Military Review

Su-57: fifth generation, sixth or does it matter?

166

After the publication of an article on the interaction of the Su-57 and S-70, in a pile of comments familiar to our time, there was one, with the author of which we continued privately well. And the reader put forward several of his options, one of which I decided to analyze "by the ribs."


The main message from the reader was that the Su-57 is a full-fledged fifth-generation aircraft, respectively, its on-board computing power will be able to ensure autopiloting of the machine even in combat conditions, while the pilot is distracted by the control of the UAV.

Doubtful. You can talk a lot about artificial intelligence in modern aviation, however, the autopilot is also an autopilot on the Tu-134, and during the battle it will not be able to provide normal aerobatics of the aircraft. And talking about artificial intelligence is just ridiculous. It has so far only been 100% implemented in the State Duma.

But let's go in order.

In general, disputes have been going on for a long time on the topic of what generation of aircraft the Su-57 is. The last time the Chinese threw on the fan so lightly, but there is no need to draw conclusions, you just need to see what they can do in this regard.

In the same way, we leave aside the Americans. We are only interested in our aircraft and its potential to become both the main fighter of the Russian Aerospace Forces and an aircraft capable of waging network-centric wars.

If you take history development and birth of the Su-57, the fact that the aircraft has been developed for about 35 years is not bad. No, it's really helpful. Put aside the problems with financing at the beginning of the journey, at the end we get the development of all possible options. It’s hard for me to judge, 15 copies for testing is a lot or a little, but with such a quantity it was possible to work out anything and test the aircraft in all modes.

The fact that the first production copy was banged is also a matter of familiarity in the world of aviation. The Americans smashed five Raptors, and nothing. Aircraft, especially new ones, have fallen, are falling and will continue to fall, regardless of the country of origin. This is the fate of any new aircraft.

Not that the author has such irrepressible optimism, no. It's just that the real problems of the Su-57 lie in a slightly different, from my point of view, area.

But we will return to the generation.


In fact, the question of which generation the aircraft belongs to is conditional. 4, 4+, 4++, 4+++ and so on. What does it affect? Only for the price. Moreover, both at the selling price for those who want to buy, and at the price that the producing country fills itself.

Let's remember what an airship the US aviation and military publications looked like in the 90s, when the F-22 began to portray something like that in the sky. How it was all presented. And nothing that the Raptor choked its pilots with oxygen system failures, but it was the first fifth generation fighter!

And in themselves, the requirements for the fifth generation aircraft were and are very vague. That is, there seems to be a set of qualities, but compliance with it is a rather conditional thing. But according to many experts, the fifth generation combat vehicle should have the following qualities:

1. Wide attacking possibilities. The aircraft must be able to work on air, surface and ground targets, be versatile and multifunctional.

In fact, fourth-generation aircraft also possess these qualities. Universality in general is the scourge of our time, the fighter-bomber is a symbol of universality.

2. The ability to fire at targets while moving at supersonic speeds, to carry out all-round fire at targets in air combat.

The MiG-21 could also attack at supersonic speed. There is no need to even talk about later models of interceptors. But all-aspect shelling of targets is not as simple as it seems. For this, side-looking radars are needed, just what the Raptor does not have, and the F-22 pilot must not release a missile from the aircraft’s radar field of view, which is not an advantage in combat, but quite the opposite.

3. Super maneuverability.

This is just a Russian "trick". Yes, our planes have it to a sufficient extent. Thrust-vectoring engines, advanced wing mechanization, a pilot's assistant in the form of a flight computer - and yes, Russian aircraft differed for the better.

However, the question arises of the following nature: is super-maneuverability really necessary in air combat if aircraft are fighting at distances of 20-50 km with the help of missiles, which have also evolved quite decently?

And the second question: how easy will it be to implement the training of flight personnel specifically in matters of super-maneuverability? To what extent can on-board computing systems help combat pilots in this? And will it not turn out in the end that super-aerobatics will remain the lot of professional aces who perform at the air show?

We will return to electronics issues at the end separately.

4. Supersonic speed without afterburner

Everything here is not smooth and uneven. The reason for this is the engines, which are not. That is, the engine of the "first stage" AL-41F1 is, but it does not suit, but they will fly on it. And the one that suits, "Product 30", it is still not there, and when it will be, everything is vague and vague.

For the sake of justification, it is worth noting that not everything is even and smooth for competitors in this regard, and “cruising supersonic” exists with a dozen reservations.

It is clear that until “that” engine is installed on the Su-57, there is no point in talking about any performance characteristics, because fortune-telling is on coffee grounds.

The situation, of course, is peculiar, there is a plane, but it is impossible to judge, because the engine is of the “first stage”. Here, in general, you can turn off all the talk, because so far there is no engine of the “second stage” and there is nothing to judge and nothing to judge. Too many characteristics remain "behind the scenes" - speed, maneuverability, efficiency, respectively, the flight range and the amount of combat cargo carried on board.

It turns out that we have before our eyes an ordinary prototype, nothing more.

5. Stealth

Here it is worth frankly admitting, but we did not spend so much time and resources on this matter, neither in the USSR, nor in Russia. “We have no one to fear, we have nothing to hide” is not quite the motto, but the fact that the United States began developing stealth much earlier and received the first results earlier is a fact.

So hypothetically, since absolutely ALL data on the real numbers of the same EPR (effective dispersion area) are classified for everyone, we can say the following: the Su-57 outwardly does not differ much from American aircraft. The same lack of right angles, the same maximum "flatness", the same coatings that absorb or scatter radio waves.

Of course, there are nuances. Many experts noted a large amount of uncovered metal in the tail section of the aircraft, where the engines are. There is an opinion that in the rear projection the Su-57 will be simply perfectly visible, both in the radio range and in the infrared.

The visibility of the aircraft on departure is, of course, yes, but is it so critical? But this is not the main thing. If the AL-41F1 is temporary, and the other engine will have different dimensions and configurations, then there is no point in puzzling over the protection. THAT engine will start instead - so the time will come to fence the garden. Radar blockers, coatings, curved air intake ducts, and so on, everything that is on American aircraft.

Stealth is generally a conditional thing. How to look, how to look... Anyway, the “invisible plane” is not even for this century, it is somewhere out there, in the future. And a lot depends on how and against which opponents the aircraft will be used.

6. Electronics

Here, perhaps, it is worth dividing into two components.

The first group is an aerobatic complex. The second is combat.

It is worth starting with the aerobatic complex, since you still have to fly to the use of the combat one. The flight complex takes on the task of monitoring the technical condition of all on-board aircraft systems, monitors the entire flight, warns and corrects pilot errors, and helps with control.

In general, these things have been worked out for us, and they have been worked out quite well, otherwise no one would have bought the aircraft of previous generations. Yes, India refused to jointly build a fifth-generation aircraft, citing precisely the fact that avionics and electronics do not match. We leave it on their conscience, because we do not know what they are clinging to.

It is clear that the requirements for the fifth generation are higher than for the previous one, but it is in the Sukhoi corporation that they know how to build aircraft. Otherwise, out of the six Su-30s built, five would not have flown in other countries.

As for assessing the level of electronics in the Su-57, one can only guess how much it lags behind or surpasses American aircraft.

They say that the onboard flight systems on the Raptor and Lutning may well allow the pilot to completely distract himself from piloting and do more important things at that time, pointing weapons, for example, or an assessment of the tactical situation.

Such statements should be treated with a certain degree of skepticism, since in practice not everything was rosy even among the Americans. But - do not praise - do not sell.

Combat complex.

Everything here is really very difficult and there are a lot of tasks. And it is electronics that should solve the problems. The Su-57 is a single-seat aircraft, so a very large load falls on the pilot, in contrast to two-seat aircraft, where duties can be divided.

It is believed that a fifth-generation aircraft simply cannot be considered as such without such a thing as a tactical situation indicator, capable of receiving information from various groups of sensors and mixing it, giving the pilot a ready-made picture.

Naturally, the aircraft is simply obliged to have in service (namely in service, and not in equipment) a separate combat automated control system capable of solving tactical problems with minimal involvement of a pilot.

In fact, it is not artificial intelligence. A system capable of analyzing, according to data received from surveillance equipment, the nature of targets and assigning importance to them - this was already known in Soviet times.

Today is the ability to exchange data with other aircraft, ground control systems and air defense systems. Redistribute targets between your combat units in order to destroy them as efficiently as possible.

It is simply impossible to say how well all this is implemented in the Su-57. On the one hand, this is good, the enemy does not need to be aware of such things, on the other ... On the other, it’s also good. If these issues are implemented in our domestic systems, that's great. But whether the layman should be so well versed in this is a question that does not require an answer. Sometimes it's enough just to be sure of some things.

As for the electronics of the Su-57, the only thing we can say with confidence is that the onboard radar has an active phased array and a decent number of transmit-receive antenna modules throughout the fuselage. This provides the pilot with virtually all-round visibility and allows you to control missiles from all angles, without changing the direction of flight.

In theory, all this equipment should work both in active and passive mode. It is clear with the active mode, this is a combat mode, without which missiles cannot be guided. The passive mode is also very useful, with it the aircraft simply “listens” to the environment with its entire surface and builds a tactical picture based on the reception of signals from other people's radars.

Additional view cameras. A very important option, it is useful for the pilot to see the situation both in the ultraviolet range and in the infrared. There are such cameras on the Su-57, how many of them are a question, but they definitely are. This means that the pilot has a view at least forward in these ranges.

It is very important for on-board systems to be able to collect, process and provide the pilot with a “squeeze” from tactical information. Moreover, it doesn’t matter whether it’s on a tactical situation screen or a helmet-mounted screen. Of course, a helmet with the ability to point weapons "by sight" is wonderful. Here, too, there is a complete failure in information, only conjectures and fortune-telling.

Here is a brief summary of what we are getting on the fifth generation fighter.


The answer to the question of whether the Su-57 is a fifth-generation fighter is simple: no, it is not. This is still a concept, albeit adopted.

By the way, it is reasonable and understandable.

The fifth generation aircraft is a very complex machine, especially in terms of electronics. I'm not afraid to say, but perhaps the Su-57 is the most complex aircraft in the history of our country's aircraft industry. Even the Tu-160 cannot be compared in many ways. In general, it is difficult to say how the fate of the project will develop in terms of the fact that sanctions from the whole world, namely in the field of electronics, we are 100% dependent on other countries, it is difficult to say, there are many fears.

But even today it can be said that the engine that was planned during the design is not yet available, until all stealth work is completed, and they can be completed only after the appearance of the “Product 30” in kind, until that time the Su-57 is prototype, concept, call it what you want.

Therefore, criticism of the number of aircraft, on the one hand, is fair. On the other hand, why do we need frankly unfinished, flawed aircraft in service? Why is it necessary to produce today's Su-57 in huge quantities? For the cheers on the internet? So our electorate is yelling about and without “cheers” ...

76 cars by 2028. It's about nothing. This is absolutely nothing, given the pace at which the United States produces its aircraft. By the way, China is in no way inferior to the Americans in terms of output growth.

We have a lot of problems. Technologies have been lost, personnel have been lost, what remains to be lost in connection with recent events is a question ... We are facing huge losses in electronics. Yes, perhaps China will help us, but China is not omnipotent. It is a fact. Even today, the PRC sells far from everything that it can sell.

There is no import substitution, and you should not believe in these beautiful fairy tales that we replaced everything here. It's just a lie. Everyone is already aware of how this “import substitution” works: by re-gluing labels, nothing more.

In light of these problems, one should not expect very rapid leaps in the development of the Su-57. From a prototype to a combat aircraft, the path is not easy and long, especially in the conditions in which Russia was plunged.

But even without sanctions, the path that the Su-57 must go through, even by analogy with American aircraft, will be replete with modifications, improvements and improvements.

Therefore, one should not expect the imminent appearance of the Su-57 in all aviation units. Combat use in Syria? Perfectly. This is an experience. Flight training at the Combat Application Center? Fine. This is experience, this is the training of instructors who will retrain pilots after a while. Flying with the S-70? Also good. The new concept requires comprehensive study and development. At least, there will be an understanding of the extent to which it is generally possible to use such a bunch as the Su-57 and UAVs in combat moments.

Perhaps the S-70 will not go into production, just as much of what has been invented in our country in recent years has not gone. Maybe the Su-57 will not be able to become the center of network-centric air combat. The main thing is not this, the main thing is developments that will allow you to pick up another aircraft or create another UAV.

By the way, the drone simply has to be cheaper, otherwise there is no point in using such a toy for such money.

