, the range of action of air combat missiles is far from the only criterion in the system for analyzing the anti-aircraft / anti-missile potential of these products when working on remote air targets. In particular, one of the most important criteria for long-range air combat / interception is also the flight performance of interceptor missiles. And here at RVV-BD and "Products 180", unfortunately, not everything is so smooth.

Thus, being a modernized version and a constructive analogue of long-range air-to-air missiles R-33 and R-33S, the promising R-37M missile missile system (Product 610M) retained an impressive range of technological shortcomings inherent in the above-mentioned early modifications. This list includes a huge midsection (about 0,113 sq. M) combined with a mass of 510 kg, as well as a mediocre design safety factor (load limit on the power units of the airframe of the product) of the order of 20-22G. As a result, even during the operation of the solid propellant rocket (burnout of the solid propellant charge at the initial segment of the trajectory) and flight at a maximum speed of about 6300 km / h, the RVV-BD rocket will be able to intercept a target maneuvering with an overload of no more than 7-8G, while the digital EDSU stealth fighters F-22A, integrated into the onboard computer command units based on i960 processors, boasts a specialized combat mode that allows the pilot to carry out anti-aircraft maneuvers with overloads of 9,5 units.

As for the flight technical / energy parameters of the R-37M / RVV-BD ultra-long-range missiles at the terminal sections of the trajectories (at a distance of more than 250 km from the vanishing points from the carrier suspension nodes), where the solid-propellant charges of the dual-mode solid propellants will be exhausted, and the missiles will enter dense layers of the stratosphere and troposphere on the descending branches of the trajectories, they are unlikely to provide a confident interception not only of the Raptors maneuvering with 9-fold overloads, but also of the F-5B STOVL SCVP maneuvering with 7-35-fold overloads. An impressive midsection, which increases the aerodynamic drag of the R-37M in dense layers of the stratosphere and troposphere, as well as a "dry" mass (with consumed fuel) of about 300 kg will contribute to a galloping decrease in the flight speed of an interceptor missile from 5-4M to 1500 and even 1300 km / h, when the planes of standard aerodynamic rudders completely lose their effectiveness.

Consequently, even in the case of an early launch of RVV-BD missiles at the Raptor, either in HOJ mode (interference guidance; if the American pilot is using the integrated electronic warfare system), or according to the data of the pilot run, which has tracked the broadband LPI radiation of the airborne AFAR -radar AN / APG-77, or by target designation from the AWACS A-100 aircraft or ground multifunctional radar complex "Sky-M", the probability of interception will remain extremely low due to the low flight performance of the R-37M at the terminal section of the trajectory.

Being the descendants of the highly maneuverable medium / long-range air combat missiles RVV-AE / SD (R-77 / -1), the more advanced "Products 180" will be able to boast a 1,5 times higher design safety factor, providing available overloads of the order of 30G, which will allow you to intercept targets maneuvering with overloads of 12-15 units. at a distance of up to 130-140 km. At this distance, the small midsection of the "Product 180" hull, which helps to reduce its ballistic braking, will allow maintaining an acceptable flight speed (1,7-2M) for intensive "energetic" interception of the F-22A.

The departure of Vympel specialists from the concept of using folding lattice aerodynamic rudders, which has proved to be excellent in the RVV-AE (R-77) project, providing the rocket with an angular turn rate of about 150 degrees / s with an available overload of about 35-40G, as well as the absence of any or advances in the refinement of the KRPD-TT "371" integral rocket-ramjet engine, which allows a promising air combat missile to maintain high flight speed and maneuverability at the terminal trajectory, will definitely not allow the "Product 180" to noticeably surpass the American long-range AIM- 120D, as well as the even more advanced European air combat missile "Meteor" from the defense missile concern MBDA. With regard to the latter, work is being carried out on constructive and hardware-software integration into the SUV and in-body armament compartments of the F-35B fighters of the Royal Air Force of Great Britain.

It is logical to assume that in long-range air battles between the promising Russian Su-57 fighters and the American and NATO stealth fighters F-22A and F-35A / B / C, parity will be established, which continues until the promising long-range guided air combat missile RVV becomes operational. -AE-PD ("Product 180-PD"), the development program of which was frozen in 2013.
Author:
110 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 28 August 2020 12: 03 New
    0
    The su-57's dominance in long-range aerial combat is questionable. Critical disadvantages of air-to-air ammunition
    Opensource projects Here hee-hee, not ha-ha. It's all grown up here ...
    1. Outsider
      Outsider 29 August 2020 09: 34 New
      -15
      - What does this have to do with the "critical shortcomings of air-to-air ammunition" ?? The people stubbornly and persistently ignore the simplest thing that frontal RCS of the F-22 is three orders of magnitude smaller than the frontal RCS of the Su-57... When this stupid self-deception is over, it will be possible to talk about real problems. So far, all these problems are contrived, they are all PSEUDO ...
      1. grandfather_Kostya
        grandfather_Kostya 29 August 2020 10: 17 New
        +9
        "Frontal EPR" works only in an ideal duel situation: exactly two planes are flying strictly towards. Turn on the element of trajectory uncertainty and group battle and the F-22 will be seen a little from the side where the RCS is much higher!
        1. Outsider
          Outsider 29 August 2020 10: 27 New
          -8
          - "frontal RCS" is the averaged RCS in a sector of approximately 25 ° -30 ° to the right and left of the longitudinal axis. This is not a small sector! And there is no need to fly strictly "nose to nose" there, this is called fly on a collision course.
          And one more thing: for stealth aircraft, the EPR even on the side is not an order of magnitude more. Only 3-4-5 times. Behind - there may be 30-50 times more - but in a rather narrow sector.
          ===================
          I repeat: EPR F-22 and Su-57 are incomparable - from any angle.
          1. Ali
            Ali 7 September 2020 23: 31 New
            0
            Quote: Outsider
            I repeat: the RCS of the F-22 and the Su-57 are incomparable - from any angle.

