Military Review

The refusal of the US Air Force from the secret project "Monty" in favor of 144 F-15EX "Eagle II" provided a trump card for the Russian Aerospace Forces

124

On April 7, 2021, the official presentation and ceremony of transferring to the 40th Squadron of the 96th Test Wing of the US Air Force (AvB Eglin, Florida) the first prototype of the deeply improved multi-functional fighter of the 4 ++ generation F-15EX "Eagle" II "were presented by Colonel General Duke Richardson as events that marked a fundamentally new stage in the formation of tactical aviation The US Air Force is of a transitional generation, during which the highest operational and tactical qualities of the old, good, well-proven in theaters of operations and loved by three generations of US Air Force flight personnel, the YF-15A-1-MC multipurpose twin-engine platform in the widest spectrum should once again be confirmed its modifications.


The performance parameters of the AN / APG-82 (V) 1 radar will provide the newest F-15EX with parity only with the early Su-30SM / 1


Indeed, having more "far-sighted" and many times more anti-jamming (in comparison with the AN / APG-70 airborne radars based on the outdated waveguide-slot antenna arrays with low resolution of the F-15E "Strike Eagle" fighters) AN / APG airborne radars -82 (V) 1 based on AFAR, promising F-15EX "Eagle II" will pose a very significant threat to our heavy multifunctional fighters of the "4 ++" generation Su-30SM / 1, equipped with far from the most advanced radar H011M "Bars-R" ".

Thus, the use in the radio-electronic architecture of AN / APG-82 (V) 1 AFAR radars of an aperture of 1500 transmit-receive modules with individual high-energy solid-state gallium nitride microwave transistors and attenuators, as well as several hundred radio frequency tunable filters RFTF (Radio Frequency Tunable Filters "), feeding the" jamming "groups of transceiver modules, will provide the pilots of the improved" Needles "with the opportunity not only to conduct long-range air combat in the most difficult jamming environment, but also to use the APG-82 (V) 1 radar in electronic warfare mode.

The highest level of noise immunity will be achieved due to the possibility of formation by the phase shifters and attenuators of the AFAR "dips" of the directional diagram in the direction of the enemy radio-electronic jammers, while the RFTF radio-frequency filters (having received information about the frequency parameters of the operation of the on-board radars of enemy fighters from the AN / ALQ-250 EPAWS) will simulate the response and aiming noise interference signals in terms of frequencies and amplitudes, transmitted to certain groups of receiving-transmitting modules of the active phased array to form narrow and high-energy "jamming" beams.

It should be noted that the power and efficiency of these beams can significantly exceed the spectral and spatial density of interference radiation from container stations of the EW L-266 "Khibiny-U / M" family with a power of about 3,6 kW.

As for the range of "capture for precise auto-tracking" of air targets of the Su-30SM1 type (image intensifier about 12 sq. M), the AN / APG-82 (V) 1 is capable of realizing this possibility at a distance of about 165 km in the absence of intense radio countermeasures from enemy and about 100-120 km in a difficult jamming environment.

Against this background, the N011M "Bars-R" radars of the Su-30SM1 fighters, having almost identical (in comparison with the APG-82 (V) 1) energy parameters, will be able to detect and "capture" the F-15EX at a distance of about 130 and 105 km in normal jamming environment and 80 and 67 - in the case of active radio countermeasures from the enemy (in our case, the AN / APG-82 (V) 1 radar operating in the electronic warfare mode).

The alignment not in favor of our machine is explained by nothing else, as, firstly, the lower level of noise immunity of passive phased array radars "Bars-R", unable to "zero" sectors of the directional patterns in the direction of the enemy's electronic warfare means, and secondly, the wider use in the design of the airframe of the improved "Eagle II" radio-absorbing materials (RPM) and coatings that provide a reduction in the effective scattering surface of the machine from 10-7 to 1,5-2,5 sq. m respectively (depending on the suspension configuration).

Nevertheless, the planned equipping of the modernized Su-30SM2 with more high-energy radar N035 "Irbis-E", or the hypothetical use against the F-15EX (in duel situations) of the multifunctional Su-35S fighters, also equipped with this type of onboard radars from the NIIP them. V. V. Tikhomirov, confidently neutralizes all the advantages of the "Eagle II" in long-range air battles.

After all, these stations are capable of locating new versions of the US "Needles" at a distance of 370-400 km, capturing them for "precise auto-tracking" from 320-290 km. And even in a difficult jamming environment, a sufficiently high average power of the H035 radars, amounting to at least 5 kW (3,3 times more than that of the Bars), will be able to partially compensate for the less solid level of noise immunity of its own PFAR architecture in comparison with the American APG radars -82 (V) 1.

Therefore, it is quite logical to assume that the crews of our Su-30SM2 and Su-35S fighters will be the first to implement the "detection - tracking - capture" cycles of the American F-15EX with the final interceptions either by means of the ultra-long-range URVV R-37M, or with the help of more highly maneuverable promising long-range URVV "Product 180" with "long-playing" dual-mode solid propellants (analogue of AIM-120D).

The Boeing Corporation specialists could only partially preserve the parity of the Eagle / II family in potential picks with our Sushki if they abandoned the more mediocre and “ordinary” F-15EX development program in favor of the previously frozen Monty project, which provides design of the F-15SE Silent Eagle transitional multi-role fighter.

The unique design features of the demonstrator of this machine were the presence of conformal fuel tanks and weapon bays, which, in conjunction with the inclined planes of the vertical tail unit with a "camber" angle of about 15 degrees, would provide an even greater reduction in RCS to 0,5-1 sq. m, reducing the detection range by means of "Barsov-R" and "Irbisov-E" by another 10-15%.