In any case, today it is worth treating the Su-57 as an unfinished prototype, which still has many steps to go towards perfection. And when all issues are removed from the agenda, then the Su-57 will become a full-fledged fifth-generation fighter. Not earlier.

A fair question will arise: why then do we need this imperfection in such quantities?


The answer is simple. The imperfection with the AD-41F1 engines will be very useful for retraining pilots. It is clear that everything is not easy with the “Product 30”, the notorious “shifts to the right” have arisen, and it is not known when the engine will be really ready.

Is this a reason to give up? No. This is an occasion to teach pilots new electronics, new avionics, new aircraft with cheaper engines. To work out, in the end, options for interaction with UAVs and other combat developments.

When a real engine appears (precisely “when”, not “if”), then the Su-57 will become a real fifth-generation aircraft. So far, this is nothing more than a prototype for training and practicing various combat techniques. But this machine is quite useful today, for obvious reasons.

It remains to be hoped that the step that separates the Su-57 from real membership in the fifth generation aircraft club will be made.

Although it is worth noting that this will not give anything but a higher price on the arms market. A good plane is a good weapon, and it doesn't matter what generation it belongs to. This is important only to managers and military politicians. The choice is made by pilots who get into the cockpits of their aircraft and fly on combat missions. And the numbers of the generation and the cost of the aircraft are not so fundamentally important to them, the combat capabilities of the machine are important to them.
Author:
166 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Aerodrome
    Aerodrome 20 May 2022 04: 24
    +2
    In any case, today it is worth treating the Su-57 as an unfinished prototype, which still has many steps to go towards perfection.
    I already started to forget about him, as well as about the T-14 ...
    1. Woodman
      Woodman 20 May 2022 08: 43
      +1
      Quote: Aerodrome
      I started forgetting about him

      And in vain
      MOSCOW, May 20. /TASS/. The Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) use Su-57 fighter jets during a military special operation in Ukraine. This was told to TASS by a source in the military-industrial complex. "The use of Su-57 aircraft in Ukraine began two to three weeks after the start of the special operation. The aircraft operate outside the zone of active destruction by enemy air defense systems, using missile weapons," the agency's interlocutor said.
      1. TreeSmall
        TreeSmall 20 May 2022 12: 38
        +1
        The Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) use Su-57 fighter jets during a military special operation in Ukraine. This was told to TASS by a source in the military-industrial complex.

        This is some bullshit.
        Objective data on the use of these combat aircraft, as well as official statements in this regard, have not yet been.
        and the "sources" they are (the author of the "news" picking his nose with his finger: why not?
        the VKS of the entire Russian Federation has 3 (three) Su-57s. The first, which arrived in November 2020 at the flight test center in Akhtubinsk, and two new ones, "will be used to retrain flight personnel for new combat vehicles."

        Aircraft operate outside the zone of active destruction by enemy air defense systems, using missile weapons," the source said.

        why then swell billions on a 5th generation aircraft if it flies "out of the zone", where 4th and 3rd generations work. Meaning?
      2. Negro
        Negro 20 May 2022 18: 25
        0
        Quote: Lesovik
        The Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) use Su-57 fighter jets during a military special operation in Ukraine. This was told to TASS by a source in the military-industrial complex.

        There were no statements by Konashenkov, but "a source in the military-industrial complex" disclosed classified / classified information to journalists? What about journalists from a state agency? Did I understand this news correctly?
        1. Volkof
          Volkof 22 May 2022 17: 47
          +1
          An empty article about nothing! The author formulated his requirements for the 5th generation aircraft, but he, like many, does not know why the 5th generation aircraft is needed! What is the purpose of the 5th generation aircraft? To be better than the 4th generation aircraft - does not work !!! Who knows ? Are there people on the forum who know or have an opinion? Ay!
          If a person does not know the main thing, why write nonsense?
          The answer to the question of whether the Su-57 is a fifth-generation fighter is simple: no, it is not. This is still a concept, albeit adopted.

    2. svoroponov
      svoroponov 7 July 2022 09: 55
      +1
      The small series of T-14s is already in operation in the army and the Su57 went in a small series to our Air Force. Everything goes on as usual. Yes, and new engines for Su are already being tested on 2 sides.
  2. kytx
    kytx 20 May 2022 04: 47
    +5
    The author is Captain Obvious. In general, this battle for the 5th generation is incomprehensible to me. Nothing breakthrough in the existing aircraft of the "5th generation" is yet to be seen either with us or with the Americans or the Chinese. Perhaps the exception is f35 with its bius.
    1. Winnie76
      Winnie76 20 May 2022 13: 37
      +2
      Radar with five AFAR arrays not? Baran sneezed?
    2. d4rkmesa
      d4rkmesa 20 May 2022 16: 17
      -4
      There would be a breakthrough if the Su-57s acted with impunity in Ukraine, for example.
      1. WapentakeLokki
        WapentakeLokki 20 May 2022 21: 48
        -1
        maybe you have Info: where, who and when ''with impunity'' acted in the sky of which country .. the Americans rushed about with their F-117 and .. lost one in Yugoslavia .. their B-2 was used with very serious reservations in terms of air defense (in no way superior in terms of efficiency to the same B-1B) .. The F-22 didn’t work on the ground at all. + .- F-35bloc only for a GREAT price .. and I summarize .. you can fly with impunity only in the sky where there is NO AIR DEFENSE AT ALL. a panacea - there are MZA and Needles & Stingers .. but then why worsen aerodynamics with the angularity of Stels .. technologies ???
        1. svoroponov
          svoroponov 7 July 2022 10: 04
          0
          I will add. One F-117 crashed in Yugoslavia, the wreckage was able to show. The second F-117 was shot down by the Yugoslav MiG-29 and crashed outside the country, which is why they don’t advertise its downing.
  3. FRoman1984
    FRoman1984 20 May 2022 05: 07
    -7
    So far, of course, this is a 4 ++ aircraft, like the Su-35S. Stealth has never been at the forefront of the creation of the Su-57. And the author correctly noted: stealth is a myth. It depends on what to look at (wavelength), how to look (at what angle, on a collision course or overtaking), and so on.
    We need the Su-57 like air, with a new engine. This is a matter of prestige of the country. So that "friends" do not accuse us that we live on the backlog of the Great Country, endlessly modernizing both tanks and aircraft of the 80s in the 4th circle.
    And of course, 76 cars are about nothing. 3 regiments.
    1. Oleg Barchev
      Oleg Barchev 20 May 2022 22: 31
      +3
      The 5th generation aircraft is a machine that has absorbed the entire intellectual, creative and technological level of the country and society. And no less important is the confirmation of the ambitions of the scientific and technical community in its viability and the presence of an advanced school of development and production.
  4. Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 20 May 2022 05: 08
    +2
    the aircraft was developed for about 35 years - this is not bad.
    "Oh, you've been digging for a long time, Cossacks! Oh, and for a long time!"
  5. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 20 May 2022 05: 37
    +3
    Is super-maneuverability so necessary in air combat if aircraft are fighting at distances of 20-50 km using missiles
    So I thought, isn't it necessary? As far as I know, a significant part of the missiles flies up to an air target with a burned-out engine (at least it has such a mode) and is no longer able to maneuver vigorously. And this is where an energetic super-maneuver (joke) will completely thwart the defeat.

    There is an opinion that in the rear projection the Su-57 will be simply perfectly visible, both in the radio range and in the infrared.
    The Su-57 is far from exclusive in this regard, even an ordinary case.
    1. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 20 May 2022 06: 53
      +4
      When avoiding a MANPADS attack, super-maneuverability is oh so necessary.
      In Ukraine, everyone saw how our planes and helicopters escaped MANPADS attacks ... not always successfully.
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 20 May 2022 06: 58
        +10
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        When avoiding a MANPADS attack, super-maneuverability is oh so necessary.
        No, well, a fighter against MANPADS is a failure in departure planning!
        1. Lech from Android.
          Lech from Android. 20 May 2022 07: 15
          +5
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          No, well, a fighter against MANPADS is a failure in departure planning!

          Well, who knew that the SU34 would manage to shoot down MANPADS ... I understand that this is a pilot's mistake at low altitude to attack the target ... request but they got it down.
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 20 May 2022 07: 21
            +7
            Quote: Lech from Android.
            Well, who knew that the SU34 would manage to shoot down MANPADS

            And the Su-34 is a front-line bomber, and its flight at low altitude is almost the main mode!
            1. Lech from Android.
              Lech from Android. 20 May 2022 07: 24
              +6
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              The Su-34 is a front-line bomber, and it has almost the main mode of flight at low altitude!

              When the enemy is saturated with Stingers and Needles, this is crazy.
              With the SU-25, okay, they can still fly low ... they have good armor and survivability ... with the SU-34, such a number will not work.
          2. TreeSmall
            TreeSmall 20 May 2022 12: 54
            -3
            There are no high-precision weapons that allow an attack to be carried out outside the range of the MANPADS.
            Hephaestus turned out to be empty.
            Operation "victorious" in Syria played a bad role.
            Of course, there has never been such a saturation of the MANPADS of the battlefield. There, every Selyuk is on a donkey: a combat crew of MANPADS.
            This means a planning error.
            Well, the armored capsule turned out to be zilch. 1,5 tons of ballast.
            An order of magnitude cheaper than the Su-25, but 20 times more available: it would bring benefits 30 times more significant.
            1. d4rkmesa
              d4rkmesa 20 May 2022 16: 22
              -1
              Yes, all these KAB-500S, UPAB and Kh-29. But these are expensive products, respectively, they are protected. For some reason, cheap upgrades did not appear, moreover, contrary to popular belief, the current FABs are by no means from bottomless (no) reserves from the USSR, but flooded relatively recently.
              1. TreeSmall
                TreeSmall 20 May 2022 17: 01
                0
                Is the pilot and plane cheaper?
                Count on the bottomless reserves of the USSR, 30 years after its collapse belay
                1. d4rkmesa
                  d4rkmesa 21 May 2022 17: 45
                  0
                  "A pilot and a plane are cheaper?" The question is not for me. You know, we love to imitate. Instead of weapons and the use of the WTO, the photo reports are solid everywhere.
                  1. TreeSmall
                    TreeSmall 21 May 2022 20: 49
                    +1
                    I know. Therefore, I wrote.
                    Not only photo reports.
                    Let me spit:
                    “How much did it cost to build the Temple of the Armed Forces?”
                    recourse
                    1. Osipov9391
                      Osipov9391 22 May 2022 02: 08
                      -1
                      And why is the Su-39 with protection against MANPADS bad? But they refused it. At least they could build in Ulan-Ude.
            2. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 20 May 2022 17: 58
              +5
              Quote from TreeSmall
              Hephaestus turned out to be empty.

              What nonsense, Hephaestus is not intended for aiming a single bomb, his task is to accurately dump a series of bombs into a hundred-meter penny. And they did the same at Azovstal. You just need to understand in Ukraine there WAS layered air defense and the Su-34 broke through it at low altitudes. Hence the losses at the beginning of the operation from MANPADS, single, by the way, no matter what you imagine.
              Quote from TreeSmall
              Well, the armored capsule turned out to be zilch. 1,5 tons of ballast.

              Another stupidity, the pilots were taken prisoner, so the armor worked.

              Quote from TreeSmall
              An order of magnitude cheaper than the Su-25, but 20 times more available: it would bring benefits 30 times more significant.
              When suppressing air defense then? Hand face.
              1. Osipov9391
                Osipov9391 22 May 2022 02: 12
                0
                In cases near Chernigov and near Kharkov, the Su-34 pilots ejected. In the first case, this is a MANPADS, in the second, a Buk. The only thing is that the navigator of the downed near Chernigov was shot from the ground while descending by parachute.
                Near Borodyanka, at the end of February, one Su-34 was shot down by a Ukrainian MiG-29, the pilots ejected and evacuated.
                The second was shot down by an S-300. The crew died.
        2. Dmitry Zadorozhniy
          Dmitry Zadorozhniy 23 July 2022 08: 29
          +1
          Personally, in March, I watched two drying, spinning over Azovmash, Mariupol, if anyone does not know. On them 8 EIGHT! Starts p.z.r.k. the guys did not shoot the traps, but none of the p.z.r.k. did not go to the target. Well, while the Marines were distracted by fighters, the faces came up and combed everyone. From my house to Azovmash, 1,5 km. What the guys have on the day for the suppression system, no idea.
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 25 July 2022 11: 47
            -1
            Quote: Dmitriy Zadorozhniy
            I personally observed in March, two drying, spinning over Azovmash,

            Su-25, not Su-34.
      2. Sergey Valov
        Sergey Valov 20 May 2022 09: 48
        +1
        Supermaneuverability is possible only at scanty near-zero speeds, otherwise either the plane will fall apart or the pilot will not survive. And what we get is either not to use super-maneuverability, or to fly in battle at meager speeds with all the consequences. I don’t even doubt which option the pilot will choose.
        1. SovAr238A
          SovAr238A 23 May 2022 13: 18
          +2
          Quote: Sergey Valov
          Supermaneuverability is possible only at scanty near-zero speeds, otherwise either the plane will fall apart or the pilot will not survive. And what we get is either not to use super-maneuverability, or to fly in battle at meager speeds with all the consequences. I don’t even doubt which option the pilot will choose.


