(Un) needed Checkmate: who will buy the new Russian fighter

167

Photo: infonavigator.com.ua

Expected surprise


Officially presented at the last MAKS air show Checkmate (now the designation Su-75 is already firmly entrenched behind it) has every chance of becoming the main Russian novelty in the field of military aviation in recent years. Now they often talk about the two-seater Su-57, as well as a new generation strategic bomber. But these machines will not appear soon, even in the prototype version. At the same time, Checkmate already exists, at least as a demonstrator: initially it was assumed that the car shown at MAKS was just a mock-up, but this, apparently, does not correspond to reality.

The characteristics of the car were announced at the presentation, and we will not touch on them again. We only note that conceptually the aircraft is a conventional, less expensive analogue of the Su-57, built on a new base. The machine has one engine and is made according to the normal aerodynamic configuration with a V-shaped tail.



Instead of two engines, as on the Su-57, they decided to limit themselves to one. Apparently with an eye on the F-35. Inside the fuselage there are three compartments for the placement of weapons: the main one and two side ones. Two side missiles are designed for air-to-air missiles. Basically, three air-to-air missiles or two air-to-surface missiles can be deployed.

One of the reasons why it is difficult to talk about the real characteristics of the machine is the modular principle. Simply put, the "filling" can vary depending on the requirements of the customer.


Photo: infonavigator.com.ua

In the service of the videoconferencing


The aircraft was initially positioned as an export one, but it is seen simply as a kind of "trick". The combat aircraft market is very narrow, while the competition is extremely high. If you look at the new programs of promising combat aircraft, you will notice that almost all of them were created with the expectation of domestic needs: export is most often viewed as an option.

And although many states of the world are involved in the F-35 program, it was born, first of all, as an element of the rearmament of the American army (and at once the Air Force, Navy and the USMC). If we look at the Su-57 or the Chinese J-20, we will see that these machines, most likely, did not find a single foreign client at all. The older Eurofighter Typhoon of the fourth generation outside the EU and Great Britain (the creators of the machine) is relatively massively exploited only by the Saudis, who do not have their own developed defense industry. The recently successful Dassault Rafale stands out a little against the general background. But even now, France operates more of these machines than all other buyers combined: a total of about 140 combat aircraft.


Photo by wikipedia.org

Was the Su-75 created for the needs of the Aerospace Forces? The very fact of possible deliveries of a new vehicle to the army was not denied. At the same time, it becomes more and more obvious that the Armed Forces will become its main buyer.

This is indirectly confirmed by the recent statement of Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov.

“The plans for the future state armaments program will consider the possibility of acquiring it,” he said at the Tyumen Oil and Gas Forum.

We are talking about the state armaments program for 2024-2033.

Borisov noted that the presence of only one engine causes the Ministry of Defense to be wary in terms of reliability requirements. This is somewhat strange, considering that modern single-engine cars are practically not inferior in terms of reliability to twin-engine ones. On the other hand, this applies primarily to the United States, which actually have engines of the corresponding reliability (and characteristics).

Checkmate and export


And yet it is obvious that the spectacular name (translated from English - "Checkmate"), the presentation video, and the presentation itself are designed for a foreign buyer. According to Yuri Borisov, the demand on the international market for the latest Russian fighter is estimated at 300 aircraft.

“The aircraft will primarily be oriented towards African countries, India and Vietnam. The demand for these aircraft is quite high and is estimated at at least 300 aircraft in the near future, ”he said at the last MAKS.

The official noted that Russia has an anchor customer for the new aircraft. Moreover, allegedly “for him it is done».


Photo: twitter.com/200_zoka

However, time passed, and foreign buyers did not show up. "No", - said Dmitry Shugaev, head of the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, on the sidelines of the WEF, answering the question of whether there are foreign applications for Checkmate.

Obviously, it is too early to draw conclusions: the aircraft does not exist either in the serial or in the pre-production version. Will Sukhoi be able to interest clients in something in the future? According to some reports, the Checkmate fighter can get up to three different export versions, which is logical given the initially declared modularity. This can increase interest in him.

The main trump card should be the price of the novelty: at least, such a conclusion suggests itself from the official statements. According to the head of Rostec, Sergei Chemezov, the plane will cost $ 25-30 million.

It is difficult to say where this figure came from and how exactly it was calculated. In simple terms, modern fighters have not cost so much on the world market for a long time. The most striking example is India, which recently acquired French Rafale for $ 200 million (!) Per plane.

Several years ago, experts calculated the price of one Russian Su-35 sold to China. The result was $ 104 million for the fighter. The price of the less advanced Su-30MKI fighter, indicated in open sources, is about 83 million. But the Rafale, the Su-35, and the Su-30MKI are machines of the past, fourth generation. That is, with a high degree of probability, the fifth generation fighter, built using stealth technology, will be even more expensive.


The fact that the Su-75 has one engine instead of two (as is the case with the above-mentioned machines) does not change much: modern aviation systems include a lot of expensive electronics, complex systems and subsystems. The engine itself no longer plays such a big role in the nominal price: this has a greater effect on the cost of operating the fighter.

The only reasonable explanation seems to be that 25-30 million is the “internal” Checkmate price for Russian videoconferencing systems. This, of course, raises uncomfortable questions, but all other options are generally difficult to consider seriously.


Photo: UACRussia / youtube.com

So we are back where we started. The Su-75 is, first of all, a "status project", which in theory can find its application in the Russian Aerospace Forces. Export deliveries cannot be ruled out either, but the declared number of 300 aircraft looks exaggerated.

The plane will not be "light" (in the classical sense) or "budgetary". And it is unlikely to become widespread. But whether it will surpass in terms of price / combat effectiveness the already existing in serial form of the Su-57 is another question. Unfortunately, it is still impossible to answer it, since the programs are at fundamentally different stages of implementation.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

167 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +29
    27 September 2021 05: 12
    We divide the skin of the unkilled bear. If only rolled out in iron. And then they showed a piece of cardboard.
    belay feel
    The modern manager must demonstrate incorrigible optimism.
    1. +14
      27 September 2021 05: 22
      Shah and Checkmate wanted, but for now Pat! sad
      1. -2
        27 September 2021 06: 08
        Quote from Uncle Lee
        Shah and Checkmate wanted, but for now Pat!

        Well this is in the opening wink
        1. +1
          27 September 2021 13: 39
          I played chess at one time, this is just the beginning of the game. Gambit is such a tricky thing! hi
          1. 0
            27 September 2021 13: 42
            Quote: tralflot1832
            Gambit is such a tricky thing!

            Here I am about it. The gambit has just begun hi
          2. 0
            19 December 2021 09: 42
            This is not chess, and the cost of the matter is survival or death.
            Moreover, we are not talking about a gambit, but about zugzwang in conditions of tough time pressure.
    2. +13
      27 September 2021 05: 38
      The modern market demands an inexpensive single engine aircraft. Mig21 of our days.
      So why not?
      Yes, and they have already stated that the su75 was created for an existing customer. On what basis Legate casts doubt on this application, I did not understand from the article.
      1. 0
        27 September 2021 06: 03
        Quote: kytx
        but they have already stated that su75 was created for an existing customer.

        So it has not yet been created, there is only a "plasticine" model, in a strange way, with its two-keel and single-engine installation, it resembles an already flying western object.
        And what is there for a given layout for implementation? Engine? Production capacity?
        It seems that this is PR or an imitation of violent managerial activity.
        1. -2
          27 September 2021 07: 59
          Quote: Stroporez
          there is only a "plasticine" model

          Plasteline, cardboard. masking tape and scotch tape are for Ukraine. In this case, it looks more like a product in "hardware"
          The term of the first flight is 23 years, static tests are already underway, the engine can be either Al-41F1 (Al-31FM3) or ed. 30 which is also not on paper for a long time.
          Let's wait until the 23rd year, and then we will throw a couple of thunders with lightning or admire (someone will be saddened) ...
          R.S. - the hearts of the hearts are already grieving ...
          1. +5
            27 September 2021 08: 09
            Quote: mark1
            The term of the first flight is 23 years, static tests are already underway, the engine can be either Al-41F1 (Al-31FM3) or ed. 30 which is also not on paper for a long time.
            Let's wait for the 23rd year, and then throw a couple of thunders with lightning or admire

            Let's wait kaneshna. The Yo-mobile also had a motor and wheels, and where is it all?
            1. +6
              27 September 2021 08: 16
              Quote: Stroporez
              Let's wait kaneshna.

              Better to wait than wang.
            2. -1
              27 September 2021 10: 53
              In Belarus, in the parking lot, and like Volfovich's. To create production from scratch is not fucking bullshit. Comrade Prokhorov did not pull, a false start into big politics. But he tried.
              1. +4
                27 September 2021 11: 01
                Quote: tralflot1832
                Comrade Prokhorov did not pull off a false start into big politics, but he tried.

                Now Chemezov and Serdyukov have taken up aviation, they will break everything to hell and sell it off.
                1. -6
                  27 September 2021 11: 14
                  In a year we'll see if Shah and Mat will fly.
                2. +20
                  27 September 2021 11: 23
                  They write a lot about the problems of the fleet, but for some reason everyone is silent about the aviation disaster.
                  We do not have production of civil and military transport aircraft. There are practically no AWACS in service, no tankers, no electronic warfare aircraft, no PLO aircraft. Those 9-15 pieces that are for Russia are just laughter. For the whole country there are 220 ~ 230 more or less modern fighters.
                  It is impossible to ensure the country's defense capability with such forces. China and NATO (even without the United States) have many times more military aviation. Where at times, where dozens of times.
                  There is only one reliability left - the Strategic Missile Forces.
                  1. +3
                    27 September 2021 16: 10
                    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                    There is only one reliability left - the Strategic Missile Forces.

                    In a global confrontation, yes. But who will allow it? Oligarchs also want to live, preferably for a very long time.
                    And how can Yars and Bulava be able to help in conflicts of a limited scale? A hypothetical clash with large forces of Islamists, with Turkey, with Japan, with Ukraine ..? You will need modern tanks, artillery, aviation and professional infantry, and all this in a decent amount ...
                    1. +8
                      28 September 2021 01: 42
                      Quote: Doccor18
                      You will need modern tanks, artillery, aviation and professional infantry, and all this in a decent amount ...

