Military Review

F-15EX: USA got the best fourth generation fighter?

186

Second birth



Few winged machines have generated more excitement among amateurs in recent years. aviationthan the new American F-15EX. Based on the F-15QA Advanced Eagle that Boeing developed for Qatar, the F-15EX is the most advanced version of the F-15. Until recently, EX seemed like a bold initiative by Boeing, but on February 2, the plane made its maiden flight. After that, the corporation showed many photos and videos of the new car, in which we could see the aircraft in the camouflage of the American Air Force: I must say, the fighter was very easy to confuse with the old combat training F-15D, which has essentially an almost identical light gray color. Also, from a distance, it is difficult to distinguish the vehicle from the shock F-15E, which, however, has a darker camouflage.


In a broad sense, the new aircraft combines the capabilities of these two aircraft at a qualitatively new level. It acts both as an "advanced" fighter capable of carrying a variety of air-to-air missiles, and as one of the most powerful tactical strike aircraft of our time.

First F-15EX fighter of the United States Air Force got March 10: The aircraft is taken to Eglin Air Force Base, Florida from the Boeing plant in St. Louis. Soon, the military will begin flight tests of the vehicle. The second aircraft of the Air Force should be received around April, the rest of the aircraft of the first batch will be delivered by 2023 fiscal year. Small volumes should not be embarrassing: obviously, this is only the beginning (otherwise, the idea itself would not, in fact, make any sense). The US military budget for fiscal 2021 has funds for the purchase of the next batch of 12 F-15EX, and in the next four fiscal years they plan to buy another 72 such vehicles. In general, the American Air Force expects to eventually receive about 200 of these machines.


The figure, by the way, is quite remarkable. Approximately as many as of 2019 were at the disposal of the US Air Force mentioned your F-15E Strike Eagle, although specifically now the F-15EX is seen, first of all, as a replacement for the older F-15C / D.

Noteworthy is the assessment of the aircraft by Colonel Sean Dory, program manager for the F-15EX of the US Air Force. He stated the following:

“With its large armament, digital highway and open architecture, the F-15EX will become a key element of our tactical fighter fleet and complement the fifth generation. In addition, it is capable of carrying a hypersonic weaponwhich gives it a niche role in future conflicts of equal rivals. "

A flattering assessment for a machine that until recently was considered by many to be frankly superfluous for the US Air Force, which has traditionally relied on the purchase of fifth generation fighters.

"Eagle" with character


What are the advantages of the new car over other representatives of the fourth generation? The main advantages of the aircraft are as follows:

- Powerful radar with an active phased array antenna (AFAR) Raytheon AN / APG-82;
- Advanced electronic warfare system Eagle Passive / Active Warning and Survivability System;
- Modern digital cockpit, equipped with large displays (on earlier F-15s relatively small displays were installed, which caused complaints from the pilots);
- Extremely high carrying capacity;
- A wide range of air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons.


Traditionally, it is the last two points that are of the greatest interest. The plane is called “the most heavily armed fighter". The combat load of the F-15EX is 13 tons. For comparison, the most advanced Russian fourth-generation fighter, the Su-35S, has this figure of 8 tons. The Eurofighter Typhoon, claiming the title of the best European fighter, has a combat load even less - 7,5 tons.


The total number of air-to-air missiles carried by the F-15EX can reach 22 units. This is more than any fourth generation fighter or any fifth generation fighter (including external hardpoints) can take. If we talk about air-to-surface weapons, the vehicle can take up to 28 Small Diameter Bombs. Their 100 kilogram weight should not mislead: we could well see what small and ultra-small aircraft weapons can do in a war during the last year's conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh.


If this does not seem enough, then, as noted above, the aircraft will be able to carry "hypersonic weapons up to 22 feet long and weighing up to 7000 pounds". It can be placed on the central suspension. It is unclear exactly what hypersonic weapons the Air Force is considering for integration with the F-15EX: there are a number of possible options, including several hypersonic cruise missiles. As noted by The Drive, no matter what weapons the F-15EX will carry in the future, the chosen role of the platform for hypersonic systems emphasizes that these aircraft will not only replace the old F-15s, but will give the Air Force units equipped with them fundamentally new opportunities.

This is the place for old people


So is the F-15EX the best fourth generation fighter? Obviously, the answer to this question lies beyond a simple comparison of load, radar capabilities, or combat radius. And even beyond the stealth factor of the aircraft, although this is undoubtedly a very important indicator even for fourth-generation vehicles, in which this feature was not initially put at the forefront by the designers.

There are too many complex questions that cannot be answered “here and now”. This also applies to weapons, and the concept of use, and, of course, the professionalism of the pilots. One thing is for sure: the new F-15 is one of the five and possibly the three most powerful fighters of the fourth generation, second only to the fifth generation. Mainly, of course, in terms of stealth.


It should be noted that the consideration of the aircraft as a full-fledged alternative to the fifth generation has no basis. The F-15EX will complement the F-35, not replace them as some have suggested. He will act as a kind of "flying arsenal". As you know, the disadvantage of the F-35 is in part that it can only take four AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles into the internal compartments, while the strengthening of the air force potential of Russia and China suggests that this maybe not enough. Among the plans of the Americans is to strengthen the weapons of the F-35 by increasing the missiles carried inside to six. However, when exactly combat vehicles will receive such an opportunity is unknown. In this sense, the appearance of the F-15EX is quite justified (in addition to the fact that the plane is seen as a platform for strike weapons).

A similar "dualism of generations", incidentally, can be traced in the American Navy. We will remind, last year made the first flight of the F / A-18 Block III Super Hornet, which can be called the most advanced carrier-based fighter of the fourth generation. And that will serve alongside the seemingly much more advanced F-35C for years to come.
Author:
186 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Ros 56
    Ros 56 15 March 2021 18: 11
    -37%
    As they love striped heels to pound themselves in the chest, uzhos straight. And in the forehead they will shuffle and begin fairy tales about the white bull.
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 15 March 2021 18: 27
      +8
      Nobody likes to receive on the forehead.
      Our military personnel from PMCs who were under attack behaved quite typical for people with ATGMs, like the former "Afghans".
      It is a big mistake to proceed from some kind of cultural or "racial" superiority.
      1. Niko
        Niko 15 March 2021 22: 33
        +6
        Quote: 3danimal
        Nobody likes to receive on the forehead.
        Our military personnel from PMCs who were under attack behaved quite typical for people with ATGMs, like the former "Afghans".
        It is a big mistake to proceed from some kind of cultural or "racial" superiority.

        Thank you. Great comment
      2. Ros 56
        Ros 56 16 March 2021 06: 05
        -15%
        So talk about what, after all, it is the striped ones who put themselves above everyone else, it is they who consider themselves exceptional. And they consider their planes the same. And let them take the statistics of aircraft losses in the same Korea or Vietnam and it turns out that their number is sixteen.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 16 March 2021 10: 17
          +3
          During the war there are losses, much still depends on tactics.
          In Afghanistan, we lost planes from machine-gun fire, quite often.
          They have good planes (outstanding at the time of release), there are medium ones, and there are unsuccessful ones.
      3. max702
        max702 17 March 2021 15: 54
        -8
        Where and from which PMC did our military come under attack? Only facts, not fakes from Ukrainian garbage dumps and lirberast resources .. I will repeat the FACTS !!
        1. yehat2
          yehat2 April 29 2021 15: 44
          0
          Are you not aware of the attempt to recapture one of the oil facilities in Syria with the help of Wagner PMC?
          several dozen people with hand weapons came under fire from American artillery and UAVs and suffered casualties.
          1. max702
            max702 April 30 2021 12: 06
            0
            Quote: yehat2
            Are you not aware of the attempt to recapture one of the oil facilities in Syria with the help of Wagner PMC?
            several dozen people with hand weapons came under fire from American artillery and UAVs and suffered casualties.

            Does the question of PMC Wagner even exist? Well, at least one fact! And the fake about the destruction of some object is not funny at all, there are no photos of video evidence, although there any small shot is filmed like in Hollywood, but nothing here .. Yeah .. Or you will post me a photoshop of the Martian desert with burnt-out equipment in the Ilovaisk cauldron now. ? Let me see ..
            1. yehat2
              yehat2 April 30 2021 12: 41
              0
              I don't owe you anything
              but I want to poke my nose like a pig that is too lazy to google
              here, for example, a video of that fight from a drone
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_joJflCoIOg&t=6s
              1. max702
                max702 April 30 2021 13: 14
                +1
                Are you serious? This is a video of some kind of military clash somewhere .. In the presence of only cars similar to the "Ural" and that's it, but is it not a defeat of the Ukrainian column in the Donbass with American mercenaries? Judging by the video, you can say so .. The fact that the picture is in the Latin alphabet, and even more so the voice acting, well, does not prove anything at all! What makes you think that this is the defeat of the mythical PMC "Wagner" as you defined it? By title?
                Regarding the should, well, ETOGES you announced the defeat of PMC "Wagner" and I told you where is your evidence? Or have you finally switched to highlighted like? Do Russia's accusations need proof?
                1. yehat2
                  yehat2 April 30 2021 13: 20
                  0
                  Quote: max702
                  Russia's accusations

                  you are delusional, and not only on this point.
                  1. max702
                    max702 April 30 2021 13: 59
                    0
                    That is, you have no facts? Well, this is where we will end ...
    2. figwam
      figwam 15 March 2021 18: 49
      -24%
      = Ros 56] How striped heels love to pound themselves in the chest

      They also shouted about the F-35, which has no analogues in the world, in reality, a complete failure, which in three modifications could not replace any aircraft.
      He will act as a kind of "flying arsenal"

      The flying arsenal will be shot down first. will be visible at a great distance compared to the 5th generation.
      1. Angry Alt-Right
        Angry Alt-Right 15 March 2021 20: 49
        +8
        Quote: figvam
        They also shouted about the F-35, which has no analogues in the world, in reality, a complete failure, which in three modifications could not replace any aircraft.