It was here that our overseas "colleagues" demonstrated their utter incompetence.
Author:
124 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. rocket757
    rocket757 April 30 2021 10: 12
    +2
    What battles are they talking about, where and when this technique can actually meet / fight ???
    And so it is clear that they modernize proven equipment, this is logical, since new equipment cannot replace everything and everywhere, for various reasons.
  2. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins April 30 2021 10: 14
    +10
    For all the obscure abbreviation provided by Damansky, I am BMP! (Without the slightest clue)
    1. novel66
      novel66 April 30 2021 10: 50
      +9
      Well. at least not BCG, it's not bad
    2. Kaman
      Kaman 3 May 2021 06: 34
      0
      Damantsev did not understand the main thing - the F-15EX will be used as a tactical bomber after the destruction of air defense by drones and fifth-generation aircraft. And aircraft of the fifth generation will also participate in air battles.
      1. Herman 4223
        Herman 4223 5 May 2021 14: 36
        0
        He is being handed over to the US National Guard. The main task of which is to provide air defense for the United States itself.
    3. NEOZ
      NEOZ 11 May 2021 11: 16
      0
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      Damansky obscure abbreviation I - BMP!

      and I recognize the author by the abbreviation)))))))))))))
  3. tatiana korzhenko
    tatiana korzhenko April 30 2021 10: 18
    +26
    Interestingly, one of me, when reading Mr. Damantsev's articles, starts to get heavy and troubled?
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik April 30 2021 10: 37
      +6
      A matter of habit. I'm fine, although I read his articles 2 times slower, but there are interesting points.
      True, it happens a day I analyze 3-4 terms of reference, Damantsev has a presentation close to them.
      1. novel66
        novel66 April 30 2021 10: 51
        +3
        here I agree, why blame that you do not understand? a lot of information, it is useful
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik April 30 2021 10: 55
          +14
          Well, this is still a nonfiction article, it should be easy to read, without several decades of technical background.
          1. novel66
            novel66 April 30 2021 11: 00
            +2
            these are also needed, to raise general technical literacy
            1. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk April 30 2021 11: 49
              +4
              Quote: novel xnumx
              these are also needed, to raise general technical literacy

              I agree. But for this you need to have basic knowledge in this area. How many commentators have them?
              1. novel66
                novel66 April 30 2021 11: 54
                +2
                well, do not discuss here in the forest a Christmas tree was born ??
                1. Krasnoyarsk
                  Krasnoyarsk April 30 2021 12: 03
                  0
                  Quote: novel xnumx
                  well, do not discuss here in the forest a Christmas tree was born ??

                  Did it even come to this? I don’t remember that. But to discuss something narrowly special, you must agree, is not entirely possible.
                  1. Old Michael
                    Old Michael April 30 2021 15: 55
                    +3
                    Krasnoyarsk:
                    to discuss something narrowly special, you see, it is not entirely possible. ... you must have a basic knowledge of this area. How many commentators have them?


                    It's funny
                    For example, economics, finance, politics, geopolitics are topics that require very deep knowledge in the subject area for commenting and discussion. However, the number of commentators, with an important air expressing their wise judgments in this regard, sometimes goes off scale!
                    1. Krasnoyarsk
                      Krasnoyarsk April 30 2021 16: 44
                      0
                      Quote: OldMichael

                      It's funny
                      For example, economics, finance, politics, geopolitics are topics that require very deep knowledge in the subject area for commenting and discussion. but

                      I disagree with you. Economy; there is no need for deep knowledge in this area to understand that the economy should work for its citizens in the first place, and not be a means for the enrichment of individual "people". Finance; the same thing - the financial system should work for the development of the domestic economy and be accountable only to the government, and not to the world bank. Etc. Do not agree?
                      1. Old Michael
                        Old Michael April 30 2021 16: 54
                        +3
                        I totally agree, "+". The term "Funny" refers to the wise recipes of would-be economists / financiers / philosophers and others.
                        There are, after all, "specialists" in other areas. For example, a staff clerk who has risen to the rank of corporal can reason and provide valuable advice on strategy. And a commentator can state his opinion on the state and prospects of education and science, coupled with recipes for their salvation, with a single punctuation mark - a crooked smiley at the end of the text.
                        But this does not mean at all about the low demand for highly specialized articles. On the contrary, they develop, make you think, look for additional information. And incompetent comments were and will be. We will survive.
                      2. English tarantas
                        English tarantas April 30 2021 20: 56
                        +3
                        understand - the economy should work for its citizens in the first place, and not be a means for the enrichment of individual "people". Finance; the same thing - the financial system should work for the development of the domestic economy and be accountable only to the government, and not to the world bank. Etc. Do not agree?

                        I agree, but understanding also means being able to prove your point of view. And in order to substantiate your apparently simple judgments, it will not be enough to read Capital
          2. vic02
            vic02 April 30 2021 12: 11
            0
            The article is very helpful. Any publication should contain articles, both targeted at any literate person, and more specialized. For example, I find it difficult to understand Klimov's article on submarines and torpedoes, but this article is easy to read.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik April 30 2021 13: 18
              0
              Quote: vic02
              focused on any literate person, and more specialized.

