Military Review

Su-30 and Su-35 fighters will be combined into a single "Superflanker", according to the US press

85

Su-35



Russia is currently serially producing five types of fighters that meet the individual requirements of the current state rearmament plan. These include the three heavy vehicles Su-57, Su-35 and Su-30SM, a specialized attack fighter [sic] Su-34 and a medium-weight platform MiG-35. However, in the near future, this picture may change significantly.

Too many types


As noted by Military Watch (USA), all of these aircraft will remain in serial production until the end of the current defense program in 2027. However, experts believe that after this date, the stake will be made on the production of the Su-57 fighter and the MiG-41 interceptor. Therefore, a reasonable question arises: what will happen after 2027 to the production lines responsible for supply aviation platforms of generation "4+" and "4 ++" derived from the Su-27 - Su-30, Su-35 and Su-34?

According to the author of the publication, against the backdrop of the future increase in purchases of the Su-57, we should expect the continued demand for the improvement of 4th generation products, "which are much cheaper both to build and operate, and which have the potential for modernization." At the same time, it is very likely that the production of the Su-30 and Su-35 will be localized on one joint line [currently the Su-35 is produced by KnAAZ, the Su-30 by the Irkutsk aircraft plant].

At the same time, the unification of these types will grow, since their sizes are “fundamentally the same”. Now the difference is in the equipment of the machines: the Su-35 is a more expensive model, which has more modern and powerful AL-41 engines, a much smaller radar cross-section due to a more advanced airframe design, a set of more powerful equipment, the aircraft contains a large proportion of composite materials, which increase the strength and lightness of its construction.


Su-30


Merging platforms


These two fighters can be combined into a single class, which will have both single and double modifications.

- considers Military Watch.

According to him, at the first stage, the Su-30 will be gradually improved to the level of the Su-35: aircraft of this type will receive AL-41 engines and the Irbis-E radar. At the same time, the opposite process will take place: changes in the equipment and design of the Su-35 will allow it to carry weapons systems that the Su-30 specializes in, such as the Kh-32 anti-ship missile system.

These two platforms can really merge into one

- the newspaper writes, believing that the older machines - the Su-27, whose production has long been discontinued - will also change: they will receive similar power plants.

Military Watch believes that at the second stage of the formation of a single platform, it will receive new electronic warfare equipment, new composite materials, artificial intelligence, possibly even laser weapons and AFAR with the Su-57.

Passive scan radars likely to be obsolete after 2027

- considers the publication.

Ultimately, it is unlikely that Russia will continue to produce two separate Flankers with such similar designs for similar missions, especially since they are becoming more and more similar to each other.

- concludes Military Watch, discussing the transformation of the Su-30 and Su-35 into a single "Superflanker".

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 21 September 2020 08: 44
    -4
    Su-30 and Su-35 fighters will be combined into a single "Superflanker", according to the US press
    Like hints from a well-wisher? Not special, but it seems clear why to combine and how, but "what will this result in?" ("13 chairs" pub). The station wagon is more expensive and the performance characteristics will be lower.
    The Su-35 is a more expensive model, which has more modern and powerful AL-41 engines, a much smaller radar section due to a more advanced airframe design,
    By hanging rockets on an external sling and will also ring.
    1. Boris Chernikov
      Boris Chernikov 21 September 2020 19: 55
      +3
      well, su-30 and su-35 makes sense to combine, but su-34 is not necessary
  2. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 21 September 2020 08: 49
    -2
    They look far away.
    1. Livonetc
      Livonetc 21 September 2020 08: 51
      +5
      27 is just around the corner.
  3. svp67
    svp67 21 September 2020 08: 51
    -1
    Yes, there is no particular choice. As soon as the second stage Su-57 appears and the corresponding contract for the supply of at least 100 aircraft is signed, the production of the Su-35 for our Air Force will have to be stopped.
    And I also think that over time, it will be necessary to abandon the production of the Su-34 and concentrate all forces on the multifunctional strike modification of the Su-30.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 21 September 2020 09: 05
      15
      It is unlikely that the Su-34 will stop producing, tk. it is going to replace the Su-24 of all modifications. The Su-30 will not be able to replace the Su-24. In addition, we have big problems in naval aviation, and there a naval modification of the Su-34 would be very useful.
      Su-57 will be put into operation for a long time, the basis will still be Su-35 and 30. It will take at least 10 years to saturate the fleet to the minimum level.
      But with the MiG-35 there is a big question about the release and it dangles in the air ...
      1. d4rkmesa
        d4rkmesa 21 September 2020 09: 25
        +8
        I agree that the redesign of the Su-34 for the "sea" variant has been asking for a long time, especially since there are developments in the Su-32FN and Su-33KUB. And it would be nice to bring up the technological base to the modern level. The same serial Su-57s clearly show that we can, if we want, issue products from the factory “right off the bat”, and not as if they were driven with a sledgehammer.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 21 September 2020 09: 35
          +7
          Armored Su-34, as a naval version? The naval fighter-bomber should be lightened as much as possible in order to increase the payload.
          1. d4rkmesa
            d4rkmesa 21 September 2020 09: 38
            +2
            The armored titanium cockpit is of course not needed. You can borrow from the Su-33KUB, taking into account modern developments.
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 21 September 2020 09: 42
              +3
              I wouldn't be so sure. Such a cockpit can save the lives of pilots from MANPADS from some boat. There will be no extra, that's for sure. And RCCs now know how to make small ones. The same Bramos shortened ...
              1. d4rkmesa
                d4rkmesa 21 September 2020 09: 50
                +4
                If I am not mistaken, there is mainly an emphasis on protection from the lower hemisphere, and not from behind, for example. Not that you need to reset the protection, but you can certainly modernize it with an emphasis on MANPADS, for example, make Kevlar protection in the rear of the cockpit so that the fragments do not hit the lantern.
          2. bayard
            bayard 21 September 2020 14: 02
            +9
            Quote: voyaka uh
            Armored Su-34, as a naval version? The naval fighter-bomber should be lightened as much as possible in order to increase the payload.

