Military Review

4th generation again. Hypothetical replacement for the F-16 and F-35 for the United States Air Force

98

The F-16C fighter is a massive but outdated fighter. Photo Wikimedia Commons


In mid-February, U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff, General Charles K. Brown, criticized the current state of American tactical aviation... He called the most massive F-16 fighters of various modifications at the moment obsolete and in need of replacement, and the promising F-35s were criticized due to technical problems and high prices. In this regard, there was a proposal to develop a new aircraft, devoid of the shortcomings of the existing technology.

Problems and solutions


The US Air Force has nearly 1100 F-16C / D fighters at its disposal. This equipment was built and transferred in parts until the mid-XNUMXs, after which mass production focused on the fulfillment of export contracts, and in the interests of the Pentagon, only the modernization of equipment was carried out. Several years ago it was decided to resume production; now the last modification of the technique is in the series.

C. Brown noted that the process of further improvement of the F-16 aircraft no longer makes sense. The fact is that this aircraft, even in the latest modifications, retains an outdated architecture that limits the ability to update hardware and software. Such technical features do not meet the current requirements of the Air Force.

As a direct replacement for the F-16, the promising F-35 was created, however, it is not without its drawbacks. This machine is prohibitively expensive to manufacture and operate, encounters technical problems and limitations, etc. At the same time, several hundred of the latest F-35s have been put into operation, and the approved plans provide for the creation of a fleet of more than 1700 aircraft.


F-22A after repair and modernization, November 2020 Photo by US Air Force

The Air Force headquarters proposes to revise plans for the future and explore the possibility of creating a new aircraft, taking into account the shortcomings of existing machines and more profitable in all respects. According to General Brown, such a sample would belong to the "4+" or "5-" generation. It is curious that we are talking about a return to the previous generation - the development of new samples of the 4th generation has not been remembered for several decades.

The Air Force plans to conduct a study of the needs and capabilities of tactical aviation, based on the results of which the terms of reference for a promising fighter can be formed. The TacAir study will be carried out in conjunction with the Pentagon's regulatory authorities, which will determine the optimal appearance of the aircraft, not only from a technical, but also from an economic point of view.

Customer wishes


TacAir's research work is in its earliest stages and the results remain unknown. However, Ch. Brown back in mid-February revealed not only the shortcomings of the available aircraft, but also the wishes for a promising model. Perhaps these ideas will be further developed and even included in the finished terms of reference.

According to the general, the new aircraft should differ from the F-16 in increased combat effectiveness. He must quickly go to a given area and complete the task, using modern technologies. Speed ​​statements may indicate the need for a completely new high performance platform. In particular, the ability to fly supersonic without the use of afterburner can be useful. At the same time, it should be simpler than the F-22 and F-35 aircraft so that the cost of the project remains at an acceptable level.


Serial fighter F-35A. Photo by US Air Force

A significant drawback of older aircraft is the closed architecture of the electronics and software. Promising fighters should be able to relatively quickly update programs, incl. just before departure. Moreover, the US Air Force recently experimented with the concept of Open-mission systems. In this case, the software update is carried out as quickly as possible and can be performed at any time, even during the flight to the target.

Other technical requests have not yet been announced. Remained unknown thoughts of the command of the Air Force about the required composition of electronic equipment, weapons, etc. Perhaps such details will be disclosed later, as the research work is carried out - and after the start of the development of a hypothetical project.

Past generation


Formally, the US Air Force already has two fighters of the last 5th generation - these are the F-22A and F-35 of various modifications, developed by Lockheed Martin. At the same time, such aircraft are far from fully meeting the expectations and advertising materials of the past. They still have high operating costs, technical problems, etc.

Excessive cost at one time forced the Pentagon to sharply cut plans for the construction of the F-22A, as a result of which such aircraft could not replace the cash F-15 of the previous generation. Right now, similar problems are being observed when trying to replace old F-16s with new F-35s. At the same time, tactical aviation needs further development, which has to be carried out not only through the construction of the latest generation aircraft, but also through the modernization of previous models.


The design appearance of the F-21 aircraft is a modification of the F-16V for the Indian tender. Lockheed Martin Graphics

The development of the F-16 fighter continues to this day. In 2015, flight tests of the prototype F-16V Viper began with a cardinal update of the electronic components. It was proposed both the construction of new machines of this type, and the modernization of existing ones with the use of new equipment. The F-16V has already been the subject of several export orders.

At the same time, the Pentagon does not plan to buy such equipment or order the modernization of the existing fleet to the Viper version. The reasons for this were outlined by General Brown: for all its advantages, the envisaged replacement of equipment does not solve typical problems and does not allow obtaining a sufficient reserve for the future.

At the same time, the US Air Force plans to purchase deeply modernized new-built F-15EX fighters, with the help of which they will replace the outdated F-15C in the foreseeable future. The EX project provides for the replacement of key elements of the avionics and ensuring compatibility with new weapons and suspended equipment. All these measures provide a sharp increase in combat qualities in comparison with aircraft of previous modifications.

The Pentagon openly declares that purchases of the F-15EX are related to the termination of production of modern F-22A, the limited remaining resource of the F-15C / D cash and the backlog in the F-35 program. The use of a ready-made platform equipped with new equipment is expected to cover the needs of the Air Force for the next few years. At the same time, it is noted that by the end of the decade, the F-15EX will no longer meet some of the requirements: the outdated platform will make it vulnerable to the air defense systems of the future.

Fifth to fourth


Thus, experiencing difficulties with rearmament for the new 5th generation of fighters, the US Air Force is forced to return to the previous 4th generation. Aircraft of this generation still form the backbone of tactical aviation, and this situation is not even foreseen to change. First of all, this is due to the insufficient production of the F-22A and the limited pace of construction of newer F-35s of all modifications.

