Military Review

Experts: UAV "Okhotnik" can be used as an interceptor of an aviation gateway for data exchange between F-22 and F-35

71

The other day, "Military Review" reported that the United States for the first time in the air tested a data exchange system between two fifth-generation fighters of the US Air Force - F-22 and F-35. At the same time, the communication gateway was on board the U-2S spy plane. At the same time, the American Air Force said that now the F-22 and F-35 will be able to participate in joint operations, which was previously impossible due to the lack of a single protocol for receiving and transmitting information. Subsequently, they plan to use an unmanned aerial vehicle as a "gateway".


In connection with the tests of the data exchange system, in which the presence of a third aircraft is mandatory - in this case U-2, experts express doubts about the effectiveness of this kind of operation. In particular, attention is drawn to the vulnerability of this kind of system due to the fact that enemy fighters as a target will only need to select the "airlock" - the same U-2S aircraft.

Military experts note that Russia, which the United States calls an "existential enemy", may well begin to "hunt" for the same "airlock" in the event of a real combat operation in the air. Moreover, the term "hunt" in this case refers to the newest Russian attack drone S-70 "Okhotnik", which, as previously reported, is also capable of acting as an interceptor.

The service ceiling of the American U-2S is about 21,5 km, the service ceiling of the Russian S-70 Okhotnik is about 18 km (according to data from open sources). If American aviation the gateway will not be constantly at its maximum height for itself, then it can really become a target for the Russian strike interceptor drone. Although at the maximum altitude it may well be "reached" by the Russian UAV's air-to-air missiles.

In such a situation, an interesting moment arises. Either the US Air Force F-22 and F-35 fighters participating in the operation will have to constantly be distracted by covering the airlock - U-2S, or at least one more aircraft will have to be connected to the operation, whose tasks will include directly covering the reconnaissance aircraft, which is being converted into the Air Force USA into a flying "exchanger" of information.

In this regard, in the United States itself, it is noted that a flying manned airlock is far from the best idea for a joint operation with the participation of fifth generation fighters. Firstly, it is unsafe, since the damage and even more the destruction of the U-2 puts an end to the effectiveness of the joint combat mission of the F-35 and F-22. Secondly, it is also a super-expensive "pleasure".
71 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 4 May 2021 12: 50
    +13
    Secondly, it is also a super-expensive "pleasure".
    We need to diversify the business, let there be not only gateways, but also blackjack. Lockheed with blackjack and gateways! laughing
    1. For example
      For example 4 May 2021 14: 19
      +2
      Gateways, docks ...
      If they lock, then the invisibility is down the drain. wink
      1. Grandfather
        Grandfather 4 May 2021 16: 41
        0
        but at least do something ...
        1. mole
          mole 4 May 2021 19: 12
          0
          Quote: Dead Day
          but at least do something ...

