Military Review

"An average country cannot afford the Air Force": China has calculated the cost of flights of Su-27 fighters

108

The possession of a combat-ready air force requires colossal costs from the state, which not every country can master.


Su-27 costs


Any country that intends to build its own air force must have a strong economic foundation, otherwise it will not be able to maintain its military Aviation

- indicated in the Chinese press.

At the same time, it is noted that fighters are the main platform of the Air Force. The PRC tried to list the factors affecting the cost of their flight.

First, it is necessary to take into account the fuel consumption, which is influenced by the mass of the fighter's fuselage and the weight of the ammunition; flight mode (at cruising speed, kerosene consumption is lower in contrast to tactical maneuvering); engine model (the increase in consumption is directly proportional to the power of the power plant); pilot skill.

The Su-27 is indicated as an example. The total mass of fuel in the aircraft is 9,7 tons. At the same time, the specific gravity of aviation kerosene is 0,85, which ultimately gives a fuel volume of 11 liters.

During a normal flight of the Su-27 in cruise mode, excluding maneuvering, the fuel consumption per hour is 3 liters, its flight time is three hours.

- notes the author, who calculated that with a jet fuel price of 6 yuan per ton [500 thousand rubles], an hour of flight on a fighter costs 75 yuan [63 thousand rubles]: "and this is the most economical state." ...

If we take into account the takeoff and the tactical actions of the pilot, then the fuel consumption increases at least three times, equal to approximately 200 yuan per hour [000 million rubles.].



Air Force is not a luxury for everyone


The average country simply cannot afford an Air Force at this price and this level of consumption.

- thinks the observer.

However, this is far from the main financial problem. It is necessary to design and manufacture the machines by yourself. It is easier to buy ready-made fighters abroad, having paid “only” tens of millions of dollars for each aircraft. Moreover, the price of one unit can reach hundreds of millions. After solving the problem with the purchase of equipment, it is necessary to invest in its maintenance, maintenance of ground infrastructure and pilot training.

This money cannot be compared with the purchase of fighters [...] However, without its own air force, any country in the modern world is doomed to be plundered by other states

- the author considers.

For our part, we note that flights on the Su-27 are far from the pinnacle of expenses. As previously indicated on VO, the cost of an hour of flight on an F-35 fighter is estimated at $ 36 thousand (2,6 million rubles): and this despite the fact that it has not two engines, like the Su-27, but one.
108 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 29 March 2021 01: 17
    +13
    As a matter of fact (we do not take the accuracy of the figures given in the article) military aviation is expensive ... and in the conditions of wars at the end of the XNUMXth and beginning of the XNUMXst, this is the price of independence ...
    1. Incvizitor
      Incvizitor 29 March 2021 01: 20
      +8
      Probably the main thing for independent countries is air defense and support by strong countries, the DPR LPR does not have aviation, but anyway, they are also independent and piled on the banderlog.
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 29 March 2021 03: 48
        -2
        First, you need to take into account the fuel consumption.

        I recall a joke:
        "One huckster brags to another:
        - I bought a Bentley, all the stuffing, electronics, gold discs, a platinum toilet, everything is shorter ...
        “Why don’t you go, I don’t see you in the city?”
        -Do you know how much oil he eats? !! ​​"

        All right, the Chinese, but for the leading oil power, lamenting about kerosene is a shame for the government! (I only support the fuel efficiency of the equipment, if that)
        1. Eug
          Eug 29 March 2021 20: 35
          +5
          The figures given do not take into account the resource consumption of engines, units, airframe and instruments. The cost of the consumed resource is exactly not lower than the cost of fuel.
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 30 March 2021 06: 46
            +2
            Quote: Eug
            The figures given do not take into account the resource consumption of engines, units, airframe and instruments

            Exactly, but the fuel is offered to be considered "first".
            1. Eug
              Eug 30 March 2021 09: 51
              +1
              Because the fuel is, so to speak, "in sight and by hearing." And if you also take into account the cost of training a pilot ... in 1987-89 figures were called - the cost of the MiG-25 is 1 million rubles, pilot training - 5 million rubles. Naturally, I could not check.
          2. DED_peer_DED
            DED_peer_DED 30 March 2021 18: 30
            0
            Quote: Eug
            The figures given do not include consumption

            Almost nothing has been taken into account. But ... there is a nuance about "friends or how".
            Salary of civilian technicians in the TEC? Name the amount or do you know yourself? There is laughter. Or tears.
            And no one in these positions WORKS, i.e. is not useful. These "positions" are used as a supplement to the pensions of some former officers.
            1. Eug
              Eug 30 March 2021 20: 24
              0
              Now I do not know, in the late USSR from 140 rubles. As a group technician with the rank of "lieutenant", I received 230.
              1. DED_peer_DED
                DED_peer_DED 30 March 2021 20: 30
                +1
                I worked 87-89 (sort of) in the TEC in the group. RLS repair and maintenance ..
                I don't remember my salary.
                He wrote about the current state of affairs in the TEC of the VKS in civil matters.
                About 3 years ago, I ventilated this topic on the subject of my return to work.
                That's when my comrades explained the "situation" to me.
      2. NEOZ
        NEOZ 29 March 2021 12: 19
        +4
        Quote: Incvizitor
        still independent and piled on banderlog.

