Russian fighter of the fifth generation went on his first long flight

302


The newest Russian T-50 fighter will make a long flight for the first time, getting from Komsomolsk-on-Amur to Zhukovsky near Moscow. Earlier, the flight samples of the fifth generation fighter made this route, but not independently, but on board other military transport aircraft, notes Interfax.

"Fourth PAK FA (promising aviation front-line aviation complex) has already flown from Komsomolsk-on-Amur and is expected to arrive at the Gromov LII in the near future to continue the tests, "an anonymous source told the agency.

At the helm of the fifth generation fighter during such a long flight will be the Hero of Russia Sergey Bogdan, who 12 December last year, for the first time lifted the newest car into the air.

The construction of the fifth flight model T-50 continues at the plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, the source said. Fully tested fighter over two or two and a half years. After that, by the beginning of the 2016 of the year, it is planned to start mass production of this vehicle, and the fifth generation fighter will begin to enter the Air Force combat units.
    Our news channels

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

    302 comments
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. +38
      January 16 2013
      Nice car
      1. +25
        January 16 2013
        News - A HUGE BEST!
        It’s time to launch a bird into the sky, we’ve been waiting. drinks
        1. +5
          January 16 2013
          Great news! However, a little annoying, no matter what they do, Sergey Bogdan is always at the helm. Should others be allowed to fly, if Bogdan gets sick or something else, will there be nobody to test our T-50?
          1. xzWhiteWolf
            +4
            January 16 2013
            crazyrom,
            Of course they give it to others) There have been several aircraft for a long time.
            But more serious tests are carried out by Sergey Bogdan because he has been familiar with the machine for the longest time.
            If you have given the go-ahead for such a flight, it means that the car can be trusted with such "regular" flights.
            And yet, much is being changed, checked and set in it now. This means that certain stages of the restructuring of the machine are completed. Still new engines to wait.
          2. Quiet
            0
            January 21 2013
            It will be easier ... lol The rest of the flyers will simply arrange a "dark" for him in the hotel out of jealousy ....
        2. Quiet
          +1
          January 21 2013
          Beats a hoof like a stagnant horse. It’s twice as pleasant as my share of it is invested in it ....
      2. +12
        January 16 2013
        All military equipment is beautiful in its own way. The main thing is that this "beauty" is not forced to show itself "in all its glory."

        The pun however turned out. laughing
        1. +8
          January 16 2013
          Quote: Hauptmann Emil
          All military equipment is beautiful in its own way.

          Well, not all, admire this p ... dos booger:


          1. 0
            January 17 2013
            haha, what the hell is this? Did it fly? (I'm talking about the photo above)
            1. mga04
              +2
              January 17 2013
              This shit even has a suitable nickname - Goblin. The so-called "parasitic" fighter. Designed for fighter cover for strategic bombers at a great distance from their own bases. It was transported on board the "strategist", started from it and returned to it. It was not adopted for service.
            2. 0
              January 17 2013
              The truth is even more beautiful than the Goblin, But also absurd. Bronco 9933
              1. Quiet
                0
                January 21 2013
                Looks like a lawn mower .....
            3. merkel1961
              0
              January 17 2013
              Some kind of suicide, it seems. laughing
          2. 0
            January 17 2013
            So he was not accepted into service, therefore, it is impossible to consider him military equipment.
          3. 0
            January 17 2013
            Ha, death capsule. laughing
          4. Quiet
            0
            January 21 2013
            And instead of the chassis, she needs to attach eagle legs with long claws .... laughing With which it flies up will break the tail of the enemy aircraft !!! belay (joke)....
          5. Quiet
            0
            January 21 2013
            And instead of the chassis, she needs to attach eagle legs with long claws .... laughing With which it flies up will break the tail of the enemy aircraft !!! belay (joke)....
      3. +11
        January 16 2013
        Quote: asbaev
        Nice car

        As the great Tupolev used to say: "an ugly plane cannot fly!" And our fighters have always been the most beautiful, therefore they fly the best in the world.
    2. Nastyusha
      -26
      January 16 2013
      I hope it doesn’t turn out like with the Su-35 that the car did not even go through the GI, but is already being delivered to the Air Force. Timing is running out.
      1. +12
        January 16 2013
        Nastya, I defended you yesterday, but you tie a flood. And then I’ll adjust my attitude.
        1. wax
          +3
          January 16 2013
          She does not need protection, because color blindness is simply a physiological disadvantage of color perception.
          1. +4
            January 16 2013
            Quote: Wax
            because color blindness -

            But this is already interesting ... Only men suffer from color blindness, which leads to interesting thoughts, but is transmitted along the female line ....
          2. 0
            January 16 2013
            Quote: Wax
            She does not need protection, because color blindness is simply a physiological disadvantage of color perception.

            Oddly enough, but color blindness is a purely male disease.
            1. wax
              0
              January 17 2013
              Color blindness in women is, however, an order of magnitude less common than in men.
      2. 77bor1973
        +8
        January 16 2013
        This is done in order not to stop production, besides the GI is just a formality. This was done on many machines and during the USSR.
        1. +5
          January 16 2013
          Quote: 77bor1973
          This was done on many machines and in the USSR.


          Not only in the USSR, but also abroad, only not for a hedgehog, but for a hill, that is, in the West laughing
        2. FID
          +2
          January 17 2013
          Forgive me, please, but to call the State tests "just a formality" .... this does not fit into any gate. Why hold them then? It is possible to combine (in some cases) testing and operation with restrictions, but it is impossible not to conduct flight tests.
      3. wax
        +1
        January 16 2013
        Do not worry about ours. The Grabin’s F-34 cannon mounted on the T-34 tank had already fought well in 1941 at the front, without having passed polygon (not that state) tests. Even Stalin (along with Beria) did not know this.
        http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/grabin/16.html
        1. 0
          January 23 2013
          Not the F-34, but the 76-mm field ZIS - 3, which was obtained by laying a 76 mm barrel on a carriage and a retractable 57 mm anti-tank gun, for which it was necessary to install a muzzle brake, which absorbed up to 30% of the recoil of the barrel, because now the projectile weighed 6 kg, not 3 kg, like a 57 mm gun. At the previous gun, two people were guided horizontally and vertically, as they tried to put into service a universal anti-aircraft gun. Having taken the gun carriage and the recoil device from the anti-tank gun, we received a single gunner, but the angle of elevation of the barrel decreased and, at the same time, reduced the range to 13 km, but immediately got a lower gun height. Zis -3 is the first gun in the world to be assembled at the conveyor. And before the F-34, there was the F-32, which replaced the L-11 with the KV and T-34. L-11 had some design flaws that are not technically removable.
    3. 0
      January 16 2013
      If this plane goes into series, then where will the former go? If the T-50 becomes the main type, then why the Su-35? It’s very expensive to have different types of cars in service.
      1. Nastyusha
        -18
        January 16 2013
        And it will be in addition, and almost piece goods. The basis will be this:

        Su-35
        Su-27SM -...
        Su-30
        Su-34
        Mig-35 (?)
        1. YARY
          +5
          January 16 2013
          Nastyusha (let it go, "Chorus Girl" somehow in b-and)
          You have the abbreviation PAKFA-correctly translated? Or explain?

