Military Review

"Russian somersaults are no longer needed": Western press on the likelihood of close air combat

207
"Russian somersaults are no longer needed": Western press on the likelihood of close air combat

Somersault



The use of aircraft in combat dates back to World War I, when biplanes began to carry out the first reconnaissance missions. Soon, the pilots realized that they could defeat the enemy by firing from a rifle weapons... As a result, in 1915, France began to install machine guns on aircraft; this idea was taken up by other countries.

The age of dog fighting is over


Thus was born "dogfight" [dogfight, close air combat], consisting in the execution of aerobatics in order to take your car behind the enemy aircraft to use short-range weapons. The name comes from circular motions, reminiscent of fighting dog maneuvers

- writes expert Matteo Sanzani for the Western edition of Before Flight Staff.

As indicated in the Western press, still great importance is attached to "dog fights". The US Air Force continues to use aggressor squadrons that engage in aerial combat during the Red Flag exercise

There are similar schools in other countries, for example, in Russia, where training is currently taking place at the Lipetsk airbase.

- the press writes.

However, the author believes that after the Vietnam War, close air battles were not fought, except for rare exceptions. The introduction of technological innovations and changes in tactics and strategy have further reduced their importance. Sanzani suggests recalling Operation Desert Storm in Iraq (1991). Coalition forces have fought for air superiority with missile strikes against command and control centers, combined with anti-aircraft defense.


Hill


Aerobatics in the past


Despite this obvious trend, Russia continues to focus on the "super-maneuverability" of its 4th generation fighters with new versions of the MiG-29 and Su-27 family models [apparently, they mean the MiG-35 and Su-35S]. The Russians invented impressive aerobatics such as the Cobra and Kulbit, the latter is possible only for aircraft with vector thrust [yet, on the contrary, it is required to perform Pugachev's Cobra, you can go into somersault on any plane - the main thing is go out]

- explains the expert, pointing out that the United States went in a different direction and focused on stealth, developing the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II.

The importance of air combat has diminished over the years, and the likelihood of such air combat is minimal. The development of drones, modern surface-to-air missiles, more and more effective countermeasures, electronic warfare and stealth technologies are changing the conditions of the modern battlefield and helping to avoid "dog fights"

- Sanzani writes, concluding: "Nobody needs Russian somersaults anymore."

Photos used:
Russian Defense Ministry website
207 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 17 December 2020 05: 35
    +44
    I'll look at a NATO fighter pilot when his missile weapons are blocked by electronic warfare or wasted on false targets.
    Missiles are expensive for large-scale conflict and war ... the arsenals of missiles are not endless ... so the moment when the guns will be needed again is inevitable.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Mitroha
        Mitroha 17 December 2020 07: 07
        +27
        Sanzani suggests recalling Operation Desert Storm in Iraq (1991).

        Also remember about Syria and about the Houthis, and it will be clear that there will be no close fights. Think so, and train pilots that way.
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 17 December 2020 09: 59
          +22
          These Western experts have a chance to be very surprised.
          Have they also canceled missile evasion maneuvers?
          Only on electronic warfare and hope? hi
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 17 December 2020 20: 42
            +9
            Quote: Alex777
            Have they also canceled missile evasion maneuvers?

            UPDATE.
            The faster he turned in the direction of the enemy, the faster he aimed the same missiles at him, the faster he captured the target and the faster he gave the command to launch.
          2. Intruder
            Intruder 18 December 2020 02: 12
            0
            It's just that their electronic warfare is effective, from what they can shoot them down, that's what they hope! Others have worse systems, which is why in a "dog dump" you need super-maneuverability and 30 mm. "metal cutters"!
    2. Siberian 66
      Siberian 66 17 December 2020 05: 47
      -1
      NATO will never get into close combat. They fight with technology and network. And their electronic warfare is no worse. One will use up missiles - another will do with full ammunition. Moreover, they have a quantitative advantage. They will hit from a long distance and dump. Hit did not hit - it doesn't matter. Another will finish. If you go to get closer, it will drag you into the air defense area or an air ambush.
      1. Dodikson
        Dodikson 17 December 2020 06: 11
        +34
        how would you hint that their electronic warfare is no worse, does not make the operation of their radar guaranteed, their electronic warfare will simply clog OUR radar, but THERE radar will not work well from this.
        already in Iraq, where the mattresses had an overwhelming air superiority, there were AWACS, electronic warfare and so on, although Iraq did not have either electronic warfare or AWACS. and there the SD VV SD had 7 launches on one target. and I will repeat this - without the Iraqis' opposition in terms of electronic warfare.
        in a war with us, all their maximum ranges will go nowhere.
        the AMRAAM control channels will be jammed with interference (the seeker is only at the final section) and is taken to the side, if it comes to a distance of 20-25 km, the seeker itself will be beaten.
        by the way, in the final section, AMRAAM has little energy (here the Europeans have already bypassed them having already made a 2-stage explosive missile defense) and an anti-missile maneuver can even help.
        but Stealth is good only in the X range, in the rest they are visible.
        and with the release of ROFAR, they are generally khan, and they can be seen and fly like irons.
        1. Aerodrome
          Aerodrome 17 December 2020 06: 26
          -39%
          Quote: Dodikson
          and with the release of ROFAR, they are generally khan, and they can be seen and fly like irons.

          Nichrome se ... we finally have people appeared, vaasche rummaging in the locators .. gladdens .. Dodik, let's burn, I still don't sleep after the night ... porzhu.
          1. Dodikson
            Dodikson 17 December 2020 06: 28
            +26
            tell your curator to give you a shift after the night shift.
            and let him send someone more literate here. and preferably under your own account, so that there is no confusion.
            1. Aerodrome
              Aerodrome 17 December 2020 06: 32
              -31%
              Quote: Dodikson
              tell your curator to give you a shift after the night shift.
              and let him send someone more literate here. and preferably under your own account, so that there is no confusion.

              under "substances" or what? wink do not overuse.
              1. Dodikson
                Dodikson 17 December 2020 18: 48
                +6
                under the grant what? do not overuse.
          2. digitalcn75
            digitalcn75 18 December 2020 12: 27
            0
            Very funny! laughing
      2. Aerodrome
        Aerodrome 17 December 2020 06: 12
        -32%
        Quote: Siberian 66
        NATO will never get into close combat. They fight with technology and network. And their electronic warfare is no worse. One will use up missiles - another will do with full ammunition. Moreover, they have a quantitative advantage. They will hit from a long distance and dump. Hit did not hit - it doesn't matter. Another will finish. If you go to get closer, it will drag you into the air defense area or an air ambush.

        on the verge of "foul" you are playing, right now, "patriots" will write you in "liberasty", and in "vsepropalschiki". here it is customary to wear pink earflaps. yesobserve your dress code .. and glasses of the same color. wassat
        1. Kazbek
          Kazbek 17 December 2020 19: 51
          +19
          on the verge of "foul" you are playing, right now, "patriots" will write you in "liberasty", and in "vsepropalschiki". here it is customary to wear pink earflaps. yes observe your dress code..and glasses of the same color. wassat


          Previously, such nonsense on the forums was called a flood and was mercilessly removed by moderators. And for multiple repetitions, the stoned one was banned forever. Now 70% of discussions of any topic are made of such a ram, and everyone can ... Today forums are evaluated not by the literacy of comments, but by their number. Shame ...
        2. Senka naughty
          Senka naughty 17 December 2020 20: 03
          +1
          Comment on YouTube with your gaming vocabulary.
        3. Senka naughty
          Senka naughty 17 December 2020 20: 04
          0
          Comment on YouTube with your gaming vocabulary.
        4. digitalcn75
          digitalcn75 18 December 2020 12: 30
          +1
          They also like to throw pink earflaps at the door.
        5. Black Colonel
          Black Colonel 19 December 2020 18: 17
          0
          "... keep your clothes on ... and glasses of the same color." Sorry, is "glasses" a plural point here? laughing
      3. Fitter65
        Fitter65 17 December 2020 07: 29
        +24
        Quote: Sibiryak 66
        NATO will never get into close combat. They fight with technology and network

        A simple example of the development of technology. in the late 1950s, the abandonment of cannon armament in favor of missiles occurred. That F-4В / С in the USA, but then they began to hang suspended cannon containers on them, and then the F-4E with a built-in cannon went ... already the MiG 21SM cannon returned again, so the rejection of maneuverable combat has already been once ...
      4. dauria
        dauria 17 December 2020 15: 33
        +6
        NATO troops will never get into close combat


        A strange statement. They just perfectly understand that the fight from medium distances by all means will go to the near missile all-aspect. Provided a more or less equal opponent. And the ratio of medium-to-close missiles is 1: 3. Moreover, their conclusions - when attacking, ultra-long-range missiles are not needed, while in defense, they are needed.
        The cannon is like a pistol for the infantry. There is no sense, but it is necessary to carry.
        Why present them as burdocks, dragging dubious articles here?
        They are just analyzing, modeling, and conscientiously studying. Although after Lebanon-82 there is nothing special to study. Everyone runs away from them into the bushes, the gap in means, level of management and tactics is too great. ...
      5. meandr51
        meandr51 17 December 2020 18: 03
        -3
        And no one will ask them. They will demolish all AWACS from the S-500 and overwhelm aviation with DVB and BVB missiles, and airfields with Iskander and Caliber missiles. It is not for them to fight the Syrians and Iraqis. In Europe, the advantage is ours. Electronic warfare is debatable.
      6. frruc
        frruc 17 December 2020 19: 04
        0
        Do not forget that there is also a bomber aircraft that operates outside the air defense zone and is not accompanied by an aircraft. Who will work on them?
    3. Alexey from Perm
      Alexey from Perm 17 December 2020 06: 33
      -15%
      Did you fly on airplanes wearing toys at least? It has long been clear to everyone that to win in close combat, you must first survive in the long range. This is clear to everyone except for people like you jingoistic patriots. And our pilots in the event of war, of course, will be a pity ...
      1. Aerodrome
        Aerodrome 17 December 2020 06: 35
        -16%
        Quote: Alexey from Perm
        And our pilots in the event of war, of course, will be a pity ...