4th generation again. Hypothetical replacement for the F-16 and F-35 for the United States Air Force

Assembly of the first F-15EX aircraft. Photo by US Air Force

In such a situation, the obvious solution aimed at increasing the combat capability of the Air Force is to modernize the available fleet. It is also possible to purchase additional aircraft of old types in new versions. Both of these methods are already actively used, but they do not allow making plans for the distant future.

In the near future, the US Air Force may use a third method of updating tactical aviation in the form of creating and launching production of a completely new fighter belonging to the previous generation or occupying an intermediate position between the fourth and fifth. Against the background of previous events and high-profile statements, such a proposal looks extremely interesting, and in addition, it may hit the reputation of the United States as a leading aviation power.

It should be noted that so far we are talking only about research work to study and substantiate the possibility of creating a new aircraft of the “4+” or “5-” generations. It is still a long way from design work and the start of construction, and during this time a lot, including the plans of the command, can change. However, the ratio of modern and obsolete technology in the Air Force, most likely, will not change and will remain the cause of the most serious concern.
Author:
98 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Alien From
    Alien From 12 March 2021 04: 53
    +1
    Software rules in the 21st century! We use an iPhone through one, members of the forum ??))
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 12 March 2021 05: 32
      +4
      Quote: Alien From
      We use an iPhone through one, members of the forum

      50 percent of smartphones in the world are iPhones in your opinion?
    2. Pessimist22
      Pessimist22 12 March 2021 05: 46
      +3
      I used Huawei GR5 for three years, last year I bought Redmi Note 8 Pro, neither one nor the other has ever failed.
    3. Civil
      Civil 12 March 2021 06: 51
      +6
      This is the turn) and where to start - we will make a cheap analogue of the F-22, but the result is the F-35)
      1. mojohed2012
        mojohed2012 12 March 2021 07: 21
        +5
        There is nothing to bury the 4th generation for. The 5th is still more of a fantasy (I mean the requirements for the 5th generation). Americans already know that our and Chinese (cloned from ours) radars see their vaunted 22s and 35s.
        They know that their F-35 is not a fighter, but a platform for a tactical bomber similar to our Su-24.
        F-35 will not take out against a real 4th generation fighter. Moreover, the United States protects its "incognito invincibility" with all its might, preventing not only an open battle with their participation, but even the possibility of detection and location.
        1. A1845
          A1845 12 March 2021 10: 21
          +6
          Quote: mojohed2012
          There is nothing to bury the 4th generation for

          gradations like "generation such and such .." were invented by traders to fool buyers as a way of extorting money and corresponds to the one-dimensional traders' consciousness "cheaper-more expensive"
          In fact, there is a continuous search for new opportunities for improving technology in various directions and even at the cost of an apparent regression in some part (which does not fit into the linear scheme "generation 1-2-3")
          The pursuit of exhibition specimens, which consume unreal resources (the same rare earth metals, etc.) and at the same time carry less weapons and which, at the cost of one flight, can ruin a small state, increase the country's combat capability only in the minds of armchair "X-peds"
          with respect hi
          1. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 12 March 2021 13: 20
            0
            Quote: A1845
            gradations like "generation such and such .." were invented by traders to fool buyers as a way of extorting money

            Generations were invented by Lockheed marketers to promote the F-22. Before that, they did not think about such criteria, they made an aircraft for certain tasks. I come to the conclusion that the division into 4-5 generations is erroneous, there is a fighter for certain tasks, it is no better or worse than others, it is just different.
        2. yehat2
          yehat2 12 March 2021 10: 59
          0
          Quote: mojohed2012
          They know that their F-35 is not a fighter.

          In the United States, there are constantly attempts to create an aircraft that, due to the equipment with technology, will be a fighter, and not due to the characteristic fighter. As a result, a phantom appeared without a cannon, f-105, f-111 and f-35. And strange mutants will also appear.
          1. ironic
            ironic 14 March 2021 19: 07
            -3
            Due to the characteristic destructiveness, they have already seen the success of the MiG-29 and do not want such a success for themselves. I understand them.
            1. yehat2
              yehat2 14 March 2021 22: 07
              +3
              Quote: ironic
              MiG-29 ... I understand them.

              something I'm not sure that you understand at least a third of the subject of discussion
              1. ironic
                ironic 15 March 2021 17: 54
                -3
                I am an engineer, I understand the basic principles, but the absolute majority does not understand specialized particulars on the forum, and it is not necessary.
                1. yehat2
                  yehat2 15 March 2021 20: 43
                  +1
                  engineer-economist? safety engineer? mining engineer? fish farming technician? recourse
                  1. ironic
                    ironic 15 March 2021 20: 56
                    -3
                    By Soviet education, an industrial electronics engineer, by a Western programmer of a low level. Subsequently, he also graduated from the Open University of Small Soft and moved to a high level. wink
                    Do you happen to be performing in amateur performances? lol
                    PS You have got such a cool list of amateur Soviet engineers ... laughing
                    1. yehat2
                      yehat2 15 March 2021 21: 16
                      +1
                      What makes you think that such engineers are only Soviet?
                      1. ironic
                        ironic 15 March 2021 21: 30
                        -3
                        Because only Soviet classifications were able to give such pearls of amateur performance. Having studied in the West, you quickly begin to understand why a Soviet engineer, a designer of printed circuit boards, in 80% of cases is at most a technician, and an engineer, an economist, is not an engineer at all. It's like Slava The KPSS is not a person at all. wink Especially the safety engineers were mostly engineers, yes ... Yapatstal.
                      2. yehat2
                        yehat2 15 March 2021 22: 47
                        +3
                        Quote: ironic
                        Having studied in the West, you quickly begin to understand why a Soviet engineer, a designer of printed circuit boards, in 80% of cases is like a technician at most, and an engineer, an economist, is not an engineer at all.