            This is not the deck version, but the coastal-based MRA aircraft. In its current configuration, it has a standard load of 8 tons, and with underfilling and maximum - 12 tons.
            So if you get a new engine, takeoff performance will only improve. Will carry a pair of "Zircons", or one + 4 X-31 \ 35, and about six explosive missiles for self-defense.
            And his armored cabin is integrated into the airframe, and in order to replace it with a conventional one, the airframe must be redesigned almost entirely. So it is hardly advisable, let there be protection for the crew, and no haemorrhoids for redesign.
            The Su-34 in the new guise is quite suitable for replacing the Tu-22M3 in the MRA, especially if the engines and avionics are received from the Su-57, and the airframe and wing area are slightly increased - to improve landing characteristics for the maximum landing weight (a constant scourge and the problem of MRA aircraft ).
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 21 September 2020 14: 19
              +6
              This is not the deck version, but the coastal-based MRA aircraft.

              Exactly.
              Su-34 in the new guise is quite suitable for replacing the Tu-22M3 in the MPA

              I don’t think so. The redesign of the airframe and wing area is a new aircraft. And it is already being done: the PAK YES program. Just to replace the three Tu-160/95/22. What will be there and how else is of course unknown, but we will wait.
              1. bayard
                bayard 21 September 2020 15: 22
                +5
                Quote: Wedmak

                I don’t think so. The redesign of the airframe and wing area is a new aircraft. And it is already being done: the PAK YES program. Just to replace the three Tu-160/95/22. What will be there and how else is of course unknown,

                The fact of the matter is that it is not yet known, and the news will wait for a long time. And after the news - tests, fine-tuning, the decision to launch the series, the launch of the series itself and waiting for the filling of the newly created regiments.
                LONG.
                A very long time .
                And the MPA had to be revived yesterday - only it would allow us to balance our combat capabilities at sea and stop threats from the AUG and KUG of a very likely enemy. With the help of aviation, this can be done faster (!), Easier, more reliable. And the reaction to the threat will be the highest possible.
                In addition, the PAK DA is a subsonic platform, it is good as a carrier of long-range missiles and long-term loitering in the zone, but not as a quick reaction to a threat. These are slightly different tasks.
                And one more important issue is unification.
                The Su-34 is mass-produced, its cost in the basic version is even somewhat lower than the cost of the Su-30, and even more so the Su-35. It has already been mastered by the troops and industry.
                But we are not talking about the modification of the Su-34M, which is going to be launched into production in a couple of years, the MRA needs a slightly different aircraft - with expanded capabilities in range, payload and maximum landing weight (with an unused ammo, if the combat mission was canceled already in the air ). Therefore, we need to work on the glider.
                If we take the engines of the second stage from the Su-57 (and they should already be in the series in 2-4 years), then the increased (very seriously) energy will increase the size of the airframe (length) and the wing area (for example, the increase in the airframe of the MiG-35 in relation to the MiG-29). This will give us an increase in the internal volumes for fuel and equipment, the combat radius will increase to (about) 2000 - 2500 km. depending on the load, and the increased wing area will improve the takeoff and landing characteristics and, in fact, the maximum landing weight, with the possibility of landing with an unused ammo (with which the Tu-22M3 has serious problems).
                Yes, this will already be a new aircraft, which will have to be designed almost from scratch (but not from scratch, not at all from scratch) with new combat capabilities. Which will be able to lift two air-launched Zircons and explosive missiles for self-defense and air combat in the normal mode, if it gets baked. In terms of combat capabilities, it will equal and even surpass the Tu-22M3 (the number of heavy anti-ship missiles, the combat radius and radius of destruction of targets, the ability to conduct an air battle - which the Tu-22M3 could not in principle).
                If work on such an aircraft begins now, then it will be able to appear in the MPA shelves in the second half of the 20s. And if such an aircraft does appear, then it is quite possible that it will be useful in Long-Range Aviation as a medium bomber.
                It is much faster, cheaper and easier to do than waiting for the promising subsonic PAK DA to appear.
                The avionics for such an aircraft can be almost entirely borrowed from the Su-57 (including the radar complex on the AFAR "Belka"), which will also simplify the task, because - UNIFICATION.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 21 September 2020 15: 57
                  +3
                  There are small objections, but this is not essential, you will still have to wait for the decision of the Ministry of Defense, whatever we are discussing here. Of course, we drove the naval aviation strongly ... and they are in no hurry to plug this hole.
                  1. bayard
                    bayard 21 September 2020 16: 55
                    +4
                    Quote: Wedmak
                    and they are in no hurry to plug this hole.