          So.
          The maximum speed for any super-maneuverability (let's not forget the usual physics that super-maneuverability gives a direct dependence in the form of a multiple increase in overloads) does not exceed 500 km / h. And all these aerobatics - even more so.
          A very trained pilot will withstand 9G as much as possible once, then he will be incompetent for several minutes from the word in general.
          The same overloads for air defense missiles are at least 4-6 times more.
          Up to 30 when maneuvering along the course.
          And some with micro nozzles on the fuselage are almost 50.
          therefore, super-maneuvering at low speed is a failed idea in 9 cases out of 10.
    2. kytx
      kytx 20 May 2022 14: 28
      +2
      I agree about maneuverability. But ... Anti-missile maneuvers should be handled by automation, not by a pilot. Yes, it's complex logic.
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 20 May 2022 17: 49
        +1
        Quote: kytx
        Anti-missile maneuvers should be handled by automation, not by a pilot. Yes, it's complex logic.
        Yes, although with the introduction of EDSU at least it became possible in principle.
        1. kytx
          kytx 20 May 2022 20: 10
          +1
          Edsu are possible from instant21. The problem is in algorithms with a high degree of probability in different modes and taking into account many factors
  6. Blade3
    Blade3 20 May 2022 05: 50
    -11
    If stealth characteristics are considered a determining factor, as in the case of LM aircraft, then the 57th is more likely the 6th generation or 5 ++


    So, what do we have at this stage, and specifically what is the Su-57 and how is it fundamentally different from the F-22 and 35.

    1) The world's first combat fighter aircraft with an optional drone mode and advanced AI on board.

    2) Heavy MFI 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) And this is only from the known

    Ps Start of development - 2001, for reference to the author lol
    1. Pulkovo1942
      Pulkovo1942 20 May 2022 09: 55
      +3
      It's interesting, but you keep counting how many times this nonsense was copied from the Internet.
      1. Blade3
        Blade3 20 May 2022 10: 40
        0
        Study, analyze, materiel to help you
      2. MauZerR
        MauZerR 20 May 2022 12: 43
        -2
        He pulls this shit into every topic on aviation.
    2. SovAr238A
      SovAr238A 23 May 2022 13: 49
      +1
      Quote from blade3
      If stealth characteristics are considered a determining factor, as in the case of LM aircraft, then the 57th is more likely the 6th generation or 5 ++


      So, what do we have at this stage, and specifically what is the Su-57 and how is it fundamentally different from the F-22 and 35.

      1) The world's first combat fighter aircraft with an optional drone mode and advanced AI on board.

      2) Heavy MFI 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) And this is only from the known

      Ps Start of development - 2001, for reference to the author lol


      Again, this half-bot, banned three times for his total lying, began to carry outlandish nonsense.
      Puts it everywhere.
      True, he stopped putting the point that the F-35 was stopped producing ...

      And everything is like clockwork for him.

      And not a single point - there is not a word of truth.
      But any attempt to explain something to him - causes the answer "learn the materiel" ...
      The very same materiel, even within the school program - does not know.
      Well, yes, I will repeat it again for the rest.
      1. An optional unmanned mode, and even more so no AI, does not exist in the Russian Federation in principle. To understand this, you just need to understand a little about programming and expert systems. And also know the system of university education in IT departments.

      2. Some modern URVVs are hypersonic missiles. They can reach peak acceleration speeds of 5M. But no more. There are no real hypersonic missiles (that is, missiles of full motion at hypersonic speeds) of the size of the internal compartments and are not expected for another 5-7 years.

      3. The Su-57 does not have stealth technologies. For the blades open to all radars are visible in the frontal projection. The rear of the engine is also completely open. It is not known yet what is there with the lantern. For this is not the easiest technology. Make a stealth lantern.

      4. He doesn't know how to drive a drone. If you carefully watch the video of the "joint flight" - then it is clearly visible that the S-70 is controlled remotely, and the Su-57 simply flies after it. Repeating his maneuvers.

      Start of development - again...
      The design of a promising multifunctional fighter to replace the Su-27 and MiG-31 began in the USSR in the late 1970s. On July 5, 1981, the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR issued a decree on a comprehensive target program for the creation of such aircraft.
      The design of a promising multifunctional fighter to replace the Su-27 and MiG-31 began in the USSR in the late 1970s. On July 5, 1981, the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR issued a decree on a comprehensive target program for the creation of such aircraft.

      In the late 1990s, the Sukhoi Experimental Design Bureau won the competition for the creation of a promising 5th generation front-line aviation complex (PAK FA). The aircraft project (aviation complex I-21) has been developed since 1999.

      Liar in everything.
      1. Blade3
        Blade3 23 May 2022 17: 01
        +1
        Chel, study the materiel, there is already a lot of information on the 57th for analytics.
  7. mark1
    mark1 20 May 2022 06: 17
    +12
    Sorry, author, but the main and main drawback of the Su-57 in today's configuration is precisely the lack of large-scale serial production, and by no means the engine of the "wrong system", but with edition 30 the aircraft will be much better, but with the AL-41F1 it is very doesn't look bad.
    1. kytx
      kytx 20 May 2022 20: 18
      +1
      The wash does not pull. Hello wmv1. :(
  8. Magic archer
    Magic archer 20 May 2022 06: 39
    +3
    But the THIVES who stole BILLIONS calmly leave the country (Chubais) and go free on parole (Ulyukaev) and then we ask why there is no money for new planes, ships, etc.! The oligarchs have more yachts frigates! China has the death penalty for embezzlement and corruption. I think in our country such articles, oh, would not interfere. But. The wrong people are at the helm ...
    1. kytx
      kytx 20 May 2022 17: 14
      0
      Only here it is not necessary to start this record about corruption and the death penalty in China. You don't know anything about Chinese corruption.
  9. svoroponov
    svoroponov 20 May 2022 06: 42
    0
    An engine with a flat nozzle has been flying on 2 sides of the Su-57 for about a year.
    Since 2023, the Russian Ministry of Defense has been ordering C70 in batches, which means that new engines are already being tested on them.
    If there are sensors that determine the approach of the rocket - the angle and removal, then if the aircraft is maneuverable, evasion is quite possible. A rocket at high speed cannot perform a change of direction behind a maneuvering target instantly. Therefore, there is a distance to the rocket, when it is quite possible to evade with the help of a certain maneuver, and this tactic is being worked out - what is called - evasion at the last moment.
    1. Jacket in stock
      Jacket in stock 20 May 2022 10: 49
      +9
      Quote: svoroponov
      A missile at high speed cannot perform a change of direction behind a maneuvering target instantly

      A missile with a transverse control engine as part of a gas-dynamic control belt just can. But the plane cannot, it is large and heavy, and the person in it is weak and infirm.
      1. svoroponov
        svoroponov 20 May 2022 15: 56
        -1
        I have been a flight instructor for my life. Combat use. Learned how to fight and defend. I know what I'm typing. Advertising is advertising, but life is far from being the case.
        Javelins were widely advertised, their real effectiveness, for example, in Mariupol (in the city), is none.
        Abrams was prepared as an impenetrable tank primarily for Soviet grenade launchers. And, it makes its way into the side projection of the RPG-7. They praised that the tower does not come off when broken. For now, they only carried anti-tank shells - which have a core in the form of depleted uranium scrap. As soon as high-explosive fragmentation began to be added to the ammunition, detonation began and the towers began to fly off. So, before the battle, American tankers tried to remove these shells from the tank's ammo rack. They praised American surveillance satellites - they see everything under any conditions and -
        clouds over Ukraine over the places of hostilities and immediately lost control of the Ukrainian troops due to a sharp decrease in intelligence. Satellites simply do not see the situation through the clouds.
        So it is with aircraft missiles. The advertisement is engine of the trade.
        Another example for you is radar-guided missiles. Use the Doppler effect while there is movement, aiming at the target. If, when approaching such a rocket, for example, the figure of Pugachev is performed, this is when the plane freezes for a few seconds, then the operation of the missile guidance system loses its target, the capture fails and, accordingly, misses. There are also ways to evade an aircraft from a missile and certain maneuvers. Well, yes, pilots need to be trained, that's right, that's what is being done.
        1. svoroponov
          svoroponov 20 May 2022 16: 13
          -1
          A dozen years ago, the Americans held exercises with the Bulgarians. Air battles with the use of the most advanced aviation missiles at that time (simulators without a warhead) .F-15 against the MiG-29. As a result, there were no hits by American missiles fired from long distances on Bulgarian aircraft, according to the means of objective control. When approaching, there were hits by Bulgarian missiles on F15. In the ensuing air battle, the Americans had no chance at all. Conditionally, they were all destroyed. But these are only exercises.
          In India, during exercises with the Americans, the Indians on the MiG 21 ,, Bison ,,! in training battles, they did not leave the Americans in F15 and F16 a chance to win. Well, google how ours flew to America and conducted training battles there in the advanced aviation unit.
          1. Negro
            Negro 20 May 2022 18: 31
            +4
            Amazing stories about which it is impossible to remain silent.

            Yes, Soviet vehicles have always won training gun battles. It’s a pity they didn’t send the Yak-3 - he would also have won a cannon battle against the F-22.

            The trouble is that for the last 40 years, gun battles have not been planned at all. The guns on American fighters are an analogue of a pistol for an infantryman.
            1. WapentakeLokki
              WapentakeLokki 20 May 2022 22: 05
              0
              comrade BLM, you know, in Vietnam, the Americans counted exactly the same .. and did not put guns on the F-4 .. and, which is typical, the old MiG-17s converging in a dog fight shot them down ... but about 40 years ... You can remember the battles in air level of Vietnam or Sinai ?? .. the fact that the Americans hit from afar is not an axiom ..
              1. Negro
                Negro 21 May 2022 00: 28
                +3
                Yes, the sidewinder story is widely known. As a matter of fact, in memory of her, the F-35 has a cannon.

                However, all these 50 years, the Americans have been developing materiel in the direction of the DVB. In fact, the only argument of the supporters of super-maneuverability is that the Americans were wrong all this time. Because if they were right all this time, then there is nothing to catch at all.
                Quote: WapentakeLokki
                remember the air battles of the level of Vietnam or Sinai ??

                "Fighting in the air" in the style of Vietnam or Sinai has long disappeared (they, by the way, can be counted on one hand in Vietnam). However, the volume of aviation work in the same 91st year was completely incomparable, for example, with one special military operation there. So your argument is kind of weird.
                1. WapentakeLokki
                  WapentakeLokki 21 May 2022 14: 07
                  -1
                  comrade, what is the stratum of Steals ... inconspicuous (well, not yet Absolutely inconspicuous) not including an on-board radar (guided with AWACS) approach highlighted targets at a launch range on a ''maneuvering'' target from invisibility by launching an AIM-120 type of missile destroying the unsuspecting (until the very moment of activation of the seeker) of any (even with super maneuverability) targets paragraph .. and everything will be exactly the same, provided that all components of the triad (DRLO + F-35 + AIM-120) will work normally .. and now the question is how break this order.
                  py.sy. a hint from the times of Vietnam .. The MiG-17s approached the F-4 at ultra-small where the radar board (of those times) was poorly seen .. then a sharp climb on a visually visible target (and the F-4s were terribly smoked by engines and went at a cruising speed quite commensurate with the speeds of MiGs) and 2x20 mm + 1x37 mm ... and how will the F-4 of his Sparrow and Sidewanders help here ..
                  py.sy.sy .. so here .. for example, the connection between the AWACS and the F-35 (and in Russia they are very good (and this is still weakly said by EW) ... or the AWACS itself (and by the way, the S-500 is already getting oh-hoo) .. and finally a war can take place in a mountainous area .. in general, options are possible .. and finally a saying from the harsh country of Sakura and Harakiri .... if the Samurai Sword may need only once .. The Samurai must wear it all your life ... well, how do you like my arguments ... convinced - no
                  1. Negro
                    Negro 21 May 2022 16: 24
                    +3
                    Quote: WapentakeLokki
                    Well, how do you like my arguments ... convinced - no

                    Did you provide any arguments?