            Outsider (Michael). Do not write nonsense, learn to count for the beginning.
        2. Outsider
          Outsider 7 September 2020 23: 32 New
          -1
          - Let's imagine that under the 4/4 angle, the EPR of the F-22 is actually an order of magnitude larger! And it is "already" 0.001 m² instead of the frontal 0.0001 m². So what?? And the Su-35s will see the F-22s not at a range of 20 km, but at a distance of √√10 more - 36 km! "Whole" 36 km. Whereas the F-22 will see the Su-35 352 km away and shoot it like in a shooting range ...
          1. krizis
            krizis 16 September 2020 17: 54 New
            0
            the raptor does not even have 0.1. There is advertising, there is no reality. And even 0.0001 m reflects the air near the planes better.
      2. zwlad
        zwlad 29 August 2020 10: 31 New
        14
        Three orders of magnitude is 1000 times. So EPR f22 0,0003 m2? If I haven't forgotten the math, this is 1x3 cm. 4 times smaller than a matchbox. Why is he not quite radio-transparent, eh?
        Maybe we don't need to keep our designers for that.
        1. Outsider
          Outsider 29 August 2020 11: 38 New
          -11
          Three orders of magnitude is 1000 times. So EPR f22 0,0003 m2?

          - Even less:
          http://faculty.nps.edu/jenn/EC4630/RCSredux.pdf
          If I have not forgotten the math, this is 1x3 cm. 4 times smaller than a matchbox. Why is he not quite radio-transparent, eh?

          - It is not radio-transparent, it very correctly reflects the incoming sounding pulses of enemy radars, and their remnants are absorbing.
          Maybe we don't need to keep our designers for that.

          - The Americans made stealth: F-117, B-2, YF-22 (F-22), YF-23, X-32, X-35 (F-35), now they are making B-21, and also made a lot stealth UAVs in a variety of sizes and configurations. The Chinese made two stealths: J-20 (mass-produced) and J-31. The Japanese made one stealth prototype.
          In Russia, they did not make a single one - the Su-57 with an average RCS = 0.3 m² - not even close to stealth and not the 5th generation. So why keep those designers?
          1. zwlad
            zwlad 29 August 2020 16: 26 New
            +7
            - Even less:
            http://faculty.nps.edu/jenn/EC4630/RCSredux.pdf

            Looks like I became completely blind, but there is not a word about EPR f22
            1. Outsider
              Outsider 29 August 2020 16: 45 New
              -11
              -? belay Not just "blind", there is even a highlighted:
              http://faculty.nps.edu/jenn/EC4630/RCSredux.pdf
              According to November 2005 reports, the US Air Force states that the F-22 has the lowest RCS of any manned aircraft in the USAF inventory, with a frontal RCS of 0.0001 ~ 0.0002 sqm, marble sized in frontal aspect. According to these reports, the F-35 is said to have an RCS equal to a metal golf ball, about 0.0015 sqm, which is about 5 to 10 times greater than the minimal frontal RCS of F / A-22. The F-35 has a lower RCS than the F-117 and is comparable to the B2, which was half that of the older F-117. Other reports claim that the F-35 is said to have an smaller RCS headon than the F-22, but from all other angles the F-35 RCS is greater. By comparison, the RCS of the Mig-29 is about 5 m².

              According to November 2005 reports, the US Air Force claims the F-22 has the lowest RCS of any manned aircraft in the US Air Force. with frontal EPR from 0,0001 to 0,0002 mXNUMX, this is the size of the marble (~ 13mm diameter). According to these reports, the F-35 has an RCS equal to a metal golf ball, with an area of ​​about 0,0015 square meters, which is about 5-10 times the minimum frontal RCS of the F / A-22. The F-35 has a lower RCS than the F-117 and is comparable to the B-2, which was half that of the older F-117. Other reports claim the F-35 has less frontal RCS than the F-22, but the F-35 has more RCS on all other sides. For comparison: the RCS of the MiG-29 is about 5 m².
              ==================
              RCS (radar cross section) - radar cross section, in Russian - EPR, effective scattering surface.
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_cross-section
              https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AD%D1%84%D1%84%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BF%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%89%D0%B0%D0%B4%D1%8C_%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F
              1. zwlad
                zwlad 29 August 2020 19: 34 New
                0
                Ok, on Monday I'll look at my computer, apparently I couldn't see it on the phone.
              2. gemini
                gemini 29 August 2020 20: 55 New
                +4
                Nonsense, according to the guys from the 2nd Central Research Institute "if someone tells you that the F-22 image intensifier is less than 0,5 sq. M, you can laugh loudly." And another question is whether the F-22 can be called a 5th generation fighter if time flight on cruising supersonic is 6 minutes ??? !!!
                1. Outsider
                  Outsider 29 August 2020 22: 45 New
                  -4
                  Brad, according to the guys from the 2nd Central Research Institute "if someone tells you that the F-22 image intensifier is less than 0,5 sq. M, you can laugh loudly."

                  - Just imagine that the Supreme Commander himself came to the guys from the 2nd Central Research Institute, gathered the personnel, associate professors with candidates and asked: “I heard that the F-22 has less visibility from the nose than our Su-57 a thousand times! Question: why do you get titles and salaries, which has no analogues among other citizens of Russia? Where is your return? How will my falcons fight with Pindos in the Mediterranean basin ?! "
                  The guys have two options for answers:
                  1. To tell the truth - but this will greatly upset the high authorities.
                  2. Lie, say that "they have exactly the same as ours, but physics is the same everywhere!"
                  A real war is not foreseen for a long time, but there - as in the anecdote about Khoja Nasreddin: "in 20 years one of us will definitely not be: either the donkey, or the emir, or me"
                  If the author: "if someone tells you that the F-22 image intensifier is less than 0,5 square meters, you can laugh loudly" - did not dissemble, - it is very bad. It's just a fuckin 'guy. But I cannot believe it, since the EPR of all the main aircraft of a potential enemy is described in verse in the "Guide to Weapons and Military Equipment of Foreign States" from the GRU General Staff of the RF Armed Forces. And these guys "are responsible for the market." Ask your sidekick from the 2nd Central Research Institute to go into the secret and look into this directory - there are both F-22 and F-35 - everything is "in full view", with all the small details ...
              3. Voyager
                Voyager 29 August 2020 23: 50 New
                +2
                Congratulations, you've broken bottom once again. All these 00000000.1 - many years exposed fake replicated by the American propaganda magazine
                1. Outsider
                  Outsider 31 August 2020 11: 14 New
                  -5
                  - I repeat for milking machine operators and reindeer herders in Oymyakon: all data on the F-22 and F-35 are available in the "Handbook on weapons and military equipment of foreign armies" from the GRU General Staff of the RF Armed Forces, it is updated and supplemented every two years, - in any secret any aviation regiment, or aviation school. Those who have admission - go in, look, put the sagging jaw in place and then say to the homies: "Yes, Vasya, Petya, b..t, that's how things are, guys ..."
                  1. Voyager
                    Voyager 31 August 2020 13: 16 New
                    +2
                    Quote: Outsider
                    then say to the homies: "Yes, Vasya, Petya, b..t, such are the things, guys ..."