                    Nothing, and no one. There are no new special aircraft of naval aviation - scouts, patrolmen, PLO aircraft, MRA aircraft ... We repaired a certain number of Tu-22M3s, but their resource is limited, and there are not enough of them, even a squadron will not work for all fleets. The procurement of fighters for the MA Fleet began, but the pace is also low, and the limiting factor is personnel shortage.
                    There are not enough pilots even for the Aerospace Forces.
                    ... And not only naval aviation was HUGE in our country ... we have a lot of things in a killed state ...
                    But the capitalists have their own psychology - a mercenary one.
                    And the desire to "cut costs".
                    1. ancient
                      ancient 21 September 2020 18: 22
                      +4
                      Quote: bayard
                      Nothing, and no one. There are no new special naval aviation aircraft - scouts, patrolmen, PLO aircraft, MRA aircraft ..

                      I agree completely here soldier
                2. ancient
                  ancient 21 September 2020 18: 20
                  +2
                  Quote: bayard
                  with expanded capabilities in range, payload and maximum landing weight (with unused ammo, if the combat mission was canceled already in the air). Therefore, we need to work on the glider.

                  But here there are many inconsistencies and contradictions:
                  1. Landing with Gpos.mah and G pos.mah.dop. clearly spelled out in the Airplane Flight Manual (both actions and meanings), so that nothing causes any problems, except for increased attention and composure when entering.
                  Vseda, you can use up excess fuel for the desired G pos or drain emergency (do not "blow out" the drain to the value of the "emergency residue" wink"
                  Quote: bayard
                  with the possibility of landing with an unused BC (with which the Tu-22M3 has serious problems).

                  belay belay belay what are these "serious problems"? .. Enlighten, please soldier
                  1. bayard
                    bayard 21 September 2020 19: 07
                    +2
                    This wisdom was gleaned from communicating directly with you, about the capabilities of the Tu-22M3 to take off and land with two or even three X-22s. We had a decent correspondence with you then. Including the possibilities of suspension of more than 2 "Zircons" on this "pepelats".
                    Conclusions from that conversation were made, and therefore I think that it is desirable to have an "enlarged" version of the Su-34 as a carrier of the Zircon, in order to eliminate difficulties with landing with full combat gear. Well, for the sake of a larger combat radius to the launch line.
                    Su-34 and in its current configuration will handle one or even two Zircons ... but there will be difficulties and limitations.
                    soldier hi bully
                    drinks
                    1. ancient
                      ancient 21 September 2020 21: 19
                      +4
                      Quote: bayard
                      This wisdom was gleaned from communicating directly with you, about the capabilities of the Tu-22M3 to take off and land with two or even three X-22s. We had a decent correspondence with you then. Including the possibilities of suspension of more than 2 "Zircons" on this "pepelats".

                      And what did I say so terrible to you? Did I say that the problem is a network with 2 full-weight missiles? The fact that tolerances and skills are needed is a must, and with the remainder of the 4th in 6 tons, the landing just fits into the permissible values ​​of 88 tons (there is a gap of up to 96 tons ... no more than 3% of the total number of landings is already allowed there).
                      About 3 missiles, so it is only in the transport version (it's only 9 tons).
                      The Airplane Flight Manual provides for an emergency missile drop point for "no explosion" on a dirt runway (the navigator sets the bully Q, H = 500, V = 500 and went, my dear, like ... a simple "iron pot" wink soldier
                      I don’t remember about "Zircons", but the conversation, as far as my memory serves, was for ... Kh-47M2 wink drinks
                      1. bayard
                        bayard 21 September 2020 21: 44
                        +3
                        Quote: ancient
                        I don’t remember about "Zircons", but the conversation, as far as my memory serves, was for ... Kh-47M2

                        No, just for the "Zircons", their possible number on the suspensions, the impossibility to use a T-shaped pylon (dimensions, chassis), and ... about weight restrictions during landing. Everything was complemented by photographs of the Tu-22M3 with the X-22 on suspensions and illustrating the impossibility of suspending two Zircons on one pylon.
                        ... And even about the starting weight of this product. It turned out to be 10 - 12 percent harder than what I expected and calculated empirically ...