          Although the young lady is excusable
          1. Nastyusha
            -3
            January 16 2013
            Yes. Translate if you want.
            1. YARY
              +11
              January 16 2013
              Promising Aviation Complex FRONT

              And when there is such a name, the conversation may not be about units or tens, but about hundreds and thousands.
              1. Nastyusha
                -28
                January 16 2013
                What a twist. The PAK FA is a pure fighter. The same F-22, only ours. And what do you mean by "frontline"? We are talking about a maximum of several dozen of these aircraft for the most trained pilots.
                1. YARY
                  +15
                  January 16 2013
                  All the best young lady. negative
                  1. Cavas
                    +18
                    January 16 2013
                    Andryukha! hi
                    The news is fresh.
                    The Russian Air Force has adopted the X-38 air-to-ground missile
                    16.01.13 16:20
                    At the end of December, the Russian Air Force adopted the newest X-38 air-to-ground missile. The missile was designed for the fifth generation T-50 aircraft, but it will also enter service with other fighters and bombers, Izvestia writes, citing a source in the Air Force headquarters.

                    According to a Izvestia source, "the tests were carried out throughout 2012 in complete secrecy. Serial deliveries of the first samples are now beginning. First of all, front-line bombers Su-34 and MiG-29SMT fighters will receive them. In the future, the Kh-38 will arm Su fighters. -35С, as well as modernized Su-30 fighters ".

                    "The Kh-38 is a product of the Tactical Missile Armament Corporation. It is a purely Russian development, launched in the 1990s. It has several distinctive features that give reason to call it a new generation weapon," Izvestia notes.

                    Firstly, the missile is universal, can be equipped with various homing heads and warheads. Secondly, it has folding wings, so it can be placed in the internal compartments.

                    Izvestia's interlocutor explained that only four of the largest wings are folded, and the remaining eight do not interfere with the installation in the bomb bay. One of the modifications of the Kh-38 will be able to navigate in flight using the GLONASS system.

                    Another interlocutor of Izvestia, representing the defense industry, added that, in addition to GLONASS, the X-38 modifications are equipped with radar, laser and thermal imaging homing devices.

                    "The X-38 is capable of striking maneuvering armored vehicles and stationary shelters of the enemy at a distance of 3 km to 40 km. The warhead weighs 250 kg," Izvestia writes.


                    1. +2
                      January 16 2013
                      What about BRAMOS? After all, it seems he is focused on PAKFA? If both are better than one !!!
                      1. +5
                        January 16 2013
                        What about BRAMOS? After all, it seems he is focused on PAKFA? If both are better than one !!!
                        Brahmos is only for Indians. In many respects, the Russian Armed Forces are not satisfied with it.
                      2. rolik
                        +1
                        January 16 2013
                        Quote: jindol47
                        What about BRAMOS?

                        Bramos is primarily an anti-ship missile, the range is greater. And it is made for the Indians and for export sales. Although the Indian side expected that the BrahMos missile would be built on the basis of the P-700 Granit medium-range cruise missile, Russian specialists, taking into account the norms of the Missile Technology Control Regime, preferred the short-range P-800 Onyx model (but not an export version of "Yakhont")
                    2. stranik72
                      +1
                      January 16 2013
                      On distance From 3 to 40 km. ??? this is the level of the late 60s of the last century, I hope this is a mistake.
                      1. +5
                        January 16 2013
                        Just a short-range missile. This is not the case when using a hand of 120 km at a distance of 3 km! Therefore, in this regard, everything is fine.
                        1. Cavas
                          +10
                          January 16 2013
                          Quote: Snow
                          Therefore, in this regard, everything is fine.


                          X-38MLE, X-38MAE, X-38MTE, X-38MKE short-range aviation modular guided missiles are designed to destroy a wide range of armored, durable, easily vulnerable ground-based single and group targets, as well as surface objects in the coastal strip.
                      2. postman
                        0
                        January 16 2013
                        Quote: stranik72
                        I hope this is a mistake.

                        No, everything is true. Not very clear why do you need a rocket air-to-ground
                        range 3 km from 5000m
                        1. -1
                          January 17 2013
                          So I understood the old models, and now 40 km.
                        2. postman
                          0
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Sith Lord
                          and now 40 km.

                          They do not have a range of 3-40km (with 5000m)
                          with trans and cruising s / s (up to 1,32)
                          Only ..... this is a task for planning guided bombs (cheaper)







                          + DATALINK two-way (retargeting)
                      3. 0
                        January 16 2013
                        This is the level of the end of the 60 of the last century

                        And at what distance do you think a SHORT-range rocket should fly in the 21 century? request
                        1. postman
                          +1
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Botanologist
                          should a SHORT-range rocket fly in the 21st century?

                          actually at 21m for such distances is the JSOW C-1 BOMB

                          the object was moving at a speed of 16 knots


                          483 kg
                          Up to 22 km low launch
                          and up to 130 km high
                        2. 0
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Botanologist
                          should a SHORT-range rocket fly in the 21st century?

                          Probably from 2.5 to 6 meters wassat laughing
                    3. postman
                      +1
                      January 16 2013
                      Quote: Cavas
                      The missile was created for the fifth generation T-50 aircraft

                      ?
                      The manufacturer’s website doesn’t say a word about it:
                      http://ktrv.ru/production/68/675/797/
                      Judging by the fact that so far we have only one 5th (and for a PAK YES such a missile is pointless), it is not for the T-50, because:
                      The layout of the weapon compartments and suspension points on the T-50-1.

                      Air-to-air weapons:
                      - short-range missiles of a new type (including with a square body in cross section) with an infrared seeker (planned to be adopted by 2014) - up to 12 pcs on internal suspension.
                      - KS-172 or RVV-BD - 2 pcs on an external sling, possibly up to 4 pcs (?)
                      - R-73
                      - R-77 and their derivatives ("product 180", etc.)

                      Air-to-surface weapons:
                      - RCC
                      - UAB

                      According to the Corporation "Tactical Missile Armament" in the inner compartment of the aircraft can be placed air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles developed by the design bureau's structural components of the corporation.
                      "Air-to-air" - short and long-range missiles, as well as up to 4 medium-range missiles developed by the Vympel Design Bureau. Air-to-air missiles developed by the Novator Design Bureau will not be included in the aircraft's armament.
                      "Air-surface" - anti-ship missiles, UR and UAB caliber 250 kg.
                      On external suspensions can carry rockets and bombs of caliber up to 1500 kg
                    4. 0
                      January 16 2013
                      The mass of the warhead is 250 kg
                      Camraden, and not too much for armored vehicles? Maybe a little one? wassat
                    5. 0
                      January 17 2013
                      Izvestia's interlocutor explained that only four of the largest wings are folded, and the remaining eight do not interfere with the installation in the bomb bay.

                      And in the photo exactly X-38? Because, in addition to the 4's wings, I still see a folded rear stabilizer.
                2. +5
                  January 16 2013
                  A promising aviation complex of front-line aviation is a complete transcript. This is a fighter.
                  PAK YES - the same thing, but a strategic bomber, it is still in the project.
                  Information on the types and types of Air Force aircraft can be found on the net. As well as their characteristics and purpose.
                3. OSTAP BENDER
                  +11
                  January 16 2013
                  Quote: Nastya
                  What a twist. The PAK FA is a pure fighter. The same F-22, only ours. And what do you mean by "frontline"? We are talking about a maximum of several dozen of these aircraft for the most trained pilots.