                      The number of the Ground Forces of the Russian Federation is 280 people.
                      Total !
                      Total number.
                      Even together with the Airborne Forces and the MP, this will be less than the number of the Rosgvardia - 350 people.
                      Apparently the enemy for the authorities is not outside, but inside.
                      What about the presentation of the layout ...?
                      Most likely just PR against the background of total failures with aviation in general.
                      Is it possible to do it in principle?
                      Can .
                      Will it ?
                      ..... request
                      1. +3
                        28 September 2021 02: 01
                        The number of the Ground Forces of the Russian Federation is 280 people.
                        Total !
                        Total number.
                        Even together with the Airborne Forces and the MP, this will be less than the number of the Rosgvardia - 350 people.

                        And the generals.
                        At the beginning of 2021, there were 2 generals in Russia, including
                        1 - in the armed forces,
                        340 - in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, 150-160 in the National Guard, 80 - in the Ministry of Emergency Situations.
                        Those. and in the ground forces there is one general for 212 servicemen, and with the deduction of senior officers in general, the national guard will exceed the army twice.

                        The Israeli military historian O. Granovsky tried to count their number based on the command positions held by the generals. According to his calculations, it turns out that about 100 generals are serving in the army, air force and navy. Is it a lot or a little? With full mobilization, the number of IDF reaches 700 thousand troops, that is, for each general there are about 7 thousand soldiers and officers. By contrast, the British army has 561 troops per general.
                      2. +4
                        28 September 2021 02: 19
                        Quote: Konnick
                        At the beginning of 2021, there were 2 generals in Russia, including

                        Yes
                        Quote: Konnick
                        1 - in the armed forces,

                        Yes
                        Quote: Konnick
                        Those. in the ground forces, one general for 212 military personnel

                        And here it does not beat.
                        The total strength of the RF Armed Forces is 900 people.
                        So for one general there are about 680 people.
                        Taking into account the staff and operational posts, military educational institutions ... maybe not as many as it seems at first glance ... According to the general, for two infantry battalions ...
                        There are more.
                        In addition to the Ground Forces, the RF Armed Forces also have the Navy, the Aerospace Forces, and the Airborne Forces.
                        But such an insufficient number of Ground Forces for such a large country (in terms of area and length of borders) is surprising.
                      3. 0
                        28 September 2021 17: 28
                        Quote: bayard
                        In addition to the Ground Forces, the RF Armed Forces also have the Navy, the Aerospace Forces, and the Airborne Forces.

                        Well, the Airborne Forces are part of the Ground Forces, but the Strategic Missile Forces and the Railway Forces are so separate structures
                      4. 0
                        15 December 2021 08: 24
                        The Airborne Forces is a separate branch of the military, and the Railroad Forces is included in the Rear Services of the Armed Forces.
                      5. 0
                        28 September 2021 14: 27
                        why are you comparing the number of generals with the full mobilization of the IDF, but in Russia you do not take this into account
                      6. 0
                        29 September 2021 02: 53
                        The RF Armed Forces have 2 people in reserve officially. So with mobilization, the number of the Armed Forces will be about 000 million.
                      7. 0
                        28 September 2021 17: 26
                        Quote: Konnick
                        Those. and in the ground forces there is one general for 212 servicemen, and with the deduction of senior officers in general, the national guard will exceed the army twice.

                        That is, the Aerospace Forces, the Navy, the Strategic Missile Forces, the Railway Troops were left without generals at all? Cool
                    2. -3
                      28 September 2021 11: 16
                      Yes, yes, burn the Turkish armies with nuclear bombs nizya. Interestingly, here a gopnik attacked you, and you had an ax with you, and you beat him with this ax, so that the blood of the intestine and all kinds of guro, and then they come up to you and say that you cannot beat with an ax. It's not good, ay-ay-ay, straight. You, of course, will immediately stop doing this, and do not offer to blame and not meddle in your own business. And then, for a minute, you have a bloody ax in your hands.
                      1. 0
                        28 September 2021 12: 14
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        Yes, yes, burn the Turkish armies with nuclear bombs nizya.

                        Not that it is impossible, just the combat use of the Strategic Missile Forces will mean a nuclear conflict on a global scale, with all the consequences, including the fallout of radioactive fallout on the Black Sea coast ...
                        Well, which of our liberal people would dare to do this? Do not make me laugh.
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        Interestingly, here you are attacked by a gopnik, and you have an ax with you

                        Well, he attacked, depending on what he had in his hands and what his goals were. If he attacked with a knife in his hand (maybe kill), then the ax comes in handy. But if he attacked, with bare fists, in order to rob or assert himself in front of the public, then the ax is an overkill, for which you will then have to sit down for a long time. You can calm down with a pass to the legs and a throw, or a spent overhand ...
                        If, hypothetically, a turmoil breaks out on the southern border. A mass of militants, with a grandiose experience of military operations and with modern weapons, with the support of Turkish aviation and artillery, will cross (as an example) the Afghan-Uzbek border. The Central Asian armies will quickly tremble and scatter somewhere ... Ahead may loom some gigantic pseudo-caliphate, a blazing hearth already on its border, if Russia does nothing. And in response, you propose to "cover everyone with nuclear mushrooms", everyone, Turkey, Afghanistan, and the countries of Central Asia at the same time ... By the way, simultaneously with the Asian events, the Armed Forces of Ukraine may launch a desperate attack on the LPR as the last chance to solve this problem. Inflated with imported equipment (including: ATGMs and drone UAVs) and replenished with volunteers from other countries (which cannot be denied), the Armed Forces of Ukraine can strongly press the local self-defense forces, destroy infrastructure, etc. What should the Russian Armed Forces do in this case? Should we throw a megaton warhead towards Kiev ..?
                        Will not work. They will fight, as before, tanks and planes, self-propelled guns and helicopters, and young guys with AK and RPGs ... This is the scenario that needs to be prepared for the army.
                  2. -1
                    27 September 2021 21: 37
                    into a civilian superjet, preparing ms-21
                    Il-76 military transport aircraft, preparing Il-112
                    the A-50, the IL-78 tanker are being modernized, the IL-38 is being modernized,
                    if there is a Strategic Missile Forces, why are there many planes?
                    1. +5
                      28 September 2021 01: 57
                      Quote: Janerobot
                      the civil superjet

                      Without domestic engines and components.
                      Quote: Janerobot
                      preparing ms-21

                      Without domestic components (all external suppliers have refused, there are none of their own, perhaps so far), its own "black wing" from its materials has not yet been tested.
                      Quote: Janerobot
                      military transport aircraft il-76

                      If we are talking about the Il-76MD90A, then its serial production has not been established. What has been produced in 10 years is more of a piece production. This year, deliveries were again disrupted - only one of the six promised deliveries was delivered, and apparently there will be no more by the end of the year.
                      Quote: Janerobot
                      IL-112 is being prepared

                      For an indefinite period of time, both the Il-112 and Il-114 are stuck in uncertainty - there are NO engines. There will be no imported ones either. And the pepelats itself turned out ... very unimportant.
                      Quote: Janerobot
                      modernized A-50

                      No ! Nothing else is being upgraded. In just fifteen years, 6 units have been modernized.
                      Quote: Janerobot
                      tanker IL-78,

                      Will those couple of pieces in the Il-78MD90A version solve the problem of refueling military aircraft? They were planned to be built 50 pieces.
                      And where are they?
                      And they also planned to build 50 pieces. A-100 based on the Il-76MD90A.
                      Quote: Janerobot
                      IL-38 is being modernized

                      No ! The modernization was stopped and it was found unsatisfactory.
                      There is nothing new. Neither a new PLO aircraft, nor a sane project to modernize the existing ones. Thanks to Vega. And for the failed A-100, too, thanks to her.
                      Quote: Janerobot
                      if there is a Strategic Missile Forces, why are there many planes?

                      So maybe they are not needed at all?
                      Neither the Army nor the Navy?
                      It seems that those "responsible" for this also think so.
                      Because everything they have achieved is characterized by one word - FAIL.
                      1. -6
                        28 September 2021 11: 18
                        Throw out the manual.
                      2. -1
                        28 September 2021 14: 33
                        I replied to a comment where it said that there is absolutely NO production, and this is how we see lies
                      3. +1
                        28 September 2021 20: 52
                        But you gave examples and I answered what is not true, at least fully.
                  3. -6
                    28 September 2021 11: 13
                    200 pieces of released SSJ look at you in amazement. It is not difficult to make an AWACS aircraft, the question is not in the aircraft, which can be done, but in electronics. As for the tankers, I am already tired of explaining that heavy fighters are less dependent on tankers, and practically our tankers serve only long-range aviation, and it does not need 100 tankers.

                    Modern fighters are quite enough, since there are 100500 of the most advanced air defense systems and the neighbors have few combat aircraft too.

                    The US Air Force is scattered around the world and we are not threatened in any way. How are you going to build more than half the world's planes, I suppose it's useless to ask. As well as why on earth should we shoot them down one by one, and not burn them together with airfields with nuclear strikes. There are no rules prohibiting doing this.

                    The size of the Chinese and US Air Forces is much lower than you imagine. For example, in terms of the number of aircraft, China is inferior to Russia and relatively modern aircraft from China, if more than ours, then not by an order of magnitude, hundreds of 3 J-10 and may be the same number of derivatives of the Su-27.

                    In the United States, they also fly on F-16s, F-15C 200 with something EMNIP remains. F-15E, I don’t remember the number, it seems like about 400 units were built in total, since then they got lost, and fought, and were generally written off. The same eggs with the Super Hornet.
                    1. +2
                      28 September 2021 12: 55
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      200 Pieces of released SSJs look at you in amazement

                      With imported components, which we can be refused at any time?
                      How have you already refused those for the MS-21?
                      How long will we be able to operate this park in such conditions?
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      It is not difficult to make an AWACS plane,

                      Come on ??
                      Why can't Vega do it?
                      Neither with the normal modernization of the A-50, nor with the already completely forgotten A-100?
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      the question is not in the plane, which can be done

                      Are you talking about the Il-76MD90A?
                      Something "Aviastar" does not work to confirm your thesis.
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      namely in electronics

                      Here . It's already warmer.
                      What's wrong with electronics? Which one is holding everything now? Even the automotive industry ... What's wrong.
                      What is wrong with this electronics in "Vega", if at the same time the industry is quite coping with the production of radar and air defense systems of all types, as well as radar and avionics of military aviation of the Aerospace Forces? What did they put in their previous projects the American component base, and now they have refused us? smile
                      It was so difficult to foresee ... It is simply impossible to imagine ... An unheard-of happened. Yes
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      As for the tankers, I'm already sick of it

                      Sorry .
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      explain that heavy fighters are less dependent on tankers, and practically our tankers serve only long-range aviation, and it does not need 100 tankers.