        independent of everyone?
        1. Incvizitor
          Incvizitor 29 March 2021 15: 41
          +3
          I don't think there are completely independent countries from everyone, but there is relative independence ...
      3. The comment was deleted.
    2. Thrifty
      Thrifty 29 March 2021 05: 05
      +5
      The most expensive thing is human stupidity - you often have to pay for it with the lives of innocent people, and if you consider the cost of operating military equipment, it is natural that the operation is not cheap!
  2. kot423
    kot423 29 March 2021 01: 25
    +10
    From the article one gets the impression that this is a hidden PR of the Chinese J, otherwise why don't they consider the costs of their planes? And so - "think, even Russian SUs are not so cheap" ...
  3. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 29 March 2021 01: 59
    +8
    "the cost of an hour of flight on an F-35 fighter is estimated at $ 36 thousand (2,6 million rubles): and this despite the fact that it has not two engines, like the Su-27, but one." ////
    ----
    The only F-35 engine is economical. The high cost of an F-35 flight hour is not due to
    fuel, and because of the greater number of technicians who service it, their greater
    qualifications and, accordingly, their salaries.
    1. vostok68
      vostok68 29 March 2021 02: 14
      +6
      Well, yes, in the SGA, most of the GDP is the service staff
    2. WIKI
      WIKI 29 March 2021 02: 18
      +10
      I cannot understand the cost of 75 thousand rubles per ton. If this is an ordinary TS-1 fuel, then its price is from 35 to 45 thousand rubles. Perhaps it is kerosene T-8V or T-6. But anyway, our price should be less than in China, due to our own raw materials.
      1. Yuriy Filatov
        Yuriy Filatov April 1 2021 13: 23
        0
        Right now! In the world of capitalism, Russia does not have its own raw materials! All factories belong to private owners and they decide for themselves where to sell fuel, and if in China it is 3 times more expensive than the Ministry of Defense wants, then no one will sell it cheaper in Russia
    3. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan 29 March 2021 13: 54
      0
      Well, yes, and F-16 and F-15 are probably served by illegal migrants from Mexico, so they cost very cheaply))).

      In my opinion, the United States is simply looking for an excuse to end the F-35 program, for the banal reason that the F-35 does not have any significant advantages over the F-16 and F-15, it is expensive, and in the conditions of modern war, the MiG-21 can be set up on the F-35 according to ground-based radar or AWACS aircraft.

      The United States cannot simply say that the Pentagon was mistaken and that the money was not spent effectively. They dragged too many partner countries into this project, the second time this will not work.
    4. DED_peer_DED
      DED_peer_DED 30 March 2021 18: 40
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      The high cost of an F-35 flight hour is not due to
      fuel,

      Here I agree with you.
      Plus I will add a pre-flight and not only "toolkit" on my own. In addition to the salary, and also for the Fu-35, which is worth a lot.
      I am silent about the coating.
      Try to ask on Google the question - "f-35 preparation for takeoff photo".
      You will not receive anything specific to your question. Only a photo of the F-35 in flight, etc.
      Yeah ...
  4. abc_alex
    abc_alex 29 March 2021 02: 02
    -5
    So it dawned on the Chinese that the Air Force based on heavy information security is an economic dystopia.
    1. KCA
      KCA 29 March 2021 04: 00
      +5
      This is in peacetime, look, the Internet is full of photos of different SU-25s with a broken one engine after a successful landing at the airfield, but if it was a light attack aircraft with one engine?
      1. abc_alex
        abc_alex 31 March 2021 01: 32
        0
        Where did I talk about the number of engines?
    2. NEOZ
      NEOZ 29 March 2021 12: 23
      +1
      Quote: abc_alex
      that the Air Force based on heavy information security is an economic dystopia.

      for sure!
      the best air force is on the basis of TCB !!!!!!
      1. abc_alex
        abc_alex 31 March 2021 01: 33
        0
        Quote: NEOZ
        Quote: abc_alex
        that the Air Force based on heavy information security is an economic dystopia.

        for sure!
        the best air force is on the basis of TCB !!!!!!

        No! Better chase the wunderwaffe. Let there be 5 aircraft for all the Air Force, but uuuuuh! what!
    3. EvilLion
      EvilLion 29 March 2021 20: 06
      -2
      It remains to wait until it comes to you that a large country requires light fighters in much larger quantities and therefore consume no less resources.
      1. abc_alex
        abc_alex 31 March 2021 01: 37
        0
        Quote: EvilLion
        It remains to wait until it comes to you that a large country requires light fighters in much larger quantities and therefore consume no less resources.

        Yes, the only problem is that no country in the world can afford heavy fighters in quantities that will cover all the needs of the Air Force. Even the USA. Your logic leads to the fact that in our Air Force there will still be 20 years of information security from the 80s of release. And no need to talk about "no need to steal." It goes by itself. BUT and the USSR, too, did not just make the MiG-29 and not the Su-27 the basis of the Air Force. There, people knew how to think with their brains and did not make plans with a hangover.
  5. svp67
    svp67 29 March 2021 05: 18
    +8
    The Armed Forces in general and military equipment in particular are expensive "toys", and the more modern they are, the more expensive they are.
    1. Olddetractor
      Olddetractor 29 March 2021 05: 37
      +7
      The most modern of these are drones. Whatever one may say, the future belongs to them. And the face of the Air Force will change once again
      1. svp67
        svp67 29 March 2021 05: 52
        0
        Quote: Olddetractor
        The most modern of these are drones.