                        it happens when I haven't studied at home. Unfortunately, you are not alone.
                      3. ironic
                        ironic 15 March 2021 23: 18
                        -3
                        He studied almost with honors. A few fours in sessions and a diploma perfectly well, and for the first fully computerized kouros second place and a cash prize for the first at the faculty. So go by. You haven't made a prophet. I continued the same way. In real time, I was the third in the course with an average score of 93. And the amateur performances and it only produces engineer-prophets.
                      4. yehat2
                        yehat2 15 March 2021 23: 34
                        +3
                        judging by the score that you named, you are a shkolota who studied after the collapse of the USSR and have no idea what kind of education it was before.
                        And you have nothing to compare with, so you are boasting.
                        The fact that you studied with good grades does not at all make you a good student. Because I have seen enough of graduates of culinary colleges and similar pranks. Let me give you one example. When I was transferring to KSU, I had to re-enroll a number of subjects. In algebra, the teacher told me directly that I (a third-year student) should teach it, because the volume of my course was 8 times larger. And I passed the matology, just letting the teacher copy my notes. This is so that you understand what the difference was in the level of education in different universities
                        In other words, talking is useless. You just don't understand what I'm talking about.
                      5. ironic
                        ironic 15 March 2021 23: 47
                        -1
                        This is you shkolota. Well I wrote to you what education and where I received, but you did not even learn to read. Was there a hundred-ball system in the USSR? You need to think at least a little if you don't read what you answer. I just have something to compare about the level of universities, because I learned both in the USSR and according to the Western system. There was good education in the Soviet Union, but there was also frankly weak, even in the best universities in the country there was a bias, something was strong, and something was practically useless. One thing in Soviet education was definitely good, it made it possible for those who wanted to finish their studies everywhere, but only for those who really wanted to. It gave me the opportunity to finish my studies to what I wanted, and your ideas will not take anything away from me, and they will not add anything to you. Just as they will not add an engineer to an economist and will not make the majority of design technicians with Soviet engineering diplomas into engineers. I've seen enough of this. I, just, understand what you are talking about, but what I mean, you not that you cannot understand, but you will not understand because of an attempt to be proud of the wrong thing and not there, i.e. due to self-blindness. Well, the flag is in your hands, as they say. Be proud.
                      6. yehat2
                        yehat2 16 March 2021 15: 12
                        +1
                        Quote: ironic
                        because I learned both in the USSR and in the Western system.

                        you were not the only one who studied there and there.
                        do not think that you are any special.
                        and I'm not going to take away from you what is not. The reservations show that you do not quite understand how they taught in the USSR. It is better to study the question, and do not try to imagine that you know well.
                        In addition, a whole layer of education in the USSR has gone from your attention, which does not apply to bachelor's degree at all. You could just go through reinforcing programs at the university, which did not give any diplomas. For example, I have visited such in mathematics, physics, English, economics, microprocessor architecture, holography. Finally, there was a whole system of training complex, rather than narrow specialists, on whom the entire system of training was guided in the end, but to which not everyone reached.
                        A typical example is a doctor of physics and mathematics. In the west, there were such things, not even dozens. The presence of a solid group of such specialists, combined with the planned costs of maintaining a certain stable level of research, precisely gave the USSR a serious strategic advantage in science and was the main expression of its advantage over specialized opportunistic training in the West.
                        Curiously, Western scientists (mainly Germany, Scandinavians and France) willingly adopted this paradigm. And the problem of understanding this system lies in the fact that those who did not see and did not know the tip of the iceberg at all begin to judge it, but were stuck only at the very bottom with their "good grades" and their own cut of what they "learned" and with my incomplete understanding.
                        Yes, judging by the formal baccalaureate that took shape before the collapse of the USSR and which thousands of students passed, it was far from always better. But this is not the Soviet education system. This is part of it, and it is noticeably degenerate. When it comes to you, then there will be something to talk about.

                        Note, I never tried to somehow belittle what you have achieved, I am just describing what you did not even see. As for applied learning, it was seriously destroyed just at the beginning of perestroika, and you saw the ruins. in the 60-70s in the USSR everything was much cooler in this regard.
                      7. ironic
                        ironic 16 March 2021 19: 20
                        0
                        It is clear that there is not one. Millions have left the post-Soviet space. Did you decide to earn some money with a cap of evidence? Undoubtedly, I am special, there is definitely no second such thing, even science asserts this and I definitely will not stop thinking. Why should I think to stop? I may then forget how to read what they write to me, like you. Knowledge is only a platform for cultivating wisdom, but you can use it to grow stupidity. Well, tell me how it was in universities, otherwise I myself did not graduate from the Polytechnic University in the USSR and my wife's aunt was not an assistant professor at the department. How could I find out about the special training programs of the department, I was at one such department at the Computing Center. And what I have or not you do not know until I notify you. Your personal davolno petty attempts to prophesy on my topic, even comment on broke. Well, of course, there have always been and will be well-educated and truly profound scientists and engineers, only a few of them have been and will be. And most of these broad results turned out to be extremely shallow, a lot in general about everything and little about one thing in particular. In the West, this has long been understood, so doctoral students in physics and mathematics do not exist there. And people finish one, and then the second specialization and defend themselves in the same way. And an engineer, if he still wants to be an economist, he first makes the first engineering degree, and the second an industrial and economic one. Especially talented people just do it in parallel, but they are read to them separately. That is why so many Soviet engineers and scientists turned out to be out of work in the West, and those who stayed with work were either really nontrivial, or realized that they needed to be supplemented and did not spare their time and effort for specialization. Those who did not do this changed their monumentality to sweeping. And those who already distribute work to people themselves and in practice know what is needed in order for projects to be successfully brought to work and how to organize this efficiency are taken to judge. A broad specialist is good (if he really is a specialist, which is rare) when you have limited human resources, but as soon as the development or research group grows, he can even get in the way. A formal master's or bachelor's degree does not cost anything at all, no matter where it is obtained. Specialists are important who can come and do not 30% of theoretical work, but 99% of practical work. Everything else is a fairy tale for the poor. Merilo is a live project, successful and competitive, expandable and scalable. I am ready to agree that the peak of the educational achievements of the USSR came in the 70s and began to degrade after the 80 Olympiad, but this was a system-wide, and not a private degradation. The strengths and weaknesses of Soviet education remained the same. Only degradation has belittled the strong and exposed the weak. And yet, you already somehow decide whether you drank with me on a broodershaft or not, and you lead a pseudo-scientific srach with me or express an opinion, otherwise how it turns out in a joke, or a cross from a belly or a fly to fasten.
                      8. yehat2
                        yehat2 16 March 2021 19: 52
                        0
                        Quote: ironic
                        those who already distribute work to people themselves and in practice know what is needed in order for projects to be successfully launched