                    Do not even try to project your oppressed model of behavior onto others - it will not work. It is just as futile to spread your uneducated and propagandistic chatter here. Do your best.
                    1. Outsider
                      Outsider 31 August 2020 19: 44 New
                      -5
                      - Valetina Ivanovna, you'd better go to the library, if you have access, of course ... lol
              4. Cyril G ...
                Cyril G ... 16 September 2020 10: 10 New
                +1
                Quote: Outsider
                According to November 2005 reports, the US Air Force claims the F-22 has the lowest RCS of any manned aircraft in the US Air Force, with a frontal RCS of 0,0001 to 0,0002 mXNUMX.


                This is, of course, nonsense, like everything you say. However, you have not actually written anything about the case there. And to believe in the statements of the US Air Force, you have to be mentally retarded, which you undoubtedly are. Put on a saucepan. Will suit you.
          2. BastaKarapuzik And
            BastaKarapuzik And 29 August 2020 17: 13 New
            +5
            Nobody knows all these characteristics. They can declare anything they want, it does not necessarily have to do with reality at least some. The same goes for the characteristics of carrying capacity, flight altitude, etc. Ours and the Americans think very differently. Those overestimate the characteristics, and so are not the worst, ours, on the contrary, indicate the minimum, less than less. For record flights, the machines are generally being finalized, up to the dismantling of standard equipment.
            Americans are generally balabolians, you can’t believe them categorically. It is not for nothing that the F-22 pilots were banned from flying at high speeds in peacetime. The coating is damaged, expensive. See how, supersonic separately, stealth separately, together they do not combine, well, and so on. Let it fly at supersonic, what will be the EPR? Probably the same 0.3 m²
            1. Outsider
              Outsider 29 August 2020 17: 39 New
              -5
              Americans are generally balabolic ...

              - However, not to the extent that you imagine ... lol
              you can’t believe them categorically


              It is not for nothing that F-22 pilots were banned from flying at high speeds in peacetime.

              - Yeah, banned! And the speed was limited "only" by 2M (in wartime - 2.42M), and the overload was limited to "only" 8 units (in wartime - 9.5). You will compare with the performance characteristics of the Su-57 - if you find them! laughing Them, real, nowhere. And those that were in 2015 are ridiculous:

              1. krizis
                krizis 16 September 2020 17: 56 New
                0
                so, these are the parameters achieved on tests 5 years ago, the current ones are known. Are you ashamed to bring them? :)
              2. Ali
                Ali 18 September 2020 10: 54 New
                -1
                Quote: Outsider
                - Yeah, banned! And the speed was limited "only" by 2M (in wartime - 2.42M), and the overload was limited "only" by 8 units (in wartime - 9.5). You will compare with the performance characteristics of the Su-57 - if you find them! They are not real anywhere. And those that were in 2015 are ridiculous:

                Outsider. Are you tired of lying openly? Conscience is lost forever, and arrogance is the second happiness ...
                1. Outsider
                  Outsider 18 September 2020 14: 27 New
                  -1
                  - This was said by Paul Metz, former chief test officer of the F-22, it is recorded, recorded and known to the whole world... Except you.
                  https://aircraft.fandom.com/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor
                  Performance
                  Maximum speed Classified; greater than Mach 2.42 (1856.791mph) 2575+ km / h
                  Cruising speed Classified; estimated Mach 1.82 (1396.43mph)
                  Range 2,000 miles 3,219 km
                  Ceiling 65,000 ft 19,812 m
                  Rate of climb 350 m / s

                  . Metz has also stated that the F-22 has a top speed greater than 1,600 mph (Mach 2.42) and its climb rate is faster than the F-15 Eagle due to advances in engine technology, even some of the pilots claim that the F-22 is already faster than the F-15.
                  1. Outsider
                    Outsider 18 September 2020 14: 42 New
                    -1
                    Lead Tester Paul Metz talks about the F-22:


                    About competitor F-23 - YF-23:
            2. gemini
              gemini 30 August 2020 20: 18 New
              0
              such as you believe - do not respect yourself. Settling you from the owners.
          3. Ryusey
            Ryusey 1 September 2020 07: 31 New
            -1
            Can you do better?
          4. Ali
            Ali 16 September 2020 00: 12 New
            -1
            Outsider (Michael). The F-35 is not a 5th generation aircraft at all in terms of parameters, a priori! The tales of Martin-Lockheed managers should not be rewritten, who cannot distinguish instantaneous image intensifier from average. The average value of the image intensifier of the F-22 is 0,3 m2 (the F-35 has even more). The glider's aerodynamics, sacrificed for stealth, cannot be drastically corrected! Therefore, it is not for you, an Israeli, to decide about our designers - look behind yours and lick the striped ones, because these are their "airplanes", not yours! To begin with, create a long-range RVV-BD, commensurate with the R-37M and KS-172. Weak?
            1. Outsider
              Outsider 17 September 2020 23: 16 New
              -2
              Outsider (Michael). The F-35 is not a 5th generation aircraft at all in terms of parameters, a priori!

              - The aircraft is the 5th generation according to the only parameter - extremely low visibility. It is thanks to her that he "blows" in a duel situation that the Su-35S, that the Su-57 - 10 times out of ten, 20 times out of 20, 50 times out of 50 ...
              The tales of Martin-Lockheed managers should not be rewritten, who cannot distinguish instantaneous image intensifier from average.