        Which are also not cheap, and often more expensive than their piloted counterparts, especially in operation.
        1. Olddetractor
          Olddetractor 29 March 2021 06: 00
          +2
          Really expensive, especially if you buy them from the side))
      2. NEOZ
        NEOZ 29 March 2021 12: 24
        +2
        Quote: Olddetractor
        The most modern of these are drones.

        and what is modern in them that is not in manned aviation?
        1. Cube123
          Cube123 29 March 2021 15: 55
          +6
          Quote: NEOZ
          and what is modern in them that is not in manned aviation?

          The absence of a pilot allows the structure to be considered for much greater overloads. This means much more active piloting (avoiding missiles, overcoming dangerous zones ...). Plus, the lack of life support systems allows you to increase the payload or reduce weight, which increases the time spent in the air. Plus, the ability to replace the pilot (operator) in flight if the complexity of the task changes or fatigue begins to interfere with the task. And a lot of other things ... The pilot behaves more appropriately in the safe environment of the office. wink
          1. NEOZ
            NEOZ 29 March 2021 15: 58
            -1
            Quote: Cube123
            The absence of a pilot allows the structure to be considered for much greater overloads. Plus, the lack of life support systems allows you to increase the payload or reduce weight, which increases the time spent in the air. Plus, the ability to replace the pilot (operator) in flight if the complexity of the task changes or fatigue begins to interfere with the task.

            Give examples of such UAVs !!!!
            1. Cube123
              Cube123 29 March 2021 16: 02
              0
              Now they may not be there yet, but the movement is clearly moving in this direction. And Artificial Intelligence will make the use of living pilots simply unprofitable. Just compare the cost of training one modern pilot and the cost of downloading a new program to the onboard computer.
              1. NEOZ
                NEOZ 29 March 2021 16: 08
                0
                Quote: Cube123
                Just compare the cost of training one modern pilot and the cost of downloading a new program to the onboard computer.

                I will answer like this:
                Quote: Cube123
                Now they may not be there yet, but the movement is clearly moving in this direction.
              2. Inspector
                Inspector 29 March 2021 16: 41
                0
                Remember people !!! Real AI will carry out its own tasks, and not set by narrow-minded warriors. And then the rotten inhabitants of Zaluzhie will seem to you the best friends !!!
                1. DED_peer_DED
                  DED_peer_DED 30 March 2021 18: 56
                  0
                  Quote: Inspector
                  Real AI will perform its own tasks

                  If at the same time he can drink one or two bottles of vodka and at the same time say at the end - "Eh ... Well, it's all on ...." and chop with a saber, then yes, I will believe in AI.
                  Blia himself worked as a programmer for 7-8 years in the 90s in different places.
                  On my own behalf, I want to say that there are no past programmers, the concept of the shortest and best algorithm in everything remains with its forehead to death :)
              3. TerraSandera
                TerraSandera 29 March 2021 18: 45
                -1
                And don't people write ready-made programs? Or do migrants sculpt them for a penny?
                1. Cube123
                  Cube123 29 March 2021 20: 35
                  +2
                  Quote: TerraSandera
                  And don't people write ready-made programs? Or do migrants sculpt them for a penny?

                  People, but programs are easy to replicate. And when you divide the costs for all users, it turns out to be less expensive.
                  1. dauria
                    dauria 29 March 2021 21: 41
                    +4
                    People, but programs are easy to replicate.


                    To begin with, let at least transfer the brain of a dragonfly to a computer. To find food, run away from a net and a sparrow, find a female or a male. I ask a little ... a dragonfly, a fly or at least a cockroach ... laughing
                    This is a primitive with innate reflexes, and before it, even before the moon.
                    But you still need to solve the problem with learning, acquired reflexes and (oh, horror !!!) you still need to teach how to think wassat Otherwise, the UAV will be like a fish - it is removed from the hook, and it immediately swallows it again.
                    Someone from the optimists argued that by 2030 an electronic copy of the human brain will eat 100 watts, weigh a couple of kilos and cost a hundred bucks. wink
                    I'll wait a minute to update the outdated motherboard, since such "horizons".
                    1. Cube123
                      Cube123 30 March 2021 05: 58
                      0
                      Quote: dauria
                      To begin with, let at least transfer the brain of a dragonfly to a computer. To find food, run away from a net and a sparrow, find a female or a male. I ask a little ... a dragonfly, a fly or at least a cockroach ...

                      And you will compare the complexity of the task that modern cruise missiles solve in real time when following at low altitude over the terrain and you will understand that the brain of a dragonfly is already very, very far from this. laughing
                      1. your1970
                        your1970 30 March 2021 07: 43
                        +3
                        Quote: Cube123
                        Quote: dauria
                        To begin with, let at least transfer the brain of a dragonfly to a computer. To find food, run away from a net and a sparrow, find a female or a male. I ask a little ... a dragonfly, a fly or at least a cockroach ...

                        And you will compare the complexity of the task that modern cruise missiles solve in real time when following at low altitude over the terrain and you will understand that the brain of a dragonfly is already very, very far from this. laughing

                        In fact, cruise missiles were able to do this even 50 years ago ...
                        Follow the high-altitude section of the map - checking it with the readings of the altimeter - you don't need a great mind ...
                      2. Cube123
                        Cube123 30 March 2021 10: 48
                        0
                        Quote: your1970
                        Follow the high-altitude section of the map - checking it with the readings of the altimeter - you don't need a great mind ...