              The problem is that the article contains outright "bloopers" and considers 2 parameters of EPR and power. Some conclusions are based on this. For the role of a specialized article, this frankly does not pull. There are just a lot of terms, abbreviations and abbreviations.
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. OgnennyiKotik
                  OgnennyiKotik April 30 2021 15: 35
                  +4
                  Tell me, how many accounts did you have here? Tonev / Dred / PPSh / Ali / SETSET still needs to be added! lol
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                  2. zyablik.olga
                    zyablik.olga 1 May 2021 06: 50
                    +4
                    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                    Tell me, how many accounts did you have here? Tonev / Dred / PPSh / Ali / SETSET still needs to be added! lol

                    Initially, this character was known as I. Vasya (among members of the forum I-from Vasya). And he fully matches his nickname. He is banned several times a month for rudeness, insults, incitement to ethnic conflicts and for maintaining several accounts. But alas, it is impossible to defeat such parasites. request
                    1. OgnennyiKotik
                      OgnennyiKotik 1 May 2021 09: 03
                      0
                      Understood thanks! smile In fact, it's even fun with him, you rarely find such obstinacy. smile
              2. vic02
                vic02 7 May 2021 11: 26
                0
                The problem is that the article contains outright "bloopers" and considers 2 parameters of EPR and power
                I admit that I did not read the article carefully. For example, please give a couple of blatant blunders from the article, I'm interested. And please explain why you did not like the EPR parameters and power?
    2. parusnik
      parusnik April 30 2021 12: 10
      +2
      A person, not a flea, gets used to everything. smile
    3. Azimuth
      Azimuth 1 May 2021 00: 51
      +3
      I only read comments. I’m already calculating by the name of Eugene. I scroll through and enjoy the skirmish. And it's time to write under the title of the author for the sake of decency and even better rating, bullshit reluctant to flip through.
    4. DLord
      DLord 5 May 2021 02: 09
      +1
      I counted 104 words in one of his articles in the first sentence!
  4. Dmitry Makarov
    Dmitry Makarov April 30 2021 10: 31
    .
    The production of the ancient F-15 was revived due to the collapse of the F-35 program, and it is not necessary to put empty on this fact and get away from the truth.
    With the 5th generation fighter program, the United States suffered a fiasco, suffered enormous material and moral losses. And it is not yet known how this may affect the hegemon that has lost its position.
    1. tatiana korzhenko
      tatiana korzhenko April 30 2021 10: 52
      +11
      Wow, a collapse, more than 600 aircraft have already been riveted, and many of them are quite successfully fighting. And what are their “monstrous losses”? No, patriotism is, of course, commendable, but you still need to look at things realistically. By the way, when SU -57 will there be a sufficient number, will all other aircraft of the Aerospace Forces be written off immediately?
    2. donavi49
      donavi49 April 30 2021 10: 53
      +20
      The collapse of the F-35 program is obvious. After all, they produced some 650 cars, and handed over to customers even less, about 600. By the end of the year, they will produce only 680-690, and next they will take the bar 700 ... They rust in Europe, Israel, South Korea and Australia.



      Our only serial Su-57 will shoot down a hundred of them in each sortie, and that is because the designers of the saboteurs cannot in any way increase the ammunition load of the gun.
      1. tatiana korzhenko
        tatiana korzhenko April 30 2021 11: 22
        +8
        Appreciated :)))
      2. Bradley
        Bradley April 30 2021 12: 50
        +6
        Our only serial Su-57 will shoot down a hundred of them in each sortie, and that is because the designers of the saboteurs cannot in any way increase the ammunition load of the gun.

        You forget about the NAZ, and in the NAZ AK-74U there are also a couple of stores, in total - 90 shots, i.e. - 90 penguins, and this is already about two hundred penguins in total. Three departures and no penguin park.
      3. Vitaly gusin
        Vitaly gusin April 30 2021 14: 07
        +4
        Quote: donavi49
        ... They rust in Europe, Israel, South Korea and Australia.

        As of early April, 625 F-35 aircraft in nine countries have flown a total of 380 000 hours. They work with 27 bases, who work more than 1300 pilots and more than 10 service personnel.
        When SU ​​-57 approaches at least half of these indicators, then you will compare them.
        1. Tonev
          Tonev April 30 2021 16: 08
          -6
          Quote: Vitaly Gusin
          When SU ​​-57 approaches at least half of these indicators, then you will compare them.

          One does not interfere. The F-35 is not a priori 5th generation aircraft.
          1. ironic
            ironic 3 May 2021 00: 38
            -2
            Only a glitch is. This word is a parasite. At least learn it correctly.
            1. Sarboz
              Sarboz 9 May 2021 19: 42
              0
              Quote: ironic
              Only a glitch is. This word is a parasite. At least learn it correctly.

              Oops. He made me laugh. A Russian language specialist from Israel reveals modern trends in linguistics! Not for you, young man, with your Russian at the level of a tik-turner of the 8th grade, to distribute advice on the style of the Russian language.
              1. ironic
                ironic 10 May 2021 15: 02
                -1
                Not to see your mistakes in the text and not to use the intelligentsia of thinking to convey thought through linguistic means, these are two big differences. I do not compete in grammar, this is not due to my dyslexic abilities, and even typing in transliteration. But in all other respects I can quite argue from the height of CN Tower, in rhetoric I am much stronger than in spelling, also a science by the way, in which you are not even a young man yet, but a child with a dirty ass. wink
                1. Sarboz
                  Sarboz 10 May 2021 23: 46
                  +1
                  Quote: ironic
                  do not use the intellectuals of thinking

                  I have not spoken to an adult with such an illiterate speech for a long time. It's not even about spelling and grammar, with which you simply have trouble. You yourself do not even notice how poorly you communicate. Usually, this is how today's arrogant teenagers formulate their thoughts, who, without Google, cannot connect two words themselves. From the height of your tower, you cannot even understand that "to appear" and "to appear" are two different words. But at the same time they pulled up and taught a person who obviously knows this difference. You have no idea and have no idea that not a single native speaker of the Russian language will ever say such meaningless nonsense as "intellectuals of thinking", where do you "use" it there. I don’t know, maybe such pearls are born in the head of "repatriates" in the throes of mixing surzhik with Hebrew.
                  1. ironic
                    ironic 11 May 2021 00: 29
                    -1
                    You see what's the matter. When I read your reflexive reactions, then I get inner satisfaction from the thought that no matter how poorly I expressed my thoughts, just as poorly as you I will not do it even if they hit me on the head with a frying pan. You even twist so ineptly that you are amazed that profanity can be like this ... as our teacher used to say in a sketch at the Polytechnic University - child, this is not a drawing, but a tricycle and 10 meters of barbed wire. You can only appear at a court hearing. And your waggling in one place in a hot frying pan, where you yourself sat, it was not I who put you there, by the way, cannot appear even in a nightmare, in combination with the concept of intelligentsia of thinking. You obviously probably don't know anything at all, you believe in everything, but why you need to believe in it, you obviously forgot to explain. I have no doubt that, with your level of intelligence, the intelligentsia of thinking is pointless rubbish. This is completely natural. But nothing can be born to you. Impotence is not only a disease of the reproductive system, but also concerns the brain. You would have turned out to be a fighting ant, reflexes are persistent, narrow skills, tasks set, designed for slaughter, like a T-62 tank in the USSR, release so many shells in so many minutes and die.
      4. mmaxx
        mmaxx 1 May 2021 06: 30
        0
        This is 5.
        Yes!
        drinks