                    I see only hope for a cunning plan. She is the hope for "maybe".
                    Quote: WapentakeLokki
                    everything will be exactly the same, provided that all components of the triad (DRLO + F-35 + AIM-120) will work normally

                    Yes, that's right.
                    Quote: WapentakeLokki
                    hint from vietnam

                    The days of Vietnam are long gone. And yes, if the enemy can only afford ambush tactics, then he has serious problems - his aviation does not work on strike missions.
                    Quote: WapentakeLokki
                    Russia is very good (and this is still weakly said by electronic warfare

                    These are ordinary stories. Russian electronic warfare does not have a single chance against the capabilities of the USA + Europe + Israel + Japan and never has. Russian electronics is famous for its capabilities even from Ilyich's light bulb.
                    Quote: WapentakeLokki
                    or the AWACS itself (and by the way, the S-500 is already getting hoo)

                    The S-500 does not exist outside of press releases, and ground-based air defense against a strong air force is useless. Even in Ukraine, there are reports in which the coordinates of ground-based air defense systems from Buk and above were brought to the APU online. The RF Armed Forces were very lucky with such a useless enemy.
                    Quote: WapentakeLokki
                    finally, war can take place in mountainous areas.

                    Who told you that the USAF does not know how to fight in mountainous areas?
                    1. WapentakeLokki
                      WapentakeLokki 21 May 2022 20: 26
                      -3
                      I gave you specific arguments and didn’t see equally specific counters .. in the spirit of your statements, you can say that all the declared performance characteristics of Steals are '' .. These are ordinary fairy tales .. '' ... and what can I say .. the point is to quarrel in I don’t see this style myself .. and lastly ... a real front-level operation was carried out by Western ''partners'' during Desert Storm .. the result is controversial .. now this kind of operation is being carried out in the territories of the DPR & LPR and Ukraine and the result limited only by the will of the Russian Aerospace Forces .. well, like humanism .. compare them and us (or for you we are not you) and draw conclusions .. and I’m finishing .. I don’t see the point in a dispute without arguments ..
                      1. Negro
                        Negro 21 May 2022 22: 48
                        +3
                        Quote: WapentakeLokki
                        gave specific arguments and did not see equally specific counter

                        You didn't give specific arguments. You talked about the experience of Vietnam in transposing political officers and about your fantasies about the fabulous Russian electronic warfare and the fabulous Russian ultra-long-range air defense. By the way, the only structure in the world that really understands ultra-long-range air defense is the US Navy. It is difficult for you to convey even the elementary fact that in order to disrupt communication between an AWACS aircraft and a fighter, the source of interference must be located geometrically between them.
                        Quote: WapentakeLokki
                        the result is controversial

                        It's hard for me to imagine a person whose Iraq 1 or Iraq 2 had a "controversial result".
                        Quote: WapentakeLokki
                        compare them and us (or for you we are not you) and draw conclusions

                        The cosplay of the Americans of the 91st year by the forces of the Aerospace Forces and the Russian Navy failed miserably, aviation operated freely only in Marik, which was 100 km behind the front line and, accordingly, could not be covered by Ukrainian air defense - and this despite the catastrophically weak performance of the Ukrainian side, which did not try all these 30 years to find a solution to the problem of lagging behind in aviation. The comparison is really indicative, but why you remembered it is not clear.
            2. svoroponov
              svoroponov 21 May 2022 09: 09
              -3
              It wasn't a gun fight at all. Combat at medium and close distances involves, first of all, the use of medium and short-range missiles in conjunction with maneuverability and, based on this use of appropriate tactical maneuvers, the use of cannon weapons, where without it. By the way, supersonic air combat is not conducted, mainly interception and withdrawal or exit from the battle when leaving. The speed in close air combat during maneuvers drops to subsonic 400-800 km per hour for everyone, no matter how perfect the fighter is.
              1. Negro
                Negro 21 May 2022 10: 08
                +4
                Quote: svoroponov
                The speed in close air combat during maneuvers drops to subsonic 400-800 km

                Yes. Therefore, the Yak-3, Zero, I-16 are stronger than the F-22. They are made for this kind of fight. Unlike a modern aircraft, which is forced to go almost at landing speed.
                Quote: svoroponov
                There was not a cannon fight at all

                "There" (when we are talking about the "successes" of Soviet technology) we are talking about maneuvers at a line-of-sight distance so that the missile's infrared seeker captures the engine of an enemy aircraft right at the moment of launch - this is how the missile works as reliably as possible. The underestimation of this moment became the problem of phantoms in its time.

                However, in modern conditions, this is not even a training battle, but a show match. All the efforts of the Americans were concentrated on pushing back the moment of launching missiles by 60-100 kilometers. In such scenarios, the Yak-3 or whatever you are going to fight there, there is nothing to catch at all. The hope that AMRAAM / Meteor is bullshit is essentially the only salvation for the Su-35 against the F-35. It is unlikely that it will be possible to shoot down the F-35 with the R-77 missile; on the AGSN R-77, stealth works one hundred percent.
                1. svoroponov
                  svoroponov 21 May 2022 13: 06
                  -2
                  You have unreliable data on the radar of our aircraft. The Su 35 captures the invisible with its station earlier and can launch a rocket already at the moment when the F-35 only starts to see it with its radar. Therefore, now there is a question about removing it, F35, from production. And google how surprised the Americans were at the capabilities and range of the MiG-29 radar, which they got after the unification of the GDR and the FRG. And about the effect of ,, stealth ,, you will figure out what it is. In one wavelength range, it can only be observed up close, and on the screens of long-wave locators, it glows like a Christmas tree. Our station is over-the-horizon (Sunflower, it seems) from the territory of Russia during an assassination attempt on the head of the military in Iran, when a mess was planned, I saw and led 5 of these American ,, stealth ,, that were spinning at the Iranian borders, transmitting data (friendly) Iranian air defense. Well, in Syria, after all, also the SU-35, covering the attack aircraft, discovered and went into the tail, simulating an attack, the F-22 earlier than it was reported from the guidance station that it was attacked. So that
                  each weapon has advantages and disadvantages. Disadvantages are hidden, advantages are advertised in order to profitably sell or something else, like you see how cool we are. But real fighting puts everything in its place. And the king in the face of the United States often turns out to be well, not naked, but half-naked, to put it mildly.
                  1. Negro
                    Negro 21 May 2022 13: 37
                    +3
                    Quote: svoroponov
                    You have unreliable data on the radar of our aircraft

                    Of course, they are unreliable - I'm not an anonymous "TASS source in the military-industrial complex." But judging by years of talk expertsthat sluggish is better than solid, and PFAR is better than AFAR, the situation is terrible. Despite the fact that the Indians have already refused to take aircraft with PFAR for 10 years, and modern Western weapons with PFAR are incompatible.
                    Quote: svoroponov
                    operating range of the MiG-29 radar, which came to them after the unification of the GDR and the FRG

                    I'm not interested in fairy tales 30 years ago.
                    Quote: svoroponov
                    The Su 35 captures the invisibility earlier with its station and can launch a rocket already at the moment when the F-35 only starts to see it with its radar.

                    The laws of physics do not apply during the period of the Special Military Operation, I heard about it.
                    Quote: svoroponov
                    on the screens of long-wave locators, it glows like a Christmas tree.

                    The trouble is that you will not put a long-wave radar in the AGSN missiles under any circumstances, and the radio command guidance of a V-V missile is certain death for the aircraft that launched it. By the way, the radar of the aircraft is also short-wave.
                    Quote: svoroponov
                    Sunflower seems) from the territory of Russia during the assassination attempt on the head of the military in Iran, when a mess was planned, I saw and led 5 of these American ,, stealth ,,

                    Another amazing story that is impossible to be silent about

                    ZGRLS are not capable of identifying any targets, except for ICBM launches, and even then with a lot of reservations. And yes, it is impossible to "transmit data" from the radar of one state to the air defense of another state (in the case of Iran, these are Hoki, Chinese Krotali, ZU-23 and a similar cabinet of curiosities).
                    1. svoroponov
                      svoroponov 21 May 2022 19: 56
                      -3
                      Many things once seemed like science fiction in technology, but today it is already commonplace. Once the computer was the size of a room, but today it can be replaced by a calculator.
                      Sunflower does not need to identify targets over enemy territory, and it’s clear that they are enemy if there is a connection with the Russian Air Force headquarters and you have confirmed that our planes are not there. In addition, the areas of appearance of targets usually correspond to the presence of airfields nearby, space intelligence and undercover data help. The whole system just works, and you consider the particular.
                      By Iran. There is an agreement on the passage of our aircraft to Syria through the space of Iran. There is a contract and a direct connection on this. Certainly there are other agreements to provide mutually beneficial assistance. And transmitting information on targets to the Iranian side with modern communication devices through closed channels in real time has not been a problem for a long time. Not a problem at all.
                      According to Sunflower. Although this radar is included in the definition of over-the-horizon in terms of distance, its main purpose is to monitor all aircraft at a distance of 900 km and further to the middle of Great Britain somewhere (exact data can be viewed on the Internet). It is located not at the border but in the middle lane. But its capabilities are really impressive. And by the nature of the movement of the target - speed, height, whether it goes along the corridor or not, one or a radar chain, they go in a group and so on, the area of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbappearance - you can identify the target with relatively high accuracy.
                      1. Negro
                        Negro 21 May 2022 23: 09
                        +3
                        Quote: svoroponov
                        The whole system just works, and you consider the particular.

                        These are your fantasies about space and undercover intelligence in the sky over Iran.
                        Quote: svoroponov
                        According to the Sunflower. Although this radar is included in the definition of over-the-horizon in terms of distance, its main purpose is to monitor all aircraft at a distance of 900 km and further to the middle of Great Britain somewhere

                        Where do you go with such knowledge? You are confusing the Sunflower with the Container, but the Container does not see Iran either. And of course, no ZGRLS is a radar in the full sense (radio detection and ranging), rather it is a radio intelligence station - it can see some movement in some very approximate direction at some very approximate distance. Since the movement of ICBMs is extremely peculiar, it is believed that ZGRLS are not completely useless as part of the early warning system, but that's all.
                        Quote: svoroponov
                        And transmitting information on targets to the Iranian side with modern communication devices through closed channels in real time has not been a problem for a long time. Not a problem at all.

                        You will be very surprised, but an awesome problem is to transmit information from the S-400 radar to the launcher of the same division. Transferring information to another division is generally a dead number. And to transfer information from the ZGRLS to the antediluvian American air defense system in another country is nothing but drug addiction.
                      2. svoroponov
                        svoroponov 23 May 2022 10: 26
                        -1
                        Maybe he confused a flower with a box, but the meaning is the same. At one time, a representative of the Russian General Staff confirmed this, according to the observation of American aircraft, and refute it.
                      3. Negro
                        Negro 23 May 2022 11: 04
                        0
                        There is no need to refute the representatives of the General Staff of the Russian Federation. And listen, to be honest, too.
                      4. svoroponov
                        svoroponov 23 May 2022 11: 02
                        -3
                        Once during the exercises, one station watched from afar the exit to the target of our squadron. Our means did not determine anything by the operation of any air defense systems in the target area. They were activated at the last moment and how we would have suffered losses. So, data about us (azimuth and distance) from long-range detection tools were transmitted to the air defense point via a closed channel and tracked on an electronic map. When approaching the target, there was a sharp activation of air defense systems with the capture of our sides and a conditional defeat. The use of anti-radar missiles did not happen, it was too late.
                      5. svoroponov
                        svoroponov 23 May 2022 11: 20
                        -3
                        I mean, the Iranians had to find out in time which side they were coming from, the number of sides and the distance from the border. It's enough . Their air defense is not weak anyway. And confirmation, if their detection tools have not yet been activated or these stealths do not see in range, is very useful.
                      6. svoroponov
                        svoroponov 23 May 2022 11: 24
                        -3
                        According to the work of our radars. When the war was fought in Iraq, our General Staff monitored the entire air situation there. Interesting what?
        2. Jacket in stock
          Jacket in stock 20 May 2022 16: 15
          +7
          Quote: svoroponov
          Another example for you is radar-guided missiles. Use the Doppler effect while there is movement, aiming at the target. If, when such a rocket approaches, for example, the figure of Pugachev is performed, this is when the plane freezes for a few seconds, then the operation of the missile guidance system loses its target, the capture fails