                        You are wrong. If you take into account the speed, inertia, the maximum effort that the wing can create during maneuvering and the choice of the optimal trajectory, the problem will sparkle with new colors. This was read to me 40 years ago at the institute. wink And all this is aggravated by the fact that at an altitude of 10-20 meters you have practically no room for maneuver.
                      3. Cube123
                        Cube123 30 March 2021 11: 59
                        0
                        Quote: your1970
                        Follow the altitude section of the map - checking it with the altimeter readings - you don't need a great mind ...

                        Many things seem simple until you try to do it yourself. Now it is possible to conduct a very simple and cheap experiment. A huge number of flight simulators are lying around on the network. Try flying at a speed of a thousand km / h, at an altitude of several tens of meters, especially in mountainous areas or urban conditions. But the simulator does not take into account a lot of factors: such as turbulence, air pockets, gusty side winds, changes in air density from temperature, pressure, altitude ...
                      4. your1970
                        your1970 30 March 2021 12: 21
                        +2
                        Quote: Cube123
                        You are mistaken

                        Quote: Cube123
                        Many things seem simple until you try to do it yourself.

                        So the teachers shamelessly lied to us - when they spoke in 1987 that the height catalogs are secret because of the cruise missiles ...
                        lol lol
                        So already the FAU quite maintained the altitude and direction in flight - already count 80 (!!!!) years ago
                  2. DED_peer_DED
                    DED_peer_DED 30 March 2021 19: 03
                    +1
                    Quote: Cube123
                    Can you compare the complexity of the task that modern cruise missiles solve in real time?

                    This task cannot be compared even with the task of "survival" of a microbe.
                2. DED_peer_DED
                  DED_peer_DED 30 March 2021 18: 49
                  0
                  AI will never be created in full, as a substitute for the human brain.
                  This is not real.
                  In addition to all this, a person also has a soul, how sad it is for some to understand.
                  And then, everything .... the end of AI as a substitute for people. brain.
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 30 March 2021 19: 17
                    +1
                    This is not necessary.
                    The human brain is full of rubbish.
                    Track how many unnecessary scraps of thoughts, dialogues, emotions flicker in your head in any few minutes.
                    Therefore, a person is not able to make quick decisions, despite his billions of neurons. It interferes with itself.
                  2. DED_peer_DED
                    DED_peer_DED 30 March 2021 19: 46
                    0
                    Quote: voyaka uh
                    Track how many unnecessary scraps of thoughts, dialogues, emotions flicker in your head in any few minutes.
                    Therefore, a person is not able to make quick decisions, despite his billions of neurons. Hinders himself

                    I do not agree.
                    A person can make a decision in an instant.
                    And sometimes not by itself, apparently. I know from my examples.
                    A car? Is she capable of an instant and reasonable (human, kind) decision?
                    No.
                  3. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 30 March 2021 20: 04
                    0
                    For good - no. On the human - no.
                    Instantly, yes. Moreover, a million times faster than that of a human.
                    In combat aviation, neither kind nor human (emotional) decisions are required.
                    Instant solutions are required.
                  4. DED_peer_DED
                    DED_peer_DED 30 March 2021 20: 08
                    0
                    Quote: voyaka uh
                    In combat aviation, neither kind nor human (emotional) decisions are required.
                    Instant solutions are required.

                    With a specific application, I agree.
                    But, after all, how long does it take for the rocket to move from the fired one to the recipient?
                    And compare this time with "acceleration from AI"?
                    Is it worth it?
                    Is it worth the potential AI error in using weapons?
  • FRoman1984
    FRoman1984 29 March 2021 05: 35
    +8
    There is such a joke - if you want to ruin a small economically successful country - give it a cruiser.
    Heavy fighters are not "toys" for everyone, as are modern armed forces in general.
    1. svp67
      svp67 29 March 2021 05: 53
      +1
      Quote: FRoman1984
      as well as modern armed forces in general.

      Therefore, military alliances of countries are created
    2. Lara Croft
      Lara Croft 30 March 2021 10: 54
      -1
      Quote: FRoman1984
      Heavy fighters are not "toys" for everyone, as are modern armed forces in general.

      Senior comrades from Armenia would not agree with you, now they will buy missiles for the purchased SU-30s and order a new batch of SU-30s ... a paradox ...
  • rocket757
    rocket757 29 March 2021 06: 04
    +2
    Any country that intends to build its own air force must have a strong economic foundation, otherwise it will be unable to support its combat aircraft.
    So this is not news. Everything is military, pleasure is not cheap ... and the further, the more expensive.
  • S. Sergei
    S. Sergei 29 March 2021 06: 37
    +9
    The estimated density of aviation kerosene is 0,8 (0,85 - for diesel fuel). The constant value is the capacity of the tanks. Why calculate it? This is some kind of perversion. That is, in the first paragraph - complete nonsense. You don't need to read about the yuan any further.
  • Konstantin Gogolev
    Konstantin Gogolev 29 March 2021 08: 08
    +2
    What a discovery they made - well done Chinese.
    These calculations are the economic justification for breeding the Carlsons. A jar of jam and everything is fine - you can be naughty.
  • Professor
    Professor 29 March 2021 08: 12
    +5
    For our part, we note that flights on the Su-27 are far from the pinnacle of expenses. As previously indicated on VO, the cost of an hour of flight on an F-35 fighter is estimated at $ 36 thousand (2,6 million rubles): and this despite the fact that it has not two engines, like the Su-27, but one.