        The site does not want to insert short comments.
      5. ironic
        ironic 10 May 2021 15: 03
        -1
        And the rate of fire too. smile
    3. FIR FIR
      FIR FIR April 30 2021 11: 39
      +8
      Quote: Dmitry Makarov
      The production of the ancient F-15 was revived due to the collapse of the F-35 program

      1. Not to replace, but to supplement.
      2.35th as an IS of the front line at the beginning of the conflict, using its stealth, and an advanced 15th, as an IS, capable of dragging (a car) a lot of UABs and hammering the enemy into the Stone Age.
      It seems that a very good combination will come out, it's a pity that our opponents will come out.
    4. Vitaly gusin
      Vitaly gusin April 30 2021 14: 13
      +4
      Quote: Dmitry Makarov
      The production of the ancient F-15 was revived due to the collapse of the F-35 program,

      There are fingers and toes on the hands and feet, and there, and there are 10 of them and you want to compare them, these are two different planes that perform completely different tasks. Read, there is a lot of information in the media.
  5. Sahalinets
    Sahalinets April 30 2021 10: 34
    +13
    It seems to me that the author has every chance of winning the prize of the most tongue-tied scribbler on the Russian Internet. And on this site he is out of competition.
    1. English tarantas
      English tarantas April 30 2021 21: 01
      +4
      This is how I write reports on practice. There is a minimum of information, but at every opportunity to insert a long phrase or name, I am happy to do it. True, then it is impossible to read, and the useful information of the sheet is 3, and not disclosed. Ryabov, even though he began to copy paragraphs less often, at least you can read it, this does not matter
  6. Niko
    Niko April 30 2021 10: 44
    +9
    The conclusion about the "complete incompetence" of overseas colleagues is simply a masterpiece. I just want to ask the author: why do they have ALL for anything more, better, and on time. Maybe they are not so "not competent?" Maybe it's not a babin?
    1. MinskFox
      MinskFox April 30 2021 10: 47
      -5
      Grab an ICBM) And don't generalize.
      1. Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg)
        Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg) April 30 2021 16: 53
        -1
        What's wrong with the ICBM? Have you already learned how to change fuel for Topols or will you be cutting the 4th analogue of the minuteman?
        1. MinskFox
          MinskFox April 30 2021 23: 51
          +1
          Is there a need to change fuel? Please tell us why?
          1. Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg)
            Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg) 1 May 2021 00: 02
            -1
            Please tell us why?

            ICBMs and, especially, the infrastructure for them - things are far from free. Further figure it out?
            1. MinskFox
              MinskFox 1 May 2021 00: 34
              +1
              Oh, what are you saying, tell me what infrastructure for a poplar? Maybe a garage and a tractor? Poplar rocket of the 80s, with the development of the US missile defense system, they began to be replaced by missiles that could more reliably break through it. You cannot achieve this by replacing the fuel. This is the first, the second - whether such a task was set, I don't think this is a great engineering problem, the third, but let's not build new missiles, and we will close the Votkinsk plant, we will stop financing MIT, this is not a free pleasure, why are they needed at all, and then when it will be necessary to build rockets, Gazprom or Rosneft, for example. Here they are earning. From the above, understand why I asked the question? And your phrase about the fact that a poplar is an analogue of a minitman gives you a serious specialist on Strategic Missile Forces.
    2. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik April 30 2021 11: 23
      +3
      Quote: Niko
      Maybe they are not so "not competent?" Maybe it's not a babin?

      A 1v1 battle is only possible during exercises. Group tactics are always considered. In them, most NATO fighters do not provide for radiation work at all.
      These stations are capable of locating new versions of the US "Needles" at a distance of 370-400 km, capturing them for "precise auto-tracking" from 320-290 km.
      After all, this means that Sushki are also "visible" at this distance.
      In NATO, one of the tactics of four groups of fighters: strike, demonstration, cover and build up efforts (reserve). The first will be seen a demonstration group, from the task of luring and substituting the enemy fighters, so they will be "shining", and then the "game" already begins.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  7. vvvjak
    vvvjak April 30 2021 10: 46
    +1
    with final interceptions or by means of an ultra-long-range airborne missile system R-37M

    This assumption causes some skepticism.
  8. Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock April 30 2021 10: 52
    +7
    It was here that our overseas "colleagues" demonstrated their utter incompetence.

    From attached, so attached.
    Well done.
    And we are good fellows who mastered this opus entirely.
    In general, of course, I remember the unforgettable Shurik,
    "When you speak, you get the impression that you are delusional."
  9. Undecim
    Undecim April 30 2021 12: 58
    +11
    Thus, the use of AN / APG-82 (V) AFAR radars in the electronic architecture of 1 aperture of 1500 transmit-receive modules

    The aperture cannot consist of transmit-receive modules (TPM). !!!
    Aperture Aeis a spatial characteristic of a radio system, an indicator of how effective an antenna is at receiving electromagnetic radiation power.
  10. Zaits
    Zaits April 30 2021 13: 09
    +5
    So I'm wondering how much Damantsev himself understands what he writes about?