                      Come on ? belay
                      That's why on all fighters and bombers fueling rods are provided ... request
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      she does not need 100 tankers.

                      But the Ministry of Defense planned to purchase at least 50 pieces. Il-78MD90A ... minimum.
                      But it cannot - Ulyanovsk cannot cope.
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      long-range aviation only

                      So after all, they are not enough for her darling.
                      For her, ONE.
                      And now how to be "less dependent" heavy fighters in the case of long-distance flights and the organization of long-term duty in the air? In a remote area?
                      If we have these heaviest fighters, too, a cat on .....?
                      For such and such lengths of borders and opposing groupings of a very likely enemy?
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      You don't need 100 tankers.

                      Definitely not necessary?
                      And if you think about it?
                      Head to think?
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      Modern fighters are enough

                      Wow, how confident it sounds.
                      And what is such a decisive position based on?
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      because there are 100500 of the most advanced air defense systems

                      A very plausible figure.
                      And if in more detail about the number of regiments of the air defense missile system and the places of their deployment?
                      Do they really cover our borders?
                      Or only the most critical areas and the most valuable objects on the territory of the country?
                      And how effective are these wonderful (without a shadow of sarcasm - really wonderful) air defense systems in repelling a massive raid of low-altitude, inconspicuous missile systems? Which will pave their route by no means through the positions of the air defense missile systems, but quite the opposite - bypassing them.
                      At what range are the radars of these ground complexes capable of detecting such targets?
                      And I will answer you - 20 - 35 km. depending on the height of the target (extremely low, but nevertheless), the nature of the terrain and the height of the radar position.
                      Oops ...
                      So what can you do?
                      How to detect and intercept targets - SUCH TARGETS?
                      At the turn of the 70s - 80s of the last century, they were concerned about this. And they didn’t find anything better than using them to detect and target them with fighter aircraft, ... yes, their most - AWACS aircraft.
                      Therefore, the Soviet Union also planned to build at least 50 pieces. A-50 only for air defense and air force. And there was also work on the creation of a deck version of such an aircraft, which was planned to be used not only from the decks, but also from land airfields in the front-line zone. Therefore, the Yak-44 was ready to order about 100 units.
                      But it is not enough to detect targets, they still need to be intercepted and destroyed.
                      What?
                      "The most advanced air defense systems"?
                      Of course not . Such targets can ONLY be effectively intercepted by fighter aircraft.
                      And for this it must be.
                      And to have a sufficiently developed network of home airfields. Not only for permanent deployment, but also alternate airfields, dispersal airfields during a threatened period.
                      And fighter aircraft should be sufficient for these purposes.
                      We have two main theaters - the European theater in the west, and the Far Eastern theater in the east.
                      The southern and northern directions are also important, but there you can get by with less than the first two, the number of iap.
                      What do we have?
                      We have "Trishkin's caftan". Without the proper number of dispersal and deployment aerodromes. And without the proper number of combat aircraft.
                      - Without refueling aircraft, which does not allow and will not allow organizing a long \ constant air watch during a threatened period in threatened directions. Their absence will not allow them to quickly transfer the IA forces to new theaters of operations.
                      - Without AWACS aircraft to control the war in the air and to open breakthroughs of low-altitude targets.
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      The US Air Force is scattered around the world and we are not threatened in any way.

                      belay How are you?
                      That is, they have deployed their air bases all over the world ... so as not to be able to ... threaten us?
                      Maybe it's the other way around?
                      Maybe so it is more convenient for them to deliver a coordinated strike from the airfields dispersed around our borders by the forces of TACTICAL aviation? Having made gaps in our air defense and launching strategic aviation there (as it was before) or by launching our own missile defense missiles bypassing our air defense position areas (so it is now)?
                      Or do you think that they breed pigeons of peace at these bases?
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      How are you going to build more than half of the world planes

                      There is no need to compete with the number, but the iap should be enough to repel an attack from any direction. For this it is necessary to increase the number of fighter aviation by 20 air regiments. Of these, 10 air regiments - in the Aerospace Forces and the other 10 regiments in the naval aviation, for reliable cover of the naval base and sea areas.
                      With the condition that today the air regiments have switched almost entirely to a two-squadron configuration, this is expressed in general in a frivolous number of fighters themselves.
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      As well as why on earth should we shoot them down one by one, and not burn them together with airfields with nuclear strikes. There are no rules prohibiting doing this.

                      They, too, will be bombarded with nuclear strikes. But we have fewer airfields (like aviation itself), so they won't have much work to do. Here who will be the first to start.
                      And who can fight back / retreat.
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      The size of the Chinese and US Air Forces is much lower than you imagine.

                      I think you will be surprised how much lower than your imagination the number of military aviation of the Aerospace Forces. At the same time, keep in mind that in terms of the number of combat aircraft (including new types), China has long since seriously surpassed the Russian Federation.
                      Quote: EvilLion
                      ... The same eggs with the Super Hornet.

                      Yes, yes, do not forget about the US naval / carrier-based aviation in your conclusions.
                      And throw out the training manual.
                      1. -1
                        28 September 2021 16: 17
                        200 pieces were released, already refused.

                        Definitely not necessary?
                        And if you think about it?
                        Head to think?


                        Yes, if you think about it with your head, then neither 100 tankers nor 10 thousand fighters are needed. With refuellers, with a one-time need, you can generally take extra. Su-35 and hang refueling equipment under it, increasing the range of the link. Strategists simply do not fly in large groups, and there are not even 100 of them, so your 100 tankers will simply have no one to refuel.

                        Without refueling aircraft, which does not allow and will not allow organizing a long \ constant watch in the air


                        Then immediately order airplanes-dining rooms, airplanes-bedrooms and airplanes-warm toilets for the pilots on duty in the air. In practice, a Su-35 with a PTB can display 3-4 hours without any problems. Because the Su-27 was made at one time by people who understood what a proper fighter is. Even without PTB, you can. However, the very idea of ​​keeping whole shelves of delusional a little more than completely in the air during a threatened period, since it will not give anything, but the resource is cranky, airborne duty is used only during hostilities with very specific goals.

                        There is no need to compete with the number, but the iap should be enough to repel an attack from any direction. For this it is necessary to increase the number of fighter aviation by 20 air regiments.


                        Firstly, if you are going to fight without nuclear weapons, although this is in itself nonsense, since it will be applied without hesitation and no one will listen to any claims, then you will not even be able to significantly surpass the Chinese qualitatively, because They fly not only on the MiG-1, which means that a ratio of 21: 1 is needed, and even more for a confident victory.

                        Secondly. Massive strikes, especially missiles, can only be repelled by air defense systems, you simply will not lift the whole thing in minutes.

                        In-3. It is physically impossible to place forces in each direction that could reflect a blow, so no one does this, learn how the deployment takes place, otherwise you have already counted the shelves, although you do not have any initial data for such calculations, and you have not learned the methodology of such a calculation ...
                      2. +1
                        28 September 2021 23: 19
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        200 pieces were released, already refused.

                        In-from.
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        Yes, if you think about it with your head, then neither 100 tankers nor 10 thousand fighters

                        Stop-stop, you don’t lie about 100 tankers, the General Staff counted and the government approved plans to purchase 50 units. IL-78MD90A. This is exactly the minimum that is required in the first place for our DA.
                        Give you a methodology?
                        Yes please . According to the plan of a combat flight to a close to maximum range, the scheme is as follows - an equal number of Tu-160 and Il-78 take off, and at a distance of 2000 km. from the departure airport, tankers give 40 tons of fuel each to their own bomber.
                        How many Tu-160s do we have now? 17 pcs. ?
                        How much has been ordered?
                        Minimum 10 pcs.
                        In total, we need 27 Il-78s for 27 Tu-160s. Right ?
                        Let's continue.
                        Each Il-78 is capable of refueling two Tu-95s at the same distance from the airfield.
                        Do we count Tu-95?
                        44 Tu-95MS and 20 Tu-95MSM = 64 bombers.
                        Moreover, at a slightly greater distance, it can accept all 40 tons.
                        But since the Il-78MD90A takes up to 60 tons for such a range, we believe that this fleet requires 32 tankers.
                        How many have already counted?
                        Already 59 pcs. ?
                        But we're not done yet. MRA is still being revived in our country, and in YES we have enough Tu-22M3 (for now, but there is). How many ?
                        60 - Tu-22M3, 1 - Tu-22M3M and 1 - Tu-22MR = 62 pcs.
                        And even up to 5 pieces. they want to finish building from the reserve, but we will not count them.
                        And one Il-78 for a flight fills two Tu-22M3M (it is their refueling rod that will be restored) and there will be 30 such modernized units.
                        So another 15 pieces. IL-78MD90A.
                        All ?
                        Of course not .
                        We still have long-range PLO Tu-142 aircraft. smile
                        12 pcs. Tu142MK \ M3 and 10 pcs. Tu-142MR = 22 pcs.
                        They still need 12 Il-78.
                        And that's not it . Yes
                        We still have tactical aviation. smile
                        Let's be modest and count only 20 IL-78s for this whole pack.
                        Just to spare your psyche.
                        Shall we match the result?
                        27 + 32 + 15 + 12 + 20 = 106 pcs. feel oops ... it turns out that you need even more than 100 tankers. And we didn’t count the scouts yet. And they considered the needs of tactical aviation very modestly.
                        And yes! After all, we have not yet counted the needs of AWACS aircraft. smile
                        And their General Staff was going to buy (in the guise of A-100) another 50 pieces.
                        And everyone ... well, almost everyone needs their own tanker - in order to less often raise the replacement in rotation, after all, he still has to drag into the zone.
                        Let's add 30 more tankers for them.
                        Total: 136 Il-78MD90A tankers.
                        Here's a simple methodology. With a very large coarsening downward.
                        You see the restraint shown by the General Staff, voicing the desire to get 50 tankers. smile
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        Then immediately order airplanes-dining rooms, airplanes-bedrooms and airplanes-warm toilets for the pilots on duty in the air.