    According to the anonymous author of fuel and lubricants, is this the lion's share of the cost of an hour of flight of a fighter? request
    1. DED_peer_DED
      DED_peer_DED 30 March 2021 19: 05
      +1
      Quote: Professor
      according to the anonymous author of fuel and lubricants, is this the lion's share of the cost of an hour of flight of a fighter?

      Chinese, but ...
      How should a seller on Aliexpress think?
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 29 March 2021 08: 36
    +2
    Quite true. Starting from the 4th generation, aircraft became complex and expensive ... and began to be equipped with expensive weapons. A heavy fighter such as Su27 or F-15 is generally an expensive pleasure. The lot of the countries not rich - the Yak130, FT-17 aircraft or the fleet of large UAVs of the Reaper type.
    1. agond
      agond 29 March 2021 09: 48
      +2
      The value of anything expressed in monetary terms is a conditional thing and does not reflect the real value of the product, the more the productivity of one and the same labor can vary greatly, it is more correct to compare the physical values ​​of the volume of production and processing of petroleum products in tons with the volume of aviation kerosene consumed in the Air Force so in tons, it may turn out that we are talking about some percentage
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 29 March 2021 10: 18
        0
        An airplane with two engines is always more expensive than an airplane with one engine.
        1. Herman 4223
          Herman 4223 29 March 2021 12: 20
          +2
          Not a fact, far from a fact. China bought two large batches of engines two years apart. One hundred RD93 units (it was created on the basis of the engine for the moment 29), they cost them $ 2,2 million apiece and a batch of 140 al31 (used on su27), the latter cost 5 million apiece.
          The price of engines is more than doubled. Although the total thrust of the two MiG29 engines is much more than one engine from the Su-27.
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 29 March 2021 14: 25
            0
            China created J10 with Al31 ..... and we need to see in pieces how many J10 and J11 he made.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 29 March 2021 14: 37
              0
              They have in the Air Force:
              AIRCRAFT 2,367 combat capable
              BBR 176: ε12 H-6A (trg role); ε60 H-6H / M; ε100 H-6K; 4+ H-6N
              FTR 517: 100 J-7 Fishcan; 120 J-7E Fishcan; 120 J-7G Fishcan; 50 J-8F / H Finback; 95 J-11; 32 Su-27UBK Flanker FGA 866+: 220 J-10A Firebird; 55 J-10B Firebird; 120+ J-10C Firebird; 70 J-10S Firebird; 130 J-11B / BS Flanker L; 150+ J-16 Flanker; 24+ J-20A; 73 Su-30MKK Flanker G; 24 Su-35 Flanker M
              ATK 140 JH-7A Flounder

              In the Navy:
              AIRCRAFT 426 combat capable
              BBR 45: 27 H-6G / G mod; 18 H-6J
              FTR 24 J-8F Finback
              FGA 153: 16 J-10A Firebird; 7 J-10S Firebird; 72 J-11B / BS Flanker L; 34 J-15 Flanker; 24 Su-30MK2 Flanker G
              ATK 120: 48 JH-7; 72 JH-7A Flounder ASW 16+ KQ-200
  • APASUS
    APASUS 29 March 2021 09: 57
    +1
    Believing that in conditions of colossal investments in the Air Force, poor countries will begin to massively switch to UAVs and surrogates.
    1. NEOZ
      NEOZ 29 March 2021 12: 28
      0
      Quote: APASUS
      poor countries will begin to massively switch to UAVs and surrogates.

      Give examples of UAVs that the air forces of poor countries claim.
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 29 March 2021 14: 25
        0
        Up to the size of Bayraktar .....
        1. NEOZ
          NEOZ 29 March 2021 14: 33
          +1
          Quote: Zaurbek
          Quote: APASUS
          poor countries will begin to massively switch to UAVs and surrogates.

          Give examples of UAVs that the air forces of poor countries claim.
          Reply
          Quote
          A complaint

          Zaurbek (Zaur)
          Today, 14: 25

          0
          Up to the size of Bayraktar .....


          Maximum takeoff weight: 650 kg
          Payload: up to 150 kg of payload, including 55 kg - a standard module of an electro-optical surveillance system and laser target designation.
          Maximum speed: 222 km / h
          Cruising speed: 130 km / h

          Control radius from the ground station - 150 km
          Ceiling: 8200 m

          Well, what kind of aircraft can be replaced by a bayraktar with such performance characteristics? .... he cannot even replace a maize operator with a combat module!
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 29 March 2021 15: 53
            0
            Helicopters and attack aircraft. And, taking into account, adjustments to the fire of artillery and detachments will reach a new level
          2. Vladislav Ermolaev
            Vladislav Ermolaev 31 March 2021 01: 02
            0
            And if you also connect electronic warfare, it may not even take off at all.
      2. APASUS
        APASUS 29 March 2021 15: 27
        0
        Quote: NEOZ
        Give examples of UAVs that the air forces of poor countries claim.

  • alexey alexeyev_2
    alexey alexeyev_2 29 March 2021 10: 15
    +1
    And what did they want to say? What is the quintessence of the article?
    1. NEOZ
      NEOZ 29 March 2021 14: 34
      +1
      Quote: Aleksey Alekseev_2
      And what did they want to say? What is the quintessence of the article?

      independence is expensive!
    2. DED_peer_DED
      DED_peer_DED 30 March 2021 19: 09
      0
      Quote: Aleksey Alekseev_2
      And what did they want to say? What is the quintessence of the article?