          Very funny.
          I am writing to you as an engineer-developer of airborne anti-aircraft missile locators. Even if it's a former one.
          1. svoroponov
            svoroponov 20 May 2022 16: 44
            -5
            So you can see that the former, but not the developer, but rather the operator or gunsmith at the airfield. If they served at all. If you analyze all your writings, then probably this is so.
            What will happen when aiming an aircraft missile with a radar homing head (MODERN ROCKET SHOT AND FORGET ,,) at a target if the target speed is sharply reduced to zero?
            1. Jacket in stock
              Jacket in stock 20 May 2022 17: 17
              +4
              Quote: svoroponov
              but not a developer, but rather an operator or gunsmith at the airfield

              Starley ZRV, lead engineer for the development of on-board devices for missiles and RVV. Former, of course.
              What will happen when aiming an aircraft missile with a radar homing head (MODERN ROCKET SHOT AND FORGET ,,) at a target if the target speed is sharply reduced to zero?
              a modern rocket will thank you more.
              Moreover, there can be no sharp decrease in speed.
              1. svoroponov
                svoroponov 20 May 2022 17: 35
                -5
                When performing the Pugachev figure, the speed can be extinguished very quickly and almost to zero. There is a failure to capture not only missiles with radar heads (which are without illumination), but also the fact - missile heads with an IR channel. It’s just that such a figure is performed only by varieties of Su 27, this is not available to others. But there are other opportunities for evasion.
                And with a sharp decrease in the speed of the aircraft to almost zero, the rocket will not say thank you. If you are a developer, then you should know this based on the algorithm for the control and guidance system of a missile with a radar guidance head as a whole. For this reason, now they are trying to introduce an additional guidance channel (IR and something else) into missiles, which is connected at certain ranges for safety net. But even for such missiles, a certain maneuver has already been developed that reduces the likelihood of defeat. Well, the electronic warfare equipment of the aircraft is being improved, as are anti-missiles and traps - imitators. But I am aware of this but have not seen it.
                1. Wildcat
                  Wildcat 21 May 2022 18: 11
                  +4
                  When performing the Pugachev figure, the speed can be extinguished very quickly and almost to zero. There is a failure to capture not only missiles with radar heads (which are without illumination), but also the fact - missile heads with an IR channel.

                  "God, where do you come from..." request
                  1. svoroponov
                    svoroponov 21 May 2022 20: 05
                    -2
                    From the aviation center for the training and retraining of fighter pilots.
                    1. Wildcat
                      Wildcat 21 May 2022 20: 24
                      +3
                      Sadness.
                      Well, tell them on command that the "radar heads" will not lose their target. She, the target, on the contrary, will shift less, which is more convenient for the "head" and the rocket itself.
                      And the "IR channel" - he generally sees that "warmly", which, with Pugachev's cobra, does not disappear anywhere.
                      1. svoroponov
                        svoroponov 23 May 2022 10: 32
                        -1
                        What are you saying. With a cobra, the engine at low gas and the jet of exhaust gases are briefly locked, as it were, at a stop and a small return to the rear. The contrast drops sharply. It was he himself who once told on TV how he came up with this figure based on the capabilities of Su and for what. questions for him.
                  2. Bongo
                    Bongo 22 May 2022 14: 07
                    +3
                    Quote: Wildcat
                    "God, where do you come from..."

                    And this is plagiarism... lol
                    1. Wildcat
                      Wildcat 22 May 2022 15: 32
                      +3
                      hi
                      Not trying to pass off as your own! He even "quoted", but did not indicate the authorship, since he believed that from 18.05.22/XNUMX/XNUMX this phrase passed into the category of "well-known".
                      I repent repeat , with subsequent applications, I undertake to indicate the author!
                      1. Bongo
                        Bongo 23 May 2022 13: 36
                        +2
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        Not trying to pass off as your own! He even "quoted", but did not indicate the authorship, since he believed that from 18.05.22/XNUMX/XNUMX this phrase passed into the category of "well-known".
                        I confess feel, for subsequent applications I undertake to indicate the author!

                        Hello!
                        For such characters as svoroponov or lucul, you can use without restrictions and specify the source! hi
        3. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 21 May 2022 03: 09
          +6
          "If, when such a rocket approaches, we perform, for example, the figure of Pugachev, this is when the plane freezes for a few seconds, then the operation of the missile guidance system loses its target, the capture fails and, accordingly, a miss" ///
          ----
          Freezing won't help. They will hit 100%. Missile radars
          have long been trained not to lose the target with such tricks.
          Do not teach such nonsense to young pilots, they will die.
          1. svoroponov
            svoroponov 21 May 2022 09: 26
            -4
            Many aircraft after launching missiles with a radar seeker (Western aircraft) do not illuminate the target. When a target is captured by an aircraft radar, target data is transferred to the electronic unit of the missile and its head. After launch, the illumination can be carried out from the aircraft for a short time, to ensure that the rocket head has accepted the target, after that it turns off so that the aircraft itself does not become the target. The missile, its head itself is already working in the target holding mode, performing the function of a radar and working out a certain guidance algorithm. So if the target loses speed almost to zero, then this algorithm is violated and the capture fails. It takes time to search for and restore capture, but the target and the missile itself do not stand still. Moreover, a maneuverable target can sharply change the direction of flight to the exact opposite after a zero maneuver. In this case, the missile may not find a target at all. There will be a miss and self-destruction.
          2. Negro
            Negro 21 May 2022 09: 39
            +3
            Quote: voyaka uh
            Do not teach such nonsense to young pilots, they will die

            Here, planes are shot down with their tongues, so it's okay. They won't die on the couch.
            1. svoroponov
              svoroponov 23 May 2022 11: 08
              -2
              If you start teaching, then as soon as the Americans took off, you should immediately teach the pilots to eject, because in your opinion there is no chance of avoiding their missiles? Yes, you will go far in defense of the Motherland.
              But it’s easier to talk to fighter pilots with the rank of captain and above, with extensive experience in combat flights and preferably taking part in hostilities, at least in Syria. And so we simply crush the water in a mortar. And in general, why do many here have a vision that “Everything is lost and we will all die”?
          3. svoroponov
            svoroponov 21 May 2022 09: 57
            -4
            You know, you have a very good opinion of foreign missiles.
            Once again, Javelin was also praised, considering the best in the world and the result? In the city, it is not applicable at all, which is why the Americans get rid of it. A lot of things can be cited by such prodigies
            The problem of evading missiles by our fighters was the lack of means of determining the direction of approach of missiles and the range to them. Such means have appeared (as detection, suppression, and so on). Hence, tactical methods for evading such missiles are being developed and are available. Once again - when the capture fails, the missile does not instantly find the target. She has a very narrow head capture sector, in addition, in the final sections, her engine usually does not work and she flies by inertia, any maneuvers that are not even large dampen her speed. So pilots will be taught evasions and tricks, this is no longer given to me now, old age, but those whom I once taught fought, if necessary, successfully.
            1. Negro
              Negro 21 May 2022 12: 14
              +2
              Quote: svoroponov
              Javelin was also praised, considering the best in the world and the result?

              The result - low-quality infantry disrupts the tank blitzkrieg in the style of grandfathers and forces them to switch to artillery warfare in the style of great-grandfathers. Yes, Javelin is the best ATGM in the world at the moment. Too strong for a poorly trained user.
              1. svoroponov
                svoroponov 21 May 2022 12: 47
                -4
                The advertisement is engine of the trade. Javelin is not all weather. Cannot operate at night. When the battery of the rocket is discharged, it is necessary to replace it in a specialized workshop with further new tuning and checking the parameters. And yet, the French suggested during the NATO exercises - if the tank fidgets forward and backward, that is, it does not stand still but performs such shuttle movements, the effectiveness of the complex is practically reduced by an order of magnitude and the tank is not destroyed. In addition, if the signature of the tank is changed from above - it is covered with a camouflage net, there is an extensive lattice with frequent plates above the turret at a certain distance, the efficiency also drops sharply and there is no damage with penetration.
                Stinger has a problem too. It is necessary to direct, capture the target and launch with the complex running within 30 seconds. If you didn’t have time, then you have an ordinary club in your hands. So imagine how to do it during the battle. Okay, an ambush at the most likely appearance of an aircraft or acts of sabotage with access to a pre-selected position or case. But often this is not the case.
                So even a very trained soldier may not be able to cope with a combat mission.
                1. Negro
                  Negro 21 May 2022 13: 04
                  +3
                  Quote: svoroponov
                  a trained soldier may not be able to cope with a combat mission.

                  It is difficult to imagine such a task with which a serviceman cannot fail to cope. Especially TerO.
                  Quote: svoroponov
                  The javelin is not all weather.

                  Oh those hunting stories. Non-weather IR seeker, very interesting.

                  The Javelin showed exactly one drawback: no single weapon, even the best in the world, is a REPLACEMENT for a quality army.

                  Not that this was news to anyone.
                  1. svoroponov
                    svoroponov 21 May 2022 20: 13
                    -5
                    Ukraine to help you and reviews about prodigies through the mouth of the enemy. There, after all, they are often used (try) by professional mercenaries from NATO countries fighting for Ukraine. The Ukrainians watch the military and then comment on the reviews in social networks. It's very interesting to read.
                    The effect is very low.
                    1. Negro
                      Negro 21 May 2022 23: 15
                      +2
                      Quote: svoroponov
                      The Ukrainians watch the military and then comment on the reviews in social networks.

                      I still lacked only military analytics from Ukrainian social networks in the retelling of LiveJournal and Z-channels of the telegram.
                      1. Wildcat
                        Wildcat 22 May 2022 22: 27
                        +2
                        hi
                        And I like this subject: "svoroponov (Vyacheslav)
                        From the aviation center for the training and retraining of fighter pilots.
                        "
                        There is something in it ... autochthonous:
                        About Javelins
                        "the French suggested during NATO exercises - if the tank fidgets back and forth, that is, it does not stand still, but performs such shuttle movements, the effectiveness of the complex is practically reduced by an order of magnitude and the tank is not destroyed"


                        "Cast iron" - better than "smart cast iron"
                        Hephaestus as an aiming system turns their use into a precision weapon. Very, very cheap and very angry. The deviation from the target of a conventional bomb does not exceed 10 meters in the entire range of altitudes of its use.


                        Well, about the Penguins, which are just that ... absolutely that ..
                        The Su 35 captures the invisibility earlier with its station and can launch a rocket already at the moment when the F-35 only starts to see it with its radar. Therefore, now there is a question about removing it, F35, from production.


                        In general, in difficult times, when there are no interesting discussions about American torpedoes, KRL Alaska and American politicians up to and including Nixon, watching such subjects is a little entertaining, a kind of guilty pleasure. Catching myself on this new vice...
                        request
                      2. Negro
                        Negro 23 May 2022 08: 44
                        0
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        in hard times, when there are no interesting discussions about American torpedoes, KRL Alaska

                        Let's get the discussion right.

                        Why the hell did Alaska become KRL? am
                      3. Wildcat
                        Wildcat 23 May 2022 22: 14
                        +1
                        laughing
                        Well, why not KRL?
                        Okay, big cruiser.
                        Excellent artillery of the Civil Code, a large number of barrels in a salvo, for all purposes, up to the Congo - certain death.
                        Speed ​​and air defense allow you to operate together with aircraft carriers.

                        Yes, "you can do it differently", but what if you want a cruiser, but only a very large one?

                        Yes, a little expensive, a little late and a little unlucky with the goals, but what can you do?
                        It is now clear that "it can be done differently", but in the 40s of the 20th century the idea "we will drive missile launchers and accompany aircraft carriers with this thing" seemed normal, it would be a pity for battleships for such things, IMHO.

                        It’s a good thing, it’s a pity Spruence didn’t have it at Midway, it was possible to drive wounded animals more beautifully and, in general, try to reach out to the landing detachment ...
                      4. Negro
                        Negro 24 May 2022 08: 42
                        0
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        Well, why not KRL?

                        Apparently, the KRL is a light cruiser, and the battle cruiser is an LCR.
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        Yes, "you can do it differently", but what if you want a cruiser, but only a very large one?

                        Build the big cruiser Baltimore, obviously.
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        the idea "we will drive the SRT and escort aircraft carriers with this thing" seemed normal

                        She was normal, but only Alaska is not suitable for solving this problem.
                        Alaska was a ship that was reasonable in design, but worthless in execution and time of appearance. Moreover, such decisions, as above all the Civil Code, were simply defiantly arrogant and had no other purpose than theft.
                      5. Wildcat
                        Wildcat 24 May 2022 16: 08
                        +1
                        hi
                        Apparently, the KRL is a light cruiser, and the battle cruiser is an LCR.
                        I agree, it's important.