                        But the fact is that the Su-34 glider is so good, and the engines and avionics of the Su-57 promise such prospects ... that one would certainly want to see in the hardware this hypothetical monster MRA with two or even three Zircons on suspensions.
                        And Klimov shares my passion and even had a conversation about that with Martirosov, the chief designer of the Su-34, who confirmed this possibility and expediency.

                        As far as I know, the "Dagger" has not yet confirmed its anti-ship capabilities. For now, anyway.
                      2. ancient
                        ancient 22 September 2020 19: 29
                        +2
                        Quote: bayard
                        No, it is for the "Zircons", their possible number on suspensions, the inability to use a T-shaped pylon (dimensions, chassis)

                        Well, so there the conversation is about the DB, and not about the missiles themselves wink , well, missiles .. as a "consequence" already .. "stuck" wink
                        Quote: bayard
                        It turned out to be 10 - 12 percent harder than what I expected and calculated empirically ...

                        So I was right wink
                        Otherwise I completely agree drinks
            2. ancient
              ancient 21 September 2020 18: 01
              +5
              Quote: Wedmak
              I do not think.

              And in vain ... it is the Su-34 that can replace the Tu-22M3 (of which there are ... few, few) for the MRA tasks (by the way, such a "variant" was developed and is ready for commissioning under the name "Su-32FN" (Su- 32FN - Fighter Navy).
          3. ancient
            ancient 21 September 2020 17: 56
            +5
            Quote: bayard
            In its current configuration, it has a standard load of 8 tons, and with underfilling and to a maximum - 12 tons.

            With your permission, I will correct your "numbers" a little, since they are a little ... not correct soldier
            1. There is no such criterion "standard", but there is "normal" load.
            2. Then everything is simple ..... substitute the values ​​in the formula: G is empty. + G fuel. + G1 PTB.
            3. If you "hang" (4-5 tons Gb.k). then you get G normal checkout.
            4. If you "hang up" (8 tons Gb.k.), then you get G max.vzl.
            5. And in order to get the opportunity to "hang" 12 tons (G b.c.), you need (correctly state), remove the PTB and drain 1,5 tons from the "internal" volumes of fuel, and only 10,5 tons will remain, taking into account not generated residue. (the tactical radius of action will "lame"). soldier
            Otherwise, I completely agree drinks
            PS Except for the MRA (represented by the Tu-22M3) as a branch of the Fleet's aviation, "ended" completely in 1994. crying
            1. bayard
              bayard 21 September 2020 18: 22
              +4
              Quote: ancient
              ... There is no such criterion "standard", but there is "normal" load.

              Well, I'm still not an aviator, so I admit some liberties in the presentation, trying not to distort the essence too much.
              I have a dream (just like Nelson Mandela) to see the above-described car as an MPA plane ... repeat
              A very elegant solution to "domination of the seas" could be obtained on the basis of a serial, but modernized aircraft.
        2. Boris Chernikov
          Boris Chernikov 21 September 2020 20: 00
          -2
          what is the problem? can be removed.
          1. ancient
            ancient 21 September 2020 21: 23
            +1
            Quote: Boris Chernikov
            what is the problem? can be removed.

            You do .. "what are you interested in" ... for fuel? so it, as always, for some reason is not enough and you need to have a little ... reserve, because in addition to "tuda-syudy" you need to provide for 3-4 minutes for combat maneuvering and combat use wink
            1. Boris Chernikov
              Boris Chernikov 22 September 2020 14: 14
              0
              I'm talking about a titanium bath, there are no problems with its withdrawal as such ... the plane will definitely become easier per ton
              1. ancient
                ancient 22 September 2020 19: 24
                +1
                Quote: Boris Chernikov
                I'm talking about a titanium bath, there are no problems with its withdrawal as such.

                It is clear ... but there are problems ... alignment and strength completely "flies" crying
                Try to "withdraw" the titanium on the Tu-160 ...... "base" wink
                1. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 22 September 2020 20: 28
                  0
                  so here is not the basis, but an armored vehicle) if there are problems with centering, then you can always think about what to take a ton of)
    2. svp67
      svp67 21 September 2020 10: 20
      -2
      Quote: Wedmak
      It is unlikely that the Su-34 will stop producing, tk. it is going to replace the Su-24 of all modifications.

      The Su-24 could just as well replace the Su-30
      Quote: Wedmak
      In addition, we have big problems in naval aviation, and there a naval modification of the Su-34 would be very useful.