      The fact is that during the flight of the MiG-25 more money was spent on alcohol-water mixtures than on kerosene, and in the Su-27 it was the other way around.
  • iouris
    iouris 29 March 2021 10: 16
    +2
    In the USSR, the flying hour was estimated at approximately single-engine - 10 sput., Twin-engine - 20 sput. Few people thought about Tok and knew.
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 29 March 2021 10: 20
      +1
      And the Americans think and consider ... and they have F16 and F15 ...
  • viktor_47
    viktor_47 29 March 2021 10: 32
    +1
    It is hinted that Russia cannot afford modern combat aviation ...
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 29 March 2021 14: 26
      +1
      If there was no production, then yes
  • mmaxx
    mmaxx 29 March 2021 10: 43
    +2
    Yes, and uh ... It and a wound, a simple sword cost 10 cows ... And a good one even more ...
  • mvg
    mvg 29 March 2021 12: 11
    0
    The author probably shouldn't write on such a topic. This is the level of Yandex Zen Escho a little and SpeedInfo can be taken as a serious political glossy magazine
  • mag nit
    mag nit 29 March 2021 14: 59
    0
    The Chinese have forgotten that Russia has the cheapest fuel in the world.
    1. Titus_2
      Titus_2 29 March 2021 23: 51
      0
      It depends on whom ... and not the cheapest.
  • alexmach
    alexmach 29 March 2021 18: 09
    +2
    the numbers in the article do not fight with each other at all. Journalists seemingly completely illiterate went. It's like writing just to write.
  • duchy
    duchy 29 March 2021 19: 47
    0
    The Chinese have confirmed the axiom: " You do not want to feed your army, you will feed someone else's."
  • Baron pardus
    Baron pardus 29 March 2021 20: 21
    +2
    The fact that operating an aircraft is a little (much) more than just the cost of fuel is clear. And the price of an airplane includes not only the car itself, but fuel, service time, training of service personnel, and infrastructure.
    That is why many do not buy F15. It is corny twice as expensive to maintain as F16. And if earlier the F15 had better electronics, now it is the same, and the F15 can only boast of a higher ammunition load and a higher speed at afterburner. And engines do matter. F18 Super Hornet, even though it weighs less than F15, but the cost of maintenance is still more than that of F16S (Block 52)

    F15C - $ 23100
    F16C - $ 8400
    F18E - $ 11600
    Rafale - $ 16500
    Typhoon - $ 18200
    Grippen - $ 6800

    This includes the fact that only 2 conscripts are needed to service Grippen under the command of a technician sergeant. The Swedes are famous for this - "the plane must be serviced by technical personnel consisting of average recruits." This was both Wiggen and Drakken. Wiggen is the same.

    I did not find the numbers for the MiG-29/35 and the SU-27 family. But, it is clear that two engines weigh and have more fuel than one, and that it is more expensive to maintain and sort out two engines than to maintain and sort out one.

    But the cost of the aircraft (and many do not take this into account) is not just the cost of the aircraft itself, it is fuel, and spare parts and HUMAN HOURS for maintenance, as well as training of service personnel.

    The best example. It seems that the British Merlin Engines were not made of gold and silver. Didn't seem to be super expensive. But, if you think about it, they were WILDLY expensive TO RELEASE. Why? And because workers were allowed to assemble ONLY with at least 20 years of experience. And to copy Merlin, even the Germans did not succeed (although they knocked Sptifiers and other good things, God forbid, and they had trophy engines). So it seems that Merlin is not made of gold, only people with at least 20 years of experience collect it. And it’s difficult and time-consuming to train workers of this level. For two years, the Americans could not establish mass production, even with all the documentation and the help of engineers from Roils Rois.

    So modern aviation is not only about the cost of the aircraft itself. Purely for the price, the same F-35 is not much more expensive than the F16Block 70, but the cost of one hour of operation, the F35 costs 28500 dollars per hour of operation. Here and maintenance of 3 engines, and constant replacement of anti-radiation coating and other joys. By the way, the same Harrier costs $ 13800 per hour of operation. The engines are quite time consuming there.

    Therefore, if a country does NOT manufacture its own aircraft, then it should think very carefully not only about the cost of the aircraft itself, but the cost of maintenance and spare parts, and how often they need to be changed, and how much maintenance personnel needs to be trained. In the US Air Force, only the most experienced aircraft mechanics operate the F22 and F35. They are simply trying to keep others out.
    By the way, Mirages were famous for their ease of maintenance. The French managed to make not only a cheap, but also an unkillable engine. Even the club-handed Indians have not ruined any mirage due to engine problems. True, it was not very powerful.
    When you have a reliable engine, you don’t need to put two engines in the car “Just in case one fails, the other is there”. By the same logic, the second cockpit should be placed separately from the first one "if the pilot has a heart attack, there is another one." As has already been repeatedly noted, closely spaced engines (As in Typhoon and Rafal) will take out with one close rocket blast - they will simply cut them with fragments. Two engines are installed only when one engine of sufficient power and suitable size is not available.

    The Americans put two F414 engines on a fairly heavy Super Hornet, not because the engine was weak, but simply to do everything that the fleet wanted the Hornet to do, there was no other suitable engine. The Swedes made a light fighter that surpasses the Super Hornet in all respects (the Canadians tested both, they came to this conclusion) except for the maximum combat load. And one engine was enough for them. The AESA radars on both fighters are roughly the same. The Super Hornet's operating cost is twice that of Grippen. There are no miracles. You have two engines - there will be more fuel and more fuel will need to be serviced.