        Why are you deceiving people so rudely? Out of "kindness" or "out of commitment"? good
        But what about the replacement of Harriers for the ILC, in the face of the F-35B? What could the Harrier compare to the F-35?
        But what about replacing the F-16 with the F-35A? Yes, not yet complete, but there is simply no reason why the F-35 cannot be considered a direct (and complete in terms of functionality) replacement!
        1. figwam
          figwam 15 March 2021 20: 57
          -18%
          Quote: Angry Alt-Right
          But what about the replacement of Harriers

          The F-35 has no future, it is expensive even for the United States.
          1. Angry Alt-Right
            Angry Alt-Right 15 March 2021 21: 02
            +17
            Quote: figvam
            The F-35 has no future, it is expensive even for the United States.

            Does it bother you that any transition to the next generation of fighters requires a different (larger) order of money?
            The transition from 3rd to 4th also increased the order of numbers for saturation with technology. Can you give a straightforward and detailed answer? Or will you be announcing the heading "inexpensive axioms"?
            1. figwam
              figwam 15 March 2021 21: 12
              -19%
              Quote: Angry Alt-Right
              Doesn't bother you

              You did not understand! This aircraft is showing more and more breakdowns and shortcomings, and these are unforeseen and unencumbered expenses that even the United States cannot afford, so they formulate a new technical task to create a new 4+ aircraft that can replace at least the F-16.
              1. ironic
                ironic 15 March 2021 22: 48
                0
                Perhaps that is why about 50% of the released aircraft are combat-ready, and about 70% of them are 35A? The Americans are freaking out thinking about how to reduce the cost of a flight hour to participate in conflicts of low intensity and where there is guaranteed no resistance from the ground or from the air.
              2. ironic
                ironic 15 March 2021 22: 49
                +1
                The F-35A has already replaced the F-16. All the rest of the eccentricities of generals trying to reduce the cost of a flight hour for places where there is no danger from the air or from the ground.
          2. Charik
            Charik 15 March 2021 22: 15
            +5
            So 15x EX and 18x 3 blocks will be riveted, and 35x, like 22x, will not be enough, but enough for business
          3. ironic
            ironic 15 March 2021 22: 44
            +1
            Again a lie. Its price has already dropped to almost 80 lemons. The F-15E cost under 100 when it was new.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 15 March 2021 22: 54
              +6
              Less, 78 million for the F-35A, with the engine. Here are the current prices, lot 14 last purchase.


              https://www.f35.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/aero/f35/documents/F-35%20Fast%20Facts%20-%20March%202021.pdf
              1. ironic
                ironic 15 March 2021 22: 59
                +1
                Well, that's even less already ...
              2. Zhevlonenko
                Zhevlonenko 21 March 2021 04: 31
                +1
                Only you read carefully, and do not look at the pictures, F35 is a modular design, what you will be sold for this money is a "basic" blank, which will not be able to perform ANY tasks. To bring it into such, you will have to buy a bunch of options, and oh my God, its cost rises to 100+. Even a basic software update needs to be bought, but it costs just a horse's money.
          4. 3danimal
            3danimal 15 March 2021 22: 51
            +2
            About "roads":
            https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/rates/fy2019/2019_b_c.pdf

            Find the F-35 and compare with other aircraft. The price does not differ much from the same F-15.
            In addition, with a military budget of 3 of ours, a lot becomes easier. (for example, keep the world's largest fleet of aircraft, including 500 tankers)
            And then there are all the necessary technologies and production.
            1. yehat2
              yehat2 April 30 2021 14: 15
              0
              Quote: 3danimal
              Find the F-35 and compare with other aircraft. The price does not differ much from the same F-15.

              you forgot to mention that the price of the plane (shot down on purpose) is not all, but only about 40% in the case of the f-35. There, the same amount has to be spent on training and preparing the infrastructure, and if we compare it with the F-15, then the final price tag of 60 million is different.
              But that's not all - there is a well-oiled logistics of spare parts for the F-15, but for the F-35, warehouses are just beginning to be replenished, and this further increases the cost of the F-35 by 15 percent.
              And finally, the cost of an hour of flight and the speed of preparation in flight.
              As usual, there is no way without advertising lure. The very preparation for the flight in the F-35 takes 7-10 minutes most of all, BUT ... after the departure, there is a mandatory long-term preparation work (practice shows - it takes about 4 hours), which makes the penguin actually half as efficient as it is.
              All in all, you get a one-third more expensive aircraft and half the battle-worthy one, with a significant time to enter the conditional combat readiness state.
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal April 30 2021 14: 56
                0
                that the price of the plane (shot down on purpose)

                Doesn't a 3000+ lot keep the price down?
                What modern aircraft can be produced in such quantities?
                But that's not all - there is a well-oiled logistics of spare parts for the F-15, but for the F-35, warehouses are just beginning to be replenished, and this further increases the cost of the F-35 by 15 percent.

                This is a problem with all new aircraft.
                When the F-15 was adopted, it also cost (especially at first) more expensive than the F-4.
                And finally, the cost of an hour of flight and the speed of preparation in flight.

                That's for whom I posted the link to the official document ??
                The cost of an hour is comparable to the F-18 or F-15.
                after departure, long-term preparation work is obligatory (practice shows - it takes about 4 hours)

                Where does this information come from?
                All in all, you get a one-third more expensive aircraft and half the battle-worthy one, with a significant time to enter the conditional combat readiness state.

                He should replace the F-16. More than 1000 will be built for the Air Force.
                which makes the penguin actually half as combat-ready.

                Why a penguin?
                You have forgotten about the unique characteristics that even the F-15 lacks.
                1. yehat2
                  yehat2 April 30 2021 15: 17
                  0
                  Quote: 3danimal
                  He should replace the F-16

                  it will not replace the F-16 in any way.
                  by contrast, this is an expensive machine, which will never be enough and the armament scheme is somewhat different. For example, hanging tanks are not hung.
                  Quote: 3danimal
                  Why a penguin?

                  I didn't call it that, but it looks like both in silhouette from above and in the way it flies.
                  Quote: 3danimal
                  Where does this information come from?

                  The Israelis are now exploiting that way. In general, flights more often than 1 time per day are extremely rare for the F-35.
                  Quote: 3danimal
                  Doesn't a 3000+ lot keep the price down?

                  1 screwed-in bolt in US aircraft costs about $ 35.
                  Prices were reduced partly due to the production of components abroad and the use of outsourcers, partly due not to the use of standard mark-ups and taxes, partly due to a huge series, and partly due to the valiant decision of dumping, since F-35 is also an attempt to finally drown the aircraft industry in Europe.
                  1. 3danimal
                    3danimal April 30 2021 15: 46
                    0
                    this is an expensive car that will never be enough

                    Not for the US Air Force. request
                    For example, hanging tanks are not hung.

                    Hang up, there are external pylons.
                    But the F-35 carries almost twice as much fuel in its internal tanks.
                    The combat radius on them is 1040 km.
                    but it looks like a silhouette from above

                    More like a peregrine falcon or kestrel (front).
                    and the way it flies.

                    One of the most maneuverable fighters without OVT. Have you seen how he flies?
                    part at the expense of a huge series

                    Can you imagine how much, say, another processor in a PC would have cost if it had not been released in the millionth series?
                    This is the main way to reduce prices.
                    and partly by the valiant decision of the dumping, tk. F-35 is also an attempt to finally drown the aircraft industry in Europe.

                    The simplest explanation is to increase the series at the expense of foreign buyers.
                    And even more to reduce the cost for yourself.
                    We also wanted when we invited Indians to invest in the FGFA / PAK FA program.
                    The Israelis are now exploiting that way. In general, flights more often than 1 time per day are extremely rare for the F-35.

                    There are Israelis on the forum here. They praise the F-35.
                    1. yehat2
                      yehat2 4 May 2021 09: 21
                      -1
                      Quote: 3danimal
                      Not for the US Air Force.

                      Oh well
                      listen to what the "rich" US senators have to say about the costs of this program
                      1. 3danimal
                        3danimal 4 May 2021 10: 17
                        0
                        Complaints of the majors that "10 Bentleys came out a little expensive", which does not prevent you from continuing to buy a collection of cars. (Analogy)
                        There is an element of politics: to score political points on the topic of saving money, to sink the F-35 in favor of purchasing the F-18 E / F.
                      2. yehat2
                        yehat2 4 May 2021 10: 35
                        -1
                        there is no politics, but stupid mathematics.
                        The United States has certain requirements - for all their needs, about 3500 aircraft are needed, and preferably 4k.
                        And the latest expensive programs have led to the fact that with the write-off of worn-out cars, a hole of about 700-800 units is formed, for which there is stupidly no money.
                        That is why the purchases of the modernized f-18, f-16 and f-15 are being activated now, they even plan to modernize the f-22, because there is a sorely lack of money for penguins.
                      3. 3danimal
                        3danimal 4 May 2021 10: 52
                        +1
                        because the money for penguins is sorely lacking.

                        US Navy - 30 F-35Cs, as of 2021;
                        United States Marine Corps aviation 95 F-35B and 11 F-35C, as of 2021;
                        United States Air Force - 231 F-35A, as of 2021

                        It is planned to purchase: Air Force - 1763 units (13% of the plan is fulfilled), KMP - 340 units (31% of the plan), Navy - 340 units (9%).

                        In 2020, 123 F-35s were produced (only them), of which 74 aircraft were for the US Armed Forces. The pandemic had an impact: it was planned to release 141 aircraft.
                        Who else is capable of such production volumes of 5th generation aircraft? And they grow from year to year.
                        The number of those wishing to buy abroad is growing (just as the volumes are adjusted upward.