    In the AFAR / PFAR part, he has some kind of porridge. Probably due to the difficulty in translating the English technical text. For some highly specialized topics, this is not so easy. But Damantsev looks very clever in serving.
    We still need to see what the English-speaking people actually write about the APG-82 (V) 1.
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 1 May 2021 06: 57
      +4
      Quote: Zaits
      So I'm wondering how much Damantsev himself understands what he writes about?

      I'm sure sane readers know the answer to this question ... wink Eugene was repeatedly accused of ignorance of elementary things. negative
      Earlier, Damantsev tried to enter into skirmishes with readers, but after he had been dunked a couple of times in what he had written, he stopped being so substituted. Moreover, he removed his own most illiterate and incriminating comments. Staff writers have this option.
    2. yehat2
      yehat2 4 May 2021 16: 11
      -1
      judging by the strain of stitching his thoughts together, he does not understand what he is writing about.
      copied, adjusted as allowed 8 school classes and that's it.
  11. Krasnodar
    Krasnodar April 30 2021 13: 42
    +6
    Explanation:
    Amers have a prototype of the upgraded F-15, which has been submitted for testing.
    Performance characteristics - so be it, but in some places better than the Russian Sushki, which are in service with the Aerospace Forces.
    But we are not standing still, we have planned to modernize our Su-thirties, and then the amersky minced meat should not be about anything.
    But if amers made another upgrade, our plans would be useless fellow
    Perhaps such reasoning is interesting for guys who are deep in the topic.
    I summarize for a simple person, like me, for example, a layman:
    The Americans are testing what will surpass what is currently in service with us, and we have plans on how to change the situation in our favor.
    A curtain soldier
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik April 30 2021 16: 03
      +2
      Not really. Just different fighters created for different tactics, with different technical capabilities.
      1. Krasnodar
        Krasnodar April 30 2021 16: 16
        +2
        What you write is known. I made a short retelling of Damantsev
  12. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat April 30 2021 15: 43
    -8
    And no one takes into account that the characteristics of mattress products, as a rule, are overstated for advertising purposes, and the characteristics of our products are understated for secrecy reasons. Moreover, the comparison of export and "own" modifications of aircraft and equipment in our country is constantly not in favor of export models. So I doubt everything is so "sad". It is enough to take into account that the mattresses "swallowed dust" many times, trying to catch up even with our export samples. I'm not even talking about the situation in the air defense, where the radar is also not for furniture. laughing
  13. ximkim
    ximkim April 30 2021 19: 00
    0
    Fighters from the 4th to the 5th generation are more of a demonstration of technology.
    So far, no manufacturer can claim that our fighter poses a threat to the enemy in the sky, and our fighter is not afraid of enemy attacks
  14. mmaxx
    mmaxx 1 May 2021 06: 26
    +4
    It is strange that all of a sudden the Americans have become "incompetent." The F-15 is an excellent aircraft and will remain so for a long time to come.
  15. alexey alexeyev_2
    alexey alexeyev_2 1 May 2021 07: 51
    +2
    I understand that they are inferior to ours ..
  16. bars1
    bars1 1 May 2021 16: 10
    +2
    If someone would tell the Americans in 2005 that they would start producing F-2021s for their Air Force again in 15, then he would be considered crazy. And now they have come up with a theoretical basis for the resumption of the F-15 ...
  17. Peaceful SEO
    Peaceful SEO 1 May 2021 21: 59
    +1
    Eh Damantsev ... When will the list of authors be added to the VO? So that this nonsense does not even appear
  18. And Us Rat
    And Us Rat 2 May 2021 01: 09
    0
    The main problem of analysts from Damantsev is that all the comparisons he simulates are absolutely divorced from the overall strategic picture. It compares data in an "isolated lab environment", one-on-one in an open field. In reality, however, there is a chance of a confrontation situation in such conditions, on the verge of a statistical error. Like hand-to-hand combat of two special forces who "fell in love" with a machine gun, grenades, a pistol, a knife and a shovel.
  19. ironic
    ironic 2 May 2021 15: 41
    0
    Neighing at the confidence that giving energy to the obsolete PFAR and it would turn out to be better than the modern AFAR.
  20. silver_roman
    silver_roman 2 May 2021 21: 02
    0
    That is, the United States, being the world leader in the production of AFAR, has made its new best radar, which sees our aircraft at a distance of 165 km, and we are making radars that can see the American needles at 350 ki? doesn't that sound crazy?
    1. ironic
      ironic 3 May 2021 00: 44
      0
      In general, if we compare the total radiation power along the normal to the radar canvas, then it turns out that they should see each other from approximately the same distance, if there was the same EPR and EW did not exist as a species. But at an angle, everything begins to change dramatically, as well as when jamming.
      1. Herman 4223
        Herman 4223 5 May 2021 15: 15
        +1
        At what angle does it change and what?
        1. ironic
          ironic 5 May 2021 18: 16
          +2
          At any, the larger the angle, the more PFAR loses. Signal energy. wink
          1. Herman 4223
            Herman 4223 5 May 2021 18: 29
            0
            I am certainly not an expert, but how does it work? By what means?
            1. ironic
              ironic 5 May 2021 23: 21
              0
              Not by itself, but due to a fundamentally different approach to digital signal processing, the capabilities of which are provided due to the reception and transmission of signals of different angular directions.
              1. Herman 4223
                Herman 4223 6 May 2021 07: 22
                +1
                And why does this fundamentally different approach not work in the forward direction, but only at an angle? And why won't it work the same way in pfar?
                1. ironic
                  ironic 6 May 2021 11: 45
                  +1
                  Because the PFAR has one receiver and one transmitter, because along the normal to the antenna there is no fundamental difference ten times once, or once ten times, for the formation of the broadcast signal and for processing the received one, and if the enemy does not use electronic warfare and if he does not try to jam the enemy himself.
                  1. Herman 4223
                    Herman 4223 6 May 2021 12: 31
                    0
                    It is a little difficult to understand from your answer why this magical force stops working when the beam is emitted along the normal.
                    And if the PFAR has one transmitter but many receivers? After all, we are talking about processing the return signal, do I understand correctly?
                    1. ironic
                      ironic 6 May 2021 13: 18
                      0
                      On the contrary, not along the normal. PFAR has one transmitter and one receiver. AFAR theoretically as many as it has lattice cells.
                      1. Herman 4223
                        Herman 4223 6 May 2021 13: 58
                        0
                        The phased array has one transmitter. + Many transmit and receive antennas. Each of which has a phase shifter. Therefore, the array is phased. A PAR can form a beam of any shape and in any direction or several directions. Including passive. The receiver can be either one or separately for each antenna.
                      2. ironic
                        ironic 9 May 2021 16: 03
                        0
                        PFAR has one transmitter and one receiver, for multiple antennas, with digital control of phase shifters on more modern models. AFAR has a transmitter and a receiver for each antenna, with full digitization of each signal at the input, a DAC at the output and digital processing and signal manipulation. Therefore, AFAR in this very "any" is superior to PFAR in all respects, except for price and complexity (including service).
                      3. Herman 4223
                        Herman 4223 9 May 2021 21: 17
                        0
                        What is the difference between digital control on passive lattices?
                      4. ironic
                        ironic 10 May 2021 14: 56
                        0
                        Digital AFAR works on a different principle. There, analog signals are only directly on the array antennas themselves (to the input or output). There are no phase shifters in general, as such. Everything already ready in digital goes to the DAC and to the output or analog reception to the ADC and for processing.
                      5. Herman 4223
                        Herman 4223 10 May 2021 23: 40
                        0
                        All clear. You are talking about digital antenna arrays. smart antenna. There really are no phase shifters. An interesting thing about them is little written for some reason. But they are not called headlights or afar. However, headlights or afar also have digital control of antenna elements. For example, digital control of phase shifters and amplifiers. Both can have an ADC to process the received signal.
                      6. ironic
                        ironic 11 May 2021 00: 37
                        0
                        They are called digital AFARs. They represent the generation of radars that will wage wars in the near future. PFAR yes have digital circuits to control the phase shifters, but this cannot be compared with the fully digital signal processing system that exists in the digital AFAR system. The capabilities are not comparable and scalability is just fundamentally at different levels.
                      7. Herman 4223
                        Herman 4223 11 May 2021 07: 28
                        0
                        No, they are called the CAR. (Digital Antenna Array.) CAR is currently not available on any fighter radar. But for a very long time, for about twenty years, they have been used in civilian life.
                        At the digitized AFAR, digital control is the same as for the headlights by phase shifters and signal amplifiers. On receiving signals, if you take for example a snow leopard, it works the same way as an active headlight. There is an ADC. Lots of receivers in pfar are not fantastic either. CARs have an advantage over headlights, but they are not yet available, probably because they are a little more complicated and more expensive.
                      8. 3danimal
                        3danimal 11 May 2021 08: 00
                        +1
                        The CAR S1850M is on the British Daring EVs. Not in the size of an airborne radar, of course, but it has been produced since 2001 ..
                      9. Herman 4223
                        Herman 4223 11 May 2021 10: 02
                        0
                        Well, you can praise the British. The technology is not new. If you read history, such radars have been developed since the 60s. Even in the USSR, there were different prototypes, in civilian life such radars have been used for more than twenty years. But the military is not rapidly adopting this technology. As I understand it, the increase in characteristics does not cover additional costs. Otherwise, AFAR would have turned into the last century twenty years ago. And in the future, too, unlikely, already new systems are on the way: quantum, radio-optical.
  • Conjurer
    Conjurer 9 May 2021 15: 22
    +2
    Quote: ironic
    the possibilities of which are provided due to the reception and transmission of signals of different angular directions.