              - "Specialist" you are alpine, again you climbed into an area in which you do not petr "no snout, no ear". Nobody, ever, anywhere needs your "instantaneous" EPR. IT IS NOT USED IN PRACTICE. ONLY AVERAGE IN THIS SECTOR.
              The average value of the image intensifier of the F-22 is 0,3 m2 (the F-35 has even more).

              - The frontal RCS of the F-22 in the +/- 25 ° sector relative to the longitudinal axis from the front hemisphere is 0.0001 m². The F-35 has it in the same sector and even less: ~ 0.0000316 m². Of course - average!
              The glider's aerodynamics, sacrificed for stealth, cannot be drastically corrected!

              - Tell those rams that you herd that "the F-22's aerodynamics are disfigured for the sake of stealth"... Only your rams will laugh at you. Because the aerodynamic quality of the F-22 is one higher than that of the recognized Soviet standard of aerodynamic excellence - the Su-27 (and its clones).
              Therefore, it is not for you, an Israeli, to decide about our designers - look behind yours and lick the striped ones, because these are their "airplanes", not yours!

              - The population of Israel is 7 million people (the Arabs do not count), the population of Russia is 146 million people. Are you wondering why we don't make our own combat aircraft? It is more profitable for us to buy them in the USA. And you just look at the Chinese - they made TWO real stealth. In Russia - not a single one.
              To begin with, create a long-range RVV-BD, commensurate with the R-37M and KS-172. Weak?

              - What is the point of hanging against the F-22 on the Su-35S RVV-BD with a range of 200 km if its radar sees the F-22 at a range of only 30 km ?? So what for ?!
              1. Cyril G ...
                Cyril G ... 17 September 2020 23: 30 New
                +1
                Quote: Outsider
                It is thanks to her that he "blows" in a duel situation that the Su-35S, that the Su-57 - 10 times out of ten, 20 times out of 20, 50 times out of 50 ...

                Go plunge into the icy water so as not to carry delirium ...

                Quote: Outsider
                Radar will see the F-22 at a range of only 30 km ?? So what for ?!


                Because he sees him at least a hundred kilometers.

                The frontal RCS of the F-22 in the +/- 25 ° sector relative to the longitudinal axis from the front hemisphere is 0.0001 m². The F-35 has it in the same sector and even less: ~ 0.0000316 m². Of course - average!

                Clown w ... wassat
                Go to kindergarten with fairy tales, and it will hardly help, and there they will throw rotten eggs ...
                1. Outsider
                  Outsider 17 September 2020 23: 33 New
                  -1
                  Go plunge into the icy water so as not to carry delirium ...

                  - This is a harsh reality, only it is beyond your understanding.
                  Because he sees him at least a hundred kilometers.

                  - He won't even see him at 50. You, unfortunately, do not understand this. Because the "guys on the" Global Adventure "told everything differently. lol
              2. Ali
                Ali 18 September 2020 10: 45 New
                -1
                Quote: Outsider
                To begin with, create a long-range RVV-BD, commensurate with the R-37M and KS-172. Weak?


                - What is the point of hanging against the F-22 on the Su-35S RVV-BD with a range of 200 km if its radar sees the F-22 at a range of only 30 km ?? So what for ?!

                Outsider! Not tired of writing lies from time to time? TNor did they learn to distinguish the average image intensifier from the instantaneous value.The average image intensifier tube of the F-22 is 0,3 m2, therefore, the Irbis Su-35 radar will detect the vaunted F-22 at a distance of D = 224,936 km in free space, not 30 km, march to school! Learn radar, an adherent of Martin-Lockheed managers, and do not write an illiterate lie on the VO website.
        2. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. The comment was deleted.
            2. The comment was deleted.
      3. bk0010
        bk0010 29 August 2020 16: 51 New
        +4
        Quote: Outsider
        frontal RCS of the F-22 is three orders of magnitude smaller than the frontal RCS of the Su-57
        Why do you think so? Please provide a link.
        1. Outsider
          Outsider 29 August 2020 17: 44 New
          -3
          - So I brought it above! And the EPR of the Su-57 has been known for 10 years already, it was first reported to the Indians, they were then quoted as the main sponsors, they were shown the PAK FA before the Russians saw it:
          http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2010/01/india-russia-close-to-agreement-on-next.html
          Sukhoi's FGFA prototype, which is expected to make its first flight within weeks, is a true stealth aircraft, almost invisible to enemy radar. According to an MoD official, “It is an amazing looking aircraft. It has a Radar Cross Section (RCS) of just 0.5 square meters as compared to the Su-30MKI's RCS of about 20 square meters. "
          1. bk0010
            bk0010 29 August 2020 23: 49 New
            +3
            Yeah, I saw it, thanks.
          2. Sckepsis
            Sckepsis 30 August 2020 22: 35 New
            +6
            Sir, why are you doing bullshit here. The real values ​​of EPR are not known, neither ours, nor theirs. They are known to a very narrow circle of people, and I suspect that they do not know the whole truth, which is in the dominion of a couple of designers. But you do not need to have access to supersecrets to understand: EPR 0.0003 m2 SHOOT.
            1. Outsider
              Outsider 31 August 2020 00: 15 New
              -4
              - No, sir, they pretend to be, like, naive: the F-22 has been in service for 15 years:
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor
              Introduction - 15 December 2005
              F-35 - also for a long time in combat units, especially B и A
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II
              Introduction
              F-35B: 31 July 2015 (USMC) [
              F-35A: 2 August 2016 (USAF)
              F-35C: 28 February 2019 (USN)