        I'm sorry for you already ... don't .... I'm lying, I'm not sorry.
      2. Fitter65
        Fitter65 17 December 2020 07: 30
        +10
        Quote: Alexey from Perm
        And our pilots in the event of war, of course, will be a pity ...

        Whose are yours? ..
        1. Alexey from Perm
          Alexey from Perm 17 December 2020 21: 33
          0
          mine are russian
      3. nemar7106
        nemar7106 17 December 2020 13: 18
        +19
        Did you fly? I did not fly, but I spent 30 years in aviation at the command post as an officer of the combat command from the PN to the command post of the corps, and was always surprised by the statements of incompetent people in the area in which they do not think, and if they do, they were failures in tactics, BRAVS and characteristics of domestic and foreign aircraft. But how did our people fight the Americans in Vietnam? on the MiG 17 against the F - 4 Phantoms and shot them down in close combat, although the F 4 carried 8 medium and short-range missiles ...
        1. Alexey from Perm
          Alexey from Perm 17 December 2020 21: 33
          -2
          then there were no stealth, that's the problem.
          1. Fitter65
            Fitter65 17 December 2020 23: 58
            +3
            Quote: Alexey from Perm
            then there were no stealth, that's the problem.

            Generally past the basin. F-117 which the Serbs shot down out of "ignorance" -stels. True, although he was designated as a fighter, air combat for him - any was contraindicated. And again, stealth is not a panacea, as soon as you turn on the radar your "stealth" starts to go to zero, so it's not for nothing that our aircraft, starting with the MiG-23 and MiG-25, were equipped with infrared detection stations, and on the Su-27 and MiG- 29 began to put KOLS ...
            1. Intruder
              Intruder 18 December 2020 02: 20
              -1
              True, even though he was designated as a fighter
              well, if you correctly approach the western terminology, he is an attack aircraft, and never a fighter;)) somehow like this ...
              again, stealth is not a panacea, as soon as you turn on the radar, your "stealth" starts tending to zero,
              there are enough optoelectronic systems to work on the ground, plus external target designation up to laser target designation from the ground, by the way, they will illuminate if necessary and without turning on their own radar, just so as not to open up in the zone of the alleged enemy air defense!
              1. Fitter65
                Fitter65 18 December 2020 07: 28
                +3
                Quote: Intruder
                , if you correctly approach the western terminology, he is a strike aircraft, and never a fighter;)) somehow like this ...

                Teach materiel, it is designated F-117A, where F is a fighter (Fighter). It's from
                US Aircraft Designation Systems (1962), also referred to as MDS (Model-Design-Series), has been in effect since September 18, 1962 and is currently in use.
                By the way, we are discussing here not the possibility of operating the aircraft on the ground, but about air combat, where
                Quote: Intruder
                target designation up to laser target designation from the ground, by the way, they will illuminate if necessary and without turning on their own radar, just so as not to open up in the zone of the alleged enemy air defense!

                I would like to see how you illuminate a maneuvering fighter with a laser. Even NATO does not have enough AWACS for all aircraft, again, it is one thing when an aircraft flies outside of a low-intensity combat zone, where there are no decent air defense systems and other projectile actions, and it is quite another matter to fly into the area of ​​operation of air defense systems, fighters, and other professionals who would not mind knocking down such a low-maneuverable "goose" ...
                1. Intruder
                  Intruder 18 December 2020 13: 52
                  0
                  Teach materiel, it is designated F-117A, where F is a fighter (Fighter). It's from
                  and ..., American colleagues also have a number of "some" assumptions in MDS! Just like our military men, by the way;) ..., but the product itself, in terms of its performance characteristics and tactical purpose, is just: a tactical attack aircraft of low visibility in RF and IR spectra;) where is it and where is the fighter !? It is not intended for air combat from the word at all, and the target combat load, only for work on ground targets (maximum on sea targets)!
                  1. Fitter65
                    Fitter65 18 December 2020 16: 28
                    +1
                    Quote: Intruder
                    American colleagues also have a number of "some" assumptions
                    It happens, but these are not our problems, they and the Su-25 in their classification were included in the category of fighters, but let's return to the "Lame Goblin" which is the F-117A, then the product itself does not correspond to its name in terms of its performance characteristics and purpose, so this is their Problems. At one time they had a very good strike aircraft, which was also listed as a fighter, the F-105 "Thunderchief", but as they say ...
                    Quote: Intruder
                    where is he and in what place is the fighter !? It is not intended for air combat from the word at all, and the target combat load, only for work on ground targets

                    Again, it’s not in our Defense Ministry that these aircraft were classified as fighters, but you don’t need to explain to me what the F-117A aircraft is invisible to American taxpayers, I studied this in the last millennium ...
                    1. Intruder
                      Intruder 18 December 2020 17: 28
                      0
                      great if studied in the last century even, honestly and without sarcasm! and why: "imperceptible" it has little visibility, which, as it were, hints that the EPR is still not equal to zero ... and that part of the radiation in the spectrum still leaves where it is necessary! ???
            2. Alexey from Perm
              Alexey from Perm 18 December 2020 10: 21
              -5
              this is just KOLS not a panacea. Stealth radars emit a noise-like signal that is difficult to intercept. Moreover, one plane can work with incl. radar, and his partner does not turn on the radar at all, but can launch on a target by transmitting data over the network.
              In any case, the pilot feels much better not being seen than being discovered.
              1. Fitter65
                Fitter65 18 December 2020 11: 45
                +4
                Quote: Alexey from Perm
                Stealth radars emit a noise-like signal that is difficult to intercept. Moreover, one plane can work with incl. radar and his partner does not turn on the radar at all, but can launch on a target,

                Important achievements in the XX century. were the creation of noise-like or broadband signals and the development of new communication systems based on them. Therefore, now not only a harmonic, pulse, digital, but also a complex broadband signal has become a carrier (carrier vibration) of information.
                .
                ... But again, this is not a panacea, and you cannot replace physics with any kind of advertising.
                The delay time of signals when traveling long distances can change due to changes in the characteristics of the propagation medium, and this affects differently the signals arriving in different ways, which, when added, causes temporary fluctuations in the signal level, called fading in radio communications. An out-of-phase change in the signal level at different frequencies of the SS signal spectrum leads to a strong weakening of the effect of this effect on such systems.
                - as it was
                detection range is directly proportional to the beam power.
                and so it remained. And any element emitting radio waves is always detected, and even more so transmitting data. Or do you think all these stealths will work in ideal polygon conditions, and their adversary in conditions of tough presing? In Vietnam, the excellent radars on the Phantoms did not save them from the MiG-17, which did not even have simple radio rangefinders ...
      4. Alex Kozyrev
        Alex Kozyrev 17 December 2020 14: 56
        0
        You have to understand that if something suddenly happens, then we will fight over our territory. So the advantage of the Amers and NATO in the amount of equipment will no longer play such a role. Like their "long-range" explosive missiles
        1. Alexey from Perm
          Alexey from Perm 17 December 2020 21: 35
          -2
          our air defense will add stability to some extent, this is a fact, but for the time being, we see it gradually knocking out.
    4. figwam
      figwam 17 December 2020 08: 39
      +11
      The age of dog fighting is over

      And on the F-35 they put a gun)))
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 17 December 2020 12: 48
        +2
        If the F-35 meets an enemy helicopter or a reconnaissance drone, then
        a pity to waste an explosive missile on it. From the cannon ...
      2. Intruder
        Intruder 18 December 2020 02: 23
        0
        in the cheapest, A-version, only for poor NATO partner countries, in all others this option is not available to the client!
    5. qwertyui
      qwertyui 17 December 2020 18: 46
      -5
      Americans are right
    6. avdkrd
      avdkrd 17 December 2020 21: 46
      +1
      There is no need to destroy their pleasant delusion. I hope that the opinion of this undoubtedly brilliant aviation expert is shared by the aircraft customers in NATO countries.
    7. Konnick
      Konnick 18 December 2020 04: 30
      +2
      First of all, the maneuverability of the fighter makes it possible to use the ability to fly at low altitudes for the purpose of stealth, especially in mountainous areas. If we recall the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999, then the united NATO aviation could not destroy a dozen Yugov MiG-29s within 4 months, which used extremely low altitudes, even hiding from AWACS and attacking enemy aircraft from below. Cannons cannons, but the most important advantage of maneuverability is the ability to stealthily fly using the terrain, but that's my opinion.
    8. tikhonov66
      tikhonov66 18 December 2020 12: 34
      -1
      "...
      therefore the moment when the guns will be needed again is inevitable.
      ..."
      - and not only guns ...
      Have you ever thought about why planes NEVER "shoot" rockets?
      - This is such a question in physics ... 8-))
      The fact is that after undocking (dropping, detaching) a FAST-moving (not super-maneuverable) aircraft and its missile - this missile flies for some time at the speed of the aircraft - FORWARD with its stabilizers. This situation is extremely unstable. And the rocket will most likely be deployed in the direction of the very aircraft that released it (dropped, unhooked). With all the ensuing consequences - the seizure of the homing head and alles-kaput. Here is such a peculiar way of suicide ...
      - therefore, if the enemy is approaching from the rear hemisphere - then for firing missiles - a QUICK speed reduction and / or turn towards the enemy is critical.