                        The F-35 was not intended to replace the F-15. F-22x hurried to curtail production. Therefore, for the time being, the F-15EX will be produced in this niche.
                      4. yehat2
                        yehat2 4 May 2021 11: 16
                        -1
                        Quote: 3danimal
                        The F-35 was not intended to replace the F-15. F-22x hurried to curtail production. Therefore, for the time being, the F-15EX will be produced in this niche.

                        f-22 was stopped due to lack of money. It turned out to be a very expensive program.
                        they had no choice. Yes, the F-35 cannot replace the F-22 in any way. Although in some places their capabilities duplicate each other.
                        The f-15 EX has a niche that does not coincide with the f-22. Yes, initially the F-22 sought to replace the F-15 as an interceptor and dominance conquest fighter. But
                        due to the mass of problems and limitations, it so happened that there are entire areas where all stealth aircraft were not destined.
                        For example, flight range or overall armament.
                      5. 3danimal
                        3danimal 4 May 2021 11: 27
                        0
                        f-22 was stopped due to lack of money.

                        Due to the lack of relevant threats and the tendency to reduce the military budget. And the best way to cut back is to save on expensive programs.
                        For example, flight range

                        What's wrong with the combat radius of the F-22?
                        Let me remind you that, unlike the F-15, it can fly for a rather long time on a 1,6M "super cruise".
                        overall armament.

                        The F-15s also did not carry it, the long-range fighter / interceptor does not really need it.
                      6. yehat2
                        yehat2 4 May 2021 13: 39
                        -1
                        Quote: 3danimal
                        The F-15s also did not carry it, the long-range fighter / interceptor does not really need it.

                        long-range missiles are needed, but they don't fit into the f-22
                        in addition, this aircraft does not have a sufficiently powerful locator to use the range and issue target designation far enough.
                        supersonic 1.6 is also very limited in time, due to heating and a banal supply of fuel.
                        Quote: 3danimal
                        What's wrong with the combat radius of the F-22?

                        combat radius in MINIMUM configuration with 2 missiles and without PTB 750 km.
                        with a normal load of about 550. Where can invisibility and supersonic be used at such a range? Very modest depth of work.
                        Ferry range with PTB = 3k is also not very good. You won't be able to fly this plane by sea as you want - you will have to develop routes and use tankers, which significantly reduces its strategic capabilities.
                        For comparison, I will give the first drying.
                        without PTB, the practical range is 3900. If this is translated into a combat radius, then it will turn out to be about 1800 km, i.e. twice as far.
                        The f-22 sacrificed range in order to achieve advertising flight performance characteristics, which is why its special capabilities were greatly depreciated.
                        for example, I will give f-15
                        he declared 1900 with weapons without PTB, this is about 900 km of combat radius.
                      7. 3danimal
                        3danimal 4 May 2021 14: 06
                        0
                        they don't fit into f-22

                        AIM-120D have a max range of 180km.
                        Plus there are external harnesses, stealth containers for camouflaging missiles were demonstrated.
                        Moreover, this aircraft does not have a sufficiently powerful radar

                        And who has it? What do you think is a powerful locator?
                        supersonic 1.6 is also very limited in time, due to heating and a banal supply of fuel.

                        Very useful, advantage in combat.
                        Overheating of the engine and the temporary limitation of this mode is inherent in all modern engines.
                        combat radius in MINIMUM configuration with 2 missiles and without PTB 750 km.
                        with normal load about 550

                        Where does the data come from? 550 km, like the F-16? smile
                        On the open spaces of the Russian Internet, you will not find such a thing ..
                        Combat range:
                        460 nmi (530 mi, 850 km) clean with 100 nmi (115 mi, 185 km) in supercruise
                        590 nmi (679 mi, 1,093 km) clean subsonic

                        This is more realistic.
                        Let me remind you that the F-22 without PTB carries 8200 kg of fuel.
                        F-15 - 6100 kg.
                        Su-27SM - 9400kg.
                        (There is either a miracle or a mistake.)
                        Su-27 flies 1,5 times farther.
                        sacrificed range in order to achieve advertising flight performance characteristics, because of which its special capabilities were greatly depreciated.

                        This is called double standards.
                        Someone else's performance characteristics are advertising, and they are not particularly needed.
                        Ours are a super advantage that does not give the enemy a chance. No.
                        You won't be able to fly this plane by sea as you want - you will have to develop routes and use tankers, which significantly reduces its strategic capabilities.

                        Who do you think has the world's largest tanker fleet of 550 aircraft?
                        (We have 15)
                      8. yehat2
                        yehat2 4 May 2021 14: 16
                        -1
                        Quote: 3danimal
                        Su-27 flies 1,5 times farther.

                        the f-15 and su-27 have much better aerodynamics (f-22 pays for stealth geometry)
                        f-22 saves only the power of 2 of its engines and on vertical maneuvering partial thrust vector
                        Otherwise it would be worse than a penguin in terms of performance.
                        in addition, the f-22 has serious problems with stability at low altitudes during takeoff and landing. On tests, it was there that an accident occurred and 1 plane crashed. There is no advertising here, only dry facts.
                        As a result, an additional analogue of the flight stabilization system, the same as on the Su-22, had to be installed on the F-27.
                      9. 3danimal
                        3danimal 4 May 2021 14: 35
                        0
                        f-22 saves only the power of 2 of its engines and on vertical maneuvering partial thrust vector
                        Otherwise it would be worse than a penguin in terms of performance.

                        Another bike that hides the envy of the unique F-119 engine, which has remained for a long time.
                        Most high-G maneuvers are done in a vertical plane. Which, by the way, does not prevent the Raptor from performing the "leaf" figure:
                        https://youtu.be/TYASJ03TBJg

                        So the "penguin" flies better than the F-22 without OVT? smile
                        https://youtu.be/MJLoW1ClNE0

                        What is known for sure that the F-35A is more maneuverable than the Su-27 without OVT.
                        On tests, it was there that an accident occurred and 1 plane crashed.

                        Control failed, one episode.
                        How many Su-27s crashed due to childhood illnesses? And even the Su-57?
                      10. yehat2
                        yehat2 4 May 2021 14: 37
                        -1
                        Quote: 3danimal
                        How many Su-27s crashed due to childhood illnesses?

                        one crashed, the cabin collapsed from vibration during testing of extreme modes.
                      11. 3danimal
                        3danimal 4 May 2021 14: 46
                        0
                        It crashed (due to malfunctions) much more:
                        https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Список_аварий_и_катастроф_Су-27

                        https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/type/su27
                      12. yehat2
                        yehat2 4 May 2021 15: 03
                        -1
                        you confuse all accidents and accidents during the test.
                        f-22, too, it seems 7 pieces fell out of order. 1 most recently
                        another 9 or 12 (I don't remember) were out of order during the flood.
                        in total, over the years of operation, more than 30 out of 187 cars have disappeared.
                        So there is no big difference in the statistics.
                      13. 3danimal
                        3danimal 4 May 2021 15: 15
                        0
                        https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/type/f22

                        A total of 13 accidents, 6 crashed and cannot be repaired, 4 with minor damage, 3 - the status is unknown.
                        you confuse all accidents and accidents during the test.

                        Not at all. I have given dew lists of accidents, where you can trace exactly which planes crashed.
                        If YF, or T-10 - we are talking about test prototypes.
                        https://tass.ru/proisshestviya/7410895/amp

                        Like the YF-22 back in 1992.
                        Will you have to install a system from the Su-27? wink
                  2. 3danimal
                    3danimal 4 May 2021 15: 09
                    0
                    About the 1992 accident:
                    https://youtu.be/mbQx89Eklm8

                    "Computer malfunction", at the prototype.
                    There were no more accidents until 2004.
                    By the way, 27 prototypes of the Su-2 crashed (which I could find).

                    The usual thing.
                    And during the operation, accidents are also inevitable.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 April 29 2021 15: 47
    0
    you forget that the F-35 is not only an airplane.
    this is a whole bunch of related technologies that were developed within the framework of the project
    and can now be used on others.
    Maybe the plane itself will not be successful, but another one can be made instead.
    This happened with the f-22, which appeared thanks to the ATF program and some developments of the f-14 tomcat.
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 16 March 2021 06: 10
    -17%
    There is no need to sing praises to them until we see anything from them, they have not shown themselves in any way, about 900 defects are available. negative
  • Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 16 March 2021 07: 36
    +4
    Quote: Angry Alt-Right
    But what about the replacement of Harriers for the ILC, in the face of the F-35B?

    It is possible that it will replace, but has not yet replaced it. Harriers remain in service with the ILC.
    Quote: Angry Alt-Right
    But what about replacing the F-16 with the F-35A? Yes, not yet complete, but there is simply no reason why the F-35 cannot be considered a direct (and complete in terms of functionality) replacement!

    Well, for example, the fact that the US Air Force offered to abandon the further purchase of the F-35, and consider the possibility of purchasing the latest F-16 modifications instead - is that not a reason?
    1. Angry Alt-Right
      Angry Alt-Right 16 March 2021 16: 35
      -3
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      It is possible that it will replace, but has not yet replaced it.

      It's just a matter of time. The corps is so unbearable in terms of its own aviation that they even print spare parts for the remaining Harrierers on 3D printers. The very fact of such ersatz decisions speaks volumes.
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      Well, for example, the fact that the US Air Force offered to abandon the further purchase of the F-35, and consider the possibility of purchasing the latest F-16 modifications instead - is that not a reason?

      It's like a recent article in this section. About the fact that the aircraft will be created either "4+", or "5-" generation.
      I do not claim that the F-35 is a magic bogey, but so far, in spite of it, there is nothing but verbal interventions, in terms of saturation with fresh aircraft.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 16 March 2021 17: 42
        +2
        Quote: Angry Alt-Right
        It's just a matter of time.

        Not only quite possible, but very likely.
        Quote: Angry Alt-Right
        It's like a recent article in this section.