                        this is the logic of businessmen and narrow-minded inhabitants. And the GDP in the West is not made by them, but more than 75% of the corporation, who evaluate and use conscientious engineers in a completely different way. You are only familiar with the first and are focused on it. There is a different economy, different conditions, and despite your strange conviction, they are not the most numerous, but the most productive. It was in the corporate business, where tasks are more serious than fixing a coffee maker, that Soviet specialists were in demand by the thousands. And only those whose sociability or self-conceit is off scale turned out to be unsuccessful - you can talk to emigrants. Even in Europe, anti-Russian sentiments turned out to be strong, which is why very many who tried to build a career had a hard time. And there is no stupid flawed education here. I do not know a single sane student from those who studied normally, and could not get a good job in the West. There are many programmers and scientists among my acquaintances. There are even 4 teachers in their universities (physics and mathematics). I myself went to 2 scientific projects in Tokyo. Absolutely no problem - both sides were happy. Although I don't understand their language well. Where do you find the problem - I do not understand.
                      9. ironic
                        ironic 16 March 2021 20: 54
                        -1
                        There is no logic other than formal and informal. And the measure of the result is the money earned, and for whom this is not so there is an old and wise question - if they are so smart, why are they so poor? And whether they were businessmen or commoners, as we say, the shmumer died, if only he was healthy. Once they make GDP, it means they use it correctly. If it was wrong, they wouldn't do it. I am familiar with different things, because I had such an opportunity, in view of the prevailing fate, my parents were leading engineers at all-Union design institutes, and my grandfather was generally the owner of the silver medal of the USSR Exhibition of Economic Achievements. Somehow familiar with the fact that the Soviet Union designed at the all-Union level. And I choose an unambiguously capitalist approach, because it is productive. My conviction is based on actual results and these very other economies end up with varieties of the same ass, and with a very characteristic proletarian color. And when the West begins to stray on this path, the same exact red ass immediately rises above it. Soviet specialists were in demand by those who understood the conjuncture of the capitalist market and rebuilt accordingly, and who did not understand, went to sweep the streets. I talked with a sufficient number of immigrants in the States and Canada and Israel, I myself am a graduate of the Soviet university. And vizde one and the same topic, who had general knowledge on broad topics and did not deepen the specialized, or was simply too lazy, or gave up, ceased to be an engineer. Yes, there is no fundamentally bad attitude towards Russians in Europe. I worked under a contract in Switzerland for two years, and there was just no one in our group of contractors. Everyone who knew how to work from Turkey to Russia. All this is nonsense. There is no need to fight with windmills, so there will be no war. Education is all different, even from one stream in one university. People are different too. It is not necessary to heap the consideration of the methodological shortcomings and shortcomings of the subjective worldview, brought up on unproductive principles of thinking. Many studied normally, and those who learned how to sell themselves got a job. And it is right. My friend's father is also an excellent scientist physicist, really strong. But if it were not for his wife, with her sociability and knowledge of languages ​​and relatives in the appropriate place abroad, he would hardly have read lectures at Sanpaul University, despite the fact that he is not a finger-made scientist, not a sour professor at all, now retired.
                      10. VladGTN
                        VladGTN 16 March 2021 21: 29
                        +1
                        Dear Ironik! You probably studied excellently at the Microsoft Institute, but you did not graduate from Polytech. There are a lot of mistakes, it was not taught like that before.
                      11. ironic
                        ironic 16 March 2021 22: 12
                        -1
                        First he graduated from the Polytechnic University in the Soviet Union, then the university in the west, and only then also the open university in the field of small-soft. And my mistakes were always the same and no matter how taught. I am dyslexic and I read words with half of the missing and rearranged letters, as if everything is correct. To see the errors, I have to re-read straining several times. I don’t read syllables at all. I read like a scanner, from top to bottom, in whole sentences.
                      12. yehat2
                        yehat2 16 March 2021 22: 22
                        +2
                        Quote: ironic
                        He graduated first from the Polytechnic University in the Union, then from the university.

                        I saw 2 polytechnics - Krasnoyarsk and Novosibirsk
                        the difference is like between a madhouse and a normal high-quality university, although there is less than 800 km between them.
                        so your "polytechnic in soyuz" has a huge spread in reality - from the super-education of the Bauman University to .... a madhouse.
                        be more specific.
                      13. ironic
                        ironic 16 March 2021 23: 35
                        0
                        You decided to examine me? And who are you? My potential employer? Will you pull $ 100 per hour?
                2. yehat2
                  yehat2 16 March 2021 22: 21
                  0
                  Quote: ironic
                  There is no logic other than formal and informal

                  as a mathematician, I responsibly declare that from the very first sentence you were mistaken.
                  However, with the tenacity of a circus donkey, you continue to run in a circle that you have outlined. Not tired yet?
                3. ironic
                  ironic 16 March 2021 23: 42
                  +1
                  Claim irresponsibly. A person does not possess other types of logic and your mathematical knowledge has nothing to do with this fact. All kinds of applied logic and all kinds of thinking take their basis from a formal or informal logical construction. If someone is arguing with a circus donkey, the first logical question is - who is he himself? A minus for boorish stuffing.
    4. onstar9
      onstar9 9 May 2021 05: 29
      0
      Quote: yehat2
      In algebra, the teacher told me directly that I (a third-year student) should teach it, because the volume of my course was 8 times larger. And I passed the matology, just letting the teacher copy my notes.