                        Build the big cruiser Baltimore, obviously.
                        if 1 Balt instead of 1 Alaska, then it is not obvious.
                        But then again, if you build a cruiser (since "6 Alaskas that were in the cruising limit"), then why not give him more powerful guns? Yes, the new twelve inches are different from the old ones, but the fleet is not an army that clings to the rifle caliber of the WWII era before WWII. And for the fleet, you can make a supply line for new shells, especially for a series of 6 ships, as planned. So it is not entirely true that "such decisions, as primarily the Civil Code, were simply defiantly arrogant and had no other purpose than theft." On the contrary, Alaska would look better than other cruisers, starting from Midway (they could run after wounded animals ... or try to drive TK ...) and at Guadalcanal (it’s more convenient for KR, especially LKR, to “pick” 305 mm shells than 203 mm) .
                        Another question, why not do something like Dunkirk instead of an overgrown cruiser? Apparently, the answer is that a ship of the line to escort AB in the late 30s of the 20th century would have looked incredible. So you needed a cruiser - get the most powerful cruiser.
                        Alaska was a ship sensible in design, but worthless in execution
                        claims only for PTZ and, perhaps, why haven’t they delivered a couple more towers for 127 ?. "And if you remember that the second Alaska and the 4th Iowa went into operation earlier than the fifth Baltimore, then these ships were just incredibly handy."

                        Alaska was a reasonable ship in design, but worthless in ... time of appearance
                        yes, over time, no luck, interesting opponents, almost all of them deigned to end earlier. But "... to the Alaskas. A reasonable person could formulate .. like this: both Alaskas were built in Camden, after South Dakota, and both were laid down already during the war. More useful ships could and should have been laid instead. For example, Essexes. Not only more useful, but also simpler. The Essexes, laid down in December 41, came to Mahach already in the middle of the 43rd ..., and the Alaskas only managed to reach Okinawa."
                      6. Negro
                        Negro 24 May 2022 19: 51
                        0
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        A reasonable person might have phrased .. so

                        Yes, I remember something.
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        So you needed a cruiser - get the most powerful cruiser.

                        No. The Americans once again fell in love with themselves in a game that was not interesting to anyone except them. The circumstances that occurred in September 39 canceled all naval armaments treaties, so no entry into the "cruising limit" made any sense, except for intra-American lulz.
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        Another question, why not do something like Dunkirk instead of an overgrown cruiser?

                        There was a project for a conventional 30-node LC, Carolina. Which was eventually ruined in the name of apa weapons.
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        On the contrary, Alaska would look better than other cruisers,

                        What does it have to do with cruisers in general? 3x12 "Alaska towers weighed as much as 3x14" Tennessee towers, or 2x16 "Colorado towers. Moreover, abandoning the elevated tower (and saving on the length of the citadel and barbette) you could simply put two 3x16 towers from Carolina. I'm downright I am sure that 6x16 from Carolina would have shown themselves no worse than analogous 9x12.
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        1 Balt instead of 1 Alaska ... the second Alaska and the 4th Iowa entered service earlier than the fifth Baltimore ... no luck over time, interesting opponents almost all deigned to end earlier

                        There, not the opponents ended, there the allies divorced beyond all measure. It seems that in that discussion that you recalled, it was proposed to share this: were Alaska EXTRA in reality? No. Were they a wise use of resources? Of course not.
                      7. svoroponov
                        svoroponov 23 May 2022 09: 01
                        -3
                        I am not presenting my opinion here, but real facts and reviews of the military, taking into account their and my knowledge and experience of being in the troops. It’s just that I have a lot of friends in uniform in high and medium positions, as well as their children and grandchildren, who serve and who are still studying. Therefore, according to their reviews and some other sources, I answer here. I myself am no longer in the army, a bit old.
                      8. svoroponov
                        svoroponov 23 May 2022 22: 27
                        -2
                        https://glav.su/forum/5/2417?page=1654
                        To you on this site, Maybe you will learn something new .. There are other interesting topics with the narratives of specialists and participants in the database, well, and so on.
                      9. svoroponov
                        svoroponov 23 May 2022 09: 26
                        0
                        If Ukrainian warriors praise something, then it is necessary to check and check, but if something is rated low, then I believe them. They take risks, because for such posts, even in social networks, they can be very bad. But if this happens, then it really got them. They have their lives on the line.
                      10. Negro
                        Negro 23 May 2022 09: 30
                        0
                        It would matter if you read the military. You read ORDLO and all sorts of "military journalists Kotsev" who refer to supposedly Ukrainian military.
                      11. svoroponov
                        svoroponov 23 May 2022 22: 31
                        0
                        Not really. After all, I studied at a school in this territory and my friends stayed there both in the school and in the service. Some of the information comes from there. Not everyone is ugly, sorry for the expression, There were also normal guys. Sometimes, through a certain site, we communicate.
        4. SovAr238A
          SovAr238A 23 May 2022 13: 56
          +5
          Quote: svoroponov
          I have been a flight instructor for my life. Combat use. Learned how to fight and defend. I know what I'm typing. Advertising is advertising, but life is far from being the case.
          Javelins were widely advertised, their real effectiveness, for example, in Mariupol (in the city), is none.
          Abrams was prepared as an impenetrable tank primarily for Soviet grenade launchers. And, it makes its way into the side projection of the RPG-7. They praised that the tower does not come off when broken. For now, they only carried anti-tank shells - which have a core in the form of depleted uranium scrap. As soon as high-explosive fragmentation began to be added to the ammunition, detonation began and the towers began to fly off. So, before the battle, American tankers tried to remove these shells from the tank's ammo rack. They praised American surveillance satellites - they see everything under any conditions and -
          clouds over Ukraine over the places of hostilities and immediately lost control of the Ukrainian troops due to a sharp decrease in intelligence. Satellites simply do not see the situation through the clouds.
          So it is with aircraft missiles. The advertisement is engine of the trade.
          Another example for you is radar-guided missiles. Use the Doppler effect while there is movement, aiming at the target. If, when approaching such a rocket, for example, the figure of Pugachev is performed, this is when the plane freezes for a few seconds, then the operation of the missile guidance system loses its target, the capture fails and, accordingly, misses. There are also ways to evade an aircraft from a missile and certain maneuvers. Well, yes, pilots need to be trained, that's right, that's what is being done.


          Oh, and nonsense ... Pilot-instructor. military use...
          Baby talk...
          1. svoroponov
            svoroponov 23 May 2022 22: 40
            -4
            I think so, after graduating from the school, cadets are immediately put on a fighter and is it ready for battle ?.
            And if the regiment has a different type of fighter, who retrains it. After school, young pilots come poorly prepared for combat use. It's like after the institute they send you to a research institute or to production and you immediately become an ace? Or all the same, you are attached to a more experienced specialist so that you really master and improve your skills. So is combat training and the basis of training - the basis of the instructor pilot, if you don’t know and don’t show how to do it yourself, you can’t figure it out, and it may be a senior pilot and a flight commander and above, but if they fly and train with you, they first of all, pilots are instructors for you. Yes, and in the regiment someone needs to teach the young. So I see here many really ,,civilian jackets,, .
            Well, for the future, everyone - If you haven’t seen or don’t know about something, it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist ..
            And further . If you're afraid, don't get in the cockpit. Panties in the air is a disaster. Well and - If you go into flight as a feat, you are not ready for flight. This I mean that there is no need to celebrate a coward and bow down to Western technology. It is not bad, but there is no reception against scrap if there is no other scrap. And such a scrap is our technique.
      2. svoroponov
        svoroponov 27 May 2022 09: 06
        -2
        It takes time to implement the maneuver, missile control is not instantaneous. For example, if, when a missile approaches at its certain range, you start rocking the aircraft left and right with pedals, then the missile may not hit. Therefore, once again, if there are sensors and you know the angle of the missile attack and the distance to it, then evasion is possible.
    2. MauZerR
      MauZerR 20 May 2022 12: 44
      +4
      There is no flat-nozzle engine. The nozzle of the notorious "Ed. 30" is the same, i.e. cylindrical tapering-expanding with all-aspect OBT. Flat nozzle on the T-50 was not planned
    3. svoroponov
      svoroponov 20 May 2022 15: 19
      -4
      Yes, there is also about HEPHESTUS, someone wrote nonsense and scolded him. So. In the USSR, a huge number of conventional bombs have accumulated in warehouses. So, Hephaestus, as an aiming system, turns their use into a high-precision weapon. Very, very cheap and very angry. The deviation from the target of a conventional bomb does not exceed 10 meters over the entire range of altitudes of its use. So, those who scold this system, sorry, layman who does not understand anything in aviation.
      1. d4rkmesa
        d4rkmesa 20 May 2022 16: 32
        +3
        "a huge number of conventional bombs have accumulated" - this is not so.
        As the Zvezda TV channel reported on December 8, 2017, at the Dzerzhinsky FKP Zavod im. Ya.M. Sverdlov” (Dzerzhinsk, Nizhny Novgorod region), the first fully automated line in Russia for equipping high-explosive aerial bombs of 500 kg caliber was opened. The enterprise was erected in a year and a half, said the general director Vadim Rybin. “For the first time in Russia, we are launching a fully automated line for equipping five hundred kilogram products,” he said. Chairman of the Scientific and Technical Council of the Military Industrial Complex of the Russian Federation, Academician Yuri Mikhailov noted the serious demand for this type of ammunition after the Syrian campaign. "The production of this type of ammunition - high-explosive aerial bombs of 500 kg caliber - is clearly relevant for our country today," Mikhailov said. According to him, over the past two years, the existing stock of high-explosive aerial bombs has been seriously used in Syria. Therefore, there was a need to saturate the reserves of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.
        http://bmpd.livejournal.com

        FAB-500 is already a remake. Well, maybe the "blanks" are old, but not a fact, they are more likely to have already been handed over for scrap. I just can’t understand why then it’s impossible to upgrade normally, if earlier the problem was that it didn’t work with JDAM. And it turned out they are already made from new. About "Hephaestus" - this is only from poverty, I will simply remind you that it is not on the Su-34 and beyond. This is a slightly more modern implementation of what Westerners did in their fighters in the late 80s. This is not a slander, just a sterile opinion.
        1. svoroponov
          svoroponov 20 May 2022 17: 00
          -5
          These new bombs simply glide after being dropped on a target from a certain distance. That allows you not to enter the affected area of ​​the air defense system. And Hephaestus is a very good development and very successful for purposes where air defense is suppressed or ineffective (in terms of range and height of use). Yes, and it saves huge funds for the disposal of bombs already available in huge quantities left over from the USSR.
          1. d4rkmesa
            d4rkmesa 21 May 2022 17: 41
            +2
            Well, I threw off the link (at least it’s easy to find by the phrase) that there are no “bombs available in huge numbers”, why didn’t you see the essence. ) Is that very old and specialized remained. It's like with tanks, they thought that tens of thousands, but in fact only a few thousand are suitable for modernization and restoration.
            1. svoroponov
              svoroponov 21 May 2022 20: 29
              -3
              No one will put secret data on stockpiles of ammunition in warehouses into print, what roams the net according to just someone's estimates, without reference to reality. Ammunition (three tons, several pieces) of the 50s was dropped on Azovstal, which were still in storage and worked quite successfully.
              1. d4rkmesa
                d4rkmesa 22 May 2022 10: 46
                +2
                And yet, why produce new FAB-500s (and these are not estimates, this is a report from the Zvezda TV channel, for example), if there are thousands of them at the bases? And netuti, apparently, or it is already dangerous to use them.
                1. svoroponov
                  svoroponov 23 May 2022 09: 09
                  -3
                  New bombs come with new explosives, more modern and powerful, instead of tole and outdated explosives. It is possible to change the shape and design. That's what the new line is for.
            2. svoroponov
              svoroponov 21 May 2022 20: 35
              -4
              You would look at tank storage bases. There are indeed thousands of them. Simply removing them from storage and upgrading them all does not make sense for financial reasons and requests for training in quantity from the military. Yes, and the capacities of the industry for the conversion and preparation of these tanks are limited, enterprises are already loaded, but it makes no sense to work again at the warehouse. Ready, but by necessity.
      2. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 21 May 2022 03: 14
        +3
        "So the one who scolds this system, sorry, layman who does not understand anything in aviation" ///
        ----
        A layman who praises her.
        No forces can turn a free-falling bomb
        to the exact one, except by adding the seeker and rotary wings.
        It's called JDAM.
        Hephaestus - for a pack of bombs when hitting a large square.
        Such sights were still on the B-29 in the 2nd World War.
        1. svoroponov
          svoroponov 21 May 2022 08: 50
          -4
          When deviating no more than a maximum of 10 meters from the target, bombs weighing 100 kilograms and more, transfer them, with the help of this sighting system, into the category of high-precision weapons. So the one who is not “satisfied” with this system is wrong. This is the conclusion, according to this system, of the military and pilots using it, which is also confirmed by the practice of its application.
        2. svoroponov
          svoroponov 23 May 2022 08: 54
          -2
          Hephaestus allows you to work in any conditions, taking into account the speed of the aircraft, the direction and speed of the wind, and all this with reference to the exact coordinates of the target day and night, and even, count in automatic mode, through the autopilot.
          Post-war sights did not have such capabilities at all. That is why they bombed in areas and with increased consumption of ammunition in the hope that at least some kind of bomb would hit or damage the target. Well, simple conditions, okay, the target is visible, and if it’s cloudy or night, or they are at the same time, then that’s it, they sailed.
    4. kytx
      kytx 20 May 2022 20: 20
      0
      Photo su57 with a flat nozzle? Proofs plz!