      Yes, by equipping them with the proper amount of anti-ship missiles and small-sized hypersonic missiles, this can be done until they exhaust their resource
      Quote: Wedmak
      The Su-57 will be put into operation for a long time, the basis will still be the Su-35 and 30.

      It is time to hurry with the Su-57, otherwise it will soon be not so needed, and all forces will have to be directed towards the design of the "sixth generation" aircraft
    3. Ryusey
      Ryusey 21 September 2020 11: 41
      -1
      And at the base of the moment a deck boat.
      1. Piramidon
        Piramidon 21 September 2020 12: 56
        +1
        Quote: Ryusey
        And on the base of the moment a deck-boat

        And where to get "decks" for him?
    4. K-612-O
      K-612-O 21 September 2020 12: 45
      0
      Why is it hanging out? 6 machines were transferred to trial operation, based on its results, a decision on further purchase will be made. The aircraft is still accepted for service.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 21 September 2020 14: 23
        +1
        The aircraft is still accepted for service.

        Yes, but you can't hear any progress on this plane: no modifications, no orders, no discussions about the size of the order ... nothing at all. This is a light fighter, hundreds of them are needed.
        It is clear that MO is not particularly in a hurry to share his thoughts on this matter, but somehow it was faster with Sukhimi.
  4. Boris Chernikov
    Boris Chernikov 21 September 2020 19: 59
    0
    laughing oh ... that is. Americans, because of the financial issue, order new F-15 / 16s for themselves, but Russia should only hit the 5th generation ... then you need to hammer nails not with a microscope, but with an X-ray microscope)
    1. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 22 September 2020 00: 08
      0
      Quote: Boris Chernikov
      Americans because of the financial issue order new F-15/16


      Americans don't order new F-16s.
      1. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 22 September 2020 14: 19
        -1
        but have already ordered the 15th and are actively discussing purchases of the 16th under the brand name "F-21"
        1. The eye of the crying
          The eye of the crying 22 September 2020 20: 35
          +1
          Quote: Boris Chernikov
          actively discussing purchases of the 16s under the brand name "F-21"


          That is, they do not buy F-16s, of course. Where and who is discussing the purchase of the F-21 for the United States? Link please.
          1. Boris Chernikov
            Boris Chernikov 22 September 2020 20: 37
            -2
            f-21 is the 16th, but under a beautiful sauce "new plane" .. in fact, the car was assembled for an Indian tender, but it obviously won't give a ride there ... Therefore, now they are discussing the purchase for the USA .. and looking for a link, I'm honestly too lazy )
            1. The eye of the crying
              The eye of the crying 22 September 2020 20: 46
              +1
              You may think that the F-21 is the F-16, but now you yourself say that they are not purchased.

              Quote: Boris Chernikov
              ... Therefore, now they are discussing the purchase for the USA ... and looking for a link, I'm honestly too lazy)


              The States are a big country. Who and what is not discussing there ...
  • KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 21 September 2020 08: 52
    +2
    quite a plausible scenario, especially since the plans to replace both engines and equipment for the 30s have already been announced. Where did the MiG-41 come from after 27 years?
    However, experts believe that after this date, the stake will be made on the production of the Su-57 fighter and the MiG-41 interceptor.
    1. venik
      venik 21 September 2020 10: 40
      +3
      Quote: KVU-NSVD
      Where did the MiG-41 come from after 27 years?
      But experts It is believed that after this date, the stake will be made on the production of the Su-57 fighter and the MiG-41 interceptor.

      ========
      Such "experts"! request
      1. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 21 September 2020 20: 04
        0
        no, they are about the fact that Russia by the 30th year promises to issue a new interceptor
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 21 September 2020 08: 52
    +2
    Ultimately, it is unlikely that Russia will continue to produce two separate Flankers with such similar designs for similar missions, especially since they are becoming more and more similar to each other.


    Everyone agrees with this .... you can even add the Su34 the same.

    And why not follow the path of the cockpit in the MiG-35S? There is a single cockpit and a canopy for 1x and 2x cars. 1 pilot and 1 tank or 2 pilots.
  • Doctor
    Doctor 21 September 2020 08: 53
    -2
    Su - 34 there, and there will be norms.
  • Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 21 September 2020 09: 01
    +4
    One gets the impression that yesterday's schoolchildren who have played tanks and something like "IL-2" write in "Military Watch". However, this is an obvious trend in modern "mass journalism". It doesn't matter what exactly you write, it doesn't matter if there are objective facts to support what you wrote, the main thing is the title. Why is that? Yes, because in the discussion of such articles, either the same schoolchildren or those who have gone out of their minds and fallen into childhood senile of different ages participate. An adequate adult person has neither the desire nor, in the first place, time for this. The world is rapidly infantilizing and this is especially noticeable in the press. In the 80s, no one would have missed such an article, because it was a complete crap.
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 21 September 2020 09: 51
      +8
      We have a publicly popular patriotic site ..... an open discussion board. No need to assess .... this requires knowledge and skills. Put + or - .... And in the 80s for 90% of such articles would give 10 years for disclosure. It's like discussing the MiG80 MLD in the 23s, indicating the instruments, sights, radars and thrust of its turbojet engine.
      1. Al_lexx
        Al_lexx 21 September 2020 10: 20
        -5
        Quote: Zaurbek
        We have a publicly popular patriotic site .....