          Better to do nothing, no locks, no docks, no planes. wink
  2. paul3390
    paul3390 4 May 2021 12: 52
    +13
    In general, I cannot understand in any way - HOW could it be possible to pile two fighters of the fifth generation type, which absolutely do not agree with each other according to the protocols ?? And - why is a third plane absolutely necessary for the link - is the equipment really so bulky that it cannot be crammed onto the sides themselves? Some kind of crap ..
    1. alexey sidykin
      alexey sidykin 4 May 2021 13: 01
      +4
      Why be surprised? Not only we know how to cut the budget
      1. Victor Tsenin
        Victor Tsenin 4 May 2021 17: 00
        +2
        Already somewhere there was such a controversy, he wrote, compared with corruption, answers and cuts there, we are only modest students. It is clear that this is bad, but nevertheless)
    2. alexey sidykin
      alexey sidykin 4 May 2021 13: 04
      0
      No, it's just that the operating systems of both aircraft do not communicate with each other, for this we had to come up with an "adapter"
      1. paul3390
        paul3390 4 May 2021 13: 08
        +7
        And what - in order to connect, say, Windows with Linux, I certainly need a third computer ?? what
      2. KCA
        KCA 4 May 2021 14: 33
        +6
        There is such a standard for the Ethernet network, I know an institution where, in a single network, and even with access to the Internet, under this standard, well, so different PCs, workstations, computers are combined that I just can't believe it, so, from memory - VAX, SUN, Convex, Digital , PCs from PC compatible (i8086) to the most fashionable ones, operating systems from Win 3.1 to 10 and all kinds of UNIX versions, this whole heterogeneous company works stably, but do you know the size of the gateways that unite all this? Approximately 70x50x10cm, there are about 10 users in the network, there are, of course, more than a dozen gateways, but you don't need to launch an airplane to communicate with each other
        1. Tavrik
          Tavrik 4 May 2021 15: 30
          +5
          Above Ethernet, there is still a whole stack of TCP \ IP exchange protocols, which is completely identical for either Windows or Linux. Most likely, the Americans have created a problem of interfacing application software, not exchange protocols.
    3. Intruder
      Intruder 4 May 2021 13: 06
      0
      HOW was it possible to pile two fifth-generation fighters that are absolutely inconsistent with each other according to the protocols ?? And - why is a third plane absolutely necessary for the link - is the equipment really so bulky that it cannot be crammed onto the sides themselves? Some kind of crap ..
      They increase the range of a tactical decentralized network without using a satellite segment, otherwise if the orbital inspectors (RF / China) "knock down" or block / damage repeaters in orbits, then alas, it will not be good for the F-22 and F-35, far from their home shores and other things in flight! I already wrote earlier that relaying data is a necessary thing, especially in terms of "unmanned vehicles" and all sorts of newfangled trends, such as: "Combat Cloud"! yes Then why invent the modernization of the F-ok, if there is already a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft, the time-tested U-2 ??? and they will cover it in the air from drone UAVs and with MD missiles, just that F-22, and for ground-based air defense systems, the F-35 will successfully work with its on-board weapons complex, there are a lot of serial products for this inside ...
      1. Andrey Korotkov
        Andrey Korotkov 4 May 2021 13: 23
        +2
        hi Denis, well, there are, well, heaps of repeaters in different orbits, cheaper, more expensive, but in different, or all the same we are talking about ,, local ,, conflicts request
        1. Intruder
          Intruder 4 May 2021 14: 52
          -1
          well, there are, heaps, repeaters in different orbits, cheaper, more expensive, but on different
          there are, but firstly: they are expensive, plus their resources are there, not for tens of years, by the way .., and secondly: it is local orbital complexes with a low budget for operations that use expensive pleasure (the Yankees know how to count their money and expenses), for all sorts of Ukraine / Syria and Tatamstan ..., plus U-2 is quite a lot, but there is no sense in dispose of them yet, these birds will still serve their country, not one year !?
          1. Andrey Korotkov
            Andrey Korotkov 4 May 2021 15: 05
            +1
            Quote: Intruder
            well, there are, heaps, repeaters in different orbits, cheaper, more expensive, but on different
            there are, but firstly: they are expensive, plus their resources are there, not for tens of years, by the way .., and secondly: it is local orbital complexes with a low budget for operations that use expensive pleasure (the Yankees know how to count their money and expenses), for all sorts of Ukraine / Syria and Tatamstan ..., plus U-2 is quite a lot, but there is no sense in dispose of them yet, these birds will still serve their country, not one year !?

            My opinion - this is for future local conflicts, not for a war with ,, superpowers ,, damn idea, development ,,,, engine ,, local, or even not there, but progress hi
            1. Intruder
              Intruder 4 May 2021 15: 19
              -1
              My opinion - this is for future local conflicts, not for a war with ,, superpowers ,, damn idea, development ,,,, engine ,, local, or even not there, but progress
              Basically, for conflicts of low and medium tension, and for superpowers, there are a bunch of other ways to push through their political "wishes" and desires for world domination in a multipolar world (where you don’t spit, then partners, or even not very ... partners) without entering the hot phase of the relationship! winked That's why they are super-powers ... (sorry, it turned out to be butter-oil ...) !? laughing
              1. Andrey Korotkov
                Andrey Korotkov 4 May 2021 15: 48
                +1
                Quote: Intruder
                My opinion - this is for future local conflicts, not for a war with ,, superpowers ,, damn idea, development ,,,, engine ,, local, or even not there, but progress
                Basically, for conflicts of low and medium tension, and for superpowers, there are a bunch of other ways to push through their political "wishes" and desires for world domination in a multipolar world (where you don’t spit, then partners, or even not very ... partners) without entering the hot phase of the relationship! winked That's why they are super-powers ... (sorry, it turned out to be butter-oil ...) !? laughing

                You, You are right, you didn’t do it - but oooh right hi
            2. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 4 May 2021 15: 44
              +1
              No, this is specifically for high intensity wars. A la 1 and 2 wars with Iraq. 1 airplane gateway provides communication along the front for 600-800 km. Iran from north to south and west to east along ~ 1400 km. those. need 4 pieces to cover all Iran.
              Naturally, they will not be on the U-2 in the series, they will be placed on the UAV. Most recently, this system was tested on the XQ-58, and can be put on the RQ-4 and on the new UAVs of the MQ-25 type.
              1. Souchastnik
                Souchastnik 5 May 2021 06: 54
                0
                Naturally, they will not be on the U-2 in the series, they will be placed on the UAV.