    Funny)) How is this possible? In the sense of receiving and transmitting signals of different angular directions. Can you imagine the principle of operation of the antenna array?
    1. ironic
      ironic 9 May 2021 16: 05
      -1
      Well, as if the network contains a lot of works from popular science to deeply research. Not hard to read ...
      1. Conjurer
        Conjurer 10 May 2021 15: 48
        +2
        Check out it doesn't hurt. A PAR is an antenna system consisting of a number of independent antennas with a wide (in the sense of not narrow) directivity. A narrow beam is formed due to the effect of interference (i.e., mutual superposition) of the radiation of these most independent antennas, and the directionality of this narrow beam is controlled by the phase shift of the radiation in each of the independent antennas included in this antenna system. That is why it is called the Phased Antenna Array.
        Therefore, the phrase - "due to a fundamentally different approach to digital signal processing, the capabilities of which are provided due to the reception and transmission of signals of different angular directions." about AFAR in comparison with PFAR - this is a misunderstanding of the principle of operation of the PAR.
        1. ironic
          ironic 10 May 2021 17: 48
          0
          I am familiar with how the direction of the maximum power of the beam is formed due to the use of phase shifters and how the front angle changes, the beam normal to this front is quite narrow, everything else can be called lateral, and backward the beam is even larger than the lateral ones. You have not written anything new to me now. I did not see a single contradiction. Digital AFAR may not use phase rotation at all. After all, each element of the antenna has its own receiver and transmitter, or rather, modern models use modules that already consist of both a receiver and a transmitter at the same time, and for each module or array of modules, the signal amplitude and frequency parameters will be digitally calculated, and the phase is simply mathematically analyzed for admission. And theoretically there can be a great variety of such rays and angular directions, depending on the number of modules and on the power of the system. Therefore, AFAR surpasses PFAR in capabilities at significant angles to the physical normal of the antenna web.
          If you understand this principle, why did you not write anything that indicates that what I wrote is incorrect?
  • Hexenmeister
    Hexenmeister 11 May 2021 11: 09
    0
    doesn't that sound crazy?
    Well, for all the time of discussion, no one even tried to give other figures for this radar. So, let's conclude that they are "close" to reality! smile
  • And Us Rat
    And Us Rat 3 May 2021 01: 07
    -2
    Quote: silver_roman
    That is, the United States, being the world leader in the production of AFAR, has made its new best radar, which sees our aircraft at a distance of 165 km, and we are making radars that can see the American needles at 350 ki? doesn't that sound crazy?