                        Why are we fooling around?
                        Or can you not imagine a situation (even in peacetime) when such patrolling will be required?
                        For example, the launch of a submarine into the sea is provided. This is a whole procedure, but we will leave the actions of the surface fleet, but the duty of fighter aircraft in the air to accelerate / interfere with the work of enemy anti-submarine aircraft is necessary. For if they take it for escort from the base, then they will drive the entire campaign, attaching an MAPL to guide PLO aircraft. And to prevent this from happening, there must be fighter aircraft in the air.
                        And in order for it to be in the zone during the entire operation, it is advisable to refuel it.
                        Or we will knock out the resource with frequent departures.
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        In practice, a Su-35 with a PTB can display 3-4 hours without any problems.

                        And if you need a day?
                        And it still depends on how far from the airfield the loitering zone is.
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        However, the very idea of ​​keeping entire shelves of delirium in the air during the threatened period is a little more than completely

                        More than delusional to be on duty in the air with regiments. And even more so to write that.
                        But to put an AWACS aircraft with a pair of heavy fighters in a missile-hazardous direction is a very correct decision. For wars ALWAYS start suddenly.
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        First, if you are going to fight without nuclear weapons,

                        Yes, even with the use of super-bombs on antimatter! The main thing is not to miss the first blow. And if you do not fully reflect, then maximally stagnate and disorganize.
                        Britain and Germany had enough chemical weapons in WWII, but no one dared to use them.
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        Secondly. Massive attacks, especially missiles, can only be repelled by air defense systems,

                        Do not write such nonsense to the combat control officer of the air defense unit. Albeit in stock. All the more so about modern reality.
                        This was in Soviet times, when an anti-aircraft missile battalion stuck out along the borders in echelon "from under each bush", one could talk about this. And even then - to the dilettante. For in each division / corps of the air defense there was at least one regiment of fighter aviation. Very good interceptors.
                        Now there is no such thing, and air defense systems are covered only by naval bases, large airfields, industrial centers, nuclear power plants, large hydroelectric power plants, administrative centers, centers of command and control, etc. - we no longer have the country's air defense (as it was in the USSR), we have object air defense. And not all objects requiring protection are securely covered.
                        It is very expensive .
                        And difficult.
                        And low-altitude (!), Stealth (!) Cruise missiles in very large numbers will go to the targets.
                        - From surface ships in the adjacent waters,
                        - from submarines - MAPL and "Ohio" equipped in their carriers,
                        - launched from the sides of strategic and tactical aviation.
                        And they will go PAST the positional areas of our air defense systems.
                        And such a missile can detect an air defense system radar from a range of no more than 20 - 35 km. - these are not high-altitude goals for you.
                        So how can you detect and strike them?
                        ZGRLS decameter range (but this is only for notification, the accuracy is still the same), AWACS aircraft and combat fighters directed by them.
                        The only way .
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        In-3. It is physically impossible to place forces in every direction that could reflect the blow, so no one does this.

                        It is on each direction that the IAP should be based. , or located their aerodromes of dispersal. Therefore, the air defense systems will definitely not be there, and if they are installed, then the CD will bypass this area.
                        And the AWACS planes can see EVERYTHING from above. And very far away.
                        And the fighter will be able to attack such targets from a fairly large distance, and not at a dagger's distance, having a few seconds to react - as is the case with the air defense system.
                        But during the protection of the object, the air defense systems will be in their place - the last frontier.
                        For heavy air defense systems and its missiles, there are targets only at high and medium altitudes. And from low-altitude targets they themselves are protected by "Pantsyri" and "Torah".
                        Something like this .
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        teach how the deployment takes place,

                        Here I am trying to teach. I don’t know if it’s wrong. request
                        Quote: EvilLion
                        otherwise you have already counted the shelves, although you do not have any initial data for such calculations, and you have not learned the methodology of such a calculation.

                        Such detailing is not at all for this forum.
                        And how do you know about the teaching methodology.
                3. +4
                  27 September 2021 13: 43
                  Ndaaa ... Magomet Tolboyev ... Hero of Russia ... looked ... just tin. May God grant the Muslim health and long life. At least someone is worried about us Russians. Oh yes, all sorts of scum like Serdyukov, Chubais, Alyoshin ... etc. are still going through for us Russians. survived ...
            3. -3
              27 September 2021 16: 22
              And here's your e-mobile. There was initially an impossible technical assignment in our conditions. Hybrid with varik and gas turbine engine. In the conditions of the mass car industry in Russia, this cannot be done. The crap is there.
              But he is not a sucker a mammoth.
              The result is known.
              Su75 for a specific merchant.
              I’ll even guess who it is.
              Vietnam.
              I accept bets.
              You're off the Daniels bubble.
            4. 0
              27 September 2021 21: 39
              do you think you don't need to do anything?
            5. 0
              10 December 2021 03: 41
              Yo-mobile has nothing to do with the state. This is Mr. Prokhorov's project. Koiy got rid of him to the fullest. Because building something is not to steal and not to bathe girls in champagne
            6. 0
              11 December 2021 20: 25
              Quote: Stroporez
              The Yo-mobile also had a motor and wheels, and where is it all?

              Well, a few pieces were assembled, with a non-native motor. Why didn't they finish it? It looks like Prokhorov regretted the money, decided that the game was not worth the candle.
          2. 0
            28 September 2021 14: 00
            Duc .. Until the trees and cardboard
            Layout
        2. +4
          27 September 2021 13: 21
          Based on a statement from an important government official who said that there are no foreign orders
      2. +7
        27 September 2021 09: 17
        Quote: kytx
        The modern market demands an inexpensive single engine aircraft. Mig21 of our days.
        So why not?
        Yes, and they have already stated that the su75 was created for an existing customer. On what basis Legate casts doubt on this application, I did not understand from the article.

        And on what basis to believe those who said about the customer? And, yes, a modern plane cannot be cheap
      3. +4
        27 September 2021 15: 56
        Quote: kytx
        The modern market demands an inexpensive single engine aircraft. Mig21 of our days.
        So why not?
        ... On what grounds Legate casts doubt on this application, I did not understand from the article.

        And I didn't get it.
        If we look at the Su-57 or the Chinese J-20, we will see that these machines, most likely, did not find a single foreign client at all. 

        When the Su-57 "takes a confident wing" (like the Su-35), goes to the Aerospace Forces, then the contracts will not be long in coming ...
        There are many blank spots with J20, because the Chinese know how to keep secrets. Either they do not sell, due to secrecy, or not such a fifth generation, as stated ...
        However, time passed, and foreign buyers did not show up ...

        A working fighter will appear - and foreign customers will appear. In another way, apparently, there is no way. The times are difficult. "The clouds of sanctions are gathering in the sky" ...
        Cost is important, but now, oddly enough, it is far from being a sentence. Political barriers are sometimes worse than financial ones ...
        1. 0
          28 September 2021 11: 20
          Well, yes, the Chinese started up the right engine, and the whole world has not seen it with their own eyes, neither the creepy PGO from the 80s nor the bomb bay into which nothing larger than 4 air-to-air missiles can fit, where can the world judge the J-20.
          1. 0
            28 September 2021 12: 23
            Quote: EvilLion
            Well, yes, the Chinese got the right engine

            This is the main problem of the entire Chinese military aviation. Everything else is not so critical. And they will be interested in pricing policy, they know how. They more than compensate for the small ammunition by the number of vehicles ... As soon as a breakthrough occurs in engine building, the PRC Air Force will also "break through".
      4. +1
        27 September 2021 20: 52
        Quote: kytx
        On what basis Legate casts doubt on this application, I did not understand from the article.

        Without this doubt, the article could not have been written. wink
    3. 0
      28 September 2021 10: 48
      This is a ground-based full-scale stand, which must be retrofitted to a flight one. Although the differences will be retrofitted, or left as a stand, and a new one will be assembled on the first flight, no.
    4. 0
      28 September 2021 20: 26
      It has no analogues in this star system. It can also fly backwards if the headwind is strong. With cancer, sideways and with a jump, Happy New Year.
  2. +1
    27 September 2021 05: 24
    Will he fly at all ...
    1. 0
      28 September 2021 11: 20
      Considering that they flew before him, the question is stupid.
  3. -7
    27 September 2021 05: 32
    It was smooth on paper ...
  4. +4
    27 September 2021 05: 37
    We must wait until he at least rises into the air, and there is little to say about that. And here we are just seriously discussing a layout made of cardboard.
  5. +7
    27 September 2021 05: 41
    The problem with demand is that in the modern world, no one except India and Pakistan understands what kind of war to prepare for. For the same aviation - the USA built the F-117, B-2, F-22, F-35 - and none of those baubles that were clocked on them - NEVER were useful to them - they always did not break through the air defense, but bombed any overt Air defense zone - and now the US is buying SuperTucano corn makers.
    Well, and the Russian Federation ... Perhaps a downed bomber and an AWACS plane in Syria, both times not covered by fighters - prompted the idea that 2 engines are twice as expensive as flight time? As an option? So it turned out - that the cheaper Su-57 is noticeable
    1. +6
      27 September 2021 09: 55
      You are wrong about
      that in the modern world no one except India and Pakistan understands what kind of war to prepare
      where did you get that?
      F-117, B-2, F-22, F-35 - and none of those baubles that were clocked on them - NEVER were useful to them
      this phrase in support of the previous one? Using this logic, ICBMs are not needed, because they have never been useful. The baubles, wound on the F-22 and 35, would be quite useful for the same India and Pakistan, otherwise India, for example, would not necessarily require AFAR for a fighter. To resolve the issue of the need for certain baubles in case of war in peacetime, there are exercises. And at the expense of who you may have to fight in the event of a big war, there is no secret. The United States is preparing for a war with Russia and China, China is now preparing for a war with the United States and somewhat earlier with the USSR.
      1. +3
        27 September 2021 10: 04
        From the fact that the same USA does not understand how they will fight From fresh, although this strategy is already 10 years old. The USA is not in a position to wage a full-scale war. Even one. Just yesterday, the Heritage Foundation, well, an analytical center for example, the President of the United States, made a report on this for 500 pages.
        If he is not capable of waging a full-scale war, but only low-intensity conflicts, they need to reformat half of the armed forces. So busy - look at the ILC.
        And in the Russian Federation, they found out that it was necessary to prepare not for marches on armored personnel carriers through vitrified fields, but for clashes with proxies and mobile divergroups, and instead of armored personnel carriers we desperately need MRAPs.
        These are just two examples. And so everywhere. What should China prepare for? What kind of troops does Germany need? W-well? And Poland will fight with Russia at home or with Ukraine for Lviv?
        1. -1
          27 September 2021 16: 10
          War always includes different types of hostilities, ranging from clandestine work and sabotage, guerrilla warfare, local skirmishes, and ending with large-scale strategic operations. Everyone understands this and everyone is preparing. War is part of politics, and if at a particular moment the country is not ready for a full-scale war, then obviously this is the result of the political situation, but preparation must still be carried out. If the United States were stupid, the Union would not have collapsed, and there would not have been this situation in Ukraine. There are also failures, as in Afghanistan.
          1. -2
            2 October 2021 09: 45
            Quote: vic02
            There are also failures, as in Afghanistan.