    Do you want cheaper aircraft to operate? Start with the fact that you need to install reliable non-kill engines. Preferably no more than one.
  • vovochka081
    vovochka081 30 March 2021 00: 13
    +2
    "During a normal flight of the Su-27 in cruise mode, excluding maneuvering, the fuel consumption per hour is 3 liters, its flight time is three hours.

    - notes the author, who calculated that with a jet fuel price of 6 yuan per ton [500 thousand rubles], an hour of flight on a fighter costs 75 yuan [63 thousand rubles]: "and this is the most economical state." . "
    What is this trash, which editor missed this nonsense ??? What hours, if the plane has only 10 tons of fuel at a price of 75 rubles. per ton. Where is 000 rubles from? per hour for fuel, and this is still an economical solution. And if you take off and maneuver then 730. Is that also an hour? It multiplies there by itself, so it is not necessary to refuel it. The most economical transport in the history of mankind.
  • Yegor Bulavkin
    Yegor Bulavkin 30 March 2021 05: 45
    +1
    about f 35 is not accuracy, they still carry a can of invisible paint with them, so that invisibility can be tinted on the go.
  • Plechy
    Plechy 30 March 2021 06: 55
    0
    An unfortunate confusion with numbers, the author gives information that the cost of fuel consumed per hour of flight of the SU-27 is 730 rubles, with a consumption of 000 liters per hour and a price of 3 rubles per ton, but if you take it and just count it, you get that 750 rubles is the cost of a full refueling of the aircraft (75 tons), and for an hour of flight you will have to pay only 000 rubles ...
  • Wedmak
    Wedmak 30 March 2021 08: 55
    0
    If we take into account the takeoff and the tactical actions of the pilot, then the fuel consumption increases at least three times, equal to approximately 200 yuan per hour [000 million rubles.].

    For our part, we note that flights on the Su-27 are far from the pinnacle of expenses. As previously indicated at VO, the cost of an hour of flight on an F-35 fighter is estimated at $ 36 thousand (2,6 million rubles):

    No, something doesn't add up. Either I forgot math, or a purple hedgehog. If the Su-27, with two engines and a mass of 16300 kg, eats 2,4 million rubles. per hour, and the F-35B weighing 14588 kg (the heaviest), with one engine - 2.6 million rubles. then ...
    Either our TWO engines are eating VERY little, or the F135 is eating a LOT. Or take off and maneuvering is not taken into account on the F-35?
  • Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 30 March 2021 09: 38
    0
    All this, apparently, is a secret for someone ?! Did you make a discovery? Well then we must continue! For anyone in the modern world, the Air Force cannot afford it. There are simply no countries in the world that could pay for a full-fledged war with the participation of modern air forces. Maximum of three days. After that, the entire strategy and the entire tactics of using modern aircraft will change completely and completely.
    News? No, really ?!
    1. Ua3qhp
      Ua3qhp 30 March 2021 15: 18
      +1
      They haven't counted the Navy yet, that's where the trash comes out.
      1. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 30 March 2021 15: 22
        0
        That's right) Modern economic systems are not able to provide modern weapons. Our swords and armor choke us. It is necessary to change the control systems of civilization. Otherwise, there is simply no way out - it is NECESSARY to start a war! If we want to survive! Otherwise, a geopolitical rival will start it, in a matter of hours it will destroy our ability to resist, and then all of us. Right now, the United States, we and China are in exactly this position. We have to start. Otherwise, the probability of a global loss is close to one hundred percent.
        They, fools, did not like the USSR. I had to defeat him. We won. The whole planet was piled on and overpowered. Well done! Now there is no alternative to a global all-destroying war ...
        1. Ua3qhp
          Ua3qhp 30 March 2021 17: 31
          0
          Quote: Mikhail3
          IT IS NECESSARY to start a war! If we want to survive! Otherwise, a geopolitical rival will start it, in a matter of hours it will destroy our ability to resist, and then all of us.

          Not a fact, there is still no one to fight there. We are not ready, and They are even stronger.
          1. agond
            agond 30 March 2021 18: 18
            0
            Quote: Mikhail3
            Modern economic systems are unable to provide modern weapons. Our swords and armor choke us.

            We have an overestimated profit margin for everything, and everywhere because the prices for weapons are inadequate to the costs of their production, it is necessary to introduce a tax on excess profits and a turnover tax, and then the prices will be more correct.
            1. Mikhail3
              Mikhail3 31 March 2021 08: 47
              0
              Nobody will enter this time. Here is capitalism in general. Second, with normal modern weapons, even with "inflated" profit margins, R&D costs so much that they will never be recaptured. Simple solutions from HSE textbooks are simple and attractive. Only they do not work, because they have nothing to do with reality at all. These are fairy tales so that those who take them seriously will be easier to undress when needed)
            2. Ua3qhp
              Ua3qhp 31 March 2021 09: 45
              0
              The prices for weapons are on the verge of profitability. Reduce a little more and become unprofitable.
          2. Ua3qhp
            Ua3qhp 30 March 2021 21: 10
            0
            after such a statement by Biden (with a capital letter - a proper name) in the century about 17-18 and earlier, the war would have begun. But, the nuclear triad is holding back.
          3. Mikhail3
            Mikhail3 31 March 2021 08: 44
            0
            Well, that's just the joke. Modern weapons make it possible to carry out the American scenario. Namely, to dump all the drone bombs in one fell swoop on industrial centers and control centers. Without people. Consider risk-free. And then come to the country, carefully disarmed by its authorities, and start shooting with impunity.
            They are not capable of fighting, they are too pampered and cowardly. But to kill those who wander with bare hands - they are happy, believe me. Our authorities put everything on communication and the operational transfer of forces back and forth, they say, whoever attacks where - we will immediately transfer mobile units there.
            Not enough mobile units for WAR. It's funny to say. Cartridges, consumables and equipment will run out in a matter of weeks. And even days. Plus massive betrayal in the leadership, about which it is stupid to even doubt. And now, after a couple of weeks, the country is completely defenseless. And so it will be, alas ...