      You're some kind of genius! Why didn't you create an iPhone or a Su-57?
  • Hippo
    Hippo April 23 2021 19: 53
    0
    Sadam's fighters escaped to Iran from Desert Storm.
    I understand them ...
    https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2021-04/1619196820_studio_20161117_123527.jpg
  • Angry Alt-Right
    Angry Alt-Right 14 March 2021 04: 21
    +2
    Quote: Civil
    This is the turn) and where to start - we will make a cheap analogue of the F-22, but the result is the F-35)

    When was the F-35 put into the "heavy fighter" niche !? laughing
    1. yehat2
      yehat2 15 March 2021 23: 00
      +1
      Quote: Angry Alt-Right
      When was the F-35 put into the "heavy fighter" niche !?

      it is hard to buy and maintain it - so they took it.
      1. 3danimal
        3danimal 17 March 2021 11: 08
        0
        Nothing is hard. You retell rumors, being lazy to look for information on your own. Study:
        https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/rates/fy2019/2019_b_c.pdf

        F-35A: the cost of a flight hour is half the price of the F-22, comparable to the F-18E / F.
  • Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 12 March 2021 04: 57
    0
    The F35 needs to be riveted as much as possible in the United States and the allies, the Jews say that this is an extraordinary plane.
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 12 March 2021 05: 21
      +1
      creation of a new aircraft of generations "4+" or "5-".
      There is a rollback ... what
      1. sleeve
        sleeve 12 March 2021 06: 23
        +3
        Well no. Just out of a dead end on the beaten track.
  • Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 12 March 2021 06: 23
    +2
    Speed ​​statements may indicate the need for a completely new high performance platform. In particular, the ability to fly supersonic without the use of afterburner can be useful. At the same time, it should be simpler than the F-22 and F-35 aircraft so that the cost of the project remains at an acceptable level.
    fool For all the good, against all the bad. Yes, "invisible" are not in favor.
    1. Old tanker
      Old tanker 12 March 2021 06: 49
      0
      Well, let now our Su-35 and MiG-35 catch up.
      1. ironic
        ironic 14 March 2021 19: 08
        -4
        What for? Do a cobra at 110 degrees at 0.5M? It's beautiful, but they don't need it.
        1. Old tanker
          Old tanker 15 March 2021 17: 35
          +1
          And our planes are only capable of this and that's it?
          Well, well.
          1. ironic
            ironic 15 March 2021 17: 51
            -2
            More depends on the pilots. But they are capable of shooting from a cannon, it has been proven. wink
            But seriously, planes are certainly capable not only of cobras, but without classmates' AFAR and super cruise, this is readiness for yesterday's battles. By the way, the cannon would be good for a more modern one. The 30mm is weak in both rate of fire and barrel wear.
            1. Old tanker
              Old tanker 16 March 2021 07: 33
              +1
              What do you mean by "modern gun"?
              1. Mavrikiy
                Mavrikiy 16 March 2021 13: 40
                +1
                Quote: ironic
                By the way, the cannon would be good more modern. 30mm I'm weak ..... and barrel wear.
                How much of this sound ...! repeat the naval was called GAF.
              2. ironic
                ironic 16 March 2021 19: 23
                -3
                Well, which has a slightly higher rate of fire than the peak of 1700 rounds and which does not have to change the barrel if you release all the ammunition in a single burst.
  • Avior
    Avior 12 March 2021 06: 38
    +6
    The f-35 has a similar problem with the f-22.
    There are no 5th generation aircraft in service with other countries.
    In reality, many of their tasks can now be solved by cheaper 4th generation machines.
    Accordingly, the capabilities of the 5th generation turn out to be redundant, and the production of the 5th generation in large quantities is not required. So they thought about reducing the program to the required amount
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 12 March 2021 07: 18
      +6
      Accordingly, the capabilities of the 5th generation turn out to be redundant
      They are not redundant. They, in the current performance of the samples adopted for service: a) are not obvious, b) are not confirmed by anything other than the advertising statements of the parties interested in the sale.
    2. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 12 March 2021 07: 36
      -1
      Not only redundant but also more expensive. One example: the internal compartments increase the total volume of the aircraft, accordingly the resistance to the air flow increases, and in order to provide flight characteristics, a more powerful engine is needed, and it consumes more fuel, which also forces an increase in the volume of tanks, and with it the size of the aircraft. range of flight. Plus a more powerful engine is more expensive in itself. This is just one example of a problem.
      1. Ka-52
        Ka-52 12 March 2021 11: 16
        +5
        One example: internal compartments increase the total volume of the aircraft, and the resistance to air flow increases accordingly.

        increases the drag not the volume, but the midsection.
        and to provide flight characteristics, a more powerful engine is needed

        not all characteristics depend on the drag coefficient. But the truth is that many problems are countered by an increase in thrust-to-weight ratio.
      2. Angry Alt-Right
        Angry Alt-Right 14 March 2021 04: 33
        0
        Quote: Herman 4223
        One example: internal compartments increase the total volume of the aircraft, and the resistance to air flow increases accordingly.

        And the whole "fence", in the form of suspensions on the wing, does not increase the drag? And why, then, do internal weapons bays exist on long-range aircraft, for example?
        1. Herman 4223
          Herman 4223 14 March 2021 16: 34
          0
          It depends on what to hang. Several missiles can give less resistance than bays.
    3. Orange bigg
      Orange bigg 12 March 2021 10: 54
      -4
      ... There are no 5th generation aircraft in service with other countries.