        There is something else :))) In one of the articles I asked for a link not the original source, they gave it to me - in English. It was in it that I read that the Air Force was dissatisfied with the cost of the F-35 (we are talking about the cost of a flight hour) and came up with a proposal to significantly limit the supply of the F-35, but to resume production of the latest versions of the F-16.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 16 March 2021 17: 51
          0
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          made a proposal to significantly limit the supply of the F-35, but resume the production of the latest versions of the F-16.

          To be fair, they came up with many suggestions. Purchase of F-16, new 4 ++++++, acceleration of the NGAD program, development of UAVs and their various combinations. In general, it is their job to offer different options. They don't make a decision. They will calculate the costs, cry and continue to purchase the F-35. The main problem is that they are produced in small quantities, so it is logical to purchase an additional batch of F-16s. The main threat to the F-35 program is NGAD and UAVs, but this is in the realm of the unknown.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 17 March 2021 07: 45
            +2
            Quote: OgnennyiKotik
            To be fair, they came up with many suggestions. Purchase of F-16, new 4 ++++++, acceleration of the NGAD program, development of UAVs and their various combinations.

            Quite right. But we talked about this
            Quote: Angry Alt-Right
            But what about replacing the F-16 with the F-35A? Yes, not yet complete, but there is simply no reason why the F-35 cannot be considered a direct (and complete in terms of functionality) replacement!

            Nevertheless, as we can see, the US Air Force does not want to make a complete replacement of the F-16 with the F-35 today, and is looking for alternative options. Whether they will find it or not - you are right - that is another question.
  • Sckepsis
    Sckepsis 19 March 2021 07: 34
    0

    But what about replacing the F-16 with the F-35A?

    Hmm ... This is the one that the other day they were going to modernize or use to develop a new one. Can't you replace the F-35? You know, the statement of the Air Force Commander.
    1. Angry Alt-Right
      Angry Alt-Right 19 March 2021 10: 05
      0
      Quote: Sckepsis
      Hmm ... This is the one that the other day they were going to modernize or use to develop a new one. Can't you replace the F-35? You know, the statement of the Air Force Commander.

      A reference can be made to this very verbal intervention? Well, as far as the replacement of the F-35 is concerned, as you are essentially trying to assert. So yes, there was talk, but the program is still alive and, unlike the F-16, has, at least, the prospect of issuing fresh airplanes.
  • Klingon
    Klingon 15 March 2021 20: 57
    +5
    will be shot down! urryaaaa! and Su-30/33/34/35 / MiG-35 are not visible, type no?
  • lucul
    lucul 15 March 2021 21: 18
    -6
    As they love striped heels to pound themselves in the chest, uzhos straight.

    No, no, no - they made a very good apparatus.
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 16 March 2021 12: 08
    -15%
    Judging by the downsides, the State Department's lackeys are registered here. And we are your minus on horseradish. laughing hi bully
    1. aleksejkabanets
      aleksejkabanets 16 March 2021 12: 13
      +9
      Quote: Ros 56
      Judging by the downsides, the State Department's lackeys are registered here.

      That is, all those who disagree with you are "State Department lackeys"? A completely inadequate position.
      1. Ros 56
        Ros 56 16 March 2021 12: 15
        -13%
        No dear, here almost everyone will be bypassed, but we don't really care. fool
  • max702
    max702 17 March 2021 15: 57
    -2
    Right now, the tsunami of Etodrugin will pass! For this is Saint Valinor and must be understood!
  • Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 15 March 2021 18: 25
    +8
    The plane is like an airplane. The main thing will be who and how will apply it.
    1. Pete mitchell
      Pete mitchell 15 March 2021 18: 41
      +15
      The screen size in the cockpit is impressive. Boeing announced the BigPicture Cockpit technology thirty years ago: when the F-15 was still McDonald Douglas. Not immediately, but it happened
  • OgnennyiKotik
    OgnennyiKotik 15 March 2021 18: 34
    +16
    It is unclear exactly which hypersonic weapons the Air Force is considering for integration with the F-15EX: there are a number of possible options, including several hypersonic cruise missiles.

    Why is it not clear? On trials, the Air Force has 2 programs HAWC and ARRW.
    More information about ARRW, the rocket has an AGM-183A index, is made by Lockheed Martin. Typical hypersonic glider, speed up to 17M. It is planned to enter service with the B-1/52/21. B1 will be able to take 16 pieces of AGM-183A, B-52 8 pieces, F-15 1 piece. In theory, and F / A-18E / F should take 1. But these are Air Force programs, the Navy has its own.

    Two companies, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, compete in the HAWC project. A relatively light rocket is being made that the F-2/15/16/18/22 can lift. These missiles have a Hypersonic ramjet engine. Speed ​​in the region of 35-5M.

    1. figwam
      figwam 15 March 2021 19: 10
      -12%
      Typical hypersonic glider, speed up to 17M

      There are no 17M, maximum 6.5-8M, despite the fact that there has not yet been a single launch!
      1. 3danimal
        3danimal 15 March 2021 22: 43
        +1
        Previously, there was a scramjet test program. The same one that is depicted in articles about Zircon (under the wing of B-52).
      2. ironic
        ironic 15 March 2021 22: 52
        -1
        The glider may have, he is on a near-atmospheric glide path.
      3. yehat2
        yehat2 4 May 2021 10: 41
        -1
        Quote: figvam
        maximum 6.5-8M

        conventional anti-aircraft missiles are already quite capable of accelerating to Mach 8-9 and even maneuvering at that speed. So you are 10-15 years behind life. Just to break through this and think about higher speeds.
        For manned aircraft, the speed breakthrough tactic has become ineffective, but for missiles it is still relevant.
    2. 3danimal
      3danimal 15 March 2021 22: 42
      +1
      All the same, we finished the hypersonic ramjet engine, well done. However, after the Waverider program, it is not surprising.
      And what about ours, I wonder?
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 15 March 2021 22: 50
        +4
        Quote: 3danimal
        All the same, we finished

        Not a fact, there is no information about it. It is not at all clear whether anyone has a working scramjet engine. No photo, no video. You should not believe in words. While everyone (China, Russia, USA) uses hypersonic gliders, at the moment the propaganda effect of hypersound is more important than the military one.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 15 March 2021 22: 58
          +1
          Glider does not have its own engine, only plans after acceleration with a booster.
          But the X-51 was actually tested, in 2013 it was successfully. And on it stood the scramjet.
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 16 March 2021 00: 06
        -16%
        And with ours, everything is fine. Zircon is at the final stage of testing, a new tactical air-to-ground missile, airborne, in the initial tests - for both scramjet engines. Whatever one may say, but the United States in terms of setting hypersonic systems in service, we have made a controlled Vanguard combat unit and an anti-ship MRBM Dagger in service.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 16 March 2021 00: 16
          +11
          Whatever one may say, but the United States in terms of setting hypersonic systems in service, we have made a controlled combat unit Avangard and an anti-ship MRBM Dagger in service.

          Doesn't fit. (If guided by logic and critical thinking)
          And if you wholeheartedly believe TV, then everything is ok.
        2. bayard
          bayard 16 March 2021 04: 34
          +16
          Quote: Vadim237
          And with ours, everything is fine Zircon is at the final stage of testing

          Let's still wait until the end of testing and putting into service. So far, Zircon has confirmed the possibility of flying at a range of 400 - 450 km and hitting stationary targets. We will wait for confirmation of the possibility of hitting mobile targets at a distance of "over 1000 km" and using them from underwater carriers, and then we will rejoice.
          I would really like to experience such joy.
          Quote: Vadim237
          new tactical air-ground missile airborne in initial trials

          Well, here the hen is still in the nest. For such a product, one can only pray or wish good luck, but the result is still far away.
          Quote: Vadim237
          How not cool the United States in terms of staging hypersonic systems in service, we did

          In fact, only the "Dagger" is of value, which is in trial operation and at the given moment its carriers are deployed at all the main theaters. In fact, this is an aeroballistic missile on a TTD, with a range of 2000 km and maneuvering on a final trajectory - a replacement for the previously banned MRBMs. The possibility of hitting mobile sea targets has not yet been confirmed, but it is being taught, there is a seeker. If it is possible to teach how to work on naval mobile targets, it will really be a breakthrough ... But for now - only an SD aeroballistic missile.
          Quote: Vadim237
          combat unit Vanguard

          The product is one-of-a-kind - the number of these can be counted with the fingers of one hand, and the United States does not currently have an anti-missile defense system capable of countering our older generation ICBMs, because their penetration complex is designed just for such an anti-missile defense system that the United States has recently built for itself. Therefore, the usefulness of the "Vanguard" at the moment is doubtful, because instead of six (!) BB on the UR-100UTTH, there is one, though maneuvering and very difficult to intercept. So in a real scenario, he does not do the weather.

          The United States really lagged behind in rearming its strategic nuclear forces, but not because they could not, but because they decided that they had already defeated everyone and had no rivals on the planet. They simply relaxed from the late 90s - early 00s, when they realized that the USSR would not be resurrected and they just had to wait until the last Soviet missiles rotted away.
          And take it all at once.
          But they were wrong.
          And they have already realized this.
          And they began to take very energetic measures.
          And they have a backlog for this and have always been.
          And most importantly, there is money and the will of the ruling elite.
          They will be able to create an analogue of our "Dagger" in the coming years. And then he will go to the troops very quickly and in large numbers.
          They have the know-how and working samples of ramjet engines, and they can revive the program - they will be able to continue the X-51.
          And on the future ICBMs that they are developing, there will most likely be maneuvering gliders as warheads, on which they have been working since the 90s, and tests have been carried out since the end of the XNUMXs.
          We bypassed them because of the back at the turn, but now they realized their mistakes, and the rising China will no longer allow them to live on "relaxation" - we are faced with the fact of a new arms race. And the handicap that we took at its start will help us for a little while - the resources we have with the United States are incomparable ... and the old Soviet designers are gone ... and the new ones ...
          They gave birth to effective managers and their sons and daughters who, without a normal education and moral and business qualities, fuck every business they take on.
          Look at Rogozin and his offspring - the successes of Roscosmos and Ilyushin are witnesses to this.
          So there are not many reasons for "urya".
          We just preempted them at the beginning of the development of these types of weapons.
          But they did not confirm the possibility of bringing the matter to the end (the finished product is in service) and the organization of its serial production.
          The president's gallant speech about new types of weapons was already 4 years ago!
          And?
          ... 25 million high-tech jobs were promised to us too ... by the same person.
          He also promised that while he is in power, there will be no increase in the retirement age.
          MAN OF THE WORD!
          I am already silent about the "cruise missile with a ramjet nuclear engine of unlimited flight range" ... what was that about?
          "Poseidon" - just everything is clear ... it is not clear why he needs underwater carriers?
          With such and such a range?
          They would let it go "from the pier", or from any barge - cheaper, easier and faster ...