            And the "disarmed country", I'm not talking about the short-barreled)
      2. Baron pardus
        Baron pardus 30 March 2021 17: 56
        0
        Yeah. As one wise enemy of our country, Winston Churchill, said, "If you want to ruin a small country, give it a cruiser." The navy is a wildly expensive thing. I remember this quote from the magazine Modelist Constructor, there at one time there were articles on cruisers with blueprints. The boys and I even made boats from there. According to the drawings. Accuracy, of course, is doubtful, but at least something.
  • AML
    AML 30 March 2021 20: 37
    0
    Quote: DED_peer_DED
    AI will never be created in full, as a substitute for the human brain.
    This is not real.
    In addition to all this, a person also has a soul, how sad it is for some to understand.
    And then, everything .... the end of AI as a substitute for people. brain.

    One of the problems of man is that he considers himself the crown of creation. He came up with the rules for himself and believes that it is so. But is it?
    For example, only an intelligent being is capable of inventing mathematics. And if a rational creature doesn’t need mathematics. And if it can realize without recalculation how much it is in kilograms, meters, etc., will we consider it reasonable?

    Therefore, it is necessary first to give a definition, and what is mind, without being tied to a person, and only then talk about AI.
  • Vladislav Ermolaev
    Vladislav Ermolaev 31 March 2021 00: 56
    0
    Guys, thinking about drones and AI, you forgot that there is electronic warfare. I think that it is not only Donald Cook who can turn it off. But also in "the brains of AI, too, dig deeper."
    1. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 31 March 2021 08: 56
      0
      Electronic warfare, this is powerful! Disconnect communication with the control center, and the enemy will lose his toys at once, hurray! Here only there will be a war, and not a stupid game of defective children, as it is now. Having lost contact with the center, the drone will not go into basic mode. It will switch, for example, to search for the nearest source of radio emission, flying up to which, it will blow up everything onboard. Or heat radiation. Or to search for something from the library of photos of military equipment. Or an enemy soldier. Or it will sit down peacefully, but blow up the airborne one when approaching to it any mass larger than a cat. A drone can do a lot of nasty things if it is programmed as an adult ...
  • Ruslan Novruzov
    Ruslan Novruzov 31 March 2021 07: 17
    0
    The army and navy in Russia are generally expensive - about 15 billion rubles a day.
  • the same doctor
    the same doctor April 1 2021 12: 52
    0
    The cost of combat aircraft approached a critical value. The main reason is the desire to save the pilot's life, which is very expensive and entails increased requirements for all systems, and most importantly, for the effectiveness of the vehicle's weapons.
    This crisis is resolved through the creation of drones and the improvement of communications. Ultimately, an airplane is just a platform for placing missiles. If the vehicle is unmanned, then the AN-24 will do the job. Or maybe An-2, if the missiles can be launched from such a slow launch vehicle. Well, ahead, a hundred or two kilometers ahead, a smaller, but fast drone dangles. Its task is only reconnaissance and guidance. So replacement f-35 will cost a hundred times less. And the operation will be 10 times cheaper. Thus, one amersky plane can be equipped with a hundred cheap drones. For completely impoverished countries - a hundred cheap manned fighters. Possibly disposable. The F-35 does not have enough missiles for a hundred vehicles, and the last survivor will shoot him down.
    1. agond
      agond April 1 2021 16: 50
      0
      In the meantime, the wealthy USA is going to build cheap lightweight AT-6E propeller-driven attack aircraft
  • Aydar Tyutin
    Aydar Tyutin April 4 2021 22: 54
    0
    Yes ... At this rate, back to the proven, cheap propeller-driven aircraft! Just because they are 100 times cheaper! It is easier to send in one way flight, on autopilot, 100 aircraft, which will also be shot down with missiles that are several times more expensive than themselves.
  • igor.borov775
    igor.borov775 12 June 2021 16: 23
    0
    Hello!! How fast time flies. In the 80s, there was a huge and difficult task - to create a heavy platform that could be both an interceptor and a combat fighter. One platform should replace the entire variety of air defense aircraft. And the second is a light combat platform. capable of fighting fighters and capable of working on the surface On land, water. All these contradictions can be reduced to two combat platforms. Replace all variety of types. After much torment, the SU-35 appeared; it meets the requirements of a nonexistent country. And finally, the light combat platform MIG-35 was almost brought to mind. New divisions of air defense missile systems appeared, and the construction of airfields for aviation began. This has always been the case for Air Defense Regiments and Interception Aviation. Such a life And, by the way, the requirements for covering the country. And the lungs will go after all the adjustments and improvements. just there is no resource for everything, you understand yourself. First, the triad, then everything else.