                And what prevents the U-2 unmanned from performing? Hang it on the ceiling and let it hang and work.
          2. KCA
            KCA 4 May 2021 15: 45
            +2
            The resources of satellites in high orbits, like geostationary ones at 37 km, just dozens of years, they are short-lived in low orbits, where there is still an atmosphere, it is not just that they put RITEGs on reconnaissance satellites, solar batteries cannot be deployed, otherwise the service life will not last up to a month , will slow down and fall
            1. Intruder
              Intruder 4 May 2021 16: 33
              -2
              The resources of satellites in high orbits, like geostationary ones at 37 km, just dozens of years, they are short-lived in low orbits, where there is still an atmosphere, it is not just that they put RITEGs on reconnaissance satellites, solar batteries cannot be deployed, otherwise the service life will not last up to a month , will slow down and fall
              I'm talking about low-orbitals and not only meant, but they put RTGs in order to provide heat balance, not only have energy ... solar ones not only slow down, but also degrade and surprisingly do not always have maximum efficiency if they go into the shadows behind the ball , plus the positioning system is still needed by the panels, and this is also onboard energy costs, and they are surprisingly visible in the optical range, from orbit ... and so low visibility with RITEG is provided against the background of radiation noise from space and atmosphere, more precisely the ionosphere of the ball ! Yes, and in high geosynchronous orbits, it is not always possible to reach with a high bandwidth of the radio channel, not to every soft point of this world, and communication must be kept in flight constantly and locally, where necessary, plus the meteorological conditions of the disturbed atmosphere, they still make adjustments and there clearly not 64 kbps. necessary for in-flight communications and other things !?
    4. alexey sidykin
      alexey sidykin 4 May 2021 13: 07
      -5
      How, how, not only we know how to cut the budget.
    5. NDR-791
      NDR-791 4 May 2021 13: 15
      +3
      Quote: paul3390
      HOW was it possible to pile two fifth-generation fighters that are absolutely inconsistent with each other according to the protocols ??

      And because each marfushka has its own show-off. And they still haven’t thought about the unification of the issued tasks. And for the best, let them squirm now. We also once had this - at the dawn of rocketry, each design bureau issued products with its own connectors and its own power supply parameters. And putting it together was not ice at all. Then Korolev built everyone in one movement and everything became "as it should". But this then, we have Korolev.... And let them indulge in themselves ... For such a rarity as U-2, we have reserved the S-75, it is customary for him, it is not expensive for us.
      1. Tavrik
        Tavrik 4 May 2021 15: 32
        +1
        For unification, Korolev is needed, whom everyone will respect and obey and who will promote the interests of the business, and not of a particular company.
    6. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 4 May 2021 13: 18
      0
      Quote: paul3390
      I can’t understand at all

      Because the articles give half of the information.
      1. The F-22 was designed and built in the 80-90s, under the requirements of the Cold War. The F-35 was already made in the 21st century, according to modern requirements. Over the decades, technology has made a breakthrough, a digital revolution has occurred. In fact, the F-22 and 35 are completely different aircraft, created for different architectures.
      It is stupid and sometimes impossible to put the technologies of the last century on a new aircraft. Retrofitting the F-22 is very expensive and inefficient. In fact, the entire aircraft needs to be redesigned, and its replacement is on the way. Communication systems are just the tip of the iceberg.

      2. It is not only a link between 2 types of fighters, it is a system that links all participants in combined arms combat in real time. Those. on their displays, the commander of an artillery battalion, a ship, fighter pilots, central command, etc., sees the same thing. Depending on the target and effectiveness, it is chosen how to hit the target with a projectile, tomahawk or aerial bomb.
      It unites all new, old and promising communication systems.
      Flying communication hub and server. The U-2 is a test vehicle, in the future this system will be on the UAV.
    7. Kaman
      Kaman 4 May 2021 13: 26
      .
      It would be more correct to replace the outdated communication equipment with the F-22. In general, if the F-22 is equipped with avionics from the F-35, then no one will create an aircraft equal to it in the next 20 years.
    8. bar
      bar 4 May 2021 13: 37
      +2
      Quote: paul3390
      In general, I cannot understand in any way - HOW could it be possible to pile two fighters of the fifth generation type, which absolutely do not agree with each other according to the protocols ??