      - in this aspect ...
      8-))
    9. Peter Shmakov
      Peter Shmakov 18 December 2020 18: 03
      -3
      You won't look at him, he will take you from a couple of hundred kilometers with a rocket, and soon a drone. In the near future, drones will maneuver and fight, while a fighter will coordinate them from afar. Not one person can withstand the overload that a robot can withstand.
      1. Andrey sh
        Andrey sh 19 December 2020 00: 31
        +2
        First, manage to find the target from SUCH a distance and take it for escort. Especially when she makes an "unnecessary" maneuver and there is no Doppler shift ...
  2. Avior
    Avior 17 December 2020 05: 58
    +11
    There is a certain amount of truth in this
    Maneuverability, of course, is still needed, but its role is noticeably narrowed
    In long-range medium air combat in attack, its role is small, but for an anti-missile maneuver when the enemy attacks you, there is a need. But, I'm afraid, with the further appearance of missiles that retain a high overload capacity when approaching the target, maneuverability will not help much - the missile is potentially more maneuverable. And the first role in avoiding enemy attacks will be for electronic warfare and traps, and not for an anti-missile maneuver.
    There have also been significant changes in close combat. There were missiles with target acquisition after launch, with a high overload capacity, capable of attacking in any direction, there is no big sense in spinning, entering the enemy into the western hemisphere, although this gives certain advantages.
    There were missiles for a long time, the problem was with target designation
    Recently appeared
    1 indicators and helmets with a glass cockpit-style targeting system allowing aiming in any direction regardless of the aircraft position.
    2 optical-location systems of full-spherical view, network-centric possibilities of obtaining information about the enemy from other aircraft, afar radars, rtr stations - this made it possible to receive information about the enemy, regardless of the position of the aircraft at a greater distance than visually
    The foregoing, of course, reduces the requirements for maneuverability.
    But as long as they persist
    1. Dodikson
      Dodikson 17 December 2020 06: 13
      +12
      1) the development of electronic warfare means outstripping the development of the GOS
      2) the overwhelming majority of UR VVs in the final section have low energy and are not designed to defeat targets of the "fighter" class, their victims are heavy and clumsy aircraft, tankers, transport, AWACS.
      1. Avior
        Avior 17 December 2020 06: 38
        +3
        there are nuances.
        1. I agree with this, and I wrote that the situation will shift to electronic warfare from the anti-missile maneuver of aircraft.
        2. The overwhelming majority is not all. And in the long term, the situation is moving towards change.
        There are dual-mode engines at the UR VV, which allow you to restore energy in front of the target, two-stage are possible. There are explosive missiles with a sustainer ramjet engine that maintain a high speed throughout the flight, like Meteor, for example.
        Again, the AGSN, combined with modern AFAR radars and the network-centric capabilities of modern aircraft, make it difficult to determine when a long-range attack begins. Your PDF will most likely beep only when an AGSN missile is activated next to you, and there will be a minimum of time to dodge.
        Before that, everything was as you wrote, but everything goes to the fact that such missiles and new radars will force you to rely on electronic warfare at long ranges more than on maneuver, which will again increase the role of electronics and reduce maneuverability.
        1. Crimean partisan 1974
          Crimean partisan 1974 17 December 2020 08: 47
          +3
          1. I agree with this, and I wrote that the situation will shift to electronic warfare from the anti-missile maneuver of aircraft ......... for electronic warfare this is the same radar, but with the task of hammering the radar frequency with resonance. that is, the same radar station along the way has anti-radar missiles. for which an operating electronic warfare station is like a white hare that did not have time to shed during the change of seasons
          2 STR, it is likely that you will beep only when the AGSN turns on next to you ... the main thing that would beep ... everything else is in a maneuver ... I hope you do not need to explain that anti-aircraft missiles of any basing are undermined next to the target ( except for the seeker based on MK). Therefore, the maneuver will reduce to a minimum the hits of fragments, or even completely exclude ... well, this is where alloy is needed for equal overload of the pilot and fighter ...
          3 and you miss the next moment ... these are small distances between opponents in local conflicts where fighters literally rub each other against each other as soon as they leave the takeoff, that's exactly where the very "unnecessary" roll-outs and so on are needed
          1. Avior
            Avior 17 December 2020 08: 55
            +1
            there are anti-radar missiles along the way. for which an operating electronic warfare station is like a white hare that did not have time to shed during the change of seasons


            The main thing that would beep .. everything else is in the maneuver ... I hope you don’t need to explain that anti-aircraft missiles of any basing are undermined near the target (except for the seeker based on MK). Therefore, the maneuver will reduce to a minimum the hits of fragments or even completely will exclude.

            there is a directed disruption. The overload capacity of a person is inferior to missiles and, in principle, is limited - nothing can be done.
            where fighters literally rub each other against each other as soon as they leave the takeoff, that's exactly where the very "unnecessary" kulbids and so on is needed

            what somersaults, if rubbing?
            1. Crimean partisan 1974
              Crimean partisan 1974 17 December 2020 09: 22
              +1
              there is a directed disruption. The overload capacity of a person is inferior to missiles and, in principle, is limited - nothing can be done ... directed detonation only increases the proportion of submunitions towards the target, and is not always effective against intensively maneuvering objects ... with regards to overloads ... there is one dilemma .... the missiles have one technical flaw, the starting engine sets the speed and the sustainer maintains it as it burns out, with active maneuvering of the target, the rocket begins to drift (perpendicular air skid), since the main engine only maintains the speed of the rocket, then after drifting, the speed decreases with each maneuver. that is, an intensively maneuvering target makes the rocket weaken with each deep maneuver ..... if to be down to earth, this is clearly expressed in team sports, football, hockey, where athletes capable of intensive maneuvering were usually successful than others. although in strength and skill they are not inferior to the leader
              what somersaults, if rubbing? ..... I gave one of the examples of aerobatics. where in such situations it is necessary
              1. Avior
                Avior 17 December 2020 09: 43
                +2
                the plane has the same problem - after intensive maneuvers, energy is lost. Therefore, missiles against maneuvering targets are fired in pairs with a difference of several seconds. While you are doing an agile maneuver against the first, the second catches you at the exit from the maneuver.
                In addition, now there are already different missiles and engines for them. It is a matter of time before they get widespread. EW - similar. Has become an integral part of any modern aircraft.
                1. Crimean partisan 1974
                  Crimean partisan 1974 17 December 2020 10: 09
                  +3
                  the plane has the same problem - after intensive maneuvers, energy is lost ....... yes, but in the fighter it is compensated by the engine modes. but the rocket does not

                  Therefore, missiles against maneuvering targets are fired in pairs with a difference of several seconds. While you are doing an agile maneuver against the first, the second catches you exiting the maneuver ..... if we are discussing close air combat. then explosive missiles with radar ARLS are useless, with regards to the seeker with IR, then there is also one problem. this is the maximum target tracking angle, at the moment it was possible to reach no more than 60 degrees in yaw. and then only on the R-73T, on foreign counterparts, this angle does not exceed 35-40 degrees ... that is. if the pilot noticed either visually or with the help of the SPO, then such an attack may well be dropped by a maneuver ... and if the SOEM is also installed. then everything will be fine. but the cannon in close combat will not be dismissed as or by anything other than maneuverability
                  1. Avior
                    Avior 17 December 2020 10: 14
                    +2
                    if the pilot noticed either visually or with the help of a ROV, then such an attack may well be dropped by a maneuver.

                    if they have a close one, then their overload capacity is now very high, starting at all 360 degrees, matrix seeker, you can't just shake it off.
                    Maximum launch range: 20 km ....
                    Maximum available overload - 70g
                    Guidance system: thermal imaging seeker with a matrix of 320 × 240 pixels
                    The angle of deviation of the coordinator from the longitudinal axis is 100-110 ° (together with the angle of maneuver due to gas-dynamic control immediately after launch)
                    Lock-On After Launch function

                    but actually it was about distant ones.
                    1. Crimean partisan 1974
                      Crimean partisan 1974 17 December 2020 10: 28
                      0
                      their overload capacity is now very high, .... I repeat again. there are no 360 degrees. there is drift on transverse overload with decreasing speed. And there is a target lock that does not exceed 60 degrees, but the fact that it is difficult to shake off the matrix IR on the maneuver is yes, at the moment it seems like Lipa appeared instead of the EOS, even more threatening. which not only drives the IR-seeker of the missile crazy, but stupidly burns out the elements of detection ... somewhere in my archives. rummage
                      but in fact it was about long-range ....... well, with long-range attacks, everything is very clear and understandable, only to the point of them ... so only for fat ducks ..... yes, for long-range attacks, a multi-billion dollar fighter is not needed .... heavy old men like Tu-95 with s-400 on board and B-52 with patriots block 5 plus AWACS and AWACS to them and that's it ... it's all in the hat ... it will be much more effective than the exorbitantly expensive so-called fighters 5 generations
                      1. Avior
                        Avior 17 December 2020 10: 39
                        +1

                        110 degrees is Python 5. For Python 4, write + -90. I saw a video with Python 5 launches strictly back from the plane. A very playful racket. You won't dodge anywhere if you capture. And it will also be very difficult to leave before the capture, she is very quick from the start. and the fact that 70 overload and gas dynamic control, how do you shake it off?
                        hi
                      2. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 17 December 2020 11: 11
                        +2
                        110 degrees is Python 5. For Python 4, write + -90. I saw a video with Python 5 launches strictly back from the plane. A very playful racket. You won't dodge anywhere if you capture. .... since Python is so Python, let's take it apart from what is known ... and what is known ... it is known that the speed of the rocket after the launching has been worked out gains a speed of 4 M, that is, about 1300 m per second with thrust launcher 18 kN, then in this mode the rocket makes the maximum maneuver towards the target 110 degrees. then the main engine with a thrust of 7 kN comes into operation, the longitudinal overload of 70 F is also known, the transverse overload is not indicated, but I dare to assume that in the area, as in the P-73T 19-20 F, that is, at a speed of 1300 m per second at a transverse maneuver of 19 W, the main engine is simply not able to increase speed., because if you multiply 9.8 m in s squared by 19 and then the resultant by the averaged rocket iass of 100 kg. what would be 7 kN without speed loss, or rather like a cat cried .. that is, a single maneuver rocket .. what, in general, I am above our dispute and expounded
                      3. Avior
                        Avior 17 December 2020 11: 39
                        +2
                        It is known that the speed of the rocket, after the launching has been worked out, picks up a speed of 4 M, that is, approximately 1300 m per second with the launching thrust of 18 kN, then in this mode the rocket makes the maximum maneuver towards the target of 110 degrees. then the main engine with a thrust of 7 kN comes into operation, the longitudinal overload of 70 F is also known, the transverse overload is not indicated, but I dare to assume that in the area ...