      It’s clear with the hunter, the engine with a flat nozzle was originally installed there.
      1. svoroponov
        svoroponov 21 May 2022 09: 33
        -3
        The problem with a flat nozzle engine is the loss of available engine thrust in relation to an engine with a normal nozzle. An engine with a normal nozzle configuration and its vertical and horizontal deviation from the axis has an advantage. The only advantage of a flat nozzle, which can be reduced with its help, in conjunction with the design of the aircraft in the host part, is its thermal contrast. The choice is up to the military. Both options will probably be used for this aircraft. And to be honest, a very successful plane, I would fly on such a plane, but my age has already passed.
        1. kytx
          kytx 21 May 2022 13: 21
          +1
          Heh. I understand what you mean.
          Circle ideal figure
          IMHO, with a flat problem, it’s not with a heat visa and so on ..
          The mechanics of his work is the problem.
          IMHO, the jet must be directed by those very other physical principles, and not by curved and inflexible mechanics.
          Das boot!
          1. svoroponov
            svoroponov 23 May 2022 09: 17
            0
            You have a poor idea of ​​how a jet engine nozzle works. Both forms can work with deviation in different planes. The fact is that a flat nozzle has a higher resistance to gas flow than a round one, since part of the thrust is lost in the output tract of a flat nozzle due to a change in the shape of the jet stream. And new physical principles have nothing to do with it, they are not there at all because of uselessness.
    5. TreeSmall
      TreeSmall 21 May 2022 14: 46
      +1
      An engine with a flat nozzle has been flying on 2 sides of the Su-57 for about a year

      With "flat", flies 2 years?
      1. svoroponov
        svoroponov 23 May 2022 09: 21
        -3
        Yes, with a flat two sides are already being tested. At one time, they wanted to show them at the parade along with sides with conventional nozzles, but it didn’t work out then. I don't know the reasons.
        1. TreeSmall
          TreeSmall 23 May 2022 09: 51
          +1
          Parallel reality I understand?
          The Su-57 never had and never will have "flat"
          Because the glider control system, according to, centering mass, everything is designed for ALL ACCESS round

          There is not enough traction from the “round”, but flat is -8%
          1. svoroponov
            svoroponov 23 May 2022 10: 09
            -3
            There is no parallel reality. For the Su 57, the thrust of conventional engines is enough. The flat nozzle is only the end nozzle of the engine. But even its installation requires practical repeated tests (shortened)
            But the loss of traction, there are already questions for the engine from the military. In general, I have the impression that there are so many new products on the plane (like the new tank) that they are not in a hurry to use it widely and begin to use it gradually in practice.
            In addition, weapons change so quickly and new effective types appear, so
            approaches are also changing, something is immediately modernized, and from something, perhaps, there is a question of refusal in production until a lot has been stamped.
            1. TreeSmall
              TreeSmall 23 May 2022 11: 20
              +1
              The "terminal nozzle" on the nozzle killed me, completely.
              You are already in a parallel reality.
              Can you show a photo with a flat nozzle / nozzle on the su-57?
              1. svoroponov
                svoroponov 23 May 2022 11: 38
                -1
                There was one photo of landing and taxiing with such a side nozzle in the Moscow region. There was also not a big report. In addition, it slipped on television that Su 57 aircraft with a new engine would be shown at the parade, this is also for him. Otherwise, I would not refer to such nozzles. Excuse me, but I don't keep such videos. Although, probably, according to the new technology, it would be worth preserving this.
                And if on flat nozzles, then they were tested 20 years ago, but probably then they didn’t see any sense in them, and therefore they didn’t use them.
  10. Fima
    Fima 20 May 2022 06: 52
    +2
    Hello Roman! A good review on the "fingers", for blockheads like me and 99% of site visitors. It is probably difficult to create something really new in our time of a technological and mental revolution - it is difficult for these products (Su-57; T-14 and others) to be really applicable (and were a tool for solving tasks) in new tactical and operational developments . I am 62, my son is 33 - but I feel the difference with him in 3 (THREE) generations!
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. Gunther
    Gunther 20 May 2022 06: 54
    0
    Quote: Author
    talk about
    artificial intelligence is just ridiculous. It has so far only been 100% implemented in the State Duma.

    laughing
    It is precisely said, "AI" + "UNAFPryntsipah" is a terrible force, as they say, if thoughts were horses, beggars would ride)))
    Quote: Author
    Everyone already knows how it works
    this is "import substitution": plywood
    markings, nothing more.

    And all because the "galley rower" does not want to understand that import independence and "import substitution" are two big differences, and Gaidark's "we will buy everything in the West" does not work - integration and merging in ecstasy with the progressive West did not work.
    1. svoroponov
      svoroponov 23 May 2022 09: 38
      -4
      You want everything from Putin now. This does not happen in life based on the scale of the tasks. It takes time and everything or almost everything will be. He set goals and directions. Further execution. And it depends on all of us.
      Yes, and many things are now broken and revised. It would have happened anyway sooner or later - the decline of America and its attempts to remain at the top of the military and economic Olympus. But new, more successful conquerors of Olympus appeared. So what is happening in the world would still begin. It's just that the world began to rebuild during our lifetime ..
  13. Hyper_X
    Hyper_X 20 May 2022 06: 57
    +2
    Quote from blade3
    .

    1) The world's first combat fighter aircraft with an optional drone mode and advanced AI on board.

    The Su-34, as a result, uses the usual FAB, which is why you know where it goes astray ..
    It is necessary to write about the Sniper-XR container and its .. Russian "analogues?
    You are finishing writing nonsense ... Everything is visible and clear, how "modern" weapons are used, you know where ...
    See the stuffing of Orlan 10 on YouTube ... You can show local .. developments .. people will laugh ..
    1. svoroponov
      svoroponov 20 May 2022 15: 33
      -1
      Of course you can yornichat. But combat missions by aviation are being carried out successfully. The losses are minimal, otherwise there would not have been so many fakes from computer games, and the debris would have shown the enemy on all channels (I live in Europe). However, there is nothing like that.
      Losses for one reason or another can be. For example, the failure of equipment with a crash in enemy territory. Or, in a constantly changing environment, accidentally substituted for MANPADS, it happens. But there are no losses due to effectively working enemy air defense systems. Losses are rare.
      I will give you an example from Yugoslavia. There, even without the introduction of troops into the territory of this state and the transience of the war using modern weapons at that time, NATO lost attention -106 aircraft: aircraft and helicopters. So the operation in Ukraine, from the point of view of the use of Russian aviation, its effectiveness from calculation of attracted forces, very effective.
  14. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 20 May 2022 08: 00
    0
    It's time to stop measuring pussy (generations). Why is there no Su57 in Ukraine at the moment?
    1. WapentakeLokki
      WapentakeLokki 20 May 2022 22: 10
      -1
      probably because .. and further down the list .. there is no ARMATA and Okhotnik and T-15 and even no Boomerang .. except that there were videos from the BPMT Terminator-2 .. and this is already PROGRESS !!
    2. svoroponov
      svoroponov 23 May 2022 09: 44
      -3
      Just because you haven't been told it doesn't mean it's not there. It's been working for about a month now. Somewhere around mid-April.
      It’s just that he doesn’t have enough work, Ukrainian aviation rarely works, and even then more on the ground and near the ground, where air defense does a better job. More reconnaissance and large drones.
  15. EvilLion
    EvilLion 20 May 2022 08: 09
    +7
    One of the main signs of misunderstanding about nothing is the discussion about generations. The aircraft, as a technical device, has characteristics. Objective.

    The story with the engines shows only what I am saying ... to people who do not understand, not only unfinished, in general, no work can be shown. An aircraft with existing engines flies quite well. They will put new engines, so something else will appear in the plans, and so on ad infinitum, more precisely until the creation of a new model. Any technique develops in exactly the same way, and if we take the models of the 30s, when the aircraft became obsolete in a year or two, then according to the logic of modern experts, they should not have been mass-produced at all, anyway, on the trail. year will be better.

    In general, if earlier Skomorokhov did not want to see a contract for the Su-57, now he has changed the record to a "prototype". Well, yes, the prototype, apparently, a dozen prototypes of which the last correspond to production samples, and so far the few first production cars were not enough to test the concepts. For several years in the PERSONS, apparently, they did nothing.

    Everyone is already aware of how this “import substitution” works: by re-gluing labels, nothing more.


    Thank you, great Skormorokhov, you have enlightened us.

    all work on stealth, and they can be completed only after the appearance of the "Product 30" in kind


    As if radar blockers have a difference which engine to close.

    If we take the history of the development and birth of the Su-57, then the fact that the aircraft was developed for about 35 years is not bad


    The development of the Su-57 began in 2001, the poor MiG 1.42 has nothing to do with it from the word at all.

    Is super-maneuverability so necessary in air combat if aircraft are fighting at distances of 20-50 km with the help of missiles, which have also evolved quite decently?


    Actually, it's necessary. And even in peacetime, since super-maneuverability is also increased safety due to maximum control of the machine by automation.
  16. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 20 May 2022 09: 09
    +2
    They forgot to mention about the transfer of technology to the Su35S, Su30SM and Su57 ...... which will dramatically increase the capabilities of the Air Force.
    1. Jacket in stock
      Jacket in stock 20 May 2022 10: 58
      0
      Quote: Zaurbek
      They forgot to mention about the transfer of technology to the Su35S, Su30SM and Su57 ...... which will dramatically increase the capabilities of the Air Force.

      What transfer? What are you talking about?
      Why did they manage to replace the ancient radar on the Su 30 with the one that has been flying on the Su15 for 35 years?
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 20 May 2022 11: 19
        +2
        Specifically, about the fact that you need to follow the F15EX path .... remove the zoo from Sushki 30,34,35 ... and create one with an AFAR and a cockpit and a turbojet engine and systems from the Su57 ........ and make it heavy a fighter for all occasions .... and the suspension of everything standard and non-standard
    2. d4rkmesa
      d4rkmesa 20 May 2022 16: 38
      0
      Rather, it's time to do a return transfer. From su-57 to su-3x. The Indians can't wait.
  17. iouris
    iouris 20 May 2022 10: 41
    +1
    Doesn't matter. The combat aviation complex is not only the "aircraft" itself. One "aircraft" alone without modern infrastructure is worth little.
  18. Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 20 May 2022 11: 00
    +3
    Skoka bukaff ....
    Still would like to understand what the article is about?
  19. certero
    certero 20 May 2022 12: 12
    -4
    Good detailed interesting article. Only now we are looking at the actual ongoing hostilities and we see that the main thing for modern aircraft is stealth. That is why all our aircraft fly at low level. And if there were invisibles that could perform combat missions with focal air defense, it would be much easier.
    What is the conclusion? And who knows, in a clash with a NATO country, most likely we will be in the role of Ukraine, if without nuclear weapons. Therefore, that dozen of other su57s will not help us in any way, but the ability to launch 10.000 calibers will help.
    1. svoroponov
      svoroponov 23 May 2022 23: 38
      -2
      Invisibility does not exist, they are detected by radars operating at certain frequencies, just at a closer distance. But there are radars with frequencies that determine them at distant ones. In the C400, these functions seem to be combined in equipment, so it is dangerous for the enemy. Prometheus, too.
      Yes, here someone compared PFAR and AFAR. One scans the space in the forward hemisphere with a certain course of the station antenna, the second with electronic scanning when the antenna is stationary. And what will it give you in a combat situation, if the data of the stations are the same in terms of range and resolution. The reliability of technology is a moot point. And give the advertised novelty to the Indians. Any complex technique in the hands of a savage is a piece of iron.
      In a collision with NATO, it is enough to make it difficult or deprive them of target designation and air and space reconnaissance, and the chances are equalized. Our air defense and other means of blinding and destruction are generally not bad. They admit it themselves. They just have higher economic opportunities and numbers. As one American told me, we have equipment for sale, and you have it for war. Exact definition.
      They fight not by number but by skill. And to be honest, our weapons are really not bad. In Ukraine, for some reason, little is used. Americans watch, analyze and take action and develop countermeasures. Therefore, it’s better not to show them certain trump cards until the time comes. We also have shortcomings, but they can be eliminated. - drones and target designation capabilities need to be tightened up, and tactics for getting out of the strikes should be improved.
      They also have problems. Turn off the precise positioning system and in many ways they are blind and the weapon loses some of its qualities and abilities.
      Their ground units were conducting exercises in the conditions of a GPS outage, so a problem arose. They could not even navigate properly on the ground. Well, and something else.
  20. Murat
    Murat 20 May 2022 13: 03
    0
    Another "mental pearl" from Skomorokh!
    And talking about artificial intelligence is just ridiculous. It has so far only been 100% implemented in the State Duma.