                  I told you yesterday! Nastyusha is a professor, a century of will not to be seen! lol
                  1. -4
                    January 16 2013
                    Quote: OSTAP BENDER
                    I told you yesterday! Nastyusha is a professor, a century of will not to be seen!

                    In vain you laugh, competent comments. hi
                  2. +2
                    January 17 2013
                    Quote: OSTAP BENDER
                    I told you yesterday! Nastyusha is a professor, a century of will not to be seen!


                    Right Professor Moriarty. am
                4. Nikolko
                  +7
                  January 16 2013
                  Madam, since you are such a special, tell me unenlightened what is it our PAK FA is the same as a Raptor that cannot even fly in the rain wassat
                  1. Nastyusha
                    -24
                    January 16 2013
                    But they fixed it. It is not yet known what shortcomings will be in this domestic division.

                    Keels will not rot?
                    1. +5
                      January 16 2013
                      Quote: Nastya
                      Keels will not rot?

                      Sorry, but you are not a troll ????
                      1. Nastyusha
                        -9
                        January 16 2013
                        CB Mig here turned out to be a much bigger troll.

                        No, don’t worry.
                5. Gemar
                  +7
                  January 16 2013
                  Quote: Nastya
                  PAK FA is a pure fighter.

                  From the very beginning, the fifth generation project implied multifunctionality... "Purely fighter", that term no longer exists. Modern aircraft with modern sighting equipment all work both on air targets and on the ground. Well, if only the MiG-31 (and even then a cruise missile interceptor).
                  1. Nastyusha
                    -25
                    January 16 2013
                    What is known about the multifunctionality of PAK FA? \

                    The divine F-35 was created to replace the entire fleet of aircraft, including bombers. This is clearly written in JSF, as well as what it is created for.

                    About PAK FU it is only clear that he thoroughly annealed in the literal sense of the word at the air show, and that he was flying.
                    1. Sasha
                      +7
                      January 16 2013
                      About PAK FU only that is clear

                      Divine F-35

                      Troll and provocateur. His goal is to unleash the battle in the subject.
                      I told you yesterday! Nastyusha is a professor, a century of will not to be seen!

                      Maybe.
                      1. +3
                        January 16 2013
                        She works for Uganda intelligence!
                        1. 0
                          January 17 2013
                          ... and Burkina Faso.
                    2. Gemar
                      +9
                      January 16 2013
                      Quote: Nastya
                      What is known about the multifunctionality of PAK FA? \

                      Quote: Nastya
                      About PAK FU it is only clear that he thoroughly annealed in the literal sense of the word at the air show, and that he was flying.

                      Quote: Nastya
                      Divine F-35

                      Quote: Nastya
                      This is clearly written in JSF

                      Horror! belay
                      Chef, it's all gone!
                      PAK FU ... ??? PAK FA is not inclined! But before the PAK FOY everyone bow! lol

                      Multifunctional fighter is just about the PAK FA! Even the Irbis-E detects aircraft carrier-type targets at ranges of up to 400 km. Do you really think that there will be something simpler on the PAK FA ??? Plus, it will be integrated into a single information system (as I put it clumsily).
                      Those. the multifunctional PAK FA can transmit information from the air to ground-based destruction systems and, if necessary, bring an air-to-ground missile to the target.
                      1. Nastyusha
                        -15
                        January 16 2013
                        It is a pity that not one of the systems except Irbis, which literally this year, if I am not mistaken, passed the test, was not created.
                        1. Gemar
                          +7
                          January 16 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          It is a pity that not one of the systems except Irbis, which literally this year, if I am not mistaken, passed the test, was not created.

                          Che there about the multifunctionality of PAK FA?
                          Or all ... karachun to your arguments?
                        2. Nastyusha
                          -7
                          January 16 2013
                          I'm talking about the fact that he is simply not ready. Calling it an MFI is simply too early. That's when it will be ready - then we will move it as a multifunctional aircraft.
                        3. Gemar
                          +10
                          January 16 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          Calling it an MFI is simply too early. That's when he will be ready

                          And if the ultrasound showed that there will be a boy, is it too early to call him a boy, should he serve first?
                        4. Nastyusha
                          -22
                          January 16 2013
                          When he is born - then the boy is written. PAK FA is still at the ultrasound stage.

                          But "Lightning" has one foot in the ranks. Look at him: 3

                          Do you really have goosebumps?
                        5. Gemar
                          +18
                          January 16 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          PAK FA is still at the ultrasound stage

                          Eeee ... Hare plagiarize! About ultrasound I came up with it! angry
                          Quote: Nastya
                          But "Lightning" has one foot in the ranks. Look at him

                          Where??? I don’t see ... Oh yes, he is invisible!
                          Quote: Nastya
                          Do you really have goosebumps?

                          GIRL, there was syphilis, there was a canary ... I still didn’t have enough of YOUR ANIMS!
                        6. Nastyusha
                          -17
                          January 16 2013
                          He is beautiful, cat, look at him! So do you really think that he is not handsome?
                        7. Lich
                          0
                          January 16 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          But "Lightning" has one foot in the ranks. Look at him: 3

                          This one-legged man constantly finds new problems and sends all batches for revision! And from this one-legged muck goosebumps do not run only regret because of his clumsiness!
                        8. +7
                          January 16 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          ..... But "Lightning" has one foot in the ranks. ...

                          Lightning-2 is now only 35% ready.
                          Turkey (!!!) refused to buy these raw pancakes - they can still come out lumpy.

                          From the funny: "Lightning-2" is afraid of lightning!
                          The latest instructions for F35 pilots - do not fly pink clouds closer than 20 km.

                          Goosebumps run at the thought that someone believes the Pentagon tales. Are there really such stupid people?
                        9. Quiet
                          0
                          January 22 2013
                          Maybe not goosebumps and mondrashki ??? lol
                        10. +4
                          January 16 2013
                          With one foot, how is it? Chitoli up and down?
                        11. +6
                          January 16 2013
                          Do you really have goosebumps?

                          Nastia, it’s not goosebumps, it’s most likely man-da-lice. But I didn’t think that they could be picked up from an airplane belay
                          Try kerosene.
                        12. Sergh
                          +11
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Botanologist
                          Nastia, it’s not goosebumps, it’s most likely

                          MEN!
                          THIS IS NOT A NASTUSHA!
                          THIS IS AN SOMETHING KAZEL LATERED UNDER THE BABA'S AVATAR!
                        13. +3
                          January 17 2013
                          I agree, even more assertive and boorish behavior.
                        14. 0
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Sergh
                          THIS IS AN SOMETHING KAZEL LATERED UNDER THE BABA'S AVATAR!