            Complete lame, not Afghanistan dear. For Somalia? Libya? Iraq?
    2. +3
      27 September 2021 11: 48
      Perhaps a downed bomber and an AWACS plane in Syria, both times not covered by fighters - suggested that 2 engines are twice as expensive as flight time?

      And not only this.
      Without AFAR and stealth technology, there will be no quantum leap forward.

      In fact, the performance characteristics of the Su-30SM, Su-34 and Su-35 are practically the same. It was quite possible to rivet 500 Su-30s for the transition period. In the meantime, calmly tackle the concept of a 5th generation aircraft, suitable specifically for our conditions, and not try to copy the Raptor first, and now the Penguin.

      But this is not our way ... smile
      1. 0
        27 September 2021 12: 56
        And that's not the point. Imagine a dialogue in faces:
        - Comrade Minister! The Armata tank is ready for serial production !!!
        - Why the heck?
        -?!?!?!
        - In the Far East, everything that cannot swim by itself will do only for monuments, in the west against 250 Polish Abrams, half a century behind the T-72B3, so many boxes have already been crammed that they do not need to shoot, because they are also of high quality - an order of magnitude better , in Syria, in order to drive the barmaley, he did not bite into the arc ...
        ---------------
        That's what I mean. Who are we going to fight with? Because nobody knows. Who told you that there will be tank battles where Armata is needed? And who told you that fighters will fight or they will break through missile defense? WHAT-WHAT? What will the Russian Federation gain by defeating Germany, breaking through the missile defense system and rolling out the Leopards? 30 million Arabs who fundamentally do not want to work and 30 million gay parades? And from above, like a straw in a cocktail - 2 windmills for the whole country and a cry - it's cold, aphids, and there is no light, the nuclear power plant is over?
        And if everyone will fight, as they have fought until now - against farmers - why stealth at all?
        1. 0
          27 September 2021 18: 25
          Quote: Cowbra
          And that's not the point. Imagine a dialogue in faces:
          - Comrade Minister! The Armata tank is ready for serial production !!!
          - Why the heck?
          -?!?!?!
          - In the Far East, everything that cannot swim by itself will do only for monuments, in the west against 250 Polish Abrams, half a century behind the T-72B3, so many boxes have already been crammed that they do not need to shoot, because they are also of high quality - an order of magnitude better , in Syria, in order to drive the barmaley, he did not bite into the arc ...
          ---------------
          That's what I mean. Who are we going to fight with? Because nobody knows. Who told you that there will be tank battles where Armata is needed? And who told you that fighters will fight or they will break through missile defense? WHAT-WHAT? What will the Russian Federation gain by defeating Germany, breaking through the missile defense system and rolling out the Leopards? 30 million Arabs who fundamentally do not want to work and 30 million gay parades? And from above, like a straw in a cocktail - 2 windmills for the whole country and a cry - it's cold, aphids, and there is no light, the nuclear power plant is over?
          And if everyone will fight, as they have fought until now - against farmers - why stealth at all?

          And who said that we will attack? NATO needs Russia's resources. It is approaching us, it arranges provocations like 08.08.08 and usrains.
  6. +14
    27 September 2021 05: 46
    A strange analysis ... The presentation was almost yesterday only and already criticism and discussion of prices ... Let them finish the plane or something ...
    1. +3
      27 September 2021 06: 06
      That's it.
    2. +2
      27 September 2021 09: 19
      Quote: carstorm 11
      A strange analysis ... The presentation was almost yesterday only and already criticism and discussion of prices ... Let them finish the plane or something ...

      Well, in general, su 57 has been finishing for 10 years already
      1. +1
        27 September 2021 09: 59
        It has been serial for the second year, as it were.
    3. 0
      27 September 2021 18: 28
      Quote: carstorm 11
      A strange analysis ... The presentation was almost yesterday only and already criticism and discussion of prices ... Let them finish the plane or something ...

      Well, first you need to finish, and then present, otherwise they dreamed of ordering 300 aircraft, etc.
      1. -5
        28 September 2021 00: 17
        You can't do that now. You present the proposal first. You will come with a finished car there and you will wait 10 years for proposals.
        1. 0
          28 September 2021 01: 12
          Quote: carstorm 11
          You can't do that now. You present the proposal first. You will come with a finished car there and you will wait 10 years for proposals.

          To be honest, idiotic logic. Absolute idiocy. What if it doesn't work out, to lose face? Before you do something, you need to analyze the market, and in order not to fall into the mud with a good chance to do something wrong and not, it is advisable not to tell anyone. Since the reputation is also needed. I personally see it this way. And what you wrote, everything can change in 10-15 years, from the policies of those countries they count on to technological breakthroughs. And then what? Money down the drain? A very irrational decision. If I had the opportunity, I would have kicked all these managers.
          1. -4
            28 September 2021 02: 10
            Well, you say this for example amers who sold hundreds of F 35 like that. This is not a grocery store, but a somolet is a high-tech product. There are risks, yes. But they are easy to calculate. If you watched the presentation, you said quite specifically about the calculations for the market. 300 cars.
  7. +4
    27 September 2021 05: 57
    The plane is clearly needed. Used in tandem with the MiG-35 is seen. A kind of shock-assault melee complex. 35th bombed, 75th covered from the air. During the battle, as the ammunition depletes, "castling" is possible.
    Quite expecting demand from Arab countries (Emirates, Saudis, Libyans, Algerians).
    Vietnam can enter the number of customers, Cuba, if this is our financial policy, with a high probability Iran. The car asks for the best in the sky of the Persian Gulf.
    Naturally, in our Danish kingdom, the plane will be in demand due at least to the fact that the renewal of the aging fleet is inevitable. Especially in the circumpolar direction as a combat unit of "border" aviation.
    The lack of interest of potential buyers at the moment is due to the "young age" and insufficient advertising promotion. But all this is surmountable.
    1. -6
      27 September 2021 06: 09
      Quote: U-58
      The lack of interest of potential buyers at the moment is due to the "young age" and insufficient advertising promotion.

      The best promotion is economic and military power.
    2. 0
      27 September 2021 06: 12
      Quote: U-58
      The lack of interest of potential buyers at the moment is due to the "young age"

      But also the fact that there is not even a prototype.
      This is how it will fly, then they will show interest
    3. +6
      27 September 2021 06: 56
      Quote: U-58
      Used in tandem with the MiG-35 is seen. A kind of shock-assault melee complex. 35th bombed, 75th covered from the air. During the battle, as the ammunition depletes, "castling" is possible.

      And what is the bad option - the MiG-35 are bombed by other MiG-35s, or also with the Su-75? What is the tactical benefit of this mix, or is it just "shob boulo" both?
      1. +1
        27 September 2021 07: 15
        A legitimate question. The SU-75 is seen as a more nimble, nimble machine that will allow it to gain air superiority. Well, in the course of the battle (yes, a short, but battle), after clearing the space, when the enemy is defeated, dispersed and turned back, you can add more bombing under the cover of already "lightened" MiGs
        1. +4
          27 September 2021 07: 43
          Quote: U-58
          The SU-75 is seen as a more nimble, nimble machine that will allow it to gain air superiority.

          In a dog dump?)))
          In terms of agility, I do not think that the MiG-35 is less agile, so the different types, for the time being, do not justify themselves.
          You just need a modern one, not expensive. with a large modernization potential, a mass aircraft that can quickly fill the current deficit and, in the future, quickly replenish losses.
          1. +3
            27 September 2021 08: 55
            Who would argue. Needed.
            Does this mean another new plane? Who will stir it up? Is it a Yak firm?
            1. +2
              27 September 2021 09: 16
              Quote: U-58
              This is meant

              I don’t know what you mean, but I’m still talking about the same Su-75.
        2. +5
          27 September 2021 09: 21
          The MiG-35 is a 9g platform, the Su-75 is an aircraft with a declared maximum overload of 8g. A very fat argument against Checkmate. Where does the "nimbleness" of the Su-75 come from? All his external sees speaks of other priorities. Even an UHT engine is needed for ... a shortened take-off according to the announced presentation. Super-maneuverability is not even mentioned. It is no longer so easy to sell it on the foreign market: if you want to compete, then you need things promoted by Lockheed Martin. And the Su-75 goes straight through the points, exactly as an affordable F-35 it is positioned, everything is repeated up to the service of the automated Alis system, oh no, Matryoshka. Sukhoi with all this dives into something completely innovative for himself: makes a single-engine, inconspicuous tailless. Before them, only Boeing with the X-32 dared to do this and failed. This does not mean that the Su-75 will fail in maneuverability, but there is no doubt that it will be inferior to the MiG-35.
          1. +3
            27 September 2021 11: 08
            In a combat situation, no one twists aerobatics with 9g overloads. This is a drain of energy. It is immediately obvious that you are far from aviation.
            1. -1
              27 September 2021 12: 38
              He did not pretend to be an expert in the field of tactics, but compared the official data of the aircraft from Sukhoi himself. In terms of overloads, the Su-75 has less overload, the manufacturer himself says. Talk about the platform's limits. Are they being achieved in reality? Yes. Should we categorically sweep them aside? no.
              F-22 vs Rafale, 1v1, you can take a chance:

              Raphael's HUD. In the right corner - the overload during the battle, it reached 9G several times. Whether it will help you or not is another question, but if you want to survive, you can twist it even more. The Frenchman could.
              1. Eug
                0
                27 September 2021 14: 07
                Overload also speaks of resistance to combat damage - conventionally (!), How many shells are able to "take" the power elements of the aircraft. But not fuel bact!
              2. +3
                27 September 2021 15: 22
                It is a masterpiece to cite as an example a training battle with almost empty tanks and no suspensions. Do you know anything about restrictions? About the pendants? Under what conditions can this MAXIMUM overload be achieved? Will a specific aircraft be able to implement it and support it, for example, on a bend? Once again I will write, do not twist with such overloads air battles. 6-7 units are quite sufficient for a maneuverable battle. The engines will no longer be pulled - the speed / energy is lost too much for the next maneuver and the plane turns into a target at low speed. Don't be fooled by the spectacular displays of technology at air shows - this is far from practice.
                1. -1
                  27 September 2021 17: 27
                  So, they enter the zone of possible clashes with ~ 50% of the fuel, and into the battle - dropping the tanks, isn't it? Why breed these rhetorical questions if the answer to all of them has already been given in a specific video. Overload and super-maneuverability (reaching large and outrageous angles of attack) at those very air shows where somersaults are twisted are two different things. In the same video, everything is clearly shown. On the left of the HUD there is an AOA parameter - this is the actual angle of attack. It did not exceed the entire battle of 30 degrees and was apparently artificially limited on Rafal. So this is how it can be seen, he is actually not tied to overload. And even more: indeed, with a large 40,50 and more degrees, it can be obtained only at low speeds, so that your tail won't be blown off by the oncoming stream. I have no misconceptions about super-maneuverability.
                  1. +2
                    27 September 2021 17: 46
                    Want the answer, talk to the fighter pilots. The same MaxPower clearly describes everything on the conduct of combat on the Su-35S, its information correlates with my knowledge of tactics and with what I heard from the flyers as an aircraft technician. I did not mention super-maneuverability at all, for some reason you dragged it along.
                    1. -1
                      27 September 2021 19: 33
                      a feeling that they simply did not understand each other. In general, I also think that one should not neglect the theory of energetic maneuverable combat, and that, for example, showing the figure of a bell at an air show "so that Doppler radars will lose you" and so on is complete nonsense. You just got hooked on the fact that no one twists 9G, and I got hooked on a video of a real workout where they twist. But he hinted that this should not be emphasized. It is about the capabilities of the aircraft, not the pilot.
                      The background of the battle from the video is not known, maybe this is not their first duel and the Frenchman decided to try unusual tactics. I repeat, they were one on one and the profit / risk from the exchange of energy is already higher than in a group battle. Moreover, it was noted by those two commentators that they say the guy constantly exchanges excess energy for a turn to the raptor, in order to always keep his nose hot at any cost. Maybe the raptor's nerves broke down and he made some mistake. But these are all non-standard situations. Here my opinion is almost the same as yours.
    4. +2
      27 September 2021 09: 33
      The MiG-35 has a declared combat load less than that of the Su-75. The MiG-35 does not and will not have a built-in sighting system on the ground, on the suspended one - questions. The declared range of the MiG-35 is less than that of the Su-75. So why should it be this way and not vice versa? It is not clear why the MiG-35 is needed at all if the Su-75 with such outstanding characteristics appears. Only if the Mig is cheaper to maintain and it is necessary to bomb the broads, but this is a conditional Yak-130 can do.
      1. +1
        27 September 2021 10: 49
        But the Su-75 is not yet, and the MiG-35 flies and does not fly badly!
        1. 0
          27 September 2021 13: 07
          Eh, you didn't see a bit of sarcasm in my words about the Su-75. But for me personally, the MiG-35 is not the future of the Russian Air Force, but its present, which is rapidly becoming obsolete. Of course, this is not so much his fault, during this period it was difficult for many. It will become (if at all) like the Su-30SM - as long as there is something fresh and for the plant to work. For some reason, at the MIG production site, they are now boasting about the introduction of a rack on which all the necessary electrical harnesses are pre-loaded. Just welded steel pipes and savvy. The case when it would be better not to show where the "brainstorming" of the Migovites is directed. At the same time, Lockheed workers are assembling an F-35 power frame wearing augmented reality glasses.
          And of course, let the military decide what and how to fight, if only this does not make sense, which can be discussed on the forums
          1. -1
            27 September 2021 20: 53
            Quote from Flanker692
            At the same time, Lockheed workers are assembling an F-35 power frame with augmented reality glasses.

            In general, the Su-57 is also being assembled with glasses, so, by the way, there were pictures
      2. 0
        27 September 2021 15: 29
        All the fuss is done for the sake of engine unification! And just one engine! Let me remind you that two engines, judging by the statistics of the Soviet Air Force, are in no way more reliable than one! And our statistics are very rich! Let us also recall the Su-17M3 / M4 and MiG-21/23/27 families in Afghanistan - Markovsky's book "Hot Skies of Afghanistan" to help. Everything flew reliably and relatively inexpensively! On the MiG-29, duplication of units by engines. For example, KSA is one and is driven by two engines.
    5. 0
      27 September 2021 17: 03
      Quote: U-58
      The lack of interest of potential buyers at the moment is due to the "young age" and insufficient advertising

      The lack of interest of buyers at the moment is due to the lack of the subject of purchase.
    6. -2
      27 September 2021 18: 29
      Quote: U-58
      The plane is clearly needed. Used in tandem with the MiG-35 is seen. A kind of shock-assault melee complex. 35th bombed, 75th covered from the air. During the battle, as the ammunition depletes, "castling" is possible.
      Quite expecting demand from Arab countries (Emirates, Saudis, Libyans, Algerians).
      Vietnam can enter the number of customers, Cuba, if this is our financial policy, with a high probability Iran. The car asks for the best in the sky of the Persian Gulf.
      Naturally, in our Danish kingdom, the plane will be in demand due at least to the fact that the renewal of the aging fleet is inevitable. Especially in the circumpolar direction as a combat unit of "border" aviation.
      The lack of interest of potential buyers at the moment is due to the "young age" and insufficient advertising promotion. But all this is surmountable.

      absolutely unnecessary for the RF Aerospace Forces. In all respects, it will be inferior to the Su-57, and in the same price. 100%. There's no point.
  8. +3
    27 September 2021 05: 58
    Su-75 as Siberian projects of Shoigu
    1. -1
      27 September 2021 06: 05
      Quote: parusnik
      Su-75 as Siberian projects of Shoigu

      Only less "global". lol
  9. +2
    27 September 2021 05: 59
    (Un) needed Checkmate: who will buy the new Russian fighter
    ... How to inflate an elephant from a fly ??? The main thing is not to make out who to poke your finger at, who is the main swindler?
  10. +4
    27 September 2021 06: 08
    If there really is an anchor customer, then you just need to build this model! Then others will catch up, if the Americans are not frightened off.
    1. AUL
      +4
      27 September 2021 09: 11
      Quote: ASAD
      If there really is an anchor customer, then you just need to build this model!

      Just! I remember a couple of years ago we reported that there were customers for boats from VNEU. Therefore, I remember the proverb about a chicken, a nest, a testicle and something else (I don't remember exactly).
      1. 0
        27 September 2021 10: 18
        The customer is, first of all, an advance payment.
      2. 0
        27 September 2021 10: 32
        that there are customers for boats with VNEU

        A strange comparison - boats with VNEU are a completely new topic, while the SU-75 inevitably uses the Su-57 developments in many ways.
        1. 0
          27 September 2021 13: 10
          VNEU - a new topic
          and the boats were
          1. 0
            27 September 2021 13: 53
            But after all, it was not only about VNEU, but about all the equipment and the whole concept of the submarine. We needed GAS and weapons, and energy at a new level, and a higher level of automation. And with all this there are still problems.

            And in the case of aircraft, everything you need is already either there, or in development for the Su-57, and this is clearly in the final stages. IMHO there is a very big difference between the conventional "Lada" and the Su-75 in the coefficient of novelty
  11. -5
    27 September 2021 06: 10
    A single-engine riveted monster.
    There will be good savings.
    The aircraft will be built faster than conventional Dryers.

    A flock of such fighters will look more effective.
  12. +4
    27 September 2021 06: 18
    Checkmate is translated into Russian not "checkmate", but simply "checkmate".
  13. +2
    27 September 2021 06: 21
    A curious dabbler asks, maybe this is a promising model for "Kuzi"?
  14. 0
    27 September 2021 06: 48
    However, time passed, and foreign buyers did not show up ...
    ... It is obviously too early to draw conclusions: the plane does not exist neither in the serial nor in the pre-production version.