          ... I really hope that "Zircon" will successfully complete the tests and will be put into service with the previously declared characteristics.
          And that "Daggers" were deployed on the MiG-31K in all directions in the required quantities.
          And if he is also able to target naval targets ... I'll just be happy.

          Quote: Vadim237
          And with ours everything is fine

          Are we doing great with ours:
          - by AWACS aircraft?
          - by airplanes (and helicopters) PLO?
          - reconnaissance and target designation aircraft?
          - by radio-technical reconnaissance and electronic warfare aircraft?
          - with military transport aircraft?
          - with tanker aircraft?
          - with the naval missile carrier and, in general, with the Naval Aviation in general?
          - with MAPL - multipurpose nuclear submarines? "Ash" not to call - it's about something else (SSGN).
          ... it is possible for a long time to list the questions about how "everything is fine with us" ...
          But the propaganda with such questions will not overwhelm ... it has an exorbitant scope today.
          1. LastPS
            LastPS 16 March 2021 19: 37
            +3
            Propaganda-propaganda, but here on VO its victims are mercilessly avoided, which instills confidence in the adequacy of the public.
            1. bayard
              bayard 17 March 2021 07: 40
              0
              Yes, the local public confirms its adequacy. But at the same time, this indicates a DISTRUST OF THE WORD OF GOVERNMENT, and this is a very bad symptom.
              For Power.
              When the Society becomes so convinced of the incompetence and irresponsibility of the authorities ... it ends very badly.
              For Power.
              And for the State and the People as a whole.
              This was the case on the eve of 1917.
              This was the case on the eve of 1991.
              But ... history teaches only that it teaches nothing.
              Optimal would be a "revolution from above", similar to the one that Comrade Stalin carried out at the turn of the 20s - 30s of the last century.
    3. Vadim237
      Vadim237 16 March 2021 00: 08
      -7
      Judging by the image of the last missile, there is no scramjet engine there - rather a turbojet engine.
      1. 3danimal
        3danimal 16 March 2021 00: 17
        -2
        Cheating request The dagger is also with solid propellant, but it flies for some time on hypersonic smile
        1. yehat2
          yehat2 4 May 2021 10: 54
          -1
          in fact, it is not necessary to be completely immersed in hypersound.
          the British have shown that it is much easier to make a stealth missile.
          yes, it flies slowly, but the air defense reacts to it sluggishly.
          The Americans are also developing their own. They don't have very high-speed missiles,
          but there are bombs planning for 200 km. I mean, not everything depends on one technology.
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 4 May 2021 11: 00
            0
            Of course, not necessarily, just in our media they go crazy about this topic. And they fool the audience.
            The United States had a successful long-range, compact and unobtrusive JASSM-ER.
            We made an anti-ship missile system based on it and are happy.
            1. yehat2
              yehat2 4 May 2021 11: 09
              -1
              Quote: 3danimal
              Jassm-er

              firstly, the base of this missile is not an anti-ship missile, but a missile created for stationary purposes.
              secondly, stealth is very conditional. Its visibility was reduced, but not radically, but by 2-3 times.
              In addition, it is a WINGED missile, i.e. in some situations, the visibility is like a fighter.
              and thirdly, the question of its effectiveness as a RCC is open.
              And, finally, in the navy, its use is well far from problem-free.
              so I don't see much joy. Have made a tool, opportunities have grown - yes.
              Much? It is not clear yet.
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 4 May 2021 11: 24
                0
                Its visibility was reduced, but not radically, but 2-3 times.

                Compare to Tomahawk / Caliber and say it's 2-3 times smile
                Did you personally take measurements?
                In addition, it is a WINGED missile, i.e. in some situations, the visibility is like a fighter.

                Composite radio-transparent wings.
                And in general, aren't these your words:
                much easier to make a stealth missile.
                yes, it flies slowly, but the air defense reacts to it sluggishly.

                ??
                and thirdly, the question of its effectiveness as a RCC is open.

                Like any new weapon.
                I got to the exercises, the US Navy, I am sure, assessed its stealth.
                And, finally, in the navy, its use is well far from problem-free.

                In comparison with what?
  • Prisoner
    Prisoner 15 March 2021 18: 37
    -17%
    Well, for whom is this advertising "video"? what There are no buyers here.
  • Doccor18
    Doccor18 15 March 2021 18: 39
    -15%
    What is surprising is this: a rather big 5th generation fighter took off almost 30 years ago. Its lighter and cheaper generational sibling also flies with might and main. And they riveted them in hundreds ... So what's wrong with them, since they decided to sort out and re-launch the F15 series? Well, the thrust-to-weight ratio is great ... And what else? How about the vaunted stealth?
    So why F22 and F35 - F15EX?
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 15 March 2021 18: 49
      +23
      Quote: Doccor18
      So why F22 and F35 - F15EX?

      It has been written more than once. These are different aircraft for different tasks.
      F-22 - Air Superiority Conquest.
      F-35 - reconnaissance and pinpoint strikes.
      F-15EX - missile carrier / bomber / UAV carrier.
      Naturally, there are related tasks, the F-15EX can earn extra money as an interceptor and a good escort fighter, as they all participate in group tactics of air battles.
      1. Viktor Sergeev
        Viktor Sergeev 15 March 2021 19: 02
        -28%
        Yes, the tasks are different: F15 for the war, F22,35 planes that nobody needs to steal the budget. Although no, F15 is still for vparivanie slaves.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 15 March 2021 22: 48
          +11
          The F-22 is a very serious plane, you shouldn't be.
          By the way, the Su-57 will be significantly more expensive than others, both in terms of procurement and operation. And what can you do?
          1. Viktor Sergeev
            Viktor Sergeev 16 March 2021 08: 22
            -10%
            The plane is serious, but for what purpose? A war with the USSR or now with Russia implies a transition to a nuclear confrontation a few hours after its start, for local wars this miracle is not needed and is not suitable, dear. It's the same story with the F35, no one needs an aircraft, well, except that Israel will do it.
            Please tell us the price of Su57 and the cost of its operation and compare with the same parameters, for example, F35 or F15.
            Maybe it's time to stop writing nonsense, and only provide the data you know?
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 16 March 2021 10: 20
              +1
              https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/rates/fy2019/2019_b_c.pdf

              See data on the cost of a flight hour for various aircraft. Compare the F-35 and F-15s.
            2. 3danimal
              3danimal 4 May 2021 11: 17
              0
              A war with the USSR or now with Russia implies a transition to a nuclear confrontation a few hours after its start

              After the "exchange" of 2000 (in total) nuclear warheads, nothing will end. The war will continue with conventional means and TNW. Bombs will be your most valuable asset. Unlike CD and OTR, they do not need to be programmed for new targets, but they must be reset with something, taking into account the remnants of the air defense.
              The path "to heaven" in a large-scale scenario will be slow and painful.
              But there are options when the parties have enough common sense to agree and stop the escalation.
              Khrushchev, for example, did not hesitate to go on air with a proposal to negotiate. For which we should all be grateful.
              1. didra
                didra 6 May 2021 18: 59
                0
                This is a very dangerous delusion - that after 2000 thousand nuclear strikes, it will be possible to continue to fight and even win.
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 6 May 2021 19: 36
                  0
                  You can continue to fight even with cameos and sticks sad
                  The world will never be the same. Victory .. depending on what it counts. One side will retain some potential, the other will lose it altogether. Both have a humanitarian catastrophe, the help of other countries is critically important (whoever has more friends, the better).
                  But 2000 charges are not 100000, as it was in the mid-70s.
                  1. didra
                    didra 6 May 2021 21: 22
                    0
                    I understood you. I just want to say that satellites are not friends and they will not help. The United States, in fact, has fewer friends than Russia. After an exchange of blows, both countries (according to the optimistic scenario) will forever lose their power and influence in the world. And in my opinion, the Arab (Islamic) world and Latin America will benefit from such a conflict.
                    1. 3danimal
                      3danimal 7 May 2021 01: 52
                      0
                      The United States, in fact, has fewer friends than Russia.

                      But here I would like more details request
                      The main countries of the British Commonwealth - no? Canada, Australia, New Zealand? Britain, if it suddenly does not suffer? They have a lot in common.
                      And in my opinion, the Arab (Islamic) world and Latin America will benefit from such a conflict.

                      There is also China

                      About "stones and sticks":
                      most of the fleet will survive, all AUGs with a maximum of air pockets will be put out to sea.
                      1. didra
                        didra 7 May 2021 13: 47
                        0
                        The countries you named are part of the BRITISH Commonwealth of Nations. Yes, they are allies of the United States, but we must not forget that the British are a very proud and imperial people. They do not really like the role of the younger brother. So if something happens, they can finish off the "senior partner".

                        About China. I don't really understand how China will avoid participation in the world war.

                        Favorite aircraft carriers: This is a power and influence projection tool. If the center of power is destroyed, what will it give (this tool).