              Therefore, there was time in the course of HUNDREDS OF EXERCISES OF ALL RANKS AND MASTERS, of all sizes, - to make sure whether the "advertising" data corresponds to what it really is or not. Combat effectiveness - ratio of victories and losses in air battles.
              Everyone who understands has long understood that a frontal RCS of 0.0001 m² is no nonsense. This is the harsh reality given to us in sensations. Yes, the French really managed to "shoot down" the F-22 and not once - but in dogfight, close combat with guns. Never once in all the years of joint exercises, not a single frivolous Frenchman could boast that he shot down an F-22 in the DVB.
              The F-22 is shot down when the exercise leaders impose various restrictions on it:
              - to fight without using long-range missiles;
              - to fight without using missiles at all, only with a cannon;
              - AWACS, and RTR means, and electronic warfare means are given to opponents, - F-22 do not give anything;
              - despite the fact that the opponents, "red", it is allowed to "revive" up to five times after shooting down, it is only necessary after the radio command that you are shot down (from the central computer, where all data from everyone is collected by telemetry and processed in real time in microseconds), walk 30 seconds in a straight line - and again into battle ... The "Blues" die forever. .. smile
              1. EvilLion
                EvilLion 31 August 2020 08: 54 New
                +4
                Michael, write ischo, we haven't laughed for a long time.
                1. Outsider
                  Outsider 31 August 2020 11: 06 New
                  -5
                  - And in what place is it funny for someone? no This is just out of mind ...
              2. krizis
                krizis 16 September 2020 17: 59 New
                0
                "This is the harsh reality given to us in sensations."
                - These "sensations" are fully recorded from the radar screens, and are also broadcast by the nervous statements of the American military.
              3. PIT
                PIT 21 September 2020 15: 39 New
                0
                In 2018, Israel conducted tests f35 against mig2000 (reworked mig21) and what was their surprise when the melee score was 10-0 in favor of the moment, and in ranged combat the Israeli moment 21, reaching the maximum altitude, saw f35 perfectly, the score was also 8 -2 in favor of moments .....
                1. Outsider
                  Outsider 22 September 2020 12: 29 New
                  -1
                  - For such sensational news, one should bring at least a tiny link, otherwise "one woman said" ...
      4. EvilLion
        EvilLion 31 August 2020 08: 50 New
        +1
        3 orders is 1000 times. Very funny, considering that even the F-117, which is uncompromising in this regard, is less than 0.025.
      5. Ali
        Ali 7 September 2020 23: 24 New
        0
        Quote: Outsider
        The people stubbornly and persistently ignore the simplest thing that the frontal RCS of the F-22 is three orders of magnitude smaller than the frontal RCS of the Su-57.

        Outsider (Michael). It's ugly to lie and talk nonsense not knowing the real numbers of the image intensifier! And this is written by a strategist who cannot even count. To start understand the difference between the average value of the image intensifier and the instantaneousbefore writing the translation managers (not specialists) Martin - Lockheed!
      6. Ali
        Ali 7 September 2020 23: 33 New
        -1
        Quote: Outsider
        that the frontal RCS of the F-22 is three orders of magnitude smaller than the frontal RCS of the Su-57.

        Israeli. Not tired of doing propaganda and writing nonsense. Learn to count from the beginning, couch strategist.
        1. Outsider
          Outsider 10 September 2020 19: 48 New
          -2
          - First, learn to write correctly in Russian, ignorant ...
          1. Ali
            Ali 16 September 2020 00: 17 New
            0
            Quote: Outsider
            First learn to write correctly in Russian, ignorant ...

            Outsider. Look behind you, an ignoramus engaged in propaganda on VO. And learn to count by radar without confusing the radar equations all the time! Learn professional radar slang!
            1. Outsider
              Outsider 17 September 2020 23: 21 New
              -1
              You are one of the most brainless and illiterate creatures that I have met in the vastness of the network.
              1. Ali
                Ali 18 September 2020 01: 09 New
                -2
                Quote: Outsider
                You are one of the most brainless and illiterate creatures that I have met in the vastness of the network.

                Outsider Has an inferiority complex woken up? Learn radar and its basic equation!
  2. iouris
    iouris 28 August 2020 12: 07 New
    -10
    Air supremacy is ensured not by the aircraft, but by the Air Force, industry, technology, science. The USA has a clear superiority.
    1. zwlad
      zwlad 29 August 2020 10: 34 New
      +4
      They made fun. Toto, they buy titanium parts from us for aviation. It is precisely because of the superiority in technology.
      1. iouris
        iouris 29 August 2020 11: 59 New
        -5
        Quote: zwlad
        They made fun.

        Firstly. You are not Catherine I. Learn to write correctly in Russian. I have corrected your mistakes. The result is the following text.
        That's why they buy titanium parts from us for aviation. It is because of the superiority in technology.
        First, use the spell checker in Word. And, in general, I recommend reading more, but not on the Internet.
        However, please accept my assurances of utmost respect. And so on.
        1. zwlad
          zwlad 29 August 2020 15: 43 New
          +2
          I apologize for the spelling, but I write from the phone and I am lazy to switch the keyboard back and forth.
      2. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 29 August 2020 14: 52 New
        +1
        Quote: zwlad
        we buy titanium parts for aviation.

        Not parts but semi-finished products (ingots, pipes, etc.). Why not buy if it is inexpensive? Capital expenditures and R&D were paid by the Soviet government at the time.
        1. zwlad
          zwlad 29 August 2020 15: 45 New
          +2
          If my memory serves me exactly the details and not the semi-finished products.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 29 August 2020 16: 23 New
            -3
            Come and see.

            http://www.vsmpo.ru/ru/pages/Aviastroenie
            1. zwlad
              zwlad 29 August 2020 19: 49 New
              +3
              Stopped in and looked.
              And I must have discovered not only semi-finished products but also finished products supplied by foreign analogs of our technical specifications.
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 29 August 2020 20: 15 New
                -1
                Some people were stuffy from Facebook.