                          In our omitted demoted in rank.
                        15. Quiet
                          0
                          January 22 2013
                          Less than three days later, the "Sharp-Sighted Falcon" realized that there was no one wall in the barn .... good(there is such an anecdote) ...
                        16. garik404
                          +2
                          January 17 2013
                          Let your "Lightning" stay for a while with one leg in the ranks, we will move this leg to the grave a little later ...
                        17. evil hamster
                          +1
                          January 16 2013
                          I’m embarrassed to ask a side view of the snow leopard?
                      2. Eric
                        +2
                        January 16 2013
                        Add, he not only transmits data about the situation around, but also receives them. Moreover, now the fragmented information space on the battlefield is no longer conceivable. Even in peacetime. If my memory serves me right, then air defense aircraft are induced from ground-based tracking stations. And having the ability to exchange data is no longer fiction.
                        1. Alex 241
                          +3
                          January 16 2013
                          Not only from the ground, do not forget about the A-50, well, some aircraft have data transmission equipment, which facilitates interaction.
                    3. Eric
                      0
                      January 16 2013
                      You are mired in the cons!
                      1. +2
                        January 16 2013
                        Yeah, it seems like during the first comments the mamlea's epaulette was, and already ml. sergeant. laughing
                    4. tolan777
                      +1
                      January 17 2013

                      Nastyusha:
                      What is known about the multifunctionality of PAK FA? \
                      - Yes, it doesn’t seem to be a troll after all. Judging by the quality of the flood, the number of minuses, if not ProhFesSor himself, then at least his worthy student)
                      1. 0
                        January 17 2013
                        Quote: tolan777
                        if not ProhFesSor itself,

                        The professor went to lieutenants yesterday, another extraordinary rank.
                        This is his reincarnation however.
              2. 0
                January 17 2013
                PAK FA -Promising Frontline Aviation Complex (T-50)
          2. itkul
            +10
            January 16 2013
            Are you sure that this is a young lady, otherwise it may well turn out to be a transvestite
          3. 0
            January 17 2013
            Quote: Ardent
            Although the young lady is excusable

            Yeah. Yesterday, one of these parly soaked about the fact that it turns out that the Su-27 and MiG-29 are analogs of the F15 and F16 and "licked off them", the forum almost died of laughter laughing
        2. +4
          January 16 2013
          Miss, or Mr., this is the diversity. Difficulties with components, with repair, operation, with ammunition, flight equipment.
          The USSR stepped on this rake when it simultaneously held three main tanks - t-64, t-72, t-80. This is not counting junk from t-54 to t-62.
          Why does the Russian Federation repeat these mistakes? Or the Kremlin does not understand the disadvantages?
          To have airplanes for different purposes is one thing, but different types of one purpose - stupidity. Or worse, wrecking.
          By the way, the su-34 bomber.
          1. YARY
            +4
            January 16 2013
            Erased
            You are right PAKFA is a future platform for aviation - like "Armata"
            One universal model with different modifications for different purposes.
            But the basis is universal, which solves the problems of repair and maintenance.

            PySy
            For land, of course. For an Aircraft Carrier, serious modernization or another model is needed.
          2. Nastyusha
            -29
            January 16 2013
            It was only a few dozen. Even Putin seemed to say that. There will be a raccoon zoo, as it was.

            We have neither the strength nor the means to create our F-35.
            1. +7
              January 16 2013
              Quote: Nastya
              We have neither the strength nor the means to create our F-35.

              Why so.
              F-35, let's say a "lightweight" version of the f-22 with the possibility of selling to the allies. We are developing FGFA together with India (more precisely, with their money).
              1. Nastyusha
                -20
                January 16 2013
                But this is not the F-35. F-35 replaces a whole fleet.
                1. +5
                  January 16 2013
                  Nastyusha
                  But this is not the F-35. F-35 replaces a whole fleet.

                  What fleet? All of his bells and whistles (with their refinement) will not allow fighting with fighters of the 4th generation of a normal enemy. Yes, and with such modest LTH there are no new buyers for it and the old ones would have fled for a long time, but it’s a pity the money invested. Yes, and the F-16 fleet is aging, buyers all over eastern Europe are already fawning.
                2. +9
                  January 16 2013
                  So far, the F-35 has not replaced anything, and according to the latest data, the project is at the ready stage of less than 40%. And his further fate, given the amount of money swollen, is very vague.
                  The exchange even began to have thoughts about "cutting the American way" in connection with the project of the F-35 .. We trained at 22, but here they were already born
                  1. +4
                    January 16 2013
                    Regarding the "cut". They do it no worse, only in a different way. Starting from the sky-high prices for theoretical studies alone "about the need for this type of weapon ......" and ending with the arms lobby, which constantly forces us to purchase more and more motley weapons and military equipment. They have a very strong weapon lobby. So they saw the budget. Let them continue in the same spirit. 16 trl of debt does mean anything laughing
                    1. +5
                      January 16 2013
                      Quote: Hauptmann Emil
                      About the "cut"

                      Well then, it’s not ROSPil anymore, but AMPil, something like that wassat
                      1. +9
                        January 16 2013
                        Nikolay, you are right in your own way! In Kazakh, the word "am" is translated as - female genitals)))
                        1. +1
                          January 16 2013
                          Quote: romb
                          In Kazakh, the word "am"

                          Honestly, I had in mind AM from America, but I'm glad that it coincided !!! For my taste it’s so juicy !!! wassat
                        2. +1
                          January 16 2013
                          And there is. In life, just happen by chance!
                      2. +1
                        January 17 2013
                        Quote: sniper
                        Well then, it’s not ROSPil anymore, but AMPil, something like that

                        Well, the father of the ancestors of ROSpil was found laughing
                  2. +2
                    January 16 2013
                    Quote: Snow
                    So far, the F-35 has not replaced anything, and according to the latest data, the project is at the ready stage of less than 40%. And his further fate, given the amount of money swollen, is very vague.

                    The F-35A model for the Air Force reached milestones by less than 30%, due to operational limitations and problems with the weapons compartment flaps. Problems are also associated with the air refueling system of the aircraft, which affected the tests of all three models of the fighter.
                    The skin of the aircraft, which reduces its ESR, was faced with "exfoliation" when performing high-speed high-altitude flights due to the higher than planned temperature conditions for which the coating was designed. The F-35B version for the Marine Corps flew more than planned, but reached control points less than 49% due to problems with the flaps of the weapon compartment and the engine lift fan when performing vertical mode during landing. Several cracks in the lower part of the airframe were also identified, as a result of which flights were suspended in December.
                    The F-35C version for the Navy's carrier-based aircraft encountered problems transferring video images to ships, and during one live firing, serious problems with the cooling system were identified, which are currently being addressed.
                    More work is needed to protect the fuel tanks from an explosion that could cause lightning discharges, it is reported that flights are currently prohibited at a distance of 25 km from lightning-hazardous areas.

                    Read more: http://vpk-news.ru/news/13955
                3. +1
                  January 16 2013
                  Quote: Nastya
                  But this is not the F-35. F-35 replaces a whole fleet.