    Something uniformity of similar market offers becomes ... ridiculous:
  15. +4
    27 September 2021 07: 09
    It's hard to judge, let him first go into the series, and when it will be difficult to judge ... thanks to effective managers, we have shifts on all fronts in 2010, when the Su 57 took off, we also heard that by 2020 the Air Force will have 200 of them, hmmm, we are the result we all know, India will take it, and besides, there will be a queue of countries wishing to buy, what can you say, time will show it is difficult for us to make predictions
  16. +2
    27 September 2021 07: 29
    Strange statements, either from the author of this text, or from half of the commentators.
    Who is selling a ready-made aircraft now, especially a serial one.
    Okay, there are Boeings / Airbuses, which take pre-orders for non-existent models for 10 years ahead, this is a slightly different market. But the Fu35 mentioned here was also sold in the amount of hundreds of pieces long before even the layout was assembled.
  17. +3
    27 September 2021 07: 36
    And, for example, I don't see any special problems in creation.
    If, of course, you believe the statements of our officials.
    And they say that all (almost) the filling has already been worked out on the Su57, and (almost) no new equipment is expected.
    And this is very good news considering the big problems we have with electronics.
    They also say that the engine will be serial, which means that the situation in which the Su57 is now will not be repeated.
    All that remains is the glider, but here, it seems, our industry is still able to do something.
  18. +3
    27 September 2021 07: 42
    The only thing with which I agree with the author is that it is impossible to believe in the price of 25 million.
    Is that for a "naked" glider, and radar, avionics, and other stuffing will go as a trailer at the request of the customer. How cars are sold now, even without rugs and mud flaps.
  19. +1
    27 September 2021 08: 50
    The only reasonable explanation seems to be that 25-30 million is the “internal” price of Checkmate for Russian videoconferencing

    It’s hard to believe, it’s enough to see how much new cars cost today. And in the UAZ Bukhanka worth under a million and close there are no such materials and equipment, production technology, as in an airplane.
  20. +1
    27 September 2021 09: 50
    I am starting to get the impression that the state does not need the SU-57 and MiG-35 at this stage.
    If we talk about the MiG-35, then there are no serious orders and are not expected, it seems that it is only about maintaining the design school.
    If we talk about the Su-57, then the pace of deployment of this model is very alarming. At the same time, the state continues large-scale purchases and modernization of models of the previous generation, conducting an active information campaign, according to which they are generation 4 ++++ and are in no way inferior to the 5th generation from the same USA.

    Apparently, in this situation, the state is ready to bet on a deep modernization of 4th generation aircraft, since the 5th generation in the person of the Su-57 and MiG-35 does not have any serious advantages over them, and the cost is clearly higher than that of the 4th generation models for a long time and firmly. standing in production.

    And the SU-75 fits quite well into this picture. It will be a good addition to the 4 ++++ generation aircraft, light and simple, economical (suitable for performing routine tasks such as patrolling or intercepting) and, most importantly, it will be much cheaper.
    1. +3
      27 September 2021 10: 02
      The MiG-35 is a typical 4th generation. It is really unnecessary from the word at all. No advantages over the Su-30/35. There are plenty of cons.
      The Su-57 has too much novelty for the current level of the military-industrial complex. This is not an upgrade of the Su-27. That's why it's going so hard. But this is a very necessary and important fighter. F-35s have already riveted about 700 pieces, J-20s are already several dozen, not to mention the F-22s, which have not been answered for 20 years.
  21. +3
    27 September 2021 10: 04
    The fact that the Su-75 has one engine instead of two (as is the case with the above-mentioned machines) does not change much: modern aviation systems include a lot of expensive electronics, complex systems and subsystems. The engine itself no longer plays such a big role in the nominal price: this has a greater effect on the cost of operating the fighter.


    Turbojet engine - no fret West .... and its production capacity (and production time) is limited. Accordingly, from 100 turbojet engines, you can build either 50 or 100 fighters. The question is to find a balance and application, where you need 2 turbojet engines and a range, and where you do not need it, and the Su75 is as effective as the Su57
  22. -9
    27 September 2021 10: 10
    In fact, the Su-57 hammered nails into the lid of the F-35 coffin.

    If the Su-75 is actually released in the form as planned, then it will also dance on this cover. laughing
    1. +6
      27 September 2021 10: 39
      Su 57 is not even in the series, but he has already scored something there.

      Su 75 exists only on paper, but it will dance.

      Alternative reality it is, yes.
      1. -13
        27 September 2021 12: 13
        Well, as if the production of the F-35 and all its purchases stopped immediately after the launch of the Su-57 into series. Maybe just a coincidence or maybe ... laughing
        1. +1
          27 September 2021 12: 19
          1 production aircraft. Wow. NATO terrified, massive layoffs from the Air Force.

          And why didn’t you ask about the topic, then you would be aware that the reason for the Pentagon’s refusal to purchase:
          1. A large number of defects
          2. Extremely expensive maintenance and cost of flight hours.

          Accordingly, when this is eliminated (if it is still relevant), then purchases will be resumed.
          Plus, there are more than 700 of them. Much more then and against whom?

          But you have chosen the version that the Americans are horrified by the next "analogue" in a single copy. OK.
          1. -4
            27 September 2021 12: 28
            That is a coincidence?) I don't mind laughing

            Well, if for you the technology of production of the real 5th generation is just measuring the number of aircraft produced, then I pass here laughing
            1. +2
              27 September 2021 12: 45
              Let them produce the same amount, master technologies, solve inevitable problems, and make a sane mass production.
              Then it will be possible to talk about the Su-57.

              And his papery steepness is of little interest. The Death Star is still cooler.
          2. +4
            27 September 2021 13: 41
            Shopping hasn't stopped and there are no plans to stop. In recent publications, I have not seen any mention of any insurmountable technical difficulties. There is a topic with exploitation in dry sandy regions such as the Middle East. The blades of the first stage of the F-135 engines have a temperature higher than that of previous aircraft and the mineral particles of desert air melt on their surface, incapacitating them. Lockheed comes up with something about this.
            At the moment, there are two main limitations: First, the mentioned cost of an hour. Congress and the military are not yet completely sure, but they will master a thousand other F-35s, if they fail, as planned and as Lockheed promises, to reduce the cost of an hour to $ 25 by 2025. There is no aircraft to replace the F-35 in the foreseeable future. In the worst case scenario for the F-35, they will leave / produce a certain amount of F-16s for routine work. But again, this is a question that will be addressed in 2025-2030. And the second, close deployment of the Block 4 version, which is too much touted that Congress is thinking of curtailing current production to the maximum. And now they are looking for a balance, as well as not reducing production too much, so as not to raise the cost per unit and so that not too much later had to be upgraded to Block 4. Moreover, it is very vague, but they explain that Block 4 is called a machine capable of dominating the hypothetical threat of China in 15 -20 years. The current Block 3, according to the military, suits them completely.
            A runner is some special type of people who write the same nonsense non-stop.
            1. +1
              27 September 2021 13: 47
              Thanks for the detailed explanation.
            2. -5
              27 September 2021 14: 23
              Wangyu: there will be no more F-35 assembled from scratch. laughing

              ,, The American manufacturer of fifth-generation fighters, the F-35, has ceased production of these combat aircraft indefinitely.

              Coronavirus pandemic introduced adjustments to the production of the F-35, but the press release also indicates "a much more interesting problem" - identified technical problems in the aircraft.

              "Technical problems and the impact of Covid-19 have stopped the preparation of test events and facilities on which complex tests of the most expensive US weapons system are to be carried out," said a spokeswoman for the US Undersecretary of Defense.
            3. +1
              27 September 2021 15: 46
              In the worst scenarios for the F-35, they will leave / produce a certain amount of F-16s for routine work. But again, this is a question that will be addressed in 2025-2030.
              / And "Typhoon", "Rafale", "Gripen"?
              Are they still modern?
              1. 0
                27 September 2021 16: 09
                This is an interview with US Air Force generals. Everything is hazy in Europe. If I don’t get confused with the countries, now at an early stage the Anglo-Italian and French-German-Spanish sketches of the new generation aircraft. It seems that negotiations are underway to unite again as with Eurofighter, but so far there are no prospects for this. Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen are being modernized, there are new and relatively new versions with AFAR. All these aircraft are purchased in limited quantities, mainly for their own needs.
                1. +1
                  27 September 2021 17: 20
                  Thank you for the answer, what will we wait for the 6th generation from the French).
                2. 0
                  27 September 2021 18: 09
                  In light of the history of the submarines, probably not.
              2. +1
                27 September 2021 16: 14
                Quote: Maxim G
                What about Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen?
                Are they still modern?

                More than. Advanced avionics, non-afterburning supersonic cruising, excellent maneuverability. They are distinguished from the 5th generation only by the absence of advanced stealth.
                1. +1
                  27 September 2021 17: 21
                  Thanks). Rafal, like his predecessors, "Mirages" of different generations have always liked).
    2. 0
      27 September 2021 11: 06
      Nick didn't score anything ..... F35 is the main fighter and tactical bomber of NATO countries ... and will not be exported to third-party non-aligned countries for a long time ..... Su 57 and Su75 still need to compete with F35 ... ...
      1. 0
        27 September 2021 12: 50
        Something tells me that the SU 75 will compete with unmanned fighters.
        1. +1
          27 September 2021 12: 52
          It is still far from fighters, but for strike missions it will be with the same turbojet engine - Hunter
        2. +1
          27 September 2021 18: 31
          It will have an unmanned mode already, optionally, like the Su-57
  23. -2
    27 September 2021 10: 50
    Not tired of releasing empty articles? VO - even so - not a yellow ura-site.

    On VIKI, even the dimensions of the SU 75 are not. Which confirms the official statements that at least the drawings began to be developed after the exhibition.

    And despite the PR checks and mats, the foreigners did not give money for the plane, the Russian military did not order.
    So everything is exactly the opposite. A 2-seater SU57 will sooner appear, training planes are always needed, than the 75th will do quickly ...
  24. 0
    27 September 2021 11: 18
    They learned to come up with pretentious names for projects, but no one thought to translate them into real.
  25. 0
    27 September 2021 11: 22
    Uv. author. The most expensive thing about a fighter is the engine.
  26. +7
    27 September 2021 12: 41
    So we are back where we started.
    This is the main message of the article.
  27. -2
    27 September 2021 13: 02
    In my opinion there will be no "checkmate", to have 2 full-fledged fighters for Russia today is the height of excess.
    And there is strong doubt even about the "Armata" and the Su-57.
    Neither the technological, scientific, nor financial capabilities of the country - today - allow the implementation of programs so complex and with so many innovations.
    There is a reasonable minimum of "reasonable sufficiency" - and that should be done.
  28. -5
    27 September 2021 14: 24
    EVERYTHING, finita la comedy drinks

    ,, The American manufacturer of fifth-generation fighters, the F-35, has ceased production of these combat aircraft indefinitely.

    Coronavirus pandemic introduced adjustments to the production of the F-35, but the press release also indicates "a much more interesting problem" - identified technical problems in the aircraft.

    "Technical problems and the impact of Covid-19 have stopped the preparation of test events and facilities on which complex tests of the most expensive US weapons system are to be carried out," said a spokeswoman for the US Undersecretary of Defense.
  29. exo
    -1
    27 September 2021 15: 22
    The engine price starts at $ 3 million. It is unlikely that this amount can be called "insignificant". Plus, taking into account the small resource of domestic engines, considerable costs for maintenance and repair. So, minus one engine is a big savings in the long run.
    1. 0
      27 September 2021 18: 07
      Quote: exo
      The engine price starts at $ 3 million.