                VSMPO-AVISMA Corporation for its foreign and Russian customers supplies titanium semi-finished products for the manufacture of aircraft parts:
                - stampings for the chassis group
                - plates, sheets, rods and billets for the manufacture of swivel assemblies, guide rails, flaps, panels, spars, fasteners
                - one-piece structures of stamped forgings for the electro-hydraulic system.
                .
                The main directions of production of titanium semi-finished products are the production of disks and blades for the fan and compressor, forging blanks and blanks for the manufacture of cases.
                1. zwlad
                  zwlad 29 August 2020 21: 49 New
                  0
                  What is Facebook?
                  And yes. If, in addition to the first page of the site, you delve into the product section, you may also find the final product. Although I doubt it. This is not given to you.
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 29 August 2020 22: 05 New
                    -2
                    Are the paddles, or what, the end product that the Americans take? Oh well.
                    1. zwlad
                      zwlad 29 August 2020 22: 32 New
                      +2
                      I was right - not given.
          2. Outsider
            Outsider 29 August 2020 16: 56 New
            -2
            - Do not tell the public with nonsense: titanium stringers for the F-22 were cast in Nizhny Tagil ?! laughing lol They buy metal, in ingots, in bars, and at home they already alloy it as needed and then do everything that is needed at their firms according to their technologies, even for the F-35, even for Elon Musk's missiles ...
            1. zwlad
              zwlad 29 August 2020 19: 39 New
              +3
              Did I write that for f22 somewhere? Read carefully. I have it written "for aviation"
      3. Krasnoyarsk
        Krasnoyarsk 30 August 2020 08: 48 New
        -1
        Quote: zwlad
        Toto, they buy titanium parts from us for aviation.

        Don't kid yourself. They buy from us not because they themselves cannot do it, but because it is cheaper to buy from us. But why we sell cheap is a question for us. Or rather to our oligarchs.
      4. Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg)
        Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg) 30 August 2020 12: 47 New
        0
        Wonderful is your dialogue with the nine, of course, so much aplomb, it's just scary to write. And yet: what mysterious parts does Boeing buy from us?
    2. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 29 August 2020 11: 38 New
      +4
      You have a lot of disadvantages, but to the point.
    3. Outsider
      Outsider 29 August 2020 23: 51 New
      -5
      Fighter Aircrafts and World Military
      27 August

      The Indian Air Force is impatiently awaiting two more AWACS A-50 aircraft from Russia. Say they should be called Falcon AWACS, since they are equipped with Israeli-made radars.
  3. lucul
    lucul 28 August 2020 12: 11 New
    13
    So - the non-maneuverable western fighters became maneuverable enough to dodge our missiles, and our maneuverable fighters became not maneuverable enough to dodge the western ones? ))))
    Well Damantsev .... although if he drowns for the early adoption of the "product 180", then I'm all for it.
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 28 August 2020 12: 25 New
      -3
      Quote: lucul
      non-maneuverable western fighters

      They are "non-maneuverable" in the opinion of some representatives of the Russian-speaking segment of the Internet, nothing more.
      1. mark2
        mark2 28 August 2020 21: 08 New
        +3
        They are "non-maneuverable" in the opinion of some representatives of the Russian-speaking segment of the Internet, no more


        The opinion of this segment of specialists in everything and professionals in pushing sofas is very important for those who design these very planes. Aha!
    2. val43
      val43 28 August 2020 12: 26 New
      +6
      Did you not notice that it is primarily about the maneuverability and speed of the missiles?
    3. Johann Klassen
      Johann Klassen 28 August 2020 12: 39 New
      +8
      So then it is.
      Only everything that concerns things of this kind is "top secret information".
      My relatives once worked in institutions related to the "defense industry" in high positions with general's shoulder straps, and even they did not own all the secrets.
      Where, then, Mr.-Comrade Yevgeny Damantsev (forgive me, I don’t know your patronymic) know such "intimate details."
      1. iouris
        iouris 28 August 2020 14: 25 New
        -3
        Quote: Johann Klassen
        and even they did not possess all the secrets.

        So they didn't work for the CIA. Congratulations.
        1. Ali
          Ali 28 August 2020 18: 32 New
          11
          Quote: Yevgeny Damantsev
          As for the performance / energy parameters of the R-37M / RVV-BD ultra-long-range missiles at the terminal sections of the trajectories (at a distance of more than 250 km from the vanishing points from the carriers' suspension nodes), where the solid-propellant charges of dual-mode solid propellants will be exhausted, and the rockets will enter the dense layers of the stratosphere and troposphere on the descending branches of the trajectories, then they are unlikely will provide a confident interception not only of the Raptors maneuvering with 9-fold overloads, but also of the F-5B STOVL SKVP maneuvering with 7-35-fold overloads. An impressive midsection, increasing the aerodynamic drag of the R-37M in dense layers of the stratosphere and troposphere, as well as a "dry" mass (with consumed fuel) of about 300 kg will contribute to a galloping decrease in the flight speed of the interceptor missile with 5-4М to 1500 and even 1300 km / h, when the planes of standard aerodynamic rudders will finally lose their effectiveness.

          Evgeny Damantsev! No need to write about fried food when it is not there, it's just your bloopers! Read about the R-37M flight modes, then you will understand that you are wrong. The R-37M rocket has a flight speed of V = 6 M at the end of the flight path and easily hits air targets maneuvering with an overload of 10g (7g - 8g is your ancient blooper that is posted all over the Internet, and which you are promoting here without knowing real parameters). R-37M has ARGSN, insensitive to external interference. There is no exact data on the RVV-BD R-37M on the Internet.
          Evgeny Damantsev, do not write your own assumptions that are not based on anything.
          1. Kolka Semenov
            Kolka Semenov 28 August 2020 18: 42 New
            +2
            And where can you read about the flight modes of the R-37M?
            1. Brylevsky
              Brylevsky 28 August 2020 19: 38 New
              +6
              And where can you read about the flight modes of the R-37M?

              In the "Manual for Combat Use" and in the design documentation for the product. Both are secret.
  4. General failure
    General failure 28 August 2020 12: 21 New
    +2
    What about these invisibles with the post-flight maintenance requirements?
    It seems that the Raptor has a completely abnormal figure there - almost a week.
    It is interesting how the Su-57 is doing with this.

    Otherwise, it may turn out funny - we flew once, played with muscles and hustle through the holes for a week - to be repaired.
  5. mad
    mad max 28 August 2020 12: 26 New
    11
    By the title of the article, it immediately became clear who the author is. winked when you can't create an interesting article and attract readers with its content, you need to come up with a loud headline negative .
    1. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy 29 August 2020 11: 31 New
      +2
      Quote: mad-max
      need to come up with a loud headline

      This is called journalism. SMRAD's technologies are well shown in the TV series Sleepers, for which the director was forced to apologize.
  6. Ross xnumx
    Ross xnumx 28 August 2020 12: 27 New
    12
    ... comparative reviews of the combat capabilities of tactical aviation of the Russian Aerospace Forces and the US Air Force in the tasks of gaining air superiority and long-range interception often appear before the eyes of the audience in an extremely superficial and sometimes biased execution.