                  F-35 is not there yet, as is PAK FA, both are promised by 2016. Another attempt at universality, who knows and can succeed, the technology is developing, I can’t imagine how it will perform the functions of the A-10A Thunderbolt. And the F-35 has too much advertising, it needs to be provided to equity holders, and there, whatever the country, its requirements , so it replaces the entire fleet.
                  I take the F-22 more seriously.
                  1. Nastyusha
                    -12
                    January 16 2013
                    Wow "not yet". There are already fifty of them, including the Air Force.
                    1. postman
                      0
                      January 17 2013
                      Quote: Nastya
                      There are already fifty of them,

                      63
                      Quote: Nastya
                      including the air force.

                      Not yet, only LRIP-5 is signed for 2013
                      -------------------------------
                      The Naval Air Station Patuxent River only finished in November with the 2000lb GBU-31 (JDAM) and the 500lb GBU-12 Paveway II
                    2. postman
                      +1
                      January 17 2013
                      Quote: Nastya
                      There are already fifty of them,

                      63
                      Quote: Nastya
                      including the air force.

                      Not yet, only LRIP-5 is signed for 2013
                      -------------------------------
                      The Naval Air Station Patuxent River only finished in November with the 2000lb GBU-31 (JDAM) and the 500lb GBU-12 Paveway II
                  2. PLO
                    +9
                    January 16 2013
                    here is the most important vice of the Fu-35th, he can take a serious load only on outboard pylons, and without the same outboard PTB his combat radius is just ridiculous

                    the bottom line is the inconspicuous fuselage, the invisibility of which will never be used and the terrible LTX, which become simply disgusting when you realize that the Fu-35th want to replace normal F-16/15/18 aircraft
                  3. postman
                    -2
                    January 17 2013
                    Quote: saturn.mmm
                    F-35 not yet, as not

                    ? Upps, but the men don’t know.
                    2011 13 units
                    / KPM in Yuma first arrived /


                    2012 Lockheed Martin dispatched 30 aircraft - 11 F-35A conventional take-off and landing, 18 short take-off / vertical landing (for KPM) and 1 system
                    development and demonstration of weapons.

                    Eglin Air Force Base (33rd Fighter Aviation Regiment) completed testing (939 flights) in 2013 start of operation

                    FIRST EXPORT SHIPPING to (UK)




                    READ THEM TO INSTALL (video):
                    https://f35.com/building-the-f-35/production/production-strategy.aspx
                    1. 0
                      January 17 2013
                      Quote: Postman
                      in 2013 start of operation

                    2. 0
                      January 17 2013
                      Quote: Postman
                      in 2013 start of operation

                      And how many F-35s are currently in service.
                      Quote: Postman
                      READ THEM

                      By 2034, if I’m not mistaken, 3140 pieces, I watched this video earlier, it’s impressive, but I didn’t answer you, you got into, so to speak, what you have every right to, but I’m afraid I didn’t cover the whole context.
                      1. postman
                        +1
                        January 18 2013
                        Quote: saturn.mmm
                        And how many F-35s are currently in service.

                        KPM UTA = 30 (prepared for operational readiness)
                        Quote: saturn.mmm
                        It was 2034

                        by 2034 they are most likely to be written off (22 years !!!)
                        somewhere I met 183 in 2013, incl. british
                        Quote: saturn.mmm
                        the whole context is not covered.

                        Yes, I’m only that they are NOT and will be by 2016 as well as the PAK FA.
                        1. 0
                          January 22 2013
                          Quote: Postman
                          KPM UTA = 30 (prepared for operational readiness)

                          Note that the F-35 in the UTA KPM is aircraft manufactured in a small series (by US standards) that are tested by military operation, but they are not accepted for service (essentially prototypes)
                          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_rate_initial_production
                          Quote: Postman
                          by 2034 they are most likely to be written off (22 years !!!)

                          They plan to produce more than 2034 units by 3000, but how time will tell.
                          Quote: Postman
                          Yes, I’m only that they are NOT and will be by 2016 as well as the PAK FA.

                          The girl claimed that there was no PAK FA, so I wrote in an anology that there is no F-35, with PAK FA, of course, they lag behind ....
                4. +6
                  January 16 2013
                  Bravo young lady! I do not get tired of wondering how you blaspheme ours, cringing to a foreign one. Who are you?
                  1. wax
                    +4
                    January 16 2013
                    The "girl" has goosebumps from beautiful planes, and she wants them to be more and different. A completely innocent desire. The only thing that makes us assume perversity is the love for military combat aircraft of Russia's likely adversaries.
                    1. +2
                      January 16 2013
                      Quote: Wax
                      goosebumps running around the body ................................. and she wants to have more and different ones.

                      What horror .... And where is such a love for .... insects ???? wassat
                      1. terp 50
                        -2
                        January 17 2013
                        ... and, will not be, as in 41? And then, “insects,” whipped along their faces, right up to the middle of 43.
                  2. garik404
                    0
                    January 17 2013
                    she is a grantee
                5. Lich
                  +3
                  January 16 2013
                  Quote: Nastya
                  But this is not the F-35. F-35 replaces a whole fleet.

                  The F-35 has a bunch of flaws and glitches! The cost of this aircraft has already increased by 50% and it has not yet fully entered production. And a number of countries have already abandoned its purchases. Do you think this is because of its uniqueness?
            2. +6
              January 16 2013
              but can I ask what your reasoning is?
              - "Don't waste your energy, give up"? =)

              It seems to me that this girl is a troll. Because at the time when all of eastern Europe and Scandinavia says that Russia and Belarus are modernizing and preparing for war, such ridiculous speeches appear here ..
              1. +3
                January 16 2013
                I think she’s just collecting the information she needs ... Why and for whom ?!

                I think she’s just collecting the information she needs ... Why and for whom ?!

                I think she’s just collecting the information she needs ... Why and for whom ?!

                I think she’s just collecting the information she needs ... Why and for whom ?!
                1. +2
                  January 16 2013
                  Quote: MstislavHrabr
                  Why and for whom ?!

                  So for the adversaries, it’s a matter .... wassat
            3. +1
              January 16 2013
              Nastyusha, judging by your flag, you really have neither the strength nor the money !!!
            4. +4
              January 17 2013
              Signora, you use the word "Our" so often in your comments that it is already suspicious.
          3. +1
            January 17 2013
            I think everyone understands that the Tu-160 is a strategist, the Su-34 is a front-line bomber, the Su-35 is a multifunctional aircraft, the Su-39 is an attack aircraft, and the PAK FA is an airplane for gaining air superiority and a prototype for testing systems and schemes 5, 5 ++, 5 +++ and 6 generations for the future, in my opinion. winked
            1. 0
              January 17 2013
              About PAK FA can hardly be said so unambiguously. If I'm not mistaken, it was conceived as a multifunctional platform. Which gives reason to assume that the first variant of the "fighter" can be followed by the variants "fighter-bomber", "interceptor", "electronic warfare aircraft", and they can even get to the deck.
      2. YARY
        +5
        January 16 2013
        Erased
        then where will the former go?


        Every vegetable has its purpose mon sher!
        The main number of cars in the series!
        1. -1
          January 16 2013
          read the answer above.
      3. +3
        January 16 2013
        T-50 is unlikely to become the main type. It is very expensive, and for many wars it is redundant.

        It’s very expensive to have different types of cars in service.

        It’s even more expensive not to have machines in service.
      4. +1
        January 16 2013
        Quote: erased
        If this plane goes into series, then where will the former go? If the T-50 becomes the main type, then why the Su-35? It’s very expensive to have different types of cars in service.

        Maintaining the aircraft is generally an overhead event in itself. But do not forget "Who does not want to feed his Army, he will feed someone else's."
        Sometimes it’s better to use one, sometimes others. Each has his own tasks.
        1. -1
          January 16 2013
          I heard a ringing but don’t know where he is. This is not about the fact of availability, but about a mistake in the picking approach.
          1. +3
            January 16 2013
            Quote: erased
            I heard a ringing but don’t know where he is. This is not about the fact of availability, but about a mistake in the picking approach.