                        You, judging by your statements, are very keen on the idea of ​​military-technical superiority. However, this is not a one-size-fits-all solution. With the relative technological equality of opponents (and it is), other tools play a decisive role.

                        And returning to the main point. The idea of ​​being able to win a nuclear war is criminal! This is not a Russian idea (American) and you shouldn't have voiced it as a matter of course.
                      2. 3danimal
                        3danimal 7 May 2021 14: 59
                        0
                        So if something happens, they can finish off the "senior partner".

                        The British remember when, on the verge of collapse, their older brother was very supportive.
                        Strange logic of reasoning.
                        About China. I don't really understand how China will avoid participation in the world war.

                        Will not come to her. According to Lao Tzu's behest, he will sit on the banks of the river until its waters carry past the bodies of enemies / competitors.
                        Favorite aircraft carriers: This is a power and influence projection tool. If the center of power is destroyed, what will it give (this tool).

                        Unlike stationary airfields, they move freely (and quickly) around the world, aviation will not suffer on them.
                        And with a load of B-61 bombs (which will be available due to the escalation preceding Fallout), they will be a formidable force to be reckoned with.
                        You, judging by your statements, are very keen on the idea of ​​military-technical superiority.

                        It has a strong effect. And if, in addition to the superiority of the military-scientific, there is also a numerical one (in airplanes, for example), then it affects in the square.
                        The idea of ​​being able to win a nuclear war is criminal! This is not a Russian idea

                        In the early 50s in the USSR, the military and the leadership believed that it was quite possible to win.
                        The US military does too.
                        The efforts of scientists and public figures stopped the development of dangerous scenarios.
                        And by the mid-70s, the number of charges on both sides reached 100 thousand.
                        You shouldn't have voiced it, as a matter of course.

                        I have not spoken about victory anywhere. As a result, one side is dead, the other is almost dead.
                        The bottom line is that there will be no “paradise” when instantly everyone “disappeared”. It will be a disaster, extremely painful.
                        And the strongest will win this war, who will not take part - China. And it is very close.
                        So, the remnants of Russians (less than 50%, perhaps less than 20%) will learn Chinese on a par with their own, alas.
        2. yehat2
          yehat2 4 May 2021 11: 00
          -1
          Quote: 3danimal
          F-22 is a very serious aircraft

          yes, this is a serious plane for ... 1995
          now the time has passed, and the filling and weapons have changed a lot.
          And the F-22 has become much more complicated.
          He has no optical station, no new radars and bells and whistles in the cockpit, he has an old coating and the United States has already begun a program to modernize these machines.
          Now, if the modernization ends with something significant, the plane will become serious again.
          In the meantime, this is more a hyped bogey than reality.
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 4 May 2021 11: 09
            0
            It has no optical station, no latest radars and cockpit bells and whistles.

            But the best serial AFAR radar.
            In terms of stealth, it competes only with the F-35.
            Excellent visibility from the cockpit (F-35 and Su-57 are jealous).
            One of the most maneuverable fighters in general.
            Now, if the modernization ends with something significant, the plane will become serious again.

            He is serious now, and if there is modernization, it will become (even if for a while) again the best in the world.
            Its problem is that its upgrade is much more difficult than the F-35. Closed architecture.
            1. yehat2
              yehat2 4 May 2021 11: 11
              -1
              Quote: 3danimal
              But the best serial AFAR radar.

              not anymore. The Chinese have done better.
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 4 May 2021 11: 26
                0
                Do they have more than 100 tracked and 20 fired targets? Then it is the new leader in the industry.
                The "squirrel" has 60/12, EMNIP.
                1. yehat2
                  yehat2 4 May 2021 14: 17
                  -1
                  they have more than just a number of goals.
                  The Chinese boast of the new accuracy of the radar, which allows for better detailing of the situation, and this is what they consider to be the main advantage.
                  1. 3danimal
                    3danimal 4 May 2021 14: 30
                    0
                    the Chinese are bragging about the new accuracy of the radar, which allows for better detail

                    I couldn't find any information about the characteristics of this thing.
                    I know that they have never shone in this area. (As in engine building)
                    1. yehat2
                      yehat2 4 May 2021 14: 35
                      -1
                      Quote: 3danimal
                      I know that they have never excelled in this area.

                      times have changed
                      China is the capital of production of almost all parts for radio electronics and
                      because this industry has long been rushing at a gigantic pace.
                      And many years of efforts to educate engineers have led to the fact that they have been actively developing their radars for 15 years and have achieved success.
                      No, they have not discovered anything new. But their radar is several times cheaper than in the United States, so the Chinese do not skimp on bells and whistles.
      2. ironic
        ironic 15 March 2021 22: 56
        -1
        To you, this is not to anyone. You will definitely not take off from the couch. The F-15X is an intermediate and not too large-scale solution due to the small production of the F-22 and the cessation of its production without alternatives and plans for the future. Those. due to a planning error.
    2. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 15 March 2021 19: 22
      +15
      This missile and bomb load is impressive.



      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 15 March 2021 21: 27
        +3
        In the top photo, an aircraft similar to the F-15, only the vertical tail is spread apart. What is this plane? or photomontage?
        the bottom picture is F-15
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 15 March 2021 21: 32
          +2
          Quote: Bad_gr
          only the vertical tail is spread apart.

          F-15SE. But it looks more like montage.
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 15 March 2021 21: 45
            +9
            Quote: OgnennyiKotik
            F-15SE
            Thanks for the information.
            ".... F-15SE Silent Eagle (from English -" Silent Eagle ") is an American two-seat multi-role fighter of the 4 ++ generation with the use of technologies to reduce radar signature, developed by Boeing and its foreign partners [3] based on the F -15E .... "
      2. Viktor Sergeev
        Viktor Sergeev 16 March 2021 08: 19
        -4
        Normal load, 4th generation conventional airplane.
  • Avior
    Avior 15 March 2021 18: 51
    +17
    Price, of course

    The F-22 was made for a confrontation with the USSR, the confrontation ended, and the aircraft program was reduced.
    And the States were left with a limited number of heavy fighters for the future.
    There is no sense in restoring the production of the F-22 now, also because none of the potential adversaries has a fifth-generation aircraft in significant quantities, and therefore a less high-tech, but noticeably cheaper, heavy fighter was required.
  • donavi49
    donavi49 15 March 2021 18: 53
    +10
    Powerful radar.
    Full compatibility with various weapons.
    Significant ammunition in the sky, in terms of striking capabilities and the number of AIM-120, it replaces several F22 / 35 at once.

    For example, the last official version of Balalaika is 1993 - when the Su-27 and MiG-29 were already flying wink , and a series of 120 cars was launched only in the late 90s (of course, not for themselves, the Biss were written off at home).

    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 16 March 2021 10: 31
      0
      The MiG-21-93 is the modernization of the built ones, the production of the MiG-21 in the USSR went on until 1986. But in recent years, only for export.
  • 3danimal
    3danimal 15 March 2021 22: 46
    +4
    AFAR, new powerful engines, a new electronic warfare station and up to 22 AIM-120Ds (over time, they will put new ones, more than 180 km Max range).
    They will act in conjunction with AWACS, front covered with 5th generation.
  • ironic
    ironic 15 March 2021 22: 53
    0
    Because the F-22 is small, they stopped producing without thinking about the future. The F-15X is an intermediate solution. 200 pieces for a permanent solution are not ordered in the States.
  • 3danimal
    3danimal 15 March 2021 23: 03
    0
    EX still has a reduced radar signature, while it will be as a transitional option, apparently. The F-22 cannot replace it, they will develop something new, IMHO.
  • Proctologist
    Proctologist 15 March 2021 18: 42
    +1
    Thanks for the interesting article! I think we have yet to see the full potential of the updated old platforms (not only for aircraft) in conjunction with unmanned weapons.

    And a request to the author - even when quoting, translate foreign units of measurement into human ones. Let those feet and pounds remain in America! )
    1. akarfoxhound
      akarfoxhound 15 March 2021 19: 58
      0
      Judging by the style of the article - "the author" just translated the imported ad article, from there pounds
  • Cowbra
    Cowbra 15 March 2021 18: 43
    -19%
    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
    Why is it not clear?

    Therefore, it is unclear that they drowned out the hyper program due to a fundamental impasse in the guidance of hypersonic weapons. Whether they have solved this problem now is unknown. So far, we are talking only about mock-ups of American hypersonic missiles, which, by the way, they cannot even ride in a bomber jacket in the form of a mock-up - they lose along the way. So it is not clear whether they will have hypersonic weapons at all, or, as usual, Hollywood animation a la F-35 and Zamwalt
    1. ironic
      ironic 15 March 2021 23: 03
      -2
      Sho lost? Where did you lose it? Well, yes, again some kind of crap.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 15 March 2021 18: 46
    +4
    At this stage, yes. The most advanced heavy fighter and tactical bomber in one. And we must not forget about the lightweight F16 of the last series.
    1. ironic
      ironic 15 March 2021 23: 03
      -6
      Here Viper is a dead end, and the series is very shallow.
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 15 March 2021 23: 19
        +3
        What is the impasse? And it is small only because there is F35 ...
        1. ironic
          ironic 15 March 2021 23: 25
          -3
          A dead end because without conformal tanks there is no radius, and a more powerful engine, a new radar and a processor station make it very expensive, comparable to the fifth one, only the flying hour wins. Otherwise, you will lose. Even the maximum speed does not give a special advantage, because you cannot fly with it especially, and in battle it is only for getting out of it.
  • 501Legion
    501Legion 15 March 2021 19: 19
    +2
    what is the reason for such a thrust-to-weight ratio? And why can't the same Su-35 take more?
    1. figwam
      figwam 15 March 2021 19: 40
      -10%
      Quote: 501Legion
      and why the same su-35 will not be able to take more

      Of course it can, only in peacetime the load is limited to 8 tons, and the Americans always write the maximum.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 15 March 2021 21: 38
        +8
        On the Su-34, they write the same 8 tons bomb load. In Syria, they loaded 12 tons and flew without problems. In this case, it all depends on the amount of fuel that the plane takes (when loading 12 tons, our combat radius is reduced to 1000 km).
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 16 March 2021 09: 44
          +2
          The load is such a thing .... There is, for example, a couple of units of 500 kg each. That is, with a transition beam, you can hang 1 ton. And you have something for 600 kg and 1200 kg. You hang 600 and that's it. And so on and so on. Something can be under the wings, but something only under the fuselage.
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 16 March 2021 10: 47
            0
            Quote: mmaxx
            And you have something for 600 kg and 1200 kg. You hang 600 and that's it.