      Where is the droushka?
  30. -1
    27 September 2021 16: 41
    Excellent article
  31. 0
    27 September 2021 20: 00
    Let this miracle first be purchased (at least for arming 2-3 regiments) of the RF Armed Forces
  32. exo
    0
    27 September 2021 20: 36
    Quote: Zufei
    Quote: exo
    The engine price starts at $ 3 million.

    Where is the droushka?

    "Based on this, the PS-90A2 should cost approximately 110 million rubles (or 3,5 million dollars). This is almost half the price of the CFM56-5 engine installed on the A320 family aircraft." Managing Director of the Perm Motor Plant (PMZ) Mikhail Dicheskul. "(with)
    http://www.ato.ru/content/permskie-motory-hotyat-22
    And there is also personal experience. But, I will not provide invoices for which aircraft engines come to my a / company.
    The engine that will go to the fighter will be of a newer generation, which means it will definitely be more expensive than the PS-90
    1. +1
      27 September 2021 21: 27
      Proof of 2010 for a turbofan. It would be interesting to know about the price of the product 30. But I understand that pricing in this case is a policy, and also a secret one.
  33. -1
    28 September 2021 01: 25
    For 30 years without the USSR, only the Su-57 was made and only in the form of one production copy. And a great many of these mock-ups are being made, only in reality our Air Force, renamed the Aerospace Forces, fly on even modernized, but Soviet aircraft.
    The fifth generation has already entered in reasonable quantities in many air forces of countries bordering with us, and we have plans to receive only one Su-10 regiment in 57 years, with a predictable failure of this plan.
    1. -1
      28 September 2021 06: 16
      If you still tell me what kind of 5th generation aircraft are in other countries, it will be great in general laughing
      1. 0
        28 September 2021 11: 11
        USA and allies - about a thousand F-22 + F-35. China - about a hundred J-20.

        In Russia, the only Su-57 is in service.
        1. -1
          28 September 2021 12: 10
          Do 22, 35 and 20 have anything to do with the 5th generation? laughing
          1. 0
            29 September 2021 20: 25
            Do 22, 35 and 20 have anything to do with the 5th generation?

            This is our Su-57 has nothing to do with the fifth generation in any way, therefore its creator Poghosyan was sent to rest quietly, and they are in no hurry to launch it into serial production.
            1. 0
              2 October 2021 15: 58
              Don't give thanks, study drinks

              What is the Su-57 and how does it differ from the F-22 and 35.
              1) The world's first combat fighter with optional unmanned mode
              2) The world's first fighter capable of carrying hypersonic missiles.
              3) The world's first fighter with actually working stealth technology (none of the 57x transfers to the SAR were tracked by the radars of either Israel, Turkey, or NATO as a whole.
              4) The world's first fighter capable of flying drones as part of a single complex
              5) flight characteristics exceeding even the flight characteristics of the Su-35 of the most maneuverable MFI in the world.
              6) Immediately after the Su-57 was put into service (December 2020), the production of the F-35 was completely stopped and their purchase was stopped. Coincidence? I don’t think so.
              7) And this is only from the known
              1. 0
                4 October 2021 09: 23
                1) both the F-22 and the F-35 and many aircraft of the 4+ generation have this
                2) The Su-57 does not carry hypersonic missiles from the word at all, they are carried by the MiG-31, a generation 4 aircraft that took off more than 40 years ago and only one.
                3) The RCS of the Su-57 is much higher than that of the F-22 and F-35, and in the infrared mode it is ten times more noticeable, with the invisibility of the Su-57, and this is recognized by its manufacturers. And even a Tu-95 or B-52 can be secretly transferred, as they have done so many times and it has never been stealth.
                4) The avionics of the Su 57 are significantly inferior in their characteristics to the F-22 avionics, not to mention the F-35, the capabilities of the avionics of which are already unattainable for us.
                5) We do not have an aircraft, with flight characteristics similar to the F-22, perhaps after testing the product 30 will be, but not yet
                6) It's a complete lie, the Su-35 is still in production
                7) All this is complete nonsense, we do not have an aircraft comparable to the F-22 and F-35
                1. -1
                  5 October 2021 12: 21
                  Maybe it makes sense for you to teach materiel? laughing
                  1. 0
                    6 October 2021 03: 43
                    What exactly do you disagree with?
                    1. -1
                      7 October 2021 10: 55
                      With your slogans;)
                      1. 0
                        8 October 2021 00: 40
                        Slogans are politics, and I have given you the facts. Which of these facts do you disagree with? I answered you for your every fact
      2. 0
        29 September 2021 20: 19
        If you still tell me what kind of 5th generation aircraft are in other countries, it will be great in general

        The best fighter in the world today is the F-35, in total exceeding the number of all our fighters capable of flying.
        In your reality, of course, the MiG-29 of the 1985 model is significantly superior to the F-35, and the only Su-57 is capable of shooting down all aircraft 24 hours a day simultaneously in the Far East, Crimea and Kaliningrad.
        And in real reality, we have nothing to oppose their F-35, against their hundreds of AWACS aircraft in modern modernization, we have only three A-50Us on imported electronics from the 90s, almost a dozen A-50s on Soviet tube technologies from the 70s.
        1. 0
          30 September 2021 07: 25
          Is the F-35 the best fighter in the world according to mom or grandma? laughing
          1. +1
            30 September 2021 08: 19
            The F-35 is the best according to the pilots who faced it or flew it, it is the best according to the version of the whole world. And only our media have formed a stable picture among those who are not used to thinking with their own heads that this is a lousy plane.
            I don't want to prove to you otherwise, because you probably believe in the fake that our Su-24 in the Black Sea knocked out all the electronics, including Aegis on the destroyer Donald Cook
  34. +1
    28 September 2021 10: 46
    If we look at the Su-57 or the Chinese J-20, we will see that these machines, most likely, did not find a single foreign client at all.


    Did anyone offer them for export?

    The official noted that Russia has an anchor customer for the new aircraft. Moreover, supposedly "it is being done for him."


    What other information would you like to hear? There is a customer, he pays, he is not obliged to declare himself openly. A military secret. I have no questions here. This is the only scheme according to which this project can be successful, our Air Force does not really need it, the development cost and a larger number of aircraft required, plus a decrease in the level of unification compared to the production of only the Su-57, after the departure of all Su-27 derivatives, will be easily blocked lower cost of owning a single aircraft.

    However, time passed, and foreign buyers did not show up.


    Should you already? Did you see a land-based full-scale stand and ran to order? This is a citizen. aviation liners can contract before development, because they will definitely fly. In the military, either you participate in the development, or you buy ready-made and working, and this, according to optimistic statements, will be in 5 years. Well, in 5 years, they will come to see if there will be a plane for sale or not.

    The only reasonable explanation seems to be that 25-30 million is the “internal” price of Checkmate for Russian videoconferencing systems.


    First, this price is just a recalculation of the ruble value, and the ruble now has a rate 1-2 times lower than its real purchasing power in Russia. That is, if the Central Bank wants to return the ruble at 2.5, then the plane will be at 30-50 million. e.

    Secondly, if in the world a certain product costs about 2 million, plus or minus from the options, and you make it at 100, then you will still sell it for 25 million. Well, maybe at 100, like ours is cheaper. And have a much higher margin than the competition. And certainly no one will sell cheaper than the buyer is willing to pay, because each contract is negotiated for a long time.
  35. 0
    28 September 2021 18: 52
    The Japanese man assembled the model and tested it. It flies perfectly ...
  36. 0
    28 September 2021 18: 54
    Quote: t-12
    USA and allies - about a thousand F-22 + F-35. China - about a hundred J-20.

    In Russia, the only Su-57 is in service.



    Eleven. That's exactly how much ...
    1. 0
      29 September 2021 19: 20
      And exactly? It seems to me that if there really were so many of them in the ranks and flying, then on some "Zvezda" this would probably still be trumpeted.
  37. -1
    1 October 2021 22: 28
    - Maybe it will actually be launched into the series ...
  38. +1
    1 November 2021 17: 23
    How can you sell an aircraft that does not fly, is not produced and is not accepted for service ????
  39. +2
    7 November 2021 19: 55
    Quote: Cowbra
    The problem with demand is that in the modern world, no one except India and Pakistan understands what kind of war to prepare for. For the same aviation - the USA built the F-117, B-2, F-22, F-35 - and none of those baubles that were clocked on them - NEVER were useful to them - they always did not break through the air defense, but bombed any overt Air defense zone - and now the US is buying SuperTucano corn makers.

    - How can you say such incredible nonsense ?! The F-117 broke through the air defense, and it was great - and in Iraq-91, and in Yugoslavia-99, and again in Iraq-2003! You can't be ignorant to such a mind-blowing degree! There are no censorship words ...
    The F-22 has worked (and is still working!) In Syria for many years, has worked and has been working for MANY YEARS, patrolling the Persian Gulf, driving Iranian Phantoms with worn rags ...
    Only this is never told to you on Russian TV channels ... laughing lol
  40. 0
    19 November 2021 17: 58
    I think that if in ten years or so this wunder-glider goes into service with the Aerospace Forces, then in a clearly cut, cheaper version, different from the export models. And a series of 60 cars maximum is also the only real one. Remember how many SU-57s were promised in 2010 - 250-300 units. A total of 76 cars in the order after 11 years. And those will be built for 8 years. In the meantime, there are roofing felts 6 roofing felts 12 motley prototypes together with one combatant, and the one with engines is not from the project. For a long time I have not believed in the promises of officials in the Russian aviation. I only believe in facts. They will fulfill the promise, this pepelats will be on the wing, honor and pride for the manufacturer and creators, for the country. And the rest, the grandmother said in two. P.S. No matter how good or bad the F-22 and F-35 are, they are there. Adopted for service. Produced or produced in series and not 12 pieces. It is a fact. The rest is bragging.
  41. kig
    0
    10 December 2021 03: 00
    It's like selling lots on the moon.

    You can see them too

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"