            Well, how can I follow you (by the way, I ask you and I "did not drink vodka") omniscient.
            And I meant that it is better to have 100 aircraft older than 10 supernovae. Moreover, many run out of resources.
            For example, the United States also has more than one type of aircraft in service.
            1. -7
              January 16 2013
              It is unprofitable to give out versions of knowledge.
              One thing is the systematic replacement of obsolete equipment with a new one, and another is to rivet the same type of machine not on the basis of necessity, but because of lobbying of offices. This is what we see today.
              Su-35 is a good car. Su-27 / 30s are also good. But is it reasonable to deliver them as new if in 2-3 years the t-50s go? Having two cars of the same type is still possible, albeit expensive. But three or four is stupid and criminal.
              1. +4
                January 16 2013
                Su 35 and PAK-FA differ only in invisibility.
                PAK-FA can be associated with special forces. Where necessary, go quietly, make a point strike and rinse off.
                Su-35 - to hang missiles in the "sabach dump" (wall to wall).
          2. Nastyusha
            -10
            January 16 2013
            What is the mistake here? PAK FA will not be soon, and the Air Force has been without new equipment for 20 years.
            1. +1
              January 16 2013
              Quote: Nastya
              What is the mistake here? PAK FA will not be soon, and the Air Force has been without new equipment for 20 years.

              I tried to write about the same thing, but .....
              1. 0
                January 16 2013
                To release a bunch of planes you need decades. And for these decades, plants are loaded with orders. It is logical that at a certain stage these models will no longer be relevant, then what's the point of inflating the series? New models will be released. And not necessarily it will be the T-50 in its current form, perhaps it will be its 5th modification.
                1. +1
                  January 16 2013
                  I agree with you. Perhaps even he will suffer the fate of the SU-47. But the fact that it has not yet been run-in and went back to the series. And while this has not happened yet, we need to replenish our Air Force with something.
            2. +7
              January 16 2013
              Quote: Nastya
              What is the mistake here? PAK FA will not be soon, and the Air Force has been without new equipment for 20 years.

              PAK FA will be much faster than the Pindos want. The main thing for our industry is that there is at least some funding, and then "Farewell America!" wink

              And about 20 years without new equipment - don’t worry ... God forbid God to keep up with our old technology! And the new one will bewilder them at all ....
          3. +1
            January 16 2013
            Well, you, this, tie out of the blue.
            The required chamotte and the Russian Air Force confirm this.
            Everything will be awesome
            Everything will be awesome
            Big Variable Ahead
            I know that for sure everything will be awesome
            Everything will be awesome
            Everything will be awesome
      5. +4
        January 16 2013
        Quote: erased
        If this plane goes into series, then where will the former go? If the T-50 becomes the main type, then why the Su-35? It’s very expensive to have different types of cars in service.


        These are completely different cars. The Su-35 is like ordinary soldiers, and the T-50 is special forces. The country needs a lot of soldiers and a bit of special forces, for special tasks. Like that.
        1. Vanek
          +1
          January 17 2013
          Guys! Why are you talking to women, excuse me, until .... Baba place you know what is in the kitchen. They bring up children, but to meet a man from work, and not to go into aviation.

          Nastia, your day is March 8th. love
    4. +4
      January 16 2013
      If this is not an advertisement, then the news is excellent, but this at VO needs more and more often. And to be honest, I really like the stars on the wings. OUR BIRD.
    5. +4
      January 16 2013
      This machine is one of the key components of the country's survival in the future. Yes, it is survival. So we wish good luck and diligence to designers, engineers and factory craftsmen!
      1. +2
        January 17 2013
        Great wish. And many thanks to them for their hard work, both in design bureaus and on slipways!
    6. 0
      January 16 2013
      Tse..good !!!
    7. phantom359
      0
      January 16 2013
      Will begin to enter the combat units of the Air Force? It's good.
    8. +1
      January 16 2013
      If you build a lot of these handsome men, then of course there will be a sense. What about time? Do we have it? Judging by the pace of the "democratization" of countries with a lot of oil, we have little time. Maybe something simpler and more? This beauty will not soon learn to fight, and there is still no weapon for him. Somehow it is necessary to increase the number of already proven fighters before its commissioning. And not tens, but hundreds. Also with "Triumphs" and "Iskander".
    9. patriot2
      +6
      January 16 2013
      Hero of Russia Sergey Bogdan of clear sky and obedient car!
      Good luck flying in the T-50! smile
    10. Nikolko
      +2
      January 16 2013
      Yes, I also really like this plane, I remember watching a video about it on YouTube, and then I read the comments and was shocked, comments like "That's generally g_vno, from the raptor sp_zzen, etc. wassat

      Nastyusha,
      And can you imagine the arguments or is there something else that the T-50 is worse than the f-35, and even more so of some kind of smelly Raptor?
      1. Nastyusha
        -10
        January 16 2013
        Yes. F-22 in service for 20 years. Only two accidents during this time + a torn keel, it seems.

        PAK FA - for now, just a prototype.

        F-22 and F-35 are in the Air Force, F-22 more than 200. They are the only fifth generation fighters in the world. Stealth, advanced avionics, cruising supersonic on the F-22, a lot of the latest multifunction systems like optical and infrared, the latest multifunction radar, a full helmet-mounted helmet-mounted system, and so on, which we only dream about and show at air shows.
        1. Cavas
          +13
          January 16 2013
          Quote: Nastya
          They are the only fifth generation fighter in the world. Stealth


          And here is this curious F-22 video in a conventional civilian thermal imager:



          So much for Stealth! wassat


          I don’t even want to discuss it, I’m tired of my SURROUNDING to the whole site!
          You were rightly noticed here, to begin with, finish at least the tower.
          1. Nastyusha
            -18
            January 16 2013
            And what should I see here? But PAK FA hardly glows worse, especially with such nozzles.


            By the way, why did you get the idea that this is not the norm?
            1. Cavas
              +11
              January 16 2013
              Quote: Nastya
              By the way, why did you get the idea that this is not the norm?

              100% professor. laughing
              Have you invented new GOSTs using Stealth technologies? request

              And do you know that the F-22 radar is not able to map the terrain?
              1. Cavas
                +15
                January 16 2013
                Pay attention again to the photo with a flashlight and firefighters: rivets are visible on a production aircraft. This means that there is no stealth cover at all - they washed it off to hell. And then: do not drive the same aircraft every time to paint camouflage robots ...




                A photo spread around the Internet where several people in fire suits are sawing a lantern that has jammed after a flight and is already a serial, not an experienced Raptor.
                The poor pilot spent 5 hours in the cockpit, and before that he had flown for another hour, probably. I will add that there is no toilet there, and diapers are only suitable for long-distance missions with refueling ... crying
                1. Nastyusha
                  -10
                  January 16 2013
                  So what? Jammed. It happens.
                  1. Cavas
                    +14
                    January 16 2013
                    Quote: Nastya
                    So what? Jammed. It happens.


                    I do not want to write about scandals with the cost of servicing an aircraft, or that half of the airplanes are chronically unprepared for flights due to breakdowns.