            Air bomb KAB-1500

            Length - 4,4 m.;
            Diameter - 58 cm;
            Drop height - 8 km.;
            Weight - 1500 kg.;
            Hit accuracy - 4 m;
            GOS - laser / television gyro guidance
            Armor penetration - 3 m. Concrete goods or 20 m. Earth;
            Carriers - Su-24M, Su-34, Su-35.
    2. Avior
      Avior 15 March 2021 20: 23
      +9
      We also need to look at the capabilities of the suspension units.
      Perhaps the suspension assemblies do not allow for more denting, even if the design and engines allow.
  • svp67
    svp67 15 March 2021 19: 45
    +6
    for the most advanced Russian fourth generation fighter, the Su-35S, this figure is 8 tons.
    I believe that the analogue of this fighter in the Russian Aerospace Forces is, of course, the Su-30 SM, with a load indicator of 8 tons
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 15 March 2021 19: 48
      0
      There is no direct analogue. The F-15EX is a combined Su-30 and Su-34.
      1. D16
        D16 15 March 2021 21: 47
        +2
        There is no direct analogue. The F-15EX is a combined Su-30 and Su-34.

        The F-15EX does not have a built-in Platan counterpart like the Su-34 or F-35, so it is more likely an analogue of the Su-30. Only with conformal tanks, this is probably the same iron.
        1. Avior
          Avior 15 March 2021 22: 46
          +5
          the Americans, and now the Su-35, followed the path of suspended containers with OLS.
          it turned out to be more convenient.
          and about the F-35, its optical system can hardly be equated with a conventional OLS.
          1. El Chuvachino
            El Chuvachino 16 March 2021 00: 00
            -2
            OLS is built into the Su-35, what are you talking about?
            1. Avior
              Avior 16 March 2021 00: 46
              +5
              about this container
  • akarfoxhound
    akarfoxhound 15 March 2021 19: 56
    -18%
    In style, it is a translation close to the text of the article of the overseas Polossians promoting the product. Reading - you can already hear the voice of a screaming advertiser
    1. figwam
      figwam 15 March 2021 20: 19
      -24%
      Quote: akarfoxhound
      In style - a translation close to the text of the article promoting the product of the overseas Polossians

      Normal Washington propaganda backed up by local trolls. Training battles F-15 and Su-27 showed the complete superiority of our aircraft, well, now it's F-15EX and Su-35
      1. ironic
        ironic 15 March 2021 23: 06
        0
        ... Indian pilots ... that's just in real battles, they somehow are not so unambiguous. wink
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 16 March 2021 09: 39
          +1
          It is not known about the battles. But Indians fly cooler than ours sad
          After them, the Su-30 had to be strengthened. Cracked.
          1. ironic
            ironic 16 March 2021 18: 42
            +1
            You can also fly steeper on the Swifts show. Winning battles is not a show to work out. Ours are not cooler at all and do not twist any curls in the air, but there is an opinion that facing them in battle is not the most pleasant thing that can happen.
            1. mmaxx
              mmaxx 17 March 2021 01: 31
              -1
              And when was it? And where? At the modern level.
              1. ironic
                ironic 17 March 2021 18: 29
                +1
                And when, at the modern level, did someone defeat the Su-30 or Su-35 in a front-line battle? And where?

                And twice from all over the world they flock to us for training on the 35th. wink
                1. mmaxx
                  mmaxx 18 March 2021 01: 41
                  0
                  Don't juggle. We are talking about pilots.
                  1. ironic
                    ironic 18 March 2021 13: 10
                    0
                    And where is the jitter? And about the pilots of the respective aircraft, respectively.
                    1. mmaxx
                      mmaxx 18 March 2021 15: 19
                      0
                      Quote: ironic
                      And when, at the modern level, did someone defeat the Su-30 or Su-35 in a front-line battle? And where?

                      And twice from all over the world they flock to us for training on the 35th. wink


                      Yes, actually, nowhere. Dryers were used only in Eritrea. Well, they piled on the MiG-29. Our pilots fought in the air in xs what year in the Middle East with the Jews. Nothing of the kind was shown.
                      The way the Su-24 was given to the Turks speaks of complete sloppiness and no organization of the combat use of aviation. But they knew that the Turks were always accompanied by their side. The setup with the Il-38 is generally beyond everything. The crash of Tu-154 in Sochi is a complete tryndets. So there is no need to talk about any qualities of our pilots yet. The war in the air did not really test either themselves or their commanders.
                      And the planes ... But they did not fight ...
                      And the F-15 fought. And as a complex of weapons proved to be excellent.
                      You can deceive everyone, but you don't have to. You can't.
                      1. ironic
                        ironic 18 March 2021 17: 36
                        0
                        You have set the condition "up-to-date." I figured it out as a fight lately and on the latest aircraft models. I didn’t write anything because there weren’t such battles with enemy planes yet.
                      2. mmaxx
                        mmaxx 19 March 2021 01: 35
                        0
                        At the modern level, this is not an airplane versus an airplane. Now they only fight like this in the brains of amateurs. And with normal planning and control from the ground. Using all technical means. It would also be nice with AWACS.
                      3. ironic
                        ironic 21 March 2021 16: 23
                        0
                        This was also implied, so I don't remember such air battles lately. Maybe I'm wrong.
  • Eug
    Eug 15 March 2021 21: 19
    -6
    It looks like a decision has been made to support Boeing. And even then to say, there is not much of the fifth generation in the world, the F-35x will be enough for them. To me, the actual admission that the concept of stealth hasn't paid off. You look, and Su-30, 35 will rather be modernized on the model of the Su-57.
  • Fast_mutant
    Fast_mutant 15 March 2021 21: 30
    +18
    Quote: figvam
    F-35 has no future

    Quite a bold statement for a car produced in excess of 620 units!
    Remind me how many fighters we have in service? ALL generations?
    1. figwam
      figwam 15 March 2021 22: 19
      -11%
      Quote: Fast_mutant
      Quite a bold statement for a car

      The latest statements by US congressmen and generals are about this.
      1. ironic
        ironic 15 March 2021 23: 07
        -2
        These are not statements, but twitches under the socialist administration of Biden.
  • stoqn477
    stoqn477 15 March 2021 21: 32
    +8
    Quote: figvam
    Quote: akarfoxhound
    In style - a translation close to the text of the article promoting the product of the overseas Polossians

    Normal Washington propaganda backed up by local trolls. Training battles F-15 and Su-27 showed the complete superiority of our aircraft, well, now it's F-15EX and Su-35

    This is in close air combat. And the distant one? And first, you engage in long-range aerial combat.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 15 March 2021 21: 48
      +7
      Quote: stoqn477
      This is in close air combat. And the distant one?

      About complete superiority - verbiage, no more.
      Here is a close combat training session of the Su-30MKM against the F / A-18D. The American won 3-0. Moreover, he was with 2 PTB.
      None of these storytellers will include an official release, not just a video. All from the source of the OBS - one grandmother said.
      1. stoqn477
        stoqn477 15 March 2021 21: 55
        +2
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        Quote: stoqn477
        This is in close air combat. And the distant one?

        About complete superiority - verbiage, no more.
        Here is a close combat training session of the Su-30MKM against the F / A-18D. The American won 3-0. Moreover, he was with 2 PTB.
        None of these storytellers will include an official release, not just a video. All from the source of the OBS - one grandmother said.

        In close combat, it is clear that your aircraft have the edge. However, let's not forget that, for example, the Su-27 was created after the F-15 with a given superiority in its creation. We can say that the F-15 has no wing mechanization compared to the "Sukhoi"
        Su is my favorite car from your 4th generation. F-15 from the American side.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 15 March 2021 22: 03
          +2
          Quote: stoqn477
          In close combat, it is clear that your aircraft have the edge.

          No one has an advantage, the planes are comparable, everything is in the hands of the pilot and who has a fresh upgrade. F-15/16/18/22/35 and Su-27/30/34/35/57, possibly MiG-35 - all these are excellent aircraft in their classes, which are still matched
          Only the MiG-29 is much worse, in general it is strange that its 4th generation was attributed, it only began to meet these criteria in the latest modifications.
  • dgonni
    dgonni 15 March 2021 22: 04
    +13
    Unfortunately, this is the best 4 +++. For all performance characteristics! Electronics 5th glider adapted 4th.
    With a tuned production system, you get an excellent linear plane!
    The question is, why did they come back?
    Duc is a question for Russia and China! Which have not yet been able to fit into a normal 5th generation aircraft in the required quantities!
    The sixth generation will be needed. And in the right amount!
    Why pay more if the modernized necrophiliac surpasses everything that is currently flying in Europe and other countries. However, it is supported by more expensive and inconspicuous platforms!
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 16 March 2021 10: 21
      -5
      The Su-57 is, as it were, contracted, conceptually correct, and by 2030 it will already be in very serious quantities.
      1. dgonni
        dgonni 16 March 2021 16: 40
        0
        By 2030, the Japanese will have a sixth generation. However, like the amers!
        And in the current situation, given the rush of the Japanese amers in Polana to sell, the F-22 cannot be sold. The big question is what will be better and more technologically advanced!
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion 17 March 2021 08: 23
          -1
          My dear, Japan's own fighter aircraft industry is represented only by copying the F-16 to suit its own needs. All that they have now on fighters is some kind of flying model. At the current pace of development and the level of complexity of such machines, it will take 20 years from the start of the development of the fighter itself to the first deliveries. So that by 2030 the United States will roll out a certain "6th generation" year at least, if everything is so good with them), then right now, they have to drive a dozen prototypes with might and main, and not on secret training grounds over the deserts, but already in the air force test centers.