    For the most part (except for Lopatov), ​​the site contains users who know the performance characteristics and other details of modern weapons (weapons) from their past service. The authors give only the data that the guardians of military secrets allow them to find out.
    Time will show how the Su-57 or F-35, 22 will behave there in battle. And it makes no sense to measure knowledge from open sources about the latest (often secret) technology.
    Therefore, Mr. Evgeny Damantsev, state your version. We will swallow it in the same way, making comments based on the mood.
    wink
  7. silver_roman
    silver_roman 28 August 2020 12: 38 New
    +4
    One gets the impression that aerial combat and target interception at distances of 150+ km are sheer uncertainty in terms of the effectiveness of interception. There are too many variables: there is a control center or not, an angle, what means are used by the enemy (electronic warfare, AFAR mode, etc.).
    In general, of course, it is worth starting from a purely hypothetical scenario, when 1 on 1 and without a third party in the person of AWACS, etc. The fate of Product -180 DB is interesting.
    1. Hermit21
      Hermit21 29 August 2020 00: 05 New
      +5
      Damantsev, for some reason, is sure that the maximum range parameter is applicable for all types of targets. But in reality, no one will fire rockets from a distance of 100+ km at a fighter, so as not to drain their energy. Air combat will start from 50-70 kilometers
      1. 2 Level Advisor
        2 Level Advisor 29 August 2020 13: 36 New
        0
        those. Do you think long-range missiles (up to 300 km) are useless weapons. nobody uses it? strange air forces of the leading countries of the world - why do they take them into service, but launch it anyway, like a medium-range missile (up to 150 km) - at 50-70 km ... don't you find the logic strange?
        1. Hermit21
          Hermit21 30 August 2020 07: 47 New
          +3
          The maximum range is indicated for low-maneuverable large targets flying on a collision course, such as bombers, tankers, AWACS aircraft, etc. The better the target's maneuverability, the less distance the airborne missile launcher should be launched, because the engine works only for the first few seconds, and then the rocket gradually loses energy and, accordingly, maneuverability. An exception may be ramjet missiles, in which the engine runs the entire flight. But they have their disadvantages.
          1. Ali
            Ali 16 September 2020 01: 25 New
            -1
            Quote: Hermit21
            The maximum range is indicated for low-maneuverable large targets flying on a collision course, such as bombers, tankers, AWACS aircraft, etc. The better the target's maneuverability, the less distance the airborne missile launcher should be launched, because the engine works only for the first few seconds, and then the rocket gradually loses energy and, accordingly, maneuverability.

            Hermit21. You are not right. RVV-BD develops a speed of 6M in the final segment of its flight and with the energy of its flight, everything is in order at the final segment of the trajectory and it hits all types of air targets such as: F-22, F-35, E-3C (Sentry) etc...
            1. Hermit21
              Hermit21 16 September 2020 07: 44 New
              -2
              I mean missiles like R-77-1 or AIM-120
      2. Outsider
        Outsider 29 August 2020 22: 55 New
        -5
        - If the missile has a maximum passport range of application on counter-intersecting courses of 200+ km (Meteor, AIM-260) - so that it cannot be fired from this range or close to it - if the tactical conditions of the situation are conducive to this?
  8. Polente the Wanderer
    Polente the Wanderer 28 August 2020 12: 38 New
    +7
    How much water can I crush in a mortar?
    Only in real, not virtual, air collisions, everything will be clear. But in any case, you MUST first have in parts of the Su-57. And then until we establish production, we are not even talking about an aircraft with a "second stage" engine, Yankee F35 (555 ), F22 (187) it is not known how many more will be released.
  9. imobile2008
    imobile2008 28 August 2020 13: 06 New
    +2
    Quote: Mavrikiy
    The su-57's dominance in long-range aerial combat is questionable. Critical disadvantages of air-to-air ammunition
    Opensource projects Here hee-hee, not ha-ha. It's all grown up here ...

    In such articles, it is better to scold harder than to praise yourself a little. Only swearing is good, praise only hurts!
  10. Shadow041
    Shadow041 28 August 2020 13: 28 New
    +8
    The Raptor is out of production, this time. The Raptor does not have a controllable thrust vector in the horizontal direction, which reduces its maneuverability, that's two. The coating that is used on the Raptor to reduce its visibility is vulnerable not only to rain, but even to clouds with a high moisture content, these are three. New missiles are being developed for the Su-57, and the aircraft itself is new and everything connected with it is a state secret, so thinking about the characteristics of this weapon is purely the author's imagination, since he definitely does not have access to documents with the SECRET and ABSOLUTELY stamp SECRET.
    1. Hermit21
      Hermit21 29 August 2020 00: 02 New
      0
      With the coating, everything is fine for a long time. Just look at how they are safely washed from a hose
  11. NEXUS
    NEXUS 28 August 2020 13: 56 New
    +5
    It is logical to assume that in long-range air battles between the promising Russian Su-57 fighters and the American and NATO stealth fighters F-22A and F-35A / B / C, parity will be established, which continues until the promising long-range guided air combat missile RVV becomes operational. -AE-PD ("Product 180-PD"), the development program of which was frozen in 2013.

    A curtain! fellow I would like to ask the author, - well, where do you get this nonsense?
  12. Maks1995
    Maks1995 28 August 2020 14: 07 New
    +2
    Pound water in a mortar again.
    The aircraft was not accepted for service.
    Maneuverability is classified.
    There are no rockets either, do you see "promising"

    In this respect, you can write anything and as much as you like, you still cannot check.

    The best way out, IMHO, is just to give comparisons of real known performance characteristics, examples of application and justification of future performance characteristics.
    That's all.
  13. Operator
    Operator 28 August 2020 18: 16 New
    +6
    The author contradicts himself: then his P-37M with an available overload of 22g allegedly cannot intercept the F-22 with an overload limit of 9g (a difference of 2,4 times), then the 180 product with an available overload of 30g completely intercepts targets with a limit on overload 15g (2 times difference).