                    There was a strange case with test pilot David Cooley, who died in 2009, almost losing consciousness from overload, when he tried using a serial, long-adopted aircraft (!) To check the opening of the side compartment of armaments from difficult positions - a corkscrew, a coup, etc. D. Many questions at once: a test flight in a combat regiment, on a production aircraft? I mean, he entered the arsenal raw? And the restriction of overloads on it is not provided, or was it deliberately disabled? If so, why, what's the point?

                    It was reported that he "left the car at a time when its speed was about 765 knots equivalent air speed, while the ejection seat installed in the plane was designed for 550 knots. If the speed exceeds this figure, the probability of significant damage to the pilot's health or his death is about 80 percent. " We consider:

                    550 knots = 550 * 1,852 = 1018 km / h.

                    765 knots = 765 * 1,852 = 1417 km / h.

                    The speed of sound is about 1200 km / h.

                    Raptor cruising speed - 1800 km / h. It turns out that the ejection seat at cruising speed does not save? There is an afterburner supersound, but you can't escape on it?

                    American rescue systems are much worse than Russian ones, and after the fantastic rescues of Russian pilots at the Le Bourget and Farnborough air shows, the Americans even ordered the Russian Zvezda design bureau a version of the K-36 seat for themselves. Moreover, the requirements were even more stringent: after exiting the plane, the seat had to determine the direction to the ground, the height above the ground, and, if necessary, turn on its own engines and gain a safe height before releasing the parachute. The chair will return home with its own engines, like that horse in the stable. wassat I don’t know why, but it didn’t work out, although the chair was designed to meet the requirements of the Americans. So, but you could study Russian planes bought from Ukraine or Moldova and copy the seat? Or only the Chinese can copy, and the Americans can’t do it too hard?
                  2. Gemar
                    +3
                    January 16 2013
                    Quote: Nastya
                    Jammed. It happens.

                    Is it like a HIT?
                    1. Nastyusha
                      -9
                      January 16 2013
                      No. The engine is the basis of the aircraft.
                      1. Cavas
                        +6
                        January 16 2013
                        Quote: Nastya
                        No. The engine is the basis of the aircraft.


                        Tomcat's designer Bob Kress wrote well in FLIGHT magazine, in the article "What could be more ironic ... Soviet fighters for the American fleet?" offering to purchase the Su-33 from Russia for the US Navy.

                        Excluded strike missions, limiting themselves only to air targets. We decided that the old F-15 and F-16 will be able to solve the shock problems. This decision was influenced by the research of the Su-27 and MiG-29 with their super maneuverability. They decided to increase the Raptor’s maneuverability by abandoning shock tasks. Judging by his demonstration flights in Farnborough, alas, it turned out worse than the MiG and Su. Reset speed to zero, turn around in one place, etc. he clearly cannot.




                        Will you compare?

                        1. Nastyusha
                          -14
                          January 16 2013
                          The Su-35 has no stealth. The swift and aggressive F-35 has it. What is melee here?
                        2. Cavas
                          +19
                          January 16 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          The Su-35 has no stealth. The swift and aggressive F-35 has it. What is melee here?

                          The Australians said that the F-35 is a third-generation aircraft with elements of the fifth and called it a technical error.
                          Notice the Russians! laughing

                          Back to the F-35 data. Its radar with AFAR is capable of operating both on air and ground targets. The armament is the most diverse, but there are only four internal suspension points, plus six external. That is, his invisibility is very arbitrary. The engine is one, a modification of the same engine that is on the F-22, but there are only two of them, and since the mass of the planes is close, goodbye is also the afterburner supersonic and super maneuverability, since the specific thrust is less than one.

                          Yes, and afterburner maximum speed of only 1900 km / h. As much as the hefty, 45-ton Su-34 bomber ...


                          What kind of beast is this ??? laughing
                        3. toguns
                          +7
                          January 16 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          The Su-35 has no stealth. The swift and aggressive F-35 has it. What is melee here?

                          hand face.
                          speed 2500 vs 1900 minus f-35
                          the flight range of the su-35 is higher
                          flight time u su higher
                          pendants 12 versus 10 in favor of su.
                          the result of Nastyusha is sometimes better to be silent than to speak :)
                          ps
                          and what melee chtoli ram or gun shooting ???
                          for 50 years everything has been decided by rockets :)
                        4. -8
                          January 17 2013
                          I will translate the statements of Nastya)))
                          She means that due to the possession of the Stealth BVB technology (where maneuverability decides a lot) between the F-35 and Su-35 it is impossible, because the F-35 will knock down all the dryers in the DVB.
                          Melee (BVD) -fight within the boundaries of visual visibility using short-range missiles.
                        5. Nastyusha
                          -5
                          January 17 2013
                          So.
                        6. Sergh
                          +6
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          So.

                          Listen ... you idiot .. get out of here !!!
                        7. Sergh
                          +2
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          So.

                          Change the profile picture for a man, make your beak easier, otherwise you will rush into your eyes.
                        8. Sergh
                          +2
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          So.

                          Why are you silent ... pedrillo, half an hour has already passed, in a stupor, bull?
                        9. Nastyusha
                          -4
                          January 17 2013
                          What happened, hare? For business it was necessary to move away. Trifted well in the empty parking lot. ABS error even turned on. So it goes. We had a good snowball, the weather is fabulous.
                        10. Sergh
                          +3
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          hare? For business it was necessary to move away. Trifted well in the empty parking lot. ABS error

                          What are you driving? Do you have two in the morning, the third? I have a car outside the window, there are zero problems, but what does ABC have to do with it? Well, you're in kind-BULL!
                        11. Nastyusha
                          -3
                          January 17 2013
                          And what? You check the keys.
                        12. Sergh
                          +2
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Nastya
                          And what?

                          Come on ... call me on Skype right now ... sergh_neb ... Sergey, call me, let me look at you ?!
                        13. Sergh
                          +2
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Sergh
                          let me look at you ?!

                          That, nah ..., srissil, you rotten!
                        14. +1
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Sergh
                          Come on ... call me on Skype right now ... sergh_neb ... Sergey, call me, let me look at you ?!

                          Ah ha ha, Seryoga +100. It did not expect such a development! good
                        15. toguns
                          +6
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Odyssey
                          I will translate the statements of Nastya)))
                          She means that due to the possession of the Stealth BVB technology (where maneuverability decides a lot) between the F-35 and Su-35 it is impossible, because the F-35 will knock down all the dryers in the DVB.
                          Melee (BVD) -fight within the boundaries of visual visibility using short-range missiles.