                        you have too many guesses.
                        in the video, it was unfolding immediately after launch, the speed had not yet gained, and the turning angle is not the same as in the picture, but much more.
                      4. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 17 December 2020 11: 48
                        +1
                        in the video, it turned around immediately after launch, the speed has not yet gained, and the angle of rotation is not the same as in the picture, but much more ......... yes, understand. the launch of the rocket in itself is a guarantee of flight, but not the most important thing for which the rocket is actually produced, ... it is important how it compensates for the loss of speed on the marching sector during a maneuver .. that's all ... I will note only one thing, .. anti-aircraft missiles are successful exclusively in the surprise of an attack, and this is achieved with the help of a powerful energy installation in order to burn it up to 3 or more kilometers per second, and everything else from the crafty
                      5. Avior
                        Avior 17 December 2020 15: 10
                        +1
                        This is a short-range missile, it does not have time to lose much speed
                        But an airplane at a short range just does not have a speed reserve, and after its maneuver it will lose even more of it, and simply will not have time to dial
                      6. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 17 December 2020 15: 20
                        +1
                        This is a short-range missile, it does not have time to lose its speed much ..... well, it cannot, the laws of mechanics cannot be deceived. you can only clarify them. that with regards to the fighter, the afterburner makes things wonderful ..... and even an example. I wanted to highlight early in the comments ... in Vietnam, if the pilots noticed the launches of the air defense missile system, they tried not to run away, but on the contrary, to the meeting the course and then abruptly evaded ... but if the height allowed ... with such a maneuver, there were practically no losses from the air defense system among fighters ... well, something like this
                    2. Avior
                      Avior 17 December 2020 15: 15
                      +1
                      By the way, close combat is no more than 10 km (and in reality no more than 5) otherwise the enemy will simply not be seen. That is, the rocket will not burn out before it hits.
                    3. Crimean partisan 1974
                      Crimean partisan 1974 17 December 2020 15: 36
                      +1
                      That is, the rocket will not burn out before it hits ... everything is correct, it will not burn out, but it will not accelerate ... higher along the way, you saw something in my comments ... then I repeat ... a rocket weighing 100 kg with an overload of 19 W, it acquires a WEIGHT of 1900 kN, how an engine with a capacity of 7 kN will be able to push an almost two-ton weight, try to answer, ... so I will tell you, Newton's second law
                    4. Avior
                      Avior 17 December 2020 16: 00
                      +1
                      Will accelerate the starting, and the sustainer will support 4 M to the target
                      If you choke to maneuver near the target, it will lose speed - it will still be several times higher than that of the target.
                    5. Crimean partisan 1974
                      Crimean partisan 1974 17 December 2020 16: 08
                      +1
                      If you choke to maneuver near the target, it will lose speed - it will still be several times higher than that of the target ..... maybe high or maybe not. it depends on how many times it will reach the target with maximum overload. well, as a rule, this is once, if the target is notified of the attack. then maneuvers can chicken out the rocket ... this is confirmed by practice ... just as you should not dump the important factor of aerodynamics. this is the load on the wing. the higher the load. on the wing, the more inert the aerospace, the drift will be more ... you can count here, if not laziness. let's count Python and Su - !!!
                    6. Avior
                      Avior 17 December 2020 17: 01
                      +1
                      It will not be possible for the target to maneuver intensively for a long time, the speed is lost just like a rocket
                      Only the rocket flies up to 4m maneuvers, and the aircraft in close combat is 0,5m.
                      And there will simply be no time to disperse, this is close combat, everything happens quickly. And if there is also a pair launch of missiles, then even more so
                    7. Crimean partisan 1974
                      Crimean partisan 1974 17 December 2020 17: 18
                      +2
                      Only the rocket flies up to 4m maneuvers, and the plane in close combat is 0,5m ... and Seryozha. but in vain you didn’t want to calculate the wing loading, .. for a rocket it will be about 100 kg per 0.02 square meters. if translated, it will be almost a ton per square meter of aerodynamic inertia Drying about 400 kg per 1 square meter
                      but in general. missiles are different missiles are needed all sorts of important .... and fighters should be. how maneuverable. and high-speed, well, the most informative and protected by all sorts of electronic jamming bells and whistles ... but the fact that in the article the talker forced. so let him put the long-range players on the maize and fly, you can yell
              2. Crabong
                Crabong 18 December 2020 05: 33
                -3
                Rare nonsense. Homebrew physicist?
              3. Crimean partisan 1974
                Crimean partisan 1974 18 December 2020 09: 03
                +3
                Rare nonsense. ..... prove the opposite .... and very narrow-minded people are engaged in trembling
                Home-grown physicist? .... and this has to do with it !!! I expounded my thoughts at the level of the laws of physics at the level of the Soviet high school. and the basics of the youth acquired in the aviation circle ... who is to blame that you screwed up this whole thing ... you are to blame ... so you shouldn't grow old without knowing the ford
              4. Crabong
                Crabong 18 December 2020 22: 39
                -3
                I'll tell you one thing - the fact that you dragged Newton's law there is an unambiguous indicator of your level and your basics. And thank you again for the constructive comment, which, perhaps, provokes you to see what acceleration and overload are.
              5. Crimean partisan 1974
                Crimean partisan 1974 19 December 2020 20: 46
                +1
                will provoke you to see what acceleration and overload are ... well tell me. then it will be possible to doubt your knowledge ... and so ... you only have liquid stool ... please ... on the topic
              6. Crabong
                Crabong 19 December 2020 22: 31
                -1
                At school, but in the circle they fought, fought, but they did not achieve it ... Right now, I still have to?
              7. Crimean partisan 1974
                Crimean partisan 1974 20 December 2020 09: 38
                +2
                Right now, do I still have to? ....... yes, you don’t owe anything ... while you only feel manure on the fan ... it remains to find out why you got into the topic
              8. Crabong
                Crabong 21 December 2020 04: 50
                -1
                Fuck the physicist.
  3. Vitaly gusin
    Vitaly gusin 17 December 2020 13: 58
    -1
    Quote: Avior
    I saw a video with Python 5 launches strictly back from the plane.

    Perhaps this is a video?
  4. Avior
    Avior 17 December 2020 14: 53
    +1
    There was no video there from the F-16, if I'm not mistaken
    Who gave the link on Varolayna, now I can not find
  5. Dodikson
    Dodikson 17 December 2020 20: 12
    -2
    Many rockets have been able to shoot backward and have been for many years.
    the only thing that was good in the new Python is the matrix seeker, but it already exists on Sidewiders X.
    and Europeans and soon also ours are moving on to it.
  6. tikhonov66
    tikhonov66 18 December 2020 12: 52
    -1
    - good cartoons.
    The latter was especially "pleased" - like 3.35 - 3.48.
    There, the rocket turns around - and then flies DIRECT, in an incomprehensible way calculating the meeting point with the plane, which (apparently on purpose - for clarity) - stopped maneuvering ...
    - truly - the director - in his cartoon he is omnipotent ...
    8-)))
    - and the "turn" of the rocket itself is ANYWHERE except for "cartoons" - it is simply not shown ...
  7. Vitaly gusin
    Vitaly gusin 18 December 2020 14: 37
    +1
    Quote: tikhonov66
    There, the rocket turns around - and then flies DIRECT, in an incomprehensible way calculating the meeting point with the plane, which (apparently on purpose - for clarity) - stopped maneuvering ...

    Oh Andrew, should we be in sorrow
    Read what those who understand wrote

    Avior (Sergey)
    Yesterday, 10: 39
    110 degrees is Python 5. For Python 4, write + -90.