      Apparently, the specifics of the American military-industrial complex, when there is no single developer, contests / tenders are announced for each topic, and each product is developed by a separate team, which may have never been involved in such a thing, and most likely will not continue after the completion of the project. And the next one who will nag this topic may again be nagging it from scratch, since there will be problems with patents and intellectual property.
      It's good to be a rich country printing bucks.
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 4 May 2021 13: 42
        +2
        Quote: bar
        when there is no single developer

        The F-22 and 35 were made by one of the leading developers of Lockheed Martin.
        1. bar
          bar 4 May 2021 13: 53
          +1
          It was ordered at different times and by different people. What we ordered is what we got. It was not part of the lockheed function to build a long-term strategy for the development of aviation, just another one-time order, just a business. And it’s not a fact that if there’s another tender, they will win it again. So there is no point in bothering with what they don't pay for. Loot was cut down and dumped until the next project, if any. According to the principle "if we restrain ourselves, we'll figure it out." Here schaz and understand.
          They have the same problems with astronautics. Once there was Saturn-5, and then our engines began to buy ...
      2. Intruder
        Intruder 4 May 2021 14: 57
        -2
        And the next one who will nag this topic may again be nagging it from scratch, since there will be problems with patents and intellectual property.
        It's good to be a rich country printing bucks.
        In general, it is good to be rich / rich, only without harmful fanaticism in money and their zeros in the account. bully , only there is a bad thing - you or the country, everyone starts to envy, somehow surprisingly sharply .., but here, the other side of money is already ... wink !
      3. Souchastnik
        Souchastnik 5 May 2021 07: 02
        0
        Apparently, the specificity of the American military-industrial complex affects

        This is not only the specifics of the American military-industrial complex. Ours also has a number of problems ...
    9. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 4 May 2021 15: 32
      +3
      "could it be possible to pile two fifth-generation fighters, absolutely inconsistent with each other according to the protocols ??" ///
      ---
      They were sculpted with a difference of over 20 years. And the software and hardware of computers is changing much faster.
      On the F-22, they did not dare to use an open architecture. All chips are hardwired.
      And on the F-35 - open architecture. It can be upgraded in half an hour from a laptop.
    10. ABC-schütze
      ABC-schütze 5 May 2021 12: 58
      0
      Well, if you consider them simply as "aircraft" of the 5th generation, then you are right. And if we consider them as multifunctional links of the shock information system, then most likely you are not very right ... After all, the Raptor, in this case, can be not only a "hub" -node that distributes tasks and carries out information exchange with "subordinate" elements of the "air link" (strikes against the "tasks" of the F-35), only the "air" network of the network. But also a "hub" that synchronously conducts information exchange with network elements located in other environments. In marine, terrestrial, space, etc ...
  3. Andrey Korotkov
    Andrey Korotkov 4 May 2021 12: 57
    +2
    Twenty-first century, technology damn it, it seems that everything is clear on the news (but ... why the word gateway?)
    1. alexey sidykin
      alexey sidykin 4 May 2021 13: 06
      +4
      The most interesting thing is, wasn’t it easier to make them interact with each other without this "gateway" or the system is so "cumbersome" that it cannot be altered or completed?
      1. Andrey Korotkov
        Andrey Korotkov 4 May 2021 13: 16
        0
        Quote: Alexey Sedykin
        The most interesting thing is, wasn’t it easier to make them interact with each other without this "gateway" or the system is so "cumbersome" that it cannot be altered or completed?

        good A global gateway - a node between different networks, network - you need the help of a system administrator to fully control traffic. And I asked the same question - zaluzhniki are stupid? create new planes without reference to each other request
        1. Cowbra
          Cowbra 4 May 2021 13: 48
          -2
          Quote: Andrey Korotkov
          create new planes without reference to each other

          You are just like a child. Look - a connection has been created for the F-22, developed with a squeal "nikhdevmire", sawed off a lot of evergreens from the budget ... F-35 has already been delivered ?!
          1. Andrey Korotkov
            Andrey Korotkov 4 May 2021 14: 01
            0
            Quote: Cowbra
            Quote: Andrey Korotkov
            create new planes without reference to each other