    Well, you can’t help but spit on officials (especially knowing that the author himself will not become one)! In fact, AI in the US has already mastered BVB to a level that surpasses any living ace pilot.
    Is super-maneuverability so necessary in air combat if aircraft are fighting at distances of 20-50 km with the help of missiles, which have also evolved quite decently?

    Maneuverability affects the range from which it is, in principle, advisable to launch. The launch range of the URVV against a target with the maneuverability of a 4th generation aircraft is 40% of the maximum (which is for a non-maneuvering target). For a super-maneuverable aircraft, 4+(+) is only 30%.
    And will it not turn out in the end that super piloting will remain the lot of aces-professionals who perform at the air show?

    Do you want, like in the War, that half of the pilots were shot down in the very first sorties? Today, fighter aviation is 200-300 aces who have innate talents for air combat.
    That is, the engine of the "first stage" AL-41F1 is, but it does not suit, but they will fly on it. And the one that suits, "Product 30", it is still not there, and when it will be, everything is foggy and vague

    AL-41 allows even the Su-35, and even more so the Su-57, to reach supersonic without afterburner. True, worse than the Raptor, but much better than the single-engine Penguin.
    Stealth is generally a conditional thing

    No, it's very real. To: 1 - be invisible to the ARGSN of the enemy AMRAAM and not allow them to shoot in the "fire and forget" mode. 2 - in order to reduce the detection range of an AWACS aircraft to at least 12-130 km, so that you can shoot at the AWACS of a long-range air defense system and shoot it down.
    1. kytx
      kytx 20 May 2022 17: 32
      +2
      There is no AI today. Science has not yet formed its criteria, neither in our country nor over the hill. Self-learning neural networks are not AI at all
      The computer was able to conduct air combat back in the early 90s, and quite decently, including BVB. The power of computers was already enough for the eyes.
      1. DO
        DO 20 May 2022 20: 28
        0
        In the context of combat aviation, we will not take the words "artificial intelligence" (AI) literally. Under the onboard AI of combat aircraft, today most likely it should be understood as a specialized onboard computer and software, with the necessary sensors and actuators that allow the aircraft to take off and land without the participation of the pilot, to fly along a given trajectory, including at extremely low altitudes, to evade from missiles, perform an anti-aircraft maneuver, etc.
        It is too early to talk about real (and not in the virtual space of a computer) effective close air combat of an AI-controlled unmanned fighter.
        1. DO
          DO 20 May 2022 20: 57
          0
          PS
          Yes, and about the self-learning of the combat AI program. Such "self-learning" should be understood only as the accumulation of statistics, which the programmer agrees with the manual, and "with his own hand" embodies in the next version of the software.
          For if self-learning modifies the original program (especially target images and attack criteria) in the process of performing the drone’s strike task in autonomous mode, the drone will most likely hit where it is sooner or later and will not dream of it in a nightmare. After that, the developer and his boss - "with things to go."
          1. kytx
            kytx 21 May 2022 12: 10
            0
            Neural networks don't work that way
            1. DO
              DO 21 May 2022 15: 14
              +1
              Neural networks are just one of many possible solutions to combat AI challenges.
        2. kytx
          kytx 21 May 2022 12: 12
          -2
          No, not early. Computers have long learned to model the physics of flight in great detail and reliably.
          1. DO
            DO 21 May 2022 15: 22
            0
            A virtual model of air combat, and a real air combat of robotic aircraft with pilots, is not the same thing. If an unmanned fighter aircraft confidently defeated experienced pilots in close air combat, I ask for a link. Or a link to at least one such "natural" experiment.
            1. kytx
              kytx 21 May 2022 19: 37
              0
              I can't provide a link. But you can find it yourself if you're interested. A live pilot (yes, a pilot, not a fighter pilot, as is customary with us) lost an air battle at f15
              5:0 car. Officially announced by the Pentagon
              I'm for the car :)
              Such cases

              RS I don't know the words of love
              1. DO
                DO 21 May 2022 20: 59
                0
                A live pilot (yes, a pilot, not a fighter pilot, as is customary with us) lost an air battle at f15
                5:0 car. Officially announced by the Pentagon

                If so, then a bunch of old Su-27s or MiG-25s, upgraded into drones, whose AI "can" everything that a pilot should be able to, via a directed radio channel,
                target designation for enemy aircraft which is given by the operator of the two-seat Su-30 or MiG-35, and secures the drones in case the enemy breaks through them,
                should have done it yesterday.
  21. Maks1995
    Maks1995 20 May 2022 13: 08
    +1
    And why repeat all this? All this has already happened.
    5th generation - there were exactly 2 requirements - no afterburner, stealth.

    Conventionally, everything is there, as in fact - it is classified. As an example, the f35 also allegedly produces minimal afterburner on the latest engines, and its stealth quickly deteriorates at high speeds (and for many aircraft, I read, high supersonic is limited in peacetime, it’s understandable why).

    Everything else - showing the situation, radar - was invented later, although it would be nice to have it.
    Supermaneuverability - they wrote - is good for parades, at a speed of 400-700 km / h. At supersonic, everyone can spin quite briskly, but if you don’t turn supersonic, the plane will not withstand it.

    6th generation - while inventing requirements on the go. Before BLLV - access to near space and hypersound in afterburner, but too expensive. Therefore, the bar was lowered and swarm control, tactical screen and intelligence were left. In fact, it can be crammed into the 5th now ..
  22. Oorfene Juice and his wooden soldiers
    0
    Too heavy.
  23. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 20 May 2022 17: 11
    0
    Here, Roman's political articles are good, but the technical ones are so-so.
  24. Bogatyrev
    Bogatyrev 21 May 2022 12: 52
    -1
    Approx.
    Using the example of the NWO, what tasks would be interesting for an aircraft with such characteristics?
    The suppression of air defense is now going hard and with losses. Still not suppressed. This means that you need to have an inconspicuous aircraft with anti-ship missiles and strike missiles in the internal compartment, which, due to stealth, will be able to confidently and without risk take out radars and launchers, where necessary. Or detect radar fields.
    Or not necessary? What prevents even now to reach the launch line at high altitudes without any stealth? Or detect radar and radar fields without entering their zone?
    Where are our MALD decoys? Drones? EW aircraft? Israel had all this in the Bekaa already in 1982, isn't it time to study the experience?
    How was the suppression of air defense seen before the war, and why does this concept work so tightly?
    What other tasks are there for such an aircraft? He cannot and should not bomb, the planes are expensive and needed for something else. The whole range of his tasks:
    1. Stealthy penetration with strike weapons to a great depth behind enemy lines and defeating strategically important targets.
    2. Intelligence and suppression of the air defense system.
    3. Gaining air supremacy by destroying enemy aircraft.
    1. svoroponov
      svoroponov 27 May 2022 09: 32
      -2
      ..... The suppression of air defense is now difficult and with losses. Still not crushed....
      You are right, but this air defense only works on commands from foreign reconnaissance and satellites and information is transmitted to the remaining installations via closed communication channels when our sides approach the affected areas, that is, installations from their radars are activated at the last moment. Therefore, they are difficult to track and hit.
      We met this at the training grounds during the exercises. Scanning the area for the operation of the radar did not give anything, and when approaching a certain zone, like the devil from a snuffbox, the system was activated and training launches were made on us before anti-missiles could be launched from our sides or launch sites were determined. The air defense officers even then mocked us during the analysis.
      Information came to them from the AWACS aircraft.
      The solution is to monitor the area from drones or otherwise to determine the appearance of air defense installations in the area, because they also do not stand still, periodically change positions. Or the direction to the area before the strike of aircraft - or drones (large) - tricks in the first wave for at least a short activation of enemy air defense systems.
  25. iz odessy
    iz odessy 21 May 2022 13: 25
    -1
    The author is right, right and right again. While this is a "prototype". The available "classification" of the 5th generation hurts the eye with 2, the main and, one might say, fundamental differences from the 4th -1. kreyskaya speed without!! afterburner - supersonic 2. advanced stealth technology .. the rest is not exclusively a characteristic of the 5th generation. No serial engine - no 5th generation. Regarding "stealth", I read "Su57s are used in NVO outside air defense zones"! what a non-pompous parrot can deduce from this is quite understandable
  26. smaug78
    smaug78 21 May 2022 14: 12
    0
    Skomorokhovshchina is senseless and merciless. Whose mill is the author pouring water on?
  27. Evgesha
    Evgesha 23 May 2022 00: 33
    -1
    To be honest, it’s not quite clear to me - why do we need a division into generations ??
    Who came up with this idiocy?? 7Who needs it??
    The military does not care what generation the unit is, if it allows you to perform all the assigned tasks.
    Designers - yes, they don’t care either, the main thing is to make the unit so that it meets the requirements of the customer.
    So who needs this division into generations??? Current to journalists.
    Therefore, generations are purely for schoolchildren ..
    And, accordingly, reasoning on the topic "what generation of the su-57" is the level of money talking on a bench at the entrance.
  28. savoj
    savoj 24 June 2022 08: 00
    0
    It is alarming that the Russians have not been able to create a fifth generation engine for so long. But the engine can be said to be the main thing. Well, no one will believe that electronics is worth the fifth generation. This is unrealistic, knowing what chips Russia can produce. This is true.
  29. anclevalico
    anclevalico 6 July 2022 07: 47
    0
    Does not matter. Until there are at least 50 of them, they can be considered completely non-existent.
  30. Zenn
    Zenn 9 July 2022 21: 54
    0
    The author, you fall into the trap that they built for you, the concept of the 4th and 5th generations of military equipment was developed as a purely marketing ploy, which has nothing to do with the real combat value of the product.
    Like any marketing concept, it had to stand out from the competition and justify a significant increase in value. The goal was to sell more expensively and to a larger number of customers, and the real combat differences between generations were generally taken out of the brackets of this concept.
    Here you are, limiting yourself to this concept and cannot clearly articulate what you wanted to say with your article.
  31. Mikhail Maslov
    Mikhail Maslov 10 July 2022 10: 05
    0
    I don’t understand the position: we’re wasting money. Are there other options? All these generations make sense only for specialists and pilots. For us, this is just a reason to argue.
  32. av58
    av58 15 July 2022 18: 24
    0
    "Generation" and criteria were invented by the Americans, why should we care at all? The US and NATO wrote a lot about their weapons that we saw in Ukraine, so what? Zilch.
  33. TatarinSSSR
    TatarinSSSR 20 July 2022 21: 31
    0
    The author, with all due respect, the developments are wonderful, of course, but without translating them into combat units and into a series with adoption into service, they will remain "developments". Remember how many unique developments were in the USSR? Dozens. The same Black Eagle tank or an object, I don’t remember, with a gun over 150 mm. Or the same "Buran" returning orbital spacecraft. Etc. Where are they?
  34. Baikal57
    Baikal57 26 July 2022 15: 01
    0
    Nothing, we will fight at the "first stage", there will be fewer losses in 10 years. They will teach personnel to fly to reduce the EPR on a semi-half, the main thing is for us to keep the maximum height for target designation on land and water, to hit in bulk, which is more beautiful.