    The Python-5 full sphere launch ability or is an all-aspect missile, meaning it can be launched at a target regardless of the target's location relative to the direction of the launching aircraft. It can lock onto targets after launch, even when they are up to 100 degrees off the boresight of the launching aircraft.
    Because you are very competent, you will do the translation yourself.
    [media = http: //www.rafael.co.il/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Python-5-Brochure-Eng.pdf]
  • Vitaly gusin
    Vitaly gusin 17 December 2020 13: 44
    -1

    With your permission, I'll add to make it clear how this works. S-21 and S-22 are shown as the most advanced air defense systems, and not to show that they are bad.
    1. Andrey sh
      Andrey sh 19 December 2020 00: 45
      0
      The cartoon is interesting, only rockets will be fired HERE at the source of interference. The S-300 STATNO allocates 4 pieces for such purposes. And they will hit ABOVE, i.e. the pilots will hesitate to guide them with a beam. The entire screen of the locator will not be blocked by interference, only narrow sectors. So with such an attack as they drew, I do not envy the pilots - they will gut them. But I strongly suspect that CR and long-range anti-radar systems will be launched FIRST on the radar ...
      1. Vitaly gusin
        Vitaly gusin 19 December 2020 10: 42
        0
        Quote: Andrey sh
        Interesting cartoon,

        Cartoons are shown to those who are standing ovation and sitting in front of the TV, and all this is at the expense of the taxpayer, i.e. at your expense.
        AND THIS IS A COMMERCIAL private firm for the sale of their product, which was demonstrated at a number of international exhibitions.
        Sky shield ew provides high power over a wide frequency range in a 360 degree radius. The digital receiver can track complex emitters with high DF accuracy. Multibeam antenna transmitters are based on solid state amplifiers. Sky Shield can protect an entire fighter force, not just one plane. He has already found an international buyer.
        As usual, Rafael does not want to disclose clients. This onboard armament is already You can find on a wide range of platforms, namely the F-15, F-16, F-18, Super Tucano, L-39, Su-30, LCA, FA-80, Eurofighter Typhoon, Mirage 2000 and Rafale.
        X-Guard - new towed active radio
        The smart trap is designed to withstand advanced tracking techniques, including modern LORO techniques. The system is connected to the aircraft's protective avionics and electronic warfare system through a fiber-optic cable operating in a wide frequency range to combat various types of radars and missiles.
        Here is what INDIAN DEFENCE RSEARCH writes.
        http://idrw.org/this-israeli-system-can-beat-chinese-s-400-as-well-as-s-300-for-india/
        As you can see, there are also opposite opinions of international experts.
  • Dodikson
    Dodikson 17 December 2020 16: 28
    -2
    1) it doesn't matter where and what will move, the fact is that the DVB will only be with an underdeveloped enemy. with roughly equal opportunities, even mid-range combat will be a rare occurrence, most battles will shift to the close level.
    2) I myself wrote about Meteor (when I wrote about the fact that the Europeans are already making two-stage UR explosives), ours also made progress on this, and the mattresses in the new missiles will do the same,
    but the missile launch is still monitored, just like the BKO tracks the approach of any missiles, moreover, missiles are often detected at distances of 40-50 km and the aircraft has a lot of time for response.
    1. Avior
      Avior 17 December 2020 17: 03
      +2
      On the near side, even more so, there the missiles have an even higher reloading capacity
      Not the missiles that were just now
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 17 December 2020 12: 55
    0
    You need agility, but not super-maneuverability.
    The aircraft must be able to make a sharp turn without stopping in front of it.
    At transonic speed. This is useful.
    And many "somersaults" from air shows are not used in combat.
    1. Eugene-Eugene
      17 December 2020 14: 06
      0
      So that's why they are a show, the same "Cuban diamond" is just a sight. But keeping at least a bearing when performing a combat mission is already a practice.
    2. tikhonov66
      tikhonov66 18 December 2020 12: 58
      -1
      "...
      The plane must be able to make a sharp turn without stopping in front of it
      ..."
      - Well, yes - after all, you don't mind the pilot?
      6-9 "same" is practically the limit for most.
      - that is why everyone strives to switch to drones.
      Huy spin until the wings come off.
      But there is still not enough intelligence there.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 18 December 2020 13: 07
        0
        This is the standard training for the F-15, F-16, F-35 pilots.
        Make full circles with the smallest possible diameter.
        F-15 - at a speed of 1.2 MAX. F-16 and F-35 - at a speed of 0.85 MAX.
        F-15 has a larger circle. F-16 and F-35 have less.
        Super-maneuverable figures using the rotation of nozzles, I remind you that
        perform at speeds of 0.5-0.6 MAX, no more.
  • maksbazhin
    maksbazhin 17 December 2020 14: 34
    0
    Is it admitted that sooner or later "anti-missiles" will appear and the fighter will not only evade, but also counterattack first the missiles against it or against those aircraft that it covers (refuellers, AWACS, etc.) and then super-maneuverability will be needed again - to turn around quickly , capture and hold the target?
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 18 December 2020 02: 32
      0
      that sooner or later "anti-missiles" will appear and the fighter will not only evade, but also counterattack first missiles against it or against those aircraft it covers (refuellers, AWACS, etc.), and then super-maneuverability will again be needed - quickly turn around, capture hold the target?
      most likely, in the near future, it will be useful for unmanned vehicles, and is perfect as a countermeasure to the beam weapon systems of ground-based air defense systems! Right there at overloads, and it will be necessary to turn around or reduce the effect of radiation on the surface of the body and other structural elements and systems with unprotected optical elements !?
  • Dread
    Dread 17 December 2020 16: 18
    -1
    "Dear Avior", and when the seeker turns on at the end of the flight, and before that flies along the INS, will you be able to steer a modern air-to-air missile off course? Currently, ARGSN have systems of counteraction, of various kinds, interference. "Here, grandmother, she said in two."
  • Dread
    Dread 17 December 2020 16: 49
    -1
    "Dear Avior", they will hardly be able to divert an air-to-air missile off course with electronic warfare systems. I already wrote about this below. And jamming traps, as well as MALD, do not work on Russian-made air-to-air missiles. Then what can you suggest next. The speed of the air-to-air missile at the final stage of the flight of the R-37M is 6M, and not 4M, as in the US and NATO missiles.
    Sadness, big problems.
    1. Avior
      Avior 17 December 2020 17: 19
      +1
      That 6m, that 4m - there is no difference, the plane will not leave.
      What I am writing about
      1. Intruder
        Intruder 18 December 2020 02: 39
        0
        That 6m, that 4m - there is no difference, the plane will not leave.
        there is not a single one that could reach 2,5 M, at the moment, except: SR-71 and Mig-25 already in the last century, and you are talking about 4 and 6M, after 5 M the hypersound border begins ... somehow and there everything is still not clear with the materials in the plasma boundary layer and with radar and communication in the same spirit, only it remains to broadcast "cartoons" for adult taxpayers and clip planning blocks ... and use it all with all the ensuing properties " falling stone "!
        1. Avior
          Avior 18 December 2020 09: 43
          +3
          It's about the speed of the missiles
          I did not write about 6., but I did not argue either, in this case it did not matter
          And 4m is the speed of the Meteor, much higher than the speed of any aircraft
          Read the thread first
          hi
          1. Intruder
            Intruder 18 December 2020 14: 13
            0
            a little sorry, bro !? Yesterday I was just very tired when I caught my eye on your comment :)!
  • Alexander K_2
    Alexander K_2 17 December 2020 17: 02
    +1
    And where are these miracles - electronic warfare, various SHLEM's we take in the army? Maybe a draft will blow? And probably from the game IL-2! crying
  • Intruder
    Intruder 18 December 2020 02: 28
    +1
    1 indicators and helmets with a glass cockpit-style targeting system allowing aiming in any direction regardless of the aircraft position.
    and how this is combined with super-maneuverability in close combat (do not forget about the limitations on overloads for the pilot, here he is generally a "weak link" in comparison with unmanned systems for which the future is still), plus cannon armament, and so on definition on board the carrier, and it is not in the turrets !?
    1. Avior
      Avior 18 December 2020 09: 45
      +2
      Read the branch first. We are talking about melee missiles with full spherical launch
      1. Intruder
        Intruder 18 December 2020 14: 16
        0
        I didn't quite understand, super-maneuverability is used here, for an airborne missile defense system, and with standard cannon armament, and not for an RVV missile defense system !? Or did I not understand something again ???;)
        1. Avior
          Avior 18 December 2020 14: 26
          +3
          For the launch of modern short-range missiles in the presence of target designation means, the maneuverability of the carrier is not needed, since they are launched in any direction, and not only along the course of your aircraft.
          1. Intruder
            Intruder 18 December 2020 14: 47
            0
            right, here I am about the same thing, it is only needed ... if you do not have a modern multispectral optotron system and an AFAR with an FCS, plus an URO, and again here many people drowned yesterday about gun systems with their obvious course restrictions and they were raised with super-maneuverability, as a panacea since the days of Vietnam, more!;) therefore, the latest fashion trends for maneuverable kinetic interceptors "hite to kill", which do not have warheads with explosives and GGEs at all, are noticeable, which is especially interesting in terms of applications, in the field of: RVV MD!
  • Mykhalych
    Mykhalych 17 December 2020 05: 58
    +14
    Matteo Sanzani - who is this ... and what is this Before Flight Staff edition. I found only a blog with 24 subscribers ... There are a lot of such experts in Russia, a penny per bunch.
  • Egoza
    Egoza 17 December 2020 06: 02
    +7
    Tell the guys directly: "We can't do this!" Maybe for them it is somersaults, but you also need to be able to perform them!
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 18 December 2020 02: 46
      +1
      and why, these same somersaults (only for air shows and only), at 8g, almost any pilot is guaranteed to "float" in any way for a couple of seconds, plus while he "wakes up" and gets knocked down, something like: CUDA from Lockheed Martin, they have been successfully promoting this kinetic "baby" for almost a year .., and at 10g, he already stands with one foot "in the land of the eternal hunt" where the rainbow meets the sky;)!
  • svp67
    svp67 17 December 2020 06: 19
    +14
    Only battle will resolve the existing contradiction. There was already a period when they also decided to abandon maneuverability, putting everything on speed and from guns, deciding that the rocket would solve everything ... But life has shown that this is not so
    1. UAZ 452
      UAZ 452 18 December 2020 16: 45
      0
      And you can hear about "life has shown" applied to the decades after Vietnam? How many aircraft in later conflicts were destroyed by missile weapons from long and medium range, and how many by cannon fire in dog dumps? How many aircraft were actually able to evade (not escape due to speed) from modern air-to-air missiles? And then only the lazy did not remember about the F-4 and Vietnam, but I would like more recent evidence. They wrote the same thing about the cavalry before the Great Patriotic War - it will still show itself, and we beat your tanks in the Civil War (in the amount of two) .After Vietnam, much more time has passed than it was between the Civil and the Great Patriotic War.
      1. svp67
        svp67 18 December 2020 17: 20
        -1
        Quote: UAZ 452
        They wrote the same thing about the cavalry before the Great Patriotic War - it will still show itself

        And then she showed herself, and from the BEST side. Have you studied the history of that war, or do you live more on newspapers?
        Quote: UAZ 452
        How many aircraft have actually been able to evade (not escape due to speed) from modern air-to-air missiles?