      Seriously?
      The Chinese Defense Ministry has adopted a new J-20 fighter, Reuters reported. Thus, China has become the second country in the world after the United States to have fifth-generation fighters in service. The message that the aircraft was put into service was broadcasted without details on local TV channels.

      https://nplus1.ru/news/2017/03/13/j20


      1. Avior
        Avior 12 March 2021 11: 28
        +5
        but how much he is of the fifth generation is a big question.
        besides, all two dozen are still in trials.
        1. Herman 4223
          Herman 4223 12 March 2021 12: 05
          -1
          There were two dozen (28) of them a couple of years ago. And there was information about the formation of the first squadron of these with these machines, too, in 19 years.
          1. Avior
            Avior 12 March 2021 12: 16
            +3
            yes, some write that there are already five dozen. but still the question of how much they correspond to the fifth generation remains open.
            Americans do not seem to be very scared.
            either they are sloppy, or they know more than us.
            1. Herman 4223
              Herman 4223 12 March 2021 12: 29
              +3
              It must meet the requirements of the Chinese military. Whether it corresponds or not, I do not know. In any case, this is the most modern car in China and I think it is very dangerous for any aircraft.
  • VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK
    VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK 12 March 2021 07: 20
    -3
    The Americans woke up! We realized that the car is expensive, and with a bunch of flaws! And besides, the Russian F-35s can see! According to some parameters, even SU-35 overtakes it, but it is cheaper in production! It seems more likely that the Americans were trying to drive Russia into an arms race! There is more politics here than common sense!
  • Herman 4223
    Herman 4223 12 March 2021 07: 28
    +1
    All the same, it would probably be correct to call the future fighter the sixth generation, and not 4,5. Indeed, relative to the previous ones, it will be new.
    Although my opinion is that the tasks of light fighters in the near future should be taken over by unmanned systems.
  • mark1
    mark1 12 March 2021 08: 24
    +4
    Well, let them make the F-35 "lightweight" - ie. remove, if possible, everything that interferes with flying "cheap and cheerful" without disrupting the main technical process in the production. Or is it "not our (in the sense of their) method"?
  • Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 12 March 2021 08: 43
    +2
    We ate the wunderwolf.
    We remembered the principle of reasonable sufficiency.
    If the task can be performed by a technician easier and cheaper, then why do it harder and more expensive.
  • OgnennyiKotik
    OgnennyiKotik 12 March 2021 08: 58
    +9
    So let's first, we're only talking about the Air Force:
    The F-35 program is supposedly too expensive. So the replacement of aircraft types is always expensive, the matter is not in its price, it accounts for about a third or half of the total costs. It is necessary to teach pilots, technicians, redo the infrastructure, purchase new equipment for maintenance, spare parts, many mistakes due to ignorance of technology, while some people simply cannot be retrained, etc., etc. The price is now F-35A $ 78 million, F-15EX 148 million $, F-16V $ 60-70 million
    What does the minister propose to do new aircraft of 4,5 generation.
    This means new R&D, design, prototyping, fine-tuning, construction of production, test operation, again fine-tuning, again spending on training people and introducing new technology, etc.
    Only then will we get the ultimate fighter with price and service. And how much cheaper will it be? The difference will compensate for all the costs of creating and implementing a new aircraft? Something tells me not.
    And so there is still a 6th generation NGAD project on the way. Introduce it and the new 4,5? The navel will be untied.
    On the other hand, there are problems with the F-35, there are no complaints in terms of combat qualities, they are excellent in their class.
    1. Slow production. Replacing the F-16 will take 10-15 years. It is necessary to build a new production, this is a gigantic cost, the price of an airplane will jump by 1,5 times for several years.
    2. Retraining of pilots and technicians. It's not easy, the difference between the planes is too great. Some people are simply not capable and do not want to retrain physically. It's easier for them to quit.
    3. Redundancy of the F-35 for simple missions. Here are the words of the minister: "You don't go to work on Lamborghini every day?"
    4. High service cost. Here the manufacturer needs to twist the testicles.

    Therefore, there are 2 logical options
    1. Purchase a batch of F-16. You can make an upgrade following the example of the F / A-18. F-16 Super Viper open avionics, possibly a new engine. On tests, the XA100 / 101 are made compatible with the F110 and F135. The new engine should be similar to the NGAD engine, and the technology for modernization from it.
    2. Launch the UAV programs. Loyal Wingman already, several types of new drums are needed.
    1. d4rkmesa
      d4rkmesa 12 March 2021 09: 49
      -1
      The Indigenous Air Force, apparently, "gorged" on Lockheed. The F-16 does not suit them (if you buy new ones), most likely. We can stock up on popcorn, maybe we'll see another Super-Super Hornet.
    2. Avior
      Avior 12 March 2021 11: 56
      +2
      modernization of the F-16 just suggests itself instead of creating a completely new aircraft
      1. Postum
        Postum 12 March 2021 21: 12
        0
        So she already has this F-16V, in the source it says directly about it, that is, the United States is going to do the same thing as with the old F-15C / D to replace it with a new aircraft in the old form factor
        1. ironic
          ironic 14 March 2021 19: 13
          -1
          And the US Air Force does not need it and rightly so.
      2. ironic
        ironic 14 March 2021 19: 12
        -1
        This is a dead end. The F-16 flies off within a maximum of 20 years. And not only in terms of the resource.
        1. Avior
          Avior 14 March 2021 19: 49
          -1
          Phantoms still fly here and there
          And moment-21
          Will be sold second-hand, if that
          1. ironic
            ironic 14 March 2021 19: 59
            0
            Even orders for Vipers not even used are not encouraging.
    3. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 12 March 2021 12: 20
      +1
      Probably this car will still be, I read the news about it for the second time.
      The description is similar to what the Koreans are doing now on their new fighter. This aircraft (Korean) is simpler and cheaper than the F35, only slightly inferior in stealth due to the lack of internal compartments and at the same time surpasses the aircraft of previous generations.
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 12 March 2021 12: 38
        +2
        Quote: Herman 4223
        Probably this car will still be, I read the news about it for the second time.