          If you do not know how many years aircraft have been developed in general, then do not trample the loaves.
        2. DMi
          DMi 22 March 2021 22: 57
          0
          Still the fifth generation, no one really mastered in production)) what is the sixth? Why? In 30 years, maybe ...
          But propaganda, yes, it can promise in a couple of years. Propaganda already works from all sides as in wartime.
  • Niko
    Niko 15 March 2021 22: 11
    +2
    An excellent car. But the most important thing: people are not afraid to make difficult decisions, the F-35 stalled - they get a good, efficient car at least not worse than others
    1. ironic
      ironic 15 March 2021 23: 14
      +1
      The F-35 has nothing to do with it. The shortage of the F-22 and the depletion of the F-15C resource is the main reason.
  • Private SA
    Private SA 15 March 2021 22: 45
    -3
    Well, the combat losses of the F-15 during operations "In the Desert" ("Tempest" and "Shield" did not seem to be recorded).
    Unlike the F-16, Tornado, etc. A good fighter that shot down a MiG -29 with a competent
    the work of radio reconnaissance aircraft and the planning of air operations. But how
    in his memoirs, the second ace of the Luftwaffe Barkhorn said:
    the height is the P-51 "Mustang", and at the low - the Yak-9 ". Well, they will convert it into fighters-
    bombers. Well, the flag is in their hands. We'll have to invent the S-700 complex.
  • mmaxx
    mmaxx 16 March 2021 09: 36
    +5
    Nice plane F-15. And it used to be good. And it got even better. Unfortunately.
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion 16 March 2021 10: 19
    -2
    The main question is, are the Americans confident that this nesting aircraft will be competitive at all? If so, then it turns out that all the tantrums that there is no reception against the F-22 and F-35 and no 4th generation will cope with them have no grounds.

    Personally, I have the fighting efficiency of the "eagle", and he is also the youngest now from the T4 units, no doubt about it, but what about the plans to replace everyone with the F-35?

    As for the concept of a flying arsenal and a huge combat load (this is a matter of strength), it turns out that despite all the cartoons in battle, you still need to use a very large number of ASPs, including very heavy ones, otherwise the focus on such a high load would not make sense, because many small bombs just do not create weight.

    From our side, it is interesting how the history of the Su-35 will develop further, whether it will completely go out of production, since the Su-57, due to its size and correct layout, does not complain about the lack of arsenal, and there is bombers. Or it will also be as a simpler alternative to which you can hang a lot of things, c. including under the fuselage, where the Su-57 has bomb bays.
    1. Outsider
      Outsider April 2 2021 02: 41
      0
      The main question is, are the Americans confident that this nesting aircraft will be competitive at all? If so, then it turns out that all the tantrums that there is no reception against the F-22 and F-35 and no 4th generation will cope with them have no grounds.

      - Against the F-22 and F-35 "no reception", but not a single ram is going to oppose the F-15EX, but will complement... it is done like this, in a major air operation:
      1. Cruise missiles and F-22 destroy the most advanced air and missile defense systems, the most powerful enemy radars. F-22 simultaneously carry out electronic supplementary reconnaissance.
      2. The F-35 aircraft "clean up" the enemy's air defense systems throughout the theater of operations, while the F-22s organize air supremacy along with the clearing of the airspace and electronic additional reconnaissance of the theater of operations.
      3. Third wave: F-15EX aircraft (carrying capacity 13 tons), under the cover of group jammers, destroy ground targets, accumulations of armored vehicles, troops, warehouses, etc. They are assisted by the F-16s remaining in service. F-22s carry out general air defense of the theater and additional reconnaissance.
      4. A-10C, combat UAVs and attack helicopters clean mobile, small and single targets. F-22s carry out general air defense of the theater of operations and additional reconnaissance.
      Thus, everyone finds use, only at different times and in different orders.
      Personally, I have the fighting efficiency of the "eagle", and he is also the youngest now from the T4 units, no doubt about it, but what about the plans to replace everyone with the F-35?

      - The order for 200 F-15EX shows that no one is going to abandon the 4th generation aircraft, they allow in peacetime against the Papuans to save the resource of aircraft of the 5th generation.
      As for the concept of a flying arsenal and a huge combat load (this is a matter of strength), it turns out that despite all the cartoons in battle, you still need to use a very large number of ASPs, including very heavy ones, otherwise the focus on such a high load would not make sense, because many small bombs just do not create weight.

      - It gives all kinds of OPTIONS. The F-15EX can carry dozens of small-diameter bombs, launch satellite-killer missiles, and use bombs with a huge penetrating ability to destroy buried targets, for example:
      http://airwar.ru/weapon/ab/gbu28.html
      From our side, it is interesting how the history of the Su-35 will develop further, whether it will completely go out of production, since the Su-57, due to its size and correct layout, does not complain about the lack of arsenal

      - Before mass production of the Su-57 (if at all) - "like a drunk to Beijing on all fours."
      ... and there are bombers for strike missions and transportation of large ASPs.

      - For a serious war, neither the Su-34, nor the Su-30SM, nor the Su-35S, nor the Su-57 are suitable against stealth, they are flying targets there.
  • bk0010
    bk0010 16 March 2021 22: 09
    0
    Yes, this is not an F-35, this is serious. But with such a radar, it certainly won't be cheap.
    1. Outsider
      Outsider April 2 2021 03: 11
      0
      - Actually, in fact, the F-35 is much more serious than the F-15EX - for those who understand ... laughing lol
  • Petio
    Petio 16 March 2021 23: 33
    0
    The Su-57 is a good aircraft, but also expensive and complex. 76 is good, but not much for replacing the Su-27S and SM. Something will have to be done. It can build about 30-2 Su-70SM80 units with modernized equipment.
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 17 March 2021 08: 29
      +3
      For so many years you have not noticed how planes are ordered in Russia? A contract is concluded for 3-8 years within the framework of the GPV for objectified. years. This contract is being fulfilled in one way or another (with fighters successfully), new contracts are being concluded for a new GPV. And in our country, no one is trying, by analogy with the Americans, who planned the F-35 program for decades ahead, to say exactly how many Su-57s will be built and until what year it will be produced. Because it will be just a fortune-telling on the coffee grounds.
      1. mmaxx
        mmaxx 18 March 2021 15: 40
        0
        Over the past years, 15 times 3 I heard that now we will finish the game and that's it. There are no orders, we will close production. Su-30, if that.
        Well at least once again Algeria and the like, swarthy brothers appeared. They helped out. And not our MO. These are generally not clear what they wanted and who they were protecting there. They behave like in a bazaar. As if in Russia there is some other industry and some other aircraft. Although it did not come to buying a used F-16. As some leaders wanted with tanks.
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion 18 March 2021 15: 42
          0
          Keep listening further.
          1. mmaxx
            mmaxx 18 March 2021 15: 49
            0
            Taking into account the Su-57, we will arm our friends all the way. Well, and to equip the previous drying with new engines.
  • TatarinSSSR
    TatarinSSSR 17 March 2021 00: 12
    +1
    Well, everything, we are waiting for the announced work from the Ministry of Defense on the creation of a similar American, but unparalleled in the world, the Su-35EX, with 30 V-V missiles or 15 tons of combat load ... by 2035.
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. mmaxx
      mmaxx 18 March 2021 15: 23
      0
      The Su-27 was outdated in the early 90s. Although it flies well.
  • Outsider
    Outsider April 2 2021 03: 20
    0
    Quote: Zhevlonenko
    Only you read carefully, and do not look at the pictures, F35 is a modular design, what you will be sold for this money is a "basic" blank, which will not be able to perform ANY tasks. To bring it into such, you will have to buy a bunch of options, and oh my God, its cost rises to 100+. Even a basic software update needs to be bought, but it costs just a horse's money.

    - The F-35 (all modifications) is primarily intended for the US Air Force, USMC and US Navy. And what kind of "basic blank" is this, to which these types of armed forces will need to buy something else, but for "horse money" ?! laughing lol
  • Outsider
    Outsider April 2 2021 03: 23
    0
    Quote: Private SA
    Well, the combat losses of the F-15 during operations "In the Desert" ("Tempest" and "Shield" did not seem to be recorded).

    - The F-15C and F-15E aircraft have no losses in air battles, but the F-15E as a striker has losses from air defense systems ...
  • Outsider
    Outsider April 2 2021 03: 51
    0
    Quote: EvilLion
    My dear, Japan's own fighter aircraft industry is represented only by copying the F-16 for its own needs.

    - Japan also made the F-2 on the basis of the F-16, for many years it produced the F-15 on its own base, now it will independently produce the F-35 ...
    The Japanese create a 5th generation fighter of their own design extremely inactively. Probably in the future they are counting on the 6th generation, made in the USA to replace the F-22. The problem will be if they again refuse to sell it abroad, as happened with the F-22 ...
  • Vlad Vlad (Shimas)
    Vlad Vlad (Shimas) April 11 2021 12: 26
    0
    3 world in the comments?
  • Sergey G.V
    Sergey G.V 24 May 2021 18: 02
    +1
    Su-34 (product "T-10V", NATO codification: Fullback - "Defender") - Soviet / Russian multifunctional supersonic fighter-bomber

    Maximum combat load: 8000 kg [104] 12 kg with a combat radius of 000 km [1000] (105 kg with a full load of fuel)

    12 tons versus 13 tons and what is the "STRONG" difference between them?