        Why only from them? And you don't take into account "surface-to-air"?
  • 7,62h54
    7,62h54 17 December 2020 06: 20
    +10
    How can we explain the clumsiness of the "invisible"?
    1. NDR-791
      NDR-791 17 December 2020 06: 34
      +6
      How can we explain the clumsiness of the "invisible"?
      And not only. We must also force us to abandon the use of ICT engines. It seems that this very "excessive maneuverability" is a serious threat. At least in terms of empowerment.
  • Mikhail Tynda
    Mikhail Tynda 17 December 2020 06: 31
    +5
    This point of view is not new. It prevailed in the United States before the Vietnam War. Even the idea of ​​using the F4 and F5 in an unmanned version of a fighter was considered. The fruit of this point of view is the F4. But how did this turn out for Phantoms? The bulk of air battles in the skies of Vietnam were precisely maneuverable. At the initial stage of the war, the Phantoms were also threatened by Mig 17.
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 18 December 2020 02: 51
      +2
      The bulk of air battles in the skies of Vietnam were precisely maneuverable
      Duc, when was that !? In the last century, almost 60 years ago, it will soon knock :), well, maybe remember then sailboats, airships and steam corvettes, or even further, war elephants and the obligatory possession of a bow for mid-range combat and a stylet as a personal weapon of "last chance" ??? :)
      1. Mikhail Tynda
        Mikhail Tynda 18 December 2020 09: 11
        0
        What I mean is that maneuverable air combat has been buried for almost 65 years. And he is not buried ... And he will live, with variations, but he will be.
  • Vladimir61
    Vladimir61 17 December 2020 06: 32
    +2
    ... you can go into a somersault on any plane - the main thing is to get out of it.
    Well said, but misjudged. A pilot is a pilot, not a push-button dummy, even in the most sophisticated plane!
  • rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 17 December 2020 06: 54
    +2
    "Nobody needs Russian somersaults anymore."
    If you think that complex aerobatics are not needed, then the flag is in your hands. But on the performance of aerobatics, the skill of the pilot is being worked out. And the big question is that close air combat will no longer be required.
  • certero
    certero 17 December 2020 07: 04
    +5
    Nobody knows what a war in the air will be like when roughly equal opponents collide.
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 17 December 2020 07: 08
    0
    Yes, let him write anything! The main thing is not to be fooled by such writers, or quasi-writers, who have every article spitting in the direction of Russia! !!
  • Prisoner
    Prisoner 17 December 2020 07: 08
    +6
    Don't you need it? Okay. And it will come in handy for us. The article is an attempt to substantiate the lag in this area of ​​the western "chicks". They do not know how and are "not needed".
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 17 December 2020 07: 19
    +2
    That's it, we saw nozzles with OVT!
  • edeligor
    edeligor 17 December 2020 07: 36
    +5
    I have always had a belief, some both specialists and users, in "advanced" technologies. Especially when they declare with such categoricalness, they say, everything is kapets, tomorrow has come - "robots are working, not a man." Technology and progress are very good, but the old and time-tested criterion of aviation - maneuverability, will play for a long time, not the least role in tactics and air combat. I will not repeat the cases of the need for the above stated earlier, I will only add that the maneuverability of the aircraft, along with all of the above, helps the pilot to make the same avoidance of being hit by enemy missile weapons.
    1. Winnie76
      Winnie76 17 December 2020 12: 55
      +1
      Quote: edeligor
      Especially when it is declared so categorically, they say, everything is kapets, tomorrow has come - "robots are working, not a man."

      It has already arrived in my area. Already 15 years ago, boiler houses appeared without service personnel. Drivers, accountants, salespeople get ready
      1. Eugene-Eugene
        17 December 2020 14: 01
        0
        The hydroelectric power station is being built by a couple of thousand people, and already ten people are serving ...
      2. Andrey sh
        Andrey sh 19 December 2020 00: 49
        0
        But engineers constantly look at them. Directly or remotely. And much more qualified.
    2. Avior
      Avior 17 December 2020 15: 18
      +1
      everything is kapets, tomorrow has come - "robots are working, not people."

      The further, the more professions that do not involve physical work.
    3. Intruder
      Intruder 18 December 2020 02: 53
      0
      I have always had a belief, some both specialists and users, in "advanced" technologies
      but every day it doesn’t hurt to use them :))) !? Internet, computer, bank cards, TV and beyond, all the advanced technologies of the 20th and early 21st centuries, so and so;)
  • Eug
    Eug 17 December 2020 07: 45
    +3
    Improving performance has never been an empty phrase. In addition to the pilot's confidence in piloting in critical and supercritical modes for conventional (not super-maneuverable) aircraft (and for a super-maneuverable aircraft there are practically none), this is also "additional" structural strength, which is very necessary in case of combat (and not only) damage. In addition, one has to be overconfident to assert that someone (usually the authors of such articles) is able to foresee all possible situations in the air. So, as for me, there will definitely not be superfluous super-maneuverability ...
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 18 December 2020 02: 57
      0
      it is also "additional" structural strength, which is very necessary in the event of combat (and not only) damage
      And how does this help from fragments of a fragmentation field, an array of a flying GGE warhead, or from a kinetic interceptor piercing the skin in the engine area, this very super-maneuverability, with an unconscious pilot who is already guaranteed to be disabled if he reaches the ground, on the lines already !? Plus treatment, rehabilitation and a military pension and the pilot becomes a pedestrian on the ground for life, the price of this very supermaneuverability!
      1. Andrey sh
        Andrey sh 19 December 2020 00: 54
        0
        First, let the missile seeker hold onto the aircraft during the maneuver. Especially radar. And at long distances, they are the only ones that work like commands from the carrier aircraft, to which it is even further, but a different angle. When the rocket is 20 meters away, it's too late to maneuver ...
  • rocket757
    rocket757 17 December 2020 07: 45
    +3
    You will not check, you will not know .... one thing is obvious, the means of destruction, missiles, become smarter, faster, MORE DANGEROUS! It is more difficult for an aircraft to avoid defeat without using a set of means and methods !!!
  • XXXIII
    XXXIII 17 December 2020 08: 17
    0
    "Russian somersaults are no longer needed": Western press on the likelihood of close air combat