    Seeing and being able to aim weapons are two big differences. Look, radars of the meter range perfectly see stealths beyond 100500 km, but they cannot aim missiles.
    AFAR and PFAR are like comparing two color TVs, one produced in 2021, and the other in 1985 tube, it seems that the same program is shown, and the second one can even shine brighter ... But here is the text on the screen in 4k resolution read from a greater distance.
    If you add some more foolishness to the radar lamp, it will emit for a thousand kilometers, and even show something there (plus or minus bast shoes), but this will not add the resolution of the receiving lattice.
    1. Hexenmeister
      Hexenmeister 3 May 2021 12: 43
      +2
      Our and American fighter radars operate in the same range, so their detection and guidance capabilities will be the same. All the characteristics of the radar are determined by the signal used, and the ratio of the antenna dimensions to the wavelength, and not by the afar, elliptical, processor performance and the beauty of the displays in the cockpit.
      1. Herman 4223
        Herman 4223 5 May 2021 15: 29
        0
        Well, the signal strength also plays a role.
        1. Hexenmeister
          Hexenmeister 5 May 2021 15: 41
          +1
          мощность
          I agree, but it would be more correct to say from the signal energy. Energy, of course, depends on power, but other factors too.
      2. ironic
        ironic 5 May 2021 23: 54
        -1
        If you use different technologies, you won't. Digital beamforming gives the AFAR cardinal advantages over the PFAR in any mode of operation, except for the detection range of two aircraft flying straight towards each other, provided that the RCS is the same.
        1. Hexenmeister
          Hexenmeister 6 May 2021 10: 22
          +1
          Digital beamforming
          And what are these advantages ??? To form a clever DN for the synthetic aperture mode, so this is for ground targets, well, it will not affect the "quality" of air combat! What else???
          1. ironic
            ironic 6 May 2021 11: 31
            -1
            Just as your target in the air will be at a good angle to the normal to the antenna surface, there will also be that difference in its detection range compared to PFAR.
            1. Hexenmeister
              Hexenmeister 6 May 2021 11: 52
              +1
              With what fright? If the angle is 60 degrees, then only the geometry losses will be 2 times, and there is no way to get away from them, this is for any lattice, but the fact that for a real afar the losses at this angle will be conditionally 2.5, and for a usual 3, no will not play a role. So that non-uniformity in the detection range, depending on the angle to the normal, will be for all gratings.
              1. ironic
                ironic 6 May 2021 13: 27
                -1
                Everyone will have it, but the role is playing. If AFAR were an analog copy of PFAR, then yes, the difference would be at best 30% percent, and this is a theoretical maximum, and since AFAR is digital, the difference is very significant, and digitization of PFAR does not give practical advantages.
                1. Hexenmeister
                  Hexenmeister 6 May 2021 14: 09
                  0
                  since AFAR digital
                  What else is digital? Each AFAR transceiver module is an analog element, in which the attenuator and phase shifter are controlled by digital methods. A conventional phased array has only phase shifters, and their control is also digital. Plus, for both types of lattices, the control elements have a finite number of control states, which also imposes a limitation on the shape of the DN.
                  1. ironic
                    ironic 9 May 2021 15: 55
                    0
                    Yes, the receivers and transmitters themselves are analog, but then all the signals are digitized. Signal control and digital signal shaping are slightly different things, providing slightly different possibilities. And fully digital formation gives very great advantages, up to the impossibility of certain actions with the help of PFAR.
                    1. Hexenmeister
                      Hexenmeister 9 May 2021 19: 15
                      +1
                      Themselves then realized that they wrote ??? What's the difference how the signal is formed, if the signal is the same? The signal that the radar will study is determined by the master oscillator, and does not depend on the afarity. And ordinary PARs can study whatever they want !!! It seems to me that you have no idea what the fighter's radar should study in order to detect targets against the background of the underlying surface !!!
                      1. ironic
                        ironic 10 May 2021 15: 34
                        0
                        Yes, I understand, he is not the same. They can emit not what they like, but what can be applied to the emitters and what is possible with AFAR does not work with PFAR. I have a notion, of course I do not work and have not worked as a specialized specialist.
                      2. Hexenmeister
                        Hexenmeister 10 May 2021 17: 39
                        0
                        what is possible with AFAR does not work with PFAR
                        And what is it that can be emitted only by AFAR?
  • Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 4 May 2021 12: 43
    +1
    Quote: And Us Rat
    Seeing and being able to aim weapons are two big differences. Look, radars of the meter range perfectly see stealths beyond 100500 km, but they cannot aim missiles.