    In reality, explosive missiles are capable of intercepting targets with a twofold difference in overloads before fuel burns out, because the author's opinion about the R-37M does not correspond to the state of affairs. Moreover, the distance of fuel burnout for the Russian RVV BD rocket is 150 km, which allows the Su-57 to shoot down the F-22 long before it reaches the burnout distance of the slop AIM-120D rocket (90 km).

    PS A separate question - where was the author able to find pilots capable of withstanding 15g? laughing
    1. Captain Pushkin
      Captain Pushkin 29 August 2020 17: 29 New
      0
      Quote: Operator
      A separate question - where was the author able to find pilots capable of withstanding 15g?

      Duc, and there are no airplanes that can withstand 15g ...
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 31 August 2020 08: 56 New
      0
      In a rocket fuel for a minute of flight ?? There, seconds are counted, then only by inertia.
      1. Operator
        Operator 31 August 2020 08: 59 New
        0
        The OUT of an explosive missile depends on its class - for a RVV DB it is about 150 seconds.
  14. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 28 August 2020 19: 21 New
    +2
    up to 1500 and even 1300 km / h, when the planes of standard aerodynamic rudders completely lose their effectiveness.

    And from this place in more detail, pzhlst. Why is it that aerodynamic rudders suddenly lose their efficiency at 70 speeds that have been well mastered for years?
    1. mark2
      mark2 28 August 2020 21: 12 New
      +2
      And from this place in more detail, pzhlst. Why is it that aerodynamic rudders suddenly lose their efficiency at 70 speeds that have been well mastered for years?

      Well, not everyone has mastered the speed. some minibuses do not move faster. and such speeds, in principle, seem like a miracle to them))
  15. Hermit21
    Hermit21 29 August 2020 00: 00 New
    +1
    So the R-37M is not against fighters. And it is not known what and how she "gallops" there.
    AIM-120D - aka AIM-120C8 - is an AIM-120C7 with a two-way datalink, the addition of a GPS receiver and an increased remote control, which made it possible to increase the range to 120-130 km. According to LTH, it is approximately equal to R-77-1
    1. Ali
      Ali 16 September 2020 01: 44 New
      +1
      Quote: Hermit21
      So the R-37M is not against fighters.

      Hermit21. Do not write lies!

      Long-range missile R-37M is intended to hit air targets (fighters, attack aircraft, bombers, VTA aircraft, helicopters, cruise missiles), at any time of the day, at all angles, in the conditions of electronic warfare, against the background of the earth and water surface, including with multichannel shelling according to the "let it in and forget it" principle.
      Source: https://testpilot.ru/rossiya/vympel/r-37m/ Testers © www.testpilot.ru
      K-37M can destroy air targets on a collision course. After receiving the coordinates, the rocket is directed to the object by the inertial system, so the ammunition "does not shine" on the cruise line on the radars. An active radar homing head (GOS) is activated immediately in front of the target. The enemy is able to detect its radiation, but the pilot has a fraction of a second left for the evasion maneuver. On the final leg of the flight, the rocket is accelerated to a hypersonic speed of Mach 6.
      Source: https: //naukatehnika.com/finalnyie-ispyitaniya-sverxdalnobojnoj-giperzvukovoj-raketyi-r-37m.html
      Source: https://testpilot.ru/rossiya/vympel/r-37m/
  16. Sergey Valov
    Sergey Valov 29 August 2020 11: 27 New
    +1
    I like the discussion of the latest military equipment on the Internet. Where does the information come from? Especially for domestic products. Why isn't a list of sources used?
    Expressions such as "radius of interception" and "an impressive range of technological shortcomings" represent a separate piquancy. I wonder if the author understands what he wrote?
    The author repeatedly writes about the midsection of the missiles, but does he know how the lift force of the rocket is created? Its size is influenced by the mass of parameters, and not just the fuel supply.
    I am already silent about the tactics of air combat, this is a separate topic.
  17. Aleks2000
    Aleks2000 29 August 2020 13: 35 New
    0
    For some reason in the video SU 57 does not actively maneuver.
    On an Internet, it is faster than F22 and F35. But can he get away from missiles ???

    And about the future under-missiles, but the unconfirmed detection range is generally too early to write.
  18. BastaKarapuzik And
    BastaKarapuzik And 30 August 2020 00: 25 New
    -1
    Quote: Outsider

    - However, not to the extent that you imagine ...

    Before that, before that.
    For all the "successes" of the American company in the fight against coronavirus, Trump tirelessly reiterates the overwhelming advantage of their medicine. Well, judge who they are messing with.
    In his own words, the US economy has a fantastic boom.
    Therefore, NOT a SINGLE word!
  19. EvilLion
    EvilLion 31 August 2020 08: 48 New
    0
    As soon as the news of the Ministry's purchase of a large batch of new air-to-air missiles flashed through, Damantsev issued an opus that everything was lost.
  20. Egg
    Egg 31 August 2020 10: 19 New
    +2
    Quote: Outsider
    They buy metal, in ingots, in bars, and at home they already alloy it properly

    Can you imagine the alloying process? I think if they had imagined they would not have written this nonsense.
    1. CBR600
      CBR600 1 September 2020 15: 21 New
      0
      So what? Diffusion is essentially the same alloying. Ingots for remelting, in induction crucibles completely. I am not in defense, I am about the presentation of the process.
      1. Egg
        Egg 2 September 2020 21: 41 New
        0
        Exactly ... a bunch of tons of metal to completely melt and then I'm not sure that the necessary additives can be brought to the desired proportions. The meaning of such a purchase is lost.
  21. dobrik10
    dobrik10 31 August 2020 12: 05 New
    +1
    Three months and two weeks.
    Everything is beautiful with us until the cart goes crooked ..
  22. Cambustiologist
    Cambustiologist 3 September 2020 18: 28 New
    0
    So this is with AFAR radars, and if ROFAR radars are installed on SU 57. Whereas? And we already have them. And most likely they will be installed for drying together with the engines of the second stage in 24.