    Europe is as stupid as a puppy, everything is trying on Russian weapons.))
    Russia, first of all, makes weapons for itself, and it will also decide how to use them. Somersaults will not be needed, there are strategists Tu with the CD, well, or whatever you can pick up acting according to the situation.
  • Kapkan
    Kapkan 17 December 2020 08: 56
    +2
    I will repeat myself. As my familiar pilot used to say, based on the knowledge of our weapons: "We will always impose close combat on the enemy, sooner or later, according to the situation."
  • the same doctor
    the same doctor 17 December 2020 10: 18
    +1
    Absolutely right. Suffice it to recall that all our losses from Afgan to Syria. Not a single air battle, only a missile from an ambush. F-16 will hide behind a hill, aim, fire and escape. Super-maneuverability comes in handy when automatically dodging a missile upon detection. But for this you need a robot assistant on the plane: the pilot will not be in time.
    .
    a sense of super-maneuverability will give an automatic missile evasion, coupled with an anti-missile in the tail ...
    .
    The second sense of super-maneuverability is vertical landing. And in the presence of accelerators - and takeoff. But, again, a person is not able to govern in these modes. Although the thrust of the engines is enough, the person will sit down slowly and the fuel consumption will be prohibitive. We need a robot again.
  • Ilya_Nsk
    Ilya_Nsk 17 December 2020 10: 51
    +2
    Somewhere we have already heard .. 40s: "The battles will be at an altitude of more than 5 km" - mostly were up to 3, 60s: guns - to hell, but on the F-14 | 15 | 16 | 18 | 22 | 35 they are. The drone against the fighter is zero. What I don't like is that ours only have 150 rounds on board ...
    1. Avior
      Avior 17 December 2020 11: 35
      +1
      I don't think the cannons are there for air combat.
      Maybe shoot at the ground.
      but not on a modern supersonic aircraft in the air.
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 18 December 2020 11: 44
      0
      150 rounds for 1-2 bursts of 9 shots is more than enough. It is almost never necessary to shoot more often, even in the years of WWII, a fighter in battle managed to open fire 1-2 times. A lot of bombers shot down by one fighter in one battle is extremely rare, and it turns out only if each attack from 4-5 was successful.
  • nonsense
    nonsense 17 December 2020 12: 34
    +2
    wassat oh, "expert" ... EMNIP thought in the same way in the early 60s - with the advent of air-to-air missiles. They also listened to the "experts" and gave up guns on fighters! - Like, why are they, we don't get into close combat ... But Vietnam put everything in its place. The guns were returned, the planes (F-15, F-16 and then the Soviet Mig-29 and Su-27) received super-maneuverability along with the guns (compared to the previous models).
    PS: but in general the "expert" somehow lagged behind life. The wrong conclusion was made. Not really needed pilots! Back in the 60s, it became clear that the pilot is the weakest point in a fighter. He cannot withstand the maneuverability and G-forces that a fighter can easily withstand. Especially hefty and tall G-forces are not well tolerated. Therefore, in some countries, fighters began to take only short-haired jocks. But still, the pilot is the aircraft's weakest point. So soon, one must think, they will finally be thrown out of there and replaced by an autopilot. But close combat will still remain!
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 18 December 2020 11: 39
      0
      In the same Denmark, faced with the fact that young guys are so lanky that not everyone fits into the F-16. The question is not about height, as such, the question is about blood pressure, in a plump person it is likely to be higher.
      1. nonsense
        nonsense 18 December 2020 20: 14
        0
        the question is exactly growth! To pump blood "into the tower" of a two-meter long and one and a half-meter shibzdik you need miscellanea pressure "in the system"! In this case, the power of the "pump" in both cases differs slightly. Accordingly, during overloads, which system will overstrain (break) faster? -- right! the one that has a two-meter body!
    2. UAZ 452
      UAZ 452 18 December 2020 16: 34
      +1
      I agree completely! Having a pilot is the main limitation for close combat and super-maneuverability today. Remove the pilot and the melee will BACK. In manned aviation, the real possibilities for increasing maneuverability have been exhausted both due to the physiological limitations of the pilot and due to the structural weakness of manned vehicles, which are larger in size compared to UAVs and missiles.
  • iouris
    iouris 17 December 2020 12: 45
    +2
    An expert cannot be "western" or "eastern". An expert may not be an expert. Propaganda is yes, propaganda is a psychological instrument of war.
    Essentially, the statement makes sense. But you need to understand the full depth of your marketing strategy. Promotion to foreign markets of a product that does not have advanced onboard systems and weapons requires some effort.
  • Sirocco
    Sirocco 17 December 2020 13: 12
    +3
    Many years ago, on the same resource there was a similar article, or comments only about tanks, they say tanks are yesterday, they have no reconciliation on the battlefield, they are so and so with rockets and hats. And as time shows, tanks are still hoo))))
  • Uran53
    Uran53 17 December 2020 15: 32
    +1
    I remember at the F - 4 Phantom, the cannon armament was absent in the base, but after Vietnam, the gun appeared again on the F - 16 and F-15. And the reason is most likely that by relying on stealth technology, having invested two Everests in money, donating what they could for the sake of invisibility, they received the F-35 aircraft, which is inferior to ours, and most likely in some parameters, the Chinese aircraft.
  • Alexander K_2
    Alexander K_2 17 December 2020 16: 53
    +3
    I think it won't come to a fight, NATO is already pounding from 1 (one) SU-57, they don't know where to hide 100 (hundreds) of their RAPTORS, but imagine if there are 3 (three) dryers at the plant, the other flies at exhibitions, and the third is under repair! AWESOME !!! soldier
    1. Andrey sh
      Andrey sh 19 December 2020 00: 58
      0
      The super-invisible and super-maneuverable Russian maize with 2 air-to-air missiles, which flew out from under the tree crowns, will reduce the number of raptors to one ... There is nothing to detect with modern equipment.
      1. Alexander K_2
        Alexander K_2 19 December 2020 07: 22
        0
        In my opinion, you gave an expanded and exhaustive state of combat readiness of the Russian Air Force good
        1. Andrey sh
          Andrey sh 28 January 2021 13: 37
          0
          This is just in time for the question of superplanes. It is enough to have modern missiles in large numbers and early warning radars, which will cover a relatively small number of modern fighters ...
  • av58
    av58 17 December 2020 17: 00
    0
    Before Vietnam, the Americans said so: what is the point in guns and aerobatics, if everything is decided by speed, radars and long-range missiles? "The enemy won't even have time to understand." It all ended with the beating of American pilots in the "primitive" MiG-17 and MiG-19.
    1. Alexander K_2
      Alexander K_2 17 December 2020 17: 17
      +1
      In Vietnam, there was something to put guns on! In Vietnam, there was someone to shoot with guns! fellow
      1. UAZ 452
        UAZ 452 18 December 2020 16: 28
        0
        And hand-held firearms coexisted for a long time in parallel with bows and crossbows. But gradually this "good old" weapon was abandoned. It is quite possible that in some medieval armies, crossbows were abandoned too hastily, and then returned to service. But then they were all abandoned.
        If the presence of the cannon did not limit the fighter in other respects - let it stand, it would not be superfluous. But when instead of it you can take a couple of extra missiles, or a larger supply of fuel, you will get additional electronic warfare - there is already the option "let it be just in case" - it will not work. Lack of the necessary weapons, equipment and the presence of one that most likely will not reach the point of use - the guaranteed loss of the aircraft and the pilot. And let the theorists of cannon firefights between modern fighters give examples of the successful destruction of enemy aircraft with cannon fire (do not offer war with the Papuans - they generally need supertoucanoes, not modern fighter aircraft)
        1. Alexander K_2
          Alexander K_2 18 December 2020 16: 59
          0
          You know, Dear UAZ, there is such a proverb: In skillful hands and. WAY BALAIKA! I mean that a stone can be skillful, but only skillfully crying
  • Klingon
    Klingon 17 December 2020 17: 37
    +1
    Che grinds this Italian it was already the case that the Yankees took off the cannons from their pepelats during the Vietnam War and then for some reason rushed back to fit them in every manner, to hook the cannon containers, and so on. and in the Arab-Israeli war, guns on airplanes were still used by the same Jews.
    And so yes, you can shoot everything with the wings
  • Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan 17 December 2020 23: 55
    0
    Another nonsense of another rear rat.

    Maneuverability and speed of a modern aircraft are needed not for close combat, but for anti-missile maneuvers !!!

    In the same Iraq, the high-speed MiG-25 delivered quite a few problems to the NATO troops, they escaped from several missiles fired at them and successfully attacked US aircraft.
  • Outsider
    Outsider 18 December 2020 01: 31
    0
    Quote: Alex777
    These Western experts have a chance to be very surprised.
    Have they also canceled missile evasion maneuvers?
    Only on electronic warfare and hope? hi

    - They were all canceled long ago. Due to the difference in the overloads of the fighter - 9 units according to the physiological capabilities of the pilot, and modern air-to-air missiles:
    R-73 ------ 40 units
    AIM-132 - 50
    AIM-9X --- 60
    Python-5 - 70
    A-Darter - 100
    ........................
    They rely on stealths for stealth and the rest for electronic warfare.
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 18 December 2020 11: 36
      0
      Do you even understand that you are comparing the strength limitations of an aircraft and a certain short-term overload of a rocket, the possibility of achieving which depends on speed?
      1. Outsider
        Outsider 18 December 2020 13: 17
        +1
        - Of course I understand. And this "short-term" overload does not allow the plane to get away from the rocket - which you do not understand.
        1. Andrey sh
          Andrey sh 19 December 2020 01: 01
          0
          And the plane does not go away from the rocket - the speeds are also not the same. There is a breakdown in the tracking of the missile guidance head, followed by a target search. And who will she find ...
  • Outsider
    Outsider 18 December 2020 01: 42
    0
    Quote: Dodikson
    how would you hint that their electronic warfare is no worse, does not make the work of their radar guaranteed, their electronic warfare will simply clog OUR radar, but THERE radar will not work well from this.

    - They work at different frequencies, no connection.
    already in Iraq, where the mattresses had an overwhelming air superiority, there were AWACS, electronic warfare and so on, although Iraq did not have either electronic warfare or AWACS. and there the SD VV SD had 7 launches on one target. and I will repeat this - without the Iraqis' opposition in terms of electronic warfare.

    - And there are links to this ?? laughing
    in a war with us, all their maximum ranges will go nowhere.
    the AMRAAM control channels will be jammed with interference (the seeker is only at the final section) and is taken to the side, if it comes to a distance of 20-25 km, the seeker itself will be beaten.

    - how do you know that she has already approached you 25 km ?! wink
    by the way, in the final section, AMRAAM has little energy (here the Europeans have already bypassed them having already made a 2-stage explosive missile defense) and an anti-missile maneuver can even help.

    - Tell me the type of two-stage URVV, unscientific science fiction? lol
    but Stealth is good only in the X range, in the rest they are visible.
    and with the release of ROFAR, they are generally khan, and they can be seen and fly like irons.

    - Yes, especially the F-22:


  • Outsider
    Outsider 18 December 2020 02: 09
    +1
    Quote: nemar7106
    Did you fly? I did not fly, but I spent 30 years in aviation at the command post as an officer of the combat command from the PN to the command post of the corps, and was always surprised by the statements of incompetent people in the area in which they do not think, and if they do, they were failures in tactics, BRAVS and characteristics of domestic and foreign aircraft. But how did our people fight the Americans in Vietnam? on the MiG 17 against the F - 4 Phantoms and shot them down in close combat, although the F 4 carried 8 medium and short-range missiles ...

    - And how did you manage to sit on all sorts of command posts for 30 years and never find out, "but how the MiG-17 and MiG-21 successfully fought the F-4 in Vietnam - and completely failed - in the Middle East ?! WHY?" wink
  • Outsider
    Outsider 18 December 2020 02: 19
    +1
    Quote: 7,62x54
    How can we explain the clumsiness of the "invisible"?

    - The clumsiness of the "inconspicuous" exists only in the imagination of the "supermaneuverable"! laughing
  • Outsider
    Outsider 18 December 2020 02: 22
    0
    Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
    ... if the target is alerted to the attack. then maneuvers can chicken out the rocket ... this is confirmed by practice ...

    - In what shaggy year ?! All this is in the distant past ...
  • Outsider
    Outsider 18 December 2020 02: 27
    -1
    Quote: edeligor
    I have always had a belief, some both specialists and users, in "advanced" technologies. Especially when it is declared so categorically, they say, everything is kapets, tomorrow has come - "robots are working, not people."

    - How can you repeat these sad mantras after the terrible massacre in Nagorno-Karabakh ?!
    Technology and progress are very good, but the old and time-tested criterion of aviation - maneuverability, will play for a long time, not the least role in tactics and air combat.