        I read 6 times, 4 times in English, 2 here. It means something? They order only: "research work to study and substantiate the possibility of creating a new aircraft of generations" 4+ "or" 5- "."
        My forecast the Senate will thrust this idea into the minister's inappropriate place.
        Quote: Herman 4223
        This aircraft (Korean) is simpler and cheaper than f35, only slightly inferior in stealth due to the lack of internal compartments

        It will not be cheaper, they will not make it less than $ 120-140 million, it will be simpler, therefore less effective. There will be no internal compartments only in block 1 and it is not a fact that they will not replay this issue. The KF-X is a different class fighter, they do it not as replacements, but in addition to the F-35.
        1. Herman 4223
          Herman 4223 12 March 2021 13: 44
          0
          Efficiency is not only combat indicators, but also economic ones. And here the Korean version is not so bad. Then now for aircraft there is a large assortment of long-range ammunition that allows you not to enter the air defense zone at all or to strike from points where air defense systems can barely reach, and this reduces the need for such secrecy that is present on the same F-35.
          1. ironic
            ironic 14 March 2021 19: 33
            -1
            This does not diminish the need for the F-35, it allows the F-15X to be used for now.
    4. ironic
      ironic 14 March 2021 19: 34
      -1
      You definitely need to take on the UAV, and not try the propeller-driven attack aircraft ...
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 14 March 2021 19: 45
        -1
        So they are taken, as soon as they go into production, they will simply forget about these 4th and 4 ++++ generation fighters. A manned fighter, below the 5th generation, has no chance of winning against a jet UAV. Just run away.
        Screw attack aircraft have their own niche, but this has little to do with the tasks of the Air Force and the Army. This is more about border guards, PMCs, counterpartisan formations.
        1. ironic
          ironic 14 March 2021 20: 01
          -2
          On the first, I strongly agree. On the second, the question is, is it not better to develop a powerful turboprop UAV attack aircraft?
          1. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 14 March 2021 20: 20
            -2
            Quote: ironic
            a powerful turboprop UAV attack aircraft?

            So they are already there. Not suitable for tasks. You need a cheap plane with cheap maintenance, which flies for a long time and if it sees a target, it immediately attacks it.
            The UAV needs infrastructure, maintenance, there is a time lag when using. Toucans are farmers' aircraft, with the simplest maintenance under a canopy, two pilots who directly identify the target on the spot and make a decision. You can calmly transfer it to your allies, in fact, your controlled PMCs, who will easily find pilots on them.
            Again, these are specific tasks that are not entirely in the area of ​​responsibility of the army and the air force.
            1. ironic
              ironic 14 March 2021 20: 41
              -1
              Cheap, yes. But isn't it too cheap? Today, close air defense is available even to not too large bandit formations.
              1. OgnennyiKotik
                OgnennyiKotik 14 March 2021 20: 48
                -2
                This requires an assessment of threats and risks in each specific case. In which zone what to work in.
                1. ironic
                  ironic 14 March 2021 21: 14
                  -2
                  At that time I already see a solution based on combat training, but this is understandably more expensive.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 12 March 2021 09: 03
    +4
    4th generation, on units and with avionics from the 5th, it will still serve itself well.
  • Cowbra
    Cowbra 12 March 2021 09: 12
    -3
    Gentlemen, keep it simple. The situation is described in one phrase - "On the F-35, the front workers sawed everything, but we also want to!"
    There will be another F-35. They will also come up with some kind of Sumvolt for him, you will see
    1. ironic
      ironic 14 March 2021 20: 43
      -1
      Pts good. This is much better than marking time building the perfect supersonic steam locomotive. That's what I like to call modern Leica cameras.
  • Oleg Aviator
    Oleg Aviator 12 March 2021 11: 21
    -2
    I'm not surprised about F35. Lockheeds have a very long history of cheating. With fighters in particular. Up to bribery of bureaucrats. If only they took only from them.
  • APASUS
    APASUS 12 March 2021 13: 29
    -1
    Send materials with the preparation of public opinion that the Americans need another program for the fighter of the future. As I understand it, by the end of the year it will be submitted to Congress for consideration.
  • Dzenn
    Dzenn 12 March 2021 13: 55
    -3
    Let's face it, the F-22 and F-35 "stealth aircraft" programs have completely failed.
    Let the Pentagon generals look for words so that the real picture is not so cruel to them.
    Reality, and not cartoons about "invisibility" from the Pentagon, showed that both the F-22 and the F-35 are found even outside the scope of the weapons they carry.
    The readiness of the Pentagon will return to the aircraft of the 4th generation, says only one thing, the efficiency of the 5th generation is lower than the 4th.
    Indeed, the plane cannot fly on afterburner, it is detected confidently, it has no invisibility.
    out of 6-8 missiles can use 1-2, then the system refuses to launch.
    The machine gun does not shoot at the target.
    The life support system strangles the pilot, touch buttons in 20% of cases do not respond to the pilot's touch.
    There is no maneuverability as well as speed, in air combat, just a target against our 4, 4+ and 4 ++ aircraft.
    After 2-3 hours of flight, it requires maintenance for several days.
    And how will this work in the case of real hostilities?
    F-22 and F-35, they have no combat value.
    Losses in Vietnam of 9 aircraft of the US Air Force, with such aircraft, will seem insignificant.
    1. ironic
      ironic 14 March 2021 19: 22
      -2
      Yeah, they are found, just not discovered by whom.
      They returned to one F-15, and that is because the fools stopped the F-22 without an alternative.
      He cannot fly on the afterburner only on VO.
      And not only the missiles cannot fire, but the cannon shoots crookedly, the catapult kills, and the oxygen system strangles, but for some reason nobody cancels the ordered and they fly, fly, fly ...
      The maneuverability at a speed of 0.5M is worse than the 4th, but it's never pancake planes, you grab them by the tail, slow down to 0.5M and shoot them point-blank ... with a cannon, like a Su-35 shot a Su-30 in an exercise. This is a victory.
      After the flight, they do not fly for several days ... but in Israel they have not heard of this, so they fly. We urgently need to warn you!
      The combat value of the Su-57 is incomparably higher. He's alone.
      The US is already in fear, considering future losses. It's good that you reminded them of this. I wouldn't count
  • Stas1973
    Stas1973 12 March 2021 15: 18
    +3
    Any conflict between developed countries will begin with the fact that they will extinguish all communications, first of all, they will demolish satellites and data centers. And where will this open infrastructure on the aircraft rest?
  • TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 12 March 2021 16: 43
    -1
    Great news. Forward mattress covers))) drive another 200 - 300 lard to nowhere - and you will be happy))))
  • Maxwrx
    Maxwrx 12 March 2021 17: 28
    +4
    In fact, they need an F-35, just a revised one. Remove expensive coating, remove internal compartments, improve aerodynamics and, most importantly, reduce the cost of a flight hour. F-16 - $ 8,3 thousand, f-35 - $ 42 thousand (tends to 25000) Consider the average flight time of 200 hours per year in the USA. The F-16 has $ 1,66 million, the F-35 $ 8,4 million a year, per pilot.
    1. agond
      agond 12 March 2021 21: 20
      -2
      Quote: Stas1973
      Any conflict between developed countries will begin with the fact that they will extinguish all communications, first of all, they will demolish satellites