        At "YOU", who is it? Are you the owner of this resource?
        And in general, from what kind of drinking do you tell me what to write here?
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 21 September 2020 11: 42
          +5
          From the same one from which you indicate to the rest.
          It seemed that you have an aggravation. I decided to clarify.
          1. Al_lexx
            Al_lexx 21 September 2020 17: 09
            -3
            Quote: Zaurbek
            From the same one from which you indicate to the rest.

            Where did you read this from me? Did I personally point out something to you? Maybe the rest of the readers?
            You, dear, will learn to answer for yourself! And then yapping here, like that Belarusian housewife who imagines herself the president of a multimillion country.
            "Here.." ))

            I said that the quality of the resource is falling rapidly. Yes, once a week two or three articles are published, in the historical section and in armaments. The news section is yellower than yellow. The sections "Opinion" and "Analytics" match the perestroika newspaper "Komsomolskaya untruth".
            I have something to compare with. I perfectly remember what kind of resource it was almost seven years ago and how interesting it was to communicate here.
            And now ...
            I go to scroll diagonally. Sofa experts write, they comment. No, of course not all, but the further - the more. And it really upsets me.
            Well, you probably all match. The dumber the better. So, chtol? ))
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 21 September 2020 18: 49
              -1
              They yelp in your mirror. Chtole.
              1. Al_lexx
                Al_lexx 21 September 2020 21: 45
                0
                Handsome, with a talking nickname! ))
                Judging by the pursuit, you sit without getting out. Well, yes, what else can the student do? ))
                1. Zaurbek
                  Zaurbek 22 September 2020 07: 02
                  0
                  Thank. Phones are not taken at school. Here I sit.
                  1. Al_lexx
                    Al_lexx 22 September 2020 17: 59
                    0
                    Yes Yes..))
      2. K-612-O
        K-612-O 21 September 2020 12: 56
        -4
        In the 80s, they began to cut this fighter into scrap metal.
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion 21 September 2020 12: 59
          +5
          MiG-23MLD in the 80s for scrap? Yes, you have direct knowledge of God!
        2. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 21 September 2020 15: 51
          +1
          I read that on the courses at the Mary training ground, the instructors at 23mln set the heat to the pilots of Migov29x
    2. Hexenmeister
      Hexenmeister 22 September 2020 09: 39
      0
      It seems that yesterday's schoolchildren are writing in "Military Watch"
      Rather, we were given "empty chatter" from this article for review, and their main message was that fourth-generation aircraft will be relevant in the future, both in the RF Air Force and in the export supplies of the Russian Federation, due to the lower price, and inexhaustible modernization opportunities.
      While the Russian Air Force is likely to acquire the Su-57 much faster under the next State Arms Plan, it is expected that there will still be significant demand for advanced fourth-generation designs that are significantly cheaper both to build and operate, and have the potential to be upgraded with many of the same next generation technologies.
      ... while Russia itself could reorient its purchases to sixth generation aircraft, most of its export orders will likely continue to be for advanced fourth generation aircraft such as the Su-30 or MiG-35, at the expense of the lower cost ...
      ... Ultimately, it is unlikely that Russia will continue to produce two separate Flanker fighters with such a similar design for similar tasks, especially as the designs are becoming more and more similar to each other. It is likely that the new improved aircraft, regardless of whether it is designated as "Su-40", "Su-35M" or something else, will continue to be purchased by the Russian Air Force as a cheaper analogue of the Su-57, and also sold for export.
  • Maks1995
    Maks1995 21 September 2020 09: 08
    +1
    Military Watch is far from understanding Russian realities
  • Lookass
    Lookass 21 September 2020 09: 24
    -1
    I also believe in ROFAR radar
  • tech3030
    tech3030 21 September 2020 09: 44
    +2
    "And what will the head of the transport department say !?"
  • Oleg1263
    Oleg1263 21 September 2020 09: 54
    +6
    Passive scan radars likely to be obsolete after 2027