            You are just like a child. Look - a connection has been created for the F-22, developed with a squeal "nikhdevmire", sawed off a lot of evergreens from the budget ... F-35 has already been delivered ?!

            hi I remember of course about ,, cuts ,, here and there, I want to wait for the opinion of Denis (whom I respect for knowledge, and with whom I agree to argue ~
            often he is right) below-
            Quote: Intruder
            HOW was it possible to pile two fifth-generation fighters that are absolutely inconsistent with each other according to the protocols ?? And - why is a third plane absolutely necessary for the link - is the equipment really so bulky that it cannot be crammed onto the sides themselves? Some kind of crap ..
            They increase the range of a tactical decentralized network without using a satellite segment, otherwise if the orbital inspectors (RF / China) "knock down" or block / damage repeaters in orbits, then alas, it will not be good for the F-22 and F-35, far from their home shores and other things in flight! I already wrote earlier that relaying data is a necessary thing, especially in terms of "unmanned vehicles" and all sorts of newfangled trends, such as: "Combat Cloud"! yes Then why invent the modernization of the F-ok, if there is already a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft, the time-tested U-2 ??? and they will cover it in the air from drone UAVs and with MD missiles, just that F-22, and for ground-based air defense systems, the F-35 will successfully work with its on-board weapons complex, there are a lot of serial products for this inside ...
      2. Snail N9
        Snail N9 4 May 2021 13: 16
        +1
        What "Hunter"? Which exists as a "demo"? winked
        1. Andrey Korotkov
          Andrey Korotkov 4 May 2021 13: 38
          0
          Quote: Snail N9
          What "Hunter"? Which exists as a "demo"? winked

          I also have a demonstration sample hanging in my house, I didn’t let it down a couple of times, the Hunter on trials, the USA is trying to look for a blocking of its use already now
        2. Rzzz
          Rzzz 4 May 2021 13: 58
          +6
          Yeah, he is. The key point in the title of the article "CAN be used. "Maybe or maybe not. Or maybe fly to the moon.
      3. Tavrik
        Tavrik 4 May 2021 15: 40
        +3
        Imagine that there are "hundreds" of "old" products, and we begin to make "new" ones with innovative technologies. How to pair? There are three options:
        1. Upgrade all old products for new ones. It is very expensive, it takes a long time and it is not a fact that the new one will work great right away.
        2. To implant "old" exchange protocols and something else there into new products. This burdens new products with obviously old hardware and (or) software, which sooner or later will be superfluous.
        3. Make some kind of gateway for pairing "old" and "new", which will be needed only until the time when all old products are either written off or upgraded.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 4 May 2021 15: 48
          +3
          4. While the “old” is being written off, the “new” turns into the “old” and the “new new” appears. Therefore, the option with a gateway remains the only correct one.
  4. rocket757
    rocket757 4 May 2021 13: 11
    0
    Experts: UAV "Okhotnik" can be used as an interceptor of an aviation gateway for data exchange between F-22 and F-35
    ... How to hang it will ask, in advance, on something that is not yet completely ready .... not comme il faut.
  5. Borz
    Borz 4 May 2021 13: 14
    0
    For every sage, quite simplicity
  6. Cowbra
    Cowbra 4 May 2021 13: 32
    -4
    These Russians have gone completely limp. PentaNog, in the sweat of his brow, drives the progress of the chainsaw, and they will drink vodka with a bear and come up with something again, and start over!
    PiSi: how much you can already scoff at the "fat drystun"! laughing
  7. Bez 310
    Bez 310 4 May 2021 13: 46
    -1
    When will this fun end - coming up with a destination for a non-existent drone? Maybe we need to make this drone first?
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 4 May 2021 13: 51
      0
      In general, it is more logical to proceed from the need, requirements and tactics. From them to create the necessary weapons and equipment. And not vice versa, make a copy of the X-47B, and then come up with why you need it.
  8. A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 4 May 2021 13: 53
    +5
    While the UAV "Hunter" exists only in the form of a prototype and in the amount of one unit, all stories about what it will one day hunt should be perceived without undue agitation. hi
    1. Andrey Korotkov
      Andrey Korotkov 4 May 2021 14: 14
      -3
      Quote: A. Privalov
      While the UAV "Hunter" exists only in the form of a prototype and in the amount of one unit, all stories about what it will one day hunt should be perceived without undue agitation. hi

      But he is, he stood on the wing, the development of weapons is shown - yes, damn it on our TV - I don't understand, you are not a believer, or until the shekels fell into your pocket, you won’t believe?
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 4 May 2021 14: 56
        +1
        Quote: Andrey Korotkov
        But he is, he stood on the wing, the development of weapons is shown - yes, damn it on our TV - I don't understand, you are not a believer, or until the shekels fell into your pocket, you won’t believe?