      Extinguishing a military satellite can be a more difficult task than extinguishing a small flashlight from a machine gun at a distance of 1 km, the night may not be enough, you will burn the machine gun rather than extinguish the flashlight.
      And in the F-35 there is a large reserve for modernization, for example, to connect an electric, a high-power generator to the engine and power the laser
    2. ironic
      ironic 14 March 2021 19: 31
      -2
      And crap neither 4th nor 5th generation will turn out. Do they need it?
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 12 March 2021 23: 34
    +4
    "First of all, this is due to the insufficient production of the F-22A and the limited pace of construction of newer F-35 of all modifications." ////
    ----
    F-35s roll off the assembly line at 14-16 per month.
    So far, any new fighter - either the 4th or the 5th generation,
    will reach such rates of release, it will take 15-20 years after the end of R&D.
    And again there will be not enough money for their purchase and maintenance.
    The general should immediately be offered to release Mustangs and Thunderbolts
    times of World War II. Cheap and thousands, thousands. laughing
    1. ironic
      ironic 14 March 2021 19: 30
      -2
      American liberals need one more time after Obamota to sit down with their ass in some kind of puddle and everything will fall into place. And they will immediately give money and the planes will be released, which are necessary, and not some kind of crap of the 4th generation.
    2. yehat2
      yehat2 April 24 2021 16: 01
      0
      The F-35s are in no way capable of independently completely replacing the front-line level of aviation.
      they are doomed to support operations hit and run away.
      Therefore, all the talk that other planes are not needed is just some kind of short-sighted game.
      The behavior of the Pentagon clearly shows that there is a clear awareness of this fact and they are pushing the lobbyists of the F-35 project to diversify production, despite all the virtual bonuses of unification and imaginary hopes. Thus, the F-15 EX, the superhornet appeared, and a number of other projects are growing, the A-10 remain in service, and in my opinion, the total amount of F-22 and F-35 will never exceed a third of the tactical aviation. This does not mean that the penguin is bad.
      This suggests that the idiotic stuffing about the universal aircraft has again come under criticism.
      No one denies that in this project the American literally contained everything that was developed and stolen over the past 30 years, but ... this is not enough, and it is not enough.
  • ironic
    ironic 14 March 2021 19: 27
    -1
    The article is a clean proclamation. Reading for the 101st time about how expensive it is to buy the F-35 is already just bored, because it's just rut. Those who cannot afford its service buys European distributors and rejoices. It makes no sense for countries that can give up the F-35. The situation with the indispensability of the F-22 was created by themselves and out of stupidity. The production was stopped, they did not think about an alternative. Everything else is sucked out of the thumb. The Americans have no serious problems, they cut the budget artificially, and look for cheap solutions in vain. For cheaper solutions, it is necessary to develop UAVs, including jet ones.
  • Bad_gr
    Bad_gr 14 March 2021 22: 13
    0
    ....... According to the general, the new aircraft should differ from the F-16 with increased combat effectiveness. He must quickly go to a given area and complete the task, using modern technologies. Speed ​​statements may indicate the need for a completely new high performance platform. In particular, the ability to fly supersonic without the use of afterburner can be useful. At the same time, it should be simpler than the F-22 and F-35 aircraft so that the cost of the project remains at an acceptable level ...
    Something that reminds me
  • Basarev
    Basarev April 21 2021 13: 51
    0
    And Russia should not get into the overwhelming PAK FA program, namely, create a completely new fourth-generation aircraft, completely out of touch with Soviet developments. The fourth generation is the optimal balance of cost and efficiency.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 April 24 2021 15: 53
    0
    Quote: ironic
    logics and all kinds of thinking take their basis from a formal or informal logical construction

    you have NOT studied matology and a number of related disciplines. This is evident from what you say.
    So why do you climb where more knowledgeable people will scoff at you?
    Why don't you stop where you are at least confident?