    On the contrary. In my opinion, fighters should turn on the active radar mode in extreme cases. It is necessary to irradiate targets from satellites and AWACS, and fighters need to receive and analyze the "reflection".
    1. kit88
      kit88 21 September 2020 12: 22
      +9
      What kind of "passive scanning" radar is this? It lacks a transmitter as such? Open source software or what?
      It looks like translation difficulties.
      In the context of the article, it rather means abandoning PFAR in favor of AFAR.
      1. Hexenmeister
        Hexenmeister 21 September 2020 12: 37
        +2
        It looks like translation difficulties
        No, these are not translation difficulties, the original says so:
        with passively scanned radars

        this is a moron!
  • Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 21 September 2020 10: 34
    +9
    The very formulation of the question, voiced in the title of the article, stinks of fierce amateurism. I mean that no one and nothing will "unite" (neither will weld ass to face, nor wings on the second floor))))).
    There will be gradual upgrades, taking into account profitability, with an eye on the remaining life of the airframe. In the end, there will still be at least two dryings. One is more expensive (like the commander's, it is the fifth generation) and the other is cheaper 4 ++, with the maximum possible unification of weapons. If we count as the authors of the American "military alarm clock" think, then three, since 34 is still not a fighter, but American botanists probably know better.))
    Sorry for being boring, just the number of extremely moronic articles on VO has been going off scale lately. The resource has turned from quite professional (in presentation and content) into regular "classmates". They will tell me - "If you want to do well, do it yourself." Alas, I am not a journalist. I am a reader. But this does not mean that you can fill the resource space with such jelly. For the sake of attendance, the quality of the audience also suffers. Most of the comments are three words like "everything is fine, keep it up" or "everything is gone and you do not understand anything." Well, this is PPC, colleagues ... crying
    1. K-612-O
      K-612-O 21 September 2020 12: 54
      +1
      I fully share your position hi
    2. max702
      max702 22 September 2020 09: 49
      +1
      Quote: Al_lexx
      The resource has turned from quite professional (in presentation and content) into regular "classmates"

      The resource took first place in the segment of military sites in our country, after which it attracted close attention of the propaganda and media control services of a potential enemy and was bought with giblets by an Israeli citizen with very interesting views .. After this, the site smoothly turns into UG .. So our "partners" are working on all fronts and directions without forgetting anything .. The first sign of similar actions was the sale of Skype to Microsoft when they refused to transfer the encryption keys for their messages in it .. After the purchase, everyone forgot about Skype by going to other messengers, and just merged .. Also in "water! and all-spreads \ urakryakalkami turn into an icteric site ala rambler and others like them ..
      1. Al_lexx
        Al_lexx 22 September 2020 13: 47
        +1
        Quote: max702
        Likewise, IN "with water! And all-spreading \ urakryakalkami turn into an icteric site ala rambler and others like them ..

        +1
        Straight, removed from the tongue.
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion 21 September 2020 10: 50
    +1
    In practice, a variety of combinations are possible:
    1) Release of only Su-57. It is highly unlikely as it is ideal for breaking through air defenses, but not for routine bombing. I do not think that the share of the Su-57 in tactical aviation will ever exceed 50%. The complication and rise in the cost of some designs always leads to the search for cheaper alternatives.
    2) Release of the Su-57 and MiG-35 for mass production and replacement of the Su-25 as a workhorse of small wars.
    3) Release of the Su-57 and Su-35.
    4) The emergence of a single two-seat multipurpose aircraft based on the Su-35.

    Or maybe they will even revive the Su-25 on the new tech. level.
    1. Eug
      Eug 21 September 2020 19: 33
      0
      An alternative could be the new Su-5 (x) -naturally, based on the Su-57- with TWO BOARD-FREE izd. 30 takeoff weight 25 tons. (class of Raphael, Eurofighter, MiG-35). I don't think its development and production will be super expensive '(scaling up the Su-57), but the main gain is in the cost of a flight hour. In general, for some reason, the thought of "dividing" the Su-57 into a somewhat heavier two-seater Su-57-2 (take-off weight of about 42 tons) and a "single" single Su-5 (x), the most unified
      between themselves ...
  • bars1
    bars1 21 September 2020 11: 31
    -2
    Quote: EvilLion
    I don't think the Su-57's share of tactical aviation will ever exceed 50%.

    Yeah, Su-35S, Su-30, Su-34, MiG-35 will be produced until the end of the world! Is not it EvilLion?
    But seriously, after 2027 it is necessary to stop the production of all aircraft of the T-10 family and the 29th family and release only the Su-57.
    1. K-612-O
      K-612-O 21 September 2020 12: 51
      -2
      That’s why the Americans will collect Hornets until the age of 30, which are the same age as the dryers. And the attempt to make a mass aircraft of the 5th generation is still quite unsuccessful looking at the F-35.
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 21 September 2020 13: 40
        +2
        The F-35 is too small just for internal bays. The Yankees could make a big plane with 2 engines and then no one could compete with them. But it turns out too expensive. Because "Superhornet" on the new tech. level.
        1. K-612-O
          K-612-O 21 September 2020 15: 00
          +2
          So they did it. The F-22 is a wonderful aircraft, only more than 240 pieces were not released. And the torment of the penguin, I'm afraid this is an endless series
      2. zwlad
        zwlad 21 September 2020 14: 22
        0
        Oh, right now, they will minus you.
      3. The eye of the crying
        The eye of the crying 22 September 2020 00: 12
        0
        Quote: K-612-O
        Something Americans until 30 years old will collect Hornets, which are the same age as dryers.