    - When the F-22 meets a 4th generation fighter, the chances to survive until close combat are 2%. In 98% The F-22 is killing him.
    I will not repeat the cases of the need for the above stated earlier, I will only add that the maneuverability of the aircraft, along with all of the above, helps the pilot to make the same avoidance of being hit by enemy missile weapons.

    - Yes, in 1956 it really helped - sometimes. Later - it got worse and worse ...
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 18 December 2020 11: 34
      +1
      The Su-35 radar detects the F-22 at a range of up to 90 km; in addition, there are OLS with a detection range of such a target in tens of kilometers.
  • Outsider
    Outsider 18 December 2020 02: 38
    -3
    Quote: Sirocco
    Many years ago, on the same resource there was a similar article, or comments only about tanks, they say tanks are yesterday, they have no reconciliation on the battlefield, they are so and so with rockets and hats. And as time shows, tanks are still hoo))))

    - Watch here, tankman, - total time 1 hour 41 minutes:

    1. Andrey sh
      Andrey sh 19 December 2020 01: 04
      0
      Look at the idiocy of those who were even too lazy to set up an air observation post and did not stock up on several MANPADS?
      1. Outsider
        Outsider 19 December 2020 10: 54
        0
        Look! Here the obviously kind moderator replaced the correct video with an irrelevant one, again:

        1. Andrey sh
          Andrey sh 28 January 2021 13: 33
          0
          The drone flight altitude is by no means 7-8 km in most videos. NO ONE airspace observation post. And almost no disguise.
  • Ham
    Ham 18 December 2020 05: 21
    0
    so what do you say?
    it was smooth on paper ... everyone imagines himself to be a strategist, seeing the battle from afar, sitting with a laptop and coffee in his cozy apartment ... the real history of wars, just like the military manuals are written in blood on the battlefield
    dedicated to all xperds
    1. Peter Shmakov
      Peter Shmakov 18 December 2020 18: 17
      -1
      And what did your vyser mean?
      that's exactly what they do - they learn from their own blood! The smart ones, in peace and quiet, sitting on the couch, analyze and try to foresee problems in order not to pay for mistakes with blood - for this, people have a head! It is only Russian generals who use it exclusively for wearing a cap.
  • gvozdan
    gvozdan 18 December 2020 10: 20
    0
    Electronic warfare and stealth just increase the chances of close combat
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion 18 December 2020 11: 32
    +2
    The collision of two groups of unobtrusive aircraft in conditions of strong electronic suppression leads precisely to close combat. In addition, maneuvering is also necessary in long-range combat, so the fighter cannot replace the Il-76 with 100 air-to-air missiles.
  • TatarinSSSR
    TatarinSSSR 18 December 2020 11: 50
    +1
    They hope for a fight in style - the first one noticed the enemy, well, or AVKAKS gave the target - he launched all the missiles and went home, and after him the second wave came out, also, they saw the first - launches and home. And all from the maximum distance.
  • Outsider
    Outsider 18 December 2020 12: 59
    0
    Quote: EvilLion
    Su-35 radar detects F-22 at range up to 90 km

    - It is not true.
    1. Dread
      Dread 18 December 2020 15: 42
      -1
      Quote: Outsider
      Quote: EvilLion
      Su-35 radar detects F-22 at range up to 90 km

      - It is not true.

      Radar N035 "Irbis" Su-35S has a range in the front hemisphere of D = 400 km for targets with EPR = 3 sq.m. The F-22 will be detected by the Irbis radar at a distance of D ~ 224 km and then it will be guaranteed to be destroyed by the R-37M air-to-air missile.
      Outsider, please do not submit yours
      old incorrect charts from Lockheed-Martin commercials.
  • Outsider
    Outsider 18 December 2020 13: 00
    0
    Quote: TatarinSSSR
    They hope for a fight in style - the first one noticed the enemy, well, or AVKAKS gave the target - he launched all the missiles and went home, and after him the second wave came out, also, they saw the first - launches and home. And all from the maximum distance.

    - Right. And this is the most correct and competent calculation.
  • Outsider
    Outsider 18 December 2020 13: 01
    0
    Quote: gvozdan
    Electronic warfare and stealth just increase the chances of close combat

    - If they are approximately equal on both sides. If not, then the side that has a "blockage" in this regard is a tryndet ...
  • Vadim Ananyin
    Vadim Ananyin 18 December 2020 13: 42
    0
    Do they already know everything? Here, in this issue, the main thing is this very realism. Well, judging by the article, they are not going to fight on their territory, and this is their main problem.
  • Outsider
    Outsider 18 December 2020 15: 48
    0
    Quote: Dread
    Quote: Outsider
    Quote: EvilLion
    Su-35 radar detects F-22 at range up to 90 km

    - It is not true.

    Radar N035 "Irbis" Su-35S has a range of D = 400 km for targets with EPR = 3 sq. M. F-22 will be detected by the Irbis radar at a distance
    D ~ 224 km and further guaranteed to be destroyed by an air-to-air missile R-37M.
    Outsider, please do not submit yours
    incorrect charts from Lockheed-Martin commercials.

    - Where do you get the correct data from? From the Research Institute of Uryupinsk ?! But who told you that they are faithful ?! You were again despicably deceived ...
    1. Andrey sh
      Andrey sh 19 December 2020 01: 06
      0
      It was you who were deceived. Ask what the Chinese filmed when the Americans flew around them in 22x. No 90 km line-of-sight detection - much further.
      1. Outsider
        Outsider 19 December 2020 10: 36
        +1
        - Yes, yes: we flew with the Luneberg lenses screwed on:




        The last image is the J-20 and the little red cylinder below - the same block of Luneberg lenses as the F-22. But I have never seen anything like this on the Su-57, why not ?! laughing lol
  • UAZ 452
    UAZ 452 18 December 2020 16: 15
    0
    "Somersaults" are likely to be needed at the next stage in the development of combat aviation. As for the coming decades, I am inclined to agree that the need for over-maneuverability is much less than for stealth (lower ESR) and greater situational awareness. Whatever one may say, a manned aircraft cannot in principle surpass the rocket in maximum overload - the pilot will not stand it. A UAV is another matter; it can dodge.
    1. Siberian54
      Siberian54 18 December 2020 17: 28
      0
      After Vietnam, there really have never been equal opponents ... In all the rest, NATO on the latest generation of technology fought against obsolete air defense equipment and aircraft with an export version, so a little stable mirage of non-contact war was formed ... But in vain ... With equal opportunities for using electronic warfare drones will become ineffective and pilots will have to remember Korea and Vietnam
      1. Peter Shmakov
        Peter Shmakov 18 December 2020 18: 12
        -1
        Recently in Karabakh the Azerbaijanis showed what the Soviet (Russian) weapon junk is worth - it costs nothing, scrap metal!
        So, I do not advise "to meet with an equal opponent", "my own will end badly"!
        1. Siberian54
          Siberian54 19 December 2020 07: 14
          0
          So I am about the same - equal conditions and now it took skill and somersaults
  • Peter Shmakov
    Peter Shmakov 18 December 2020 18: 08
    -2
    The task of a modern fighter is to sneak up to the enemy and unexpectedly attack him with a missile, and soon a drone. No one fucking needs this maneuverability - the enemy will not fly up to you, the rocket will catch up!
    1. Hazey
      Hazey 18 December 2020 19: 16
      +2
      All will soon become "So inconspicuous" That in the air, rear-view mirrors will knock
  • Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter 18 December 2020 21: 12
    +1
    The goat understands that they are not needed. Indeed, in the modern doctrine of war, the enemy plans to conduct only "long-range battles."
    The trouble is that it is not at all a fact that it will be so.
    These are theories that not everyone understands! More precisely, only not many people understand what, but how it will actually happen, or rather, no one! ...
    To paraphrase one friend.
    Until real b / d happens. Using all possible means.
    Up to loitering balloons.
    1. Andrey sh
      Andrey sh 19 December 2020 01: 08
      +1
      If there are heels of air-to-air missiles with control from the ground on a balloon at an altitude of 10-15 km, then it will not be more effective than drones.
    2. Siberian54
      Siberian54 19 December 2020 07: 18
      0
      A doctrine like a little blood on foreign territory .... Aha!
  • bar
    bar 18 December 2020 21: 40
    0
    the author believes that after the Vietnam war, close air battles were not fought, except for rare exceptions.

    The opinion of the author is very important to us. Only the author forgets that the striped tried to refuse from the "dog dumps" yet during Vietnam War. For example, the same "Phantom-2" even then, apart from missiles, did not have cannon armament. And as a natural result - the loss of only phantoms amounted to 895 pieces against 149 MiGs from 17 to 21. It is clear that the share of air defense was hefty, but nevertheless.
    So let them envy even more laughing
  • Viktoo Kharitonov
    Viktoo Kharitonov 19 December 2020 00: 40
    +1
    I think that such somersaults make an impression on the generals of Central Africa.
  • Bear040
    Bear040 19 December 2020 00: 43
    +1
    The creators of the American Phantom-2 also believed that there would be no close combat and the fighters no longer needed guns ... The war showed that they miscalculated and the cannons on Phantoms, albeit belatedly, still appeared, but to fix the maneuverability that was insufficient for close combat The phantom was no longer real. Only the speed and power of the motors could be added, replacing the motors with new, more modern ones
    1. Siberian54
      Siberian54 19 December 2020 07: 20
      0
      And yes! MIG21 is still flying, and the "mirage" has become a mirage.
      1. Outsider
        Outsider 19 December 2020 17: 52
        0
        - Yes, the MiG-21 is still flying, and the Mirage became Rafal ... lol
        1. Siberian54
          Siberian54 20 December 2020 11: 15
          0
          just looked at an article about phrases