    What is this nonsense? If the locator sees the mark, aiming the rocket is a child's task. How is it even possible to see the mark and not be able to target? Explain, please.
    1. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 5 May 2021 15: 27
      -1
      The length of the receiving transmitting antenna must be a multiple of a quarter wavelength. It's as hard to fit into a small rocket as I guess. And there is a big error in hovering there.
    2. ironic
      ironic 6 May 2021 13: 30
      -1
      This is not nonsense. The locator sees that somewhere there, that is, and this is an airplane, not a rocket, at the point plus or minus the elephant floor. He cannot capture a target, accompany and transmit data to the missile guidance system.
      1. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 10 May 2021 11: 22
        0
        Do you understand what kind of game you are carrying?) What the locator SEES can always be filtered, cleaned, clarified. Or the locator just doesn't see it. "Somewhere there is something" is not a serif, this is chatter.
        1. ironic
          ironic 10 May 2021 13: 51
          0
          You are the one carrying the game. Not everything can be filtered, if there is nothing, and not everything can be clarified, if the inaccuracy is large. Over-the-horizon locators can see, but it is impossible to aim weapons according to this vision.
          1. Mikhail3
            Mikhail3 11 May 2021 09: 16
            0
            Well enough already) Or are you another bot? If there is something on the screen, you see nothing, nothing at all, and your statement that these locators are more sensitive than others is nonsense. This is an obstacle that needs to be removed, and forget about it, your locator does not see anything, but simply does not work well.
  • And Us Rat
    And Us Rat 3 May 2021 13: 09
    -1
    Quote: Hexenmeister
    Our and American fighter radars operate in the same range, so their detection and guidance capabilities will be the same. All the characteristics of the radar are determined by the signal used, and the ratio of the antenna dimensions to the wavelength, and not by the afar, elliptical, processor performance and the beauty of the displays in the cockpit.

    To assert this is like to assert that the effectiveness of a kerosene lamp and an electric flashlight with beam focusing is worth comparing solely by the brightness of the light.
    1. Hexenmeister
      Hexenmeister 3 May 2021 14: 11
      +1
      With you, too, everything is clear, the theory of radar, gratings and much more, passed by you in full.
  • And Us Rat
    And Us Rat 3 May 2021 14: 26
    -2
    Quote: Hexenmeister
    With you, too, everything is clear, the theory of radar, gratings and much more, passed by you in full.

    An arrogant statement from a person who deliberately ignores a number of nuances and aspects in the topic under discussion. Absolutely everything on this topic is freely available on the Internet, so I will allow myself to shy away from enlightening activities about elementary things. hi
    You can study the topic yourself, or continue to insist on your delusions, I don't care.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 4 May 2021 11: 39
    -1
    Checkmate!.......
  • Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 4 May 2021 12: 41
    0
    I read it like a song ... Just a triumph of analog technology in the mid-seventies of that century. Guys ... No analog tricks will give you a decisive advantage. Even though you build EVERYTHING that Soviet radiophysicists have invented, on the latest materials. The path to the future lies through DATA PROCESSING.
    Simply put, he will have a decisive advantage if his tactical analyzer of data from sources, including not only radar, but also optics, and even sound, will be more perfect. I understand. You didn't learn from that. All your knowledge and skills are in the past. Deep in the past, when Soviet titans, great physicists, leaders of science and the vanguard of mankind lived and worked. But this potential has been exhausted, this stage is over.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 4 May 2021 16: 09
    -1
    the author of the article pulls facts by the ears to his conclusions, like a cat for personal belongings.
    therefore, only a true sadist who is not afraid to rape his brain can read the article to the end.
  • Basarev
    Basarev 5 May 2021 14: 44
    -2
    AFAR, however, ours did not master.
  • Conjurer
    Conjurer 11 May 2021 13: 22
    +1
    Quote: ironic
    I am familiar with how the direction of the maximum power of the beam is formed due to the use of phase shifters and how the front angle changes, the beam normal to this front is quite narrow, everything else can be called lateral, and backward the beam is even larger than the lateral ones. You have not written anything new to me now. I did not see a single contradiction. Digital AFAR may not use phase rotation at all. After all, each element of the antenna has its own receiver and transmitter, or rather, modern models use modules that already consist of both a receiver and a transmitter at the same time, and for each module or array of modules, the signal amplitude and frequency parameters will be digitally calculated, and the phase is simply mathematically analyzed for admission. And theoretically there can be a great variety of such rays and angular directions, depending on the number of modules and on the power of the system. Therefore, AFAR surpasses PFAR in capabilities at significant angles to the physical normal of the antenna web.

    All these are phrases pulled from different sources, somewhat plausible, but all together they represent a mess, by which it is difficult to understand the degree of your understanding.
    For example, the
    "... everything else can be called lateral, and the backward beam is even larger than the lateral ones." Where did the beam come back from? Through a reflector, or what?
    "... Digital AFAR may not use phase rotation at all. After all, each antenna element has its own receiver and transmitter, or rather, modern models use modules that already consist of both a receiver and a transmitter at the same time and each module or array of modules signal parameters in amplitude and frequency will be issued digitally calculated ... "The set of messages in the phrase is correct, but you have an understanding of the essence? The fact that the AFAR generates signals in each module independently, but the way of forming the beam is exactly the same as that of the PFAR - interference in space. Consequently, the phase shifts are immediately embedded in the signal, therefore phase shifters are not needed.
    "... and the phase is simply mathematically analyzed at the reception." Steam up the dust to swallow. If this were possible, you would immediately get a three-dimensional picture of the distribution of objects in space without any scanning by the beam. Americans should be yelling about such a landmark achievement at every corner, but so far nothing has been heard.
    "... And theoretically there can be a great variety of such rays and angular directions, depending on the number of modules and on the power of the system ..." And again a plausible statement. But these rays are formed by more than one module, as the context suggests, by a group of modules according to the same principle of interference. And it can be any PAR, even AFAR, even PFAR.
    "... Therefore, AFAR surpasses PFAR in capabilities at significant angles to the physical normal of the antenna canvas .." This, as I understand it, is from myself, that is, unfounded. I will disappoint. The fact is that the principle of beam formation for these antennas is the same, therefore, in this parameter, their capabilities are also practically the same.