        The Super Hornet is actually a new aircraft. By the way, the Navy wanted to abandon the new F / A-18.
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 21 September 2020 13: 38
      +5
      Su-57, at a minimum, will require more maintenance due to the internal weapons bay and additional. radars. At the same time, it is no better than machines of a simpler design, when you need to fly close and drop a certain number of bombs. The irony is that the military is now not interested in the MiG-35, because even if the Su-35 is 2 times more expensive, it can do more and flies farther, which ultimately reduces the number of vehicles with air bases and the low cost of the MiG-35 ceases to be an argument. But if something even more expensive and complex comes to replace the Su-35, then the MiG-35 may again be in demand in its niche.

      Aviation, as it were, exists for strikes against ground targets, and any disassembly of fighters among themselves makes sense only because the winner will be able to bomb with impunity. And the allocation of all machines to fighters does not make much sense.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 21 September 2020 15: 10
    +1
    Irkut closed the road to the export Su-32 to Algeria with its Su-30.
  • 123456789
    123456789 21 September 2020 15: 58
    +1
    [media = https: //youtu.be/aJTec28C034]
    aerobatics of Yuri Vashchuk on the Su 35S MAKS 2019
    [media = https: //youtu.be/rKIPALBDIo4]
    Su 57 as the highlight of the MAKS-2019 program Twin takeoff Shortened landing Group and solo aerobatics
    Su-30SM2. Does Russia need Super-Sukhoi?
    Some time ago, the Chinese edition of the Global Times published a message in which it declared the unconditional advantage of Chinese J-20 aircraft over Su-30 fighters. It is reported that during training events, the pilot of a combat vehicle from the PRC with a score of 17: 0 defeated combat units produced in Russia.


    It is necessary to carry out similar "training measures" laughing Su-30 \ 35 against Su-57, and if the score is confirmed laughing then it will become obvious
    Su-30SM2. Does Russia need Super-Sukhoi?
    soldier
    1. 123456789
      123456789 23 September 2020 14: 19
      0
      Meanwhile, at specialized Russian forums, which are often conducted by both combatant and former military pilots, information has appeared that deserves, at least, attention. According to it, the Su-30 was accidentally hit by a Su-35 fighter during a "training battle".

      The wingman on the Su-35S went into the tail of the Su-30M2 and opened fire from his GSh-30-1. But no one told the pilot that the gun was combat-ready (the technician, obviously, forgot to turn off the electric igniter, and the pilot forgot to turn off the weapon)

      - writes an anonymous participant.

      The Su-35S and Su-30M2 practiced aerial combat, the Su-35S was supposed to shoot photos, but instead fired a real volley from a cannon at the 30th and demolished a bit of "plumage". The crew of the 30th successfully ejected, and the pilot of the Su-35S, after everything that happened, was a little shocked.

      - follows from another message.

      This information should be treated with a good degree of skepticism, because the official statement of the press service of the Western Military District contains nothing of the kind. At the same time, the ZVO has not yet named even preliminary reasons for the fall of the Su-30.

      Added: At 12:26 Moscow time on September 23, a source from the Russian news agency TASS confirmed information about an accidental attack against the Su-30.

      Of course, I proposed to conduct training air battles between the Su-30 \ 35 \ 57, so that there was only one Super Sukhoi, but you shouldn't take everything so literally! The key word in my proposal was EDUCATIONAL!
  • Sancho_SP
    Sancho_SP 21 September 2020 16: 15
    0
    It remains to turn on the brains and add the Su-34 here. It will turn out to be a kind of Russian F-35: a universal machine for any task.
  • Eug
    Eug 21 September 2020 19: 22
    +1
    As for me, the naval version should be done on a common base with the MiG-41 with a maximum take-off weight of about 50 tons (corresponds to the MiG-31BM) and a carrying capacity of 14 tons. (2 pcs. X-32 conformally and some "trifle" for self-defense, or 2, or even 3 Daggers, 4 Onyx, etc.). I see him as a "reduced" Tu-160 with two "ed.30".
  • lvov_aleksey
    lvov_aleksey 21 September 2020 19: 31
    0
    horror, they figured us out))))))))))))))))))))
    ps enough to create discussions about the inventions of a potential enemy !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Boris ⁣ Shaver
    Boris ⁣ Shaver 22 September 2020 02: 36
    +1
    against the backdrop of the future increase in purchases of the Su-57

    Much more then