        This, Andrei, is that very excessive agitation.
        Let's leave the shekels in my pocket, as well as questions of faith, outside the scope of the discussion.
        "Hunters" have promised to release in 2024. Being a little familiar with the situation, it will not be too exaggerated if I postpone this period for another two or three years, because in the conditions of the almost complete absence of a domestic modern element base for the electronic filling of the device, there can be no talk of a full-fledged serial production. Also, there are big problems with the AL-41F engine in the non-afterburner version, etc. So let's hurry slowly and wait for real results. hi
        1. Andrey Korotkov
          Andrey Korotkov 4 May 2021 15: 20
          -1
          hi Alexander, but the fact is he is on the wing - we don't argue request wait, wait, but it was in the USSR that money was distributed to the entire GDP of prospects, except in other countries then and now it is different? Now, with our capabilities (budget?, the path will be minus - it is not clear ,, patriotism,?,) internal policy (towards the people), external in my opinion is worthy (somewhere -sale), opinion hi
          1. A. Privalov
            A. Privalov 4 May 2021 15: 48
            -2
            Quote: Andrey Korotkov
            hi Alexander, but the fact is he is on the wing - we don't argue request wait, wait, but it was in the USSR that money was distributed to the entire GDP of prospects, except in other countries then and now it is different? Now, with our capabilities (budget?, the path will be minus - it is not clear ,, patriotism,?,) internal policy (towards the people), external in my opinion is worthy (somewhere -sale), opinion hi

            I, if you noticed, do not argue at all.
            Yes, a ridiculous sum was put on the entire project of "Hunter" - 23 million green. But the developers, very likely, were in the hands of the US RQ-170 Sentinel, which fell at one time in Iran. Copying is always easier and cheaper than creating from scratch. hi
            1. The comment was deleted.
  9. Osipov9391
    Osipov9391 4 May 2021 14: 58
    0
    This is all unnecessary. The techniques named in the article have different tasks - "Hunter" is a strike UAV, its task is to strike at ground targets. Although it has yet to be taught to do this and put into series if military tests show its value;
    The F-35 is a strike fighter for the US allies. But with good capabilities to fight air targets including fighters, cruise missiles, transport aircraft and those very UAVs;
    But the F-22 is more of a pure interceptor for fighting air targets, namely fighters. Or, in American terminology, it is an air superiority fighter.
    We do not need to intercept any data exchange gateways. Jamming is one thing. And even if something is intercepted / heard, then it will hardly be possible for us to read and decipher it. And unnecessary.
    You can see who is interested in how the TKS-2 and TKS-2M installed on the Su-27 and its entire family work. Everything is decomposed / encrypted / transmitted there. Then it is accepted / deciphered / composed at the addressee.
    1. Gregory 1
      Gregory 1 4 May 2021 15: 33
      +1
      Quote: Osipov9391
      The F-35 is a strike fighter for the US allies. But with good capabilities to fight air targets including fighters, cruise missiles, transport aircraft and those very UAVs;

      The F-35 is a fighter-bomber. An attack fighter does not exist in nature, but only in the minds of journalists. There is only multipurpose, it is also without classification.
      1. Reserve buildbat
        Reserve buildbat 4 May 2021 19: 40
        0
        That is, strike aircraft also exists "only in the minds of journalists"?
        1. Gregory 1
          Gregory 1 4 May 2021 21: 28
          +2
          Quote: Stroibat stock
          That is, strike aircraft also exists "only in the minds of journalists"?

          Attack aircraft is a strike aircraft. Bombers, fighter-bombers, multipurpose fighters, attack aircraft deliver strikes. In the classification of aircraft, there is no concept of shock (in the tactics of the air force). Give at least one example in the classification of a military aircraft, not a UAV.
          1. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 4 May 2021 21: 40
            -1
            F-35 made as part of the Joint program Strike Fighter - Single shock fighter. Accordingly, the F-35 single shock fighter.
            1. Gregory 1
              Gregory 1 4 May 2021 21: 55
              +1
              Quote: OgnennyiKotik
              The F-35 was made as part of the Joint Strike Fighter program. Accordingly, the F-35 is a single strike fighter.

              In the classification of military aircraft (aircraft) in Russia, there is no concept of shock. F-35 aircraft of the United States. Wikipedia- "Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II (" Lockheed Martin "F-35" Lightning II ") - a family of unobtrusive multifunctional fighter bombers fifth generation, developed by the American firm Lockheed Martin in three versions. "
  10. xorek
    xorek 4 May 2021 17: 32
    -4
    UAV "Okhotnik" can be used as an interceptor of an aviation gateway for data exchange between F-22 and F-35

    This is how to understand, they will install Yandex and Casper and so on .. Will everything freeze and collapse for them at once? laughing
  11. Evgeny Seleznev
    Evgeny Seleznev 4 May 2021 19: 33
    -1
    Well, all America has already surrendered or has not read this nonsense about the unborn super weapon.
  12. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 4 May 2021 19: 36
    +1
    Suppose the U-2 is able to maintain communication at a sufficient speed between the "penguin" squadron and the fu-22 squadron. But still there is a question for which I was minded in the last article on this topic: AND HOW can the U-2 accompany the same Fu-22 on cruising supersonic? Yes, and "penguins" fly faster at subsonic than U-2. That is, "such fashionable" fighters of the 5th generation will be completely dependent on the 2nd generation reconnaissance aircraft? Not to mention the fact that the "invisible" from 200 km may turn out to be invisible to the radar, but the U-2 will remain visible both 400 km and 800 km away. So what's the point? As in "Yeralash" a wristwatch and 2 suitcases of batteries. But show-off.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 4 May 2021 19: 50
      -2
      1. Who said that there will be U-2 in the series? Test prototype equipment, on available media, not a pre-production machine. It is logical to place this gateway on the UAV.
      2. No need to accompany anyone. The locks are patrolling 300-400 km from the front. They give a strip width of 600-800 km, for example, from the Baltic to the Sea of ​​Azov ~ 1600 km, i.e. 2 locks to the entire European front. Will they be shot down? So the attacker will substitute himself. The reserve UAV will take the place of the downed one, the attackers are destroyed.
      1. Reserve buildbat
        Reserve buildbat 4 May 2021 20: 04
        -1
        That is, you are not familiar with the restrictions on the volume of transmitted / received information? But in vain laughing
        Whether U-2 or AWACS, any transceiver has a limit. I think you know how the Internet "slows down" when there are many users on the network. Perhaps you even remember the data transfer rate through the modem and can compare it with the transfer rate over the leased line now. So estimate how many planes there will be in the volume described by you, and how much information you will have to transfer to the "gateway". If anything, I remind you: I said about the restrictions on the number of "users", but did not mention the range. So hello to your "2 gateways to the entire European front". In terms of range, it will be enough (and that is VERY unlikely), but in terms of throughput, it is plugged.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 4 May 2021 20: 10
          -1
          Data is transferred, not Full HD video. Enough stock. Naturally, there will not be 2 of them, this is for understanding. Communication channels should be 2-3 times redundant.
        2. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 4 May 2021 20: 17
          -1
          For your case. When the gateway accompanies the group, they test the system on the XQ-58. According to the information available, the tests were unsuccessful.

          1. Reserve buildbat
            Reserve buildbat 4 May 2021 20: 19
            0
            Thank you, I will take into account))) But the questions have not gone anywhere. And about the amount of information transmitted, and about the flight speed of the "gateway" for example)
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 4 May 2021 20: 21
              -1
              If they knew all the answers to the questions, they obviously did not write here. Even if they did, it would not take long.
  13. Peaceful SEO
    Peaceful SEO 5 May 2021 03: 29
    0
    And what, the same transmitters can not be stuck chtol in f22 and f35?
  14. tarragon
    tarragon 5 May 2021 15: 43
    0
    The natural flying airlock U2 will be hiding in the rear and it would be a risk to get it for a conventional fighter. The expert's proposal to use a drone for this purpose is understandable. Better to risk a drone than an airplane with a pilot. Now there is a tool for risky tasks. You can develop tactics in which the drone takes on the main risks. There are too many restrictions in the air, ceiling for example, etc. therefore, artificial intelligence will be created faster for aerial robots than for ground robots.