                          wassat LOL what ???
                          I’ll see you at a range of 90 with an irbis on your stealth. I will spit. I shoot the RVV-SD, do the missile defense + exit the point of destruction.
                          learn the materiel and don’t break the rubbish, otherwise you’ve gathered all the drying while sitting at the computer.
                          ps
                          The question is, why do I need close combat if I have missiles that hit 90 km and higher ???
                        16. toguns
                          +6
                          January 17 2013
                          add to myself
                          and if it will not be su-35s
                          let’s say the interceptor is mig-31 bm
                          with rockets
                          p-33 -160 km
                          p-37 -300 km
                          Of course the question with the radar is open because of the secrecy of information
                          but I’ll venture to suggest that the MiG-31BM will see on the F-35 radar itself or
                          will pull it both in the near and in the far.
                          still compete against an interceptor whose ceiling is higher and a speed of almost 1000 km / h is suicide.
                          ps
                          and you here stealth melee :)
                        17. -8
                          January 17 2013
                          Well you are my friend and dreamer)
                          You would still go to the MiG-25 in the close maneuverable battle))
                          To manage to intercept the MiG31 F-35, you need not only to be the first to see it, you need to tie it in one place)))
                          If you are so gnawing at the F-35 to bring down the old Soviet fighter, I would advise you to Mig-35, there are still more chances.
                        18. Alex 241
                          +4
                          January 17 2013
                          Explore full instrumentation mode, and on-board search.
                        19. -4
                          January 17 2013
                          Do you think this will help "pull Migom-31 in the near". As the respected Toguns advises))?
                          Seriously. As far as I remember, the 31st locator sees a 4th generation fighter with a maximum of 90 km, the P-33 has 4 g limitations on target overload, and the guidance system is inertial?
                          How will he see the F-35 without pointing from the ground? How is it possible to use the R-33 to get at such a difficult target?
                        20. Alex 241
                          +5
                          January 17 2013
                          Explore the areas of possible launches, and on-board equipment.
                        21. -5
                          January 17 2013
                          Judging by your evasive answers, there’s nothing to say to you, sorry.
                          But I wondered if I had forgotten what in my old age). No, that's right.
                          The capabilities of the Mig-31BM locator are higher, but there are a scanty number of them in the troops, and even against the F-35, the difference is not fundamental. And about nothing about his EPR, I generally keep quiet.
                          Alas, no chance of intercepting the F-35.
                        22. Alex 241
                          +3
                          January 17 2013
                          There is practically no data on the MiG-31 BM in the open press, but on tactics and interaction ................... you have not convinced me of anything. So the common phrases of two crazy people agree in the teaching staff the enemy is fully armed and we fly blink and smoke ..............
                        23. 0
                          January 17 2013
                          belay Well, you give a pancake
                          Toguns, of course, is a hero, but his idea of ​​intercepting on the Mig-31 F-35 can only be taken as a joke. I was very surprised when someone began to seriously protect her.
                          Therefore, I asked you, how will you do this?
                          With a Barrier, R-33 and no jamming station? What is there to talk about?

                          Quote: Alex 241
                          on tactics

                          There is only one tactic-get HZ in what way target designation from the ground and fuck the R-33 with YaBCH (there was such a device in good times). Then it might be a good idea.
                          But here I am calm for the BVD-Toguns will go to ram and fill up the adversary)))
                        24. -5
                          January 17 2013
                          You do not understand.
                          From the point of view of the Americans, the combination of a small ESR of a plane with a locator with active AFAR gives them absolute superiority. They will see the enemy’s plane first and shoot first. The enemy will have a chance only to make an anti-ballistic maneuver. And then there’s a small chance.
                          And the family of the 27th birth defect has a large ESR. In this regard, even the family of 29 Mig looks much better.
                          Actually because of this, we need the PAK FA.
                        25. Alex 241
                          +4
                          January 17 2013
                          Cons are not mine, but this is an occasion to reflect!
                        26. 0
                          January 17 2013
                          If you are me, then I just translate the statements of Nastya))
                          But seriously, the assessment of the combat capabilities of the Su-35 depends on how much the designers managed to reduce the EPR, if it was possible significantly, then everything is OK - we will shoot down Lightings like kittens, if not, then there will be problems ....
                        27. Alex 241
                          +1
                          January 17 2013
                          As far as I remember, there is no such author in the Tactics of the Air Defense Forces and air defense, and this something does not appear on the list of my authorities!
                        28. toguns
                          +3
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Odyssey
                          If you are me, then I just translate the statements of Nastya))
                          But seriously, the assessment of the combat capabilities of the Su-35 depends on how much the designers managed to reduce the EPR, if it was possible significantly, then everything is OK - we will shoot down Lightings like kittens, if not, then there will be problems ....

                          how can I tell you if you connect all your hopes with the EPR, then a real battle can break you off very much.
                          as if to say besides stealth, you still have to fly very fast, shoot very well and far, and besides, it is in flight for a very long time.
                        29. 0
                          January 17 2013
                          So, who would argue that flight performance is important. And our aircraft in flight performance (except for combat range) are the best.
                          But the point is about long-range aerial combat.
                          And here. First of all, everything is decided by the EPR, the locator, and the missiles.
                          By the way, do you know that in the combat units we have the main R-27 missile, and not RVV-SD at all?
                          As for the Su-27m (Su - 35), the aircraft is excellent, but only 20 years late for mass production.
                          Therefore, I categorically stand for PAK FA.
                        30. toguns
                          +6
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Odyssey
                          You do not understand.
                          From the point of view of the Americans, the combination of a small ESR of a plane with a locator with active AFAR gives them absolute superiority. They will see the enemy’s plane first and shoot first. The enemy will have a chance only to make an anti-ballistic maneuver. And then there’s a small chance.
                          And the family of the 27th birth defect has a large ESR. In this regard, even the family of 29 Mig looks much better.
                          Actually because of this, we need the PAK FA.

                          Har-ki radar AGP-77 / AGP-81

                          The maximum detection range of the CC radar channels, km
                          -Front Review 200 / 150
                          70 / 150 Side View
                          Front view channel tracking area, gr:
                          -In azimuth + -60 / + - 120
                          -in the corner of the place + -60 / + - 60
                          Antenna, size, m: AFAR 0,8m / AFAR with fur. xnumx
                          The total number of modules in the fabric AFAR: 1980 / 1200
                          The average power of the MRP, W: 10 / 10
                          Side view channel tracking area, gr:
                          -In azimuth + -60-150 / -
                          -in the corner of the place + -60 / -
                          Beam width according to 0,5 power level, g: 3 / 4
                          Operating range AFAR X / S, GHz: 8-12 / - 8-12 / 2-6
                          Radar receiving path noise factor, dB: 2,9 / 2,9
                          Channelality under the action of CC:
                          number of 20 / 20 targets followed
                          number of targets attacked 10 / 6
                          number of simultaneously launched 8 / 6 missiles

                          further quote smart people ....
                          Point one - the maximum detection range of 200 (150) km.

                          The footnotes indicate the parameters and capabilities of the radar for such a distance. And they make up such a scenario:
                          200 km - range when working in a certain average combat mode with load balancing across sectors.
                          The indicated range is achieved with the EPR of the target 3 square meters (!!!) and has the probability of detecting P = 0,5 when scanning in the 0.1 sector from the general radar sector during 2 seconds.
                          That is, having scanned a small area, for a rather long period of time, you have the opportunity with 50% probability to detect an aircraft of the type of a conventional (not inconspicuous) fighter, and this probability is not enough to build a target tracer, because only every second mark is roughly taken. The figure is paper and booklet and has nothing to do with military use. If you lay out the distances with Robn. = 0,3, there will generally be fabulous parameters.
                          Since the probability of detection varies with non-linear progression with several correction factors, for a probability of 0,9, which is typical for guaranteed detection and tracing of a target, we have a detection range of 120-140 km for max and min. correction factors. for the F-22 and 95-105 km for the F-35 with a wide-band scanning mode in the "air combat at medium-long distances" mode.
                          The above also applies to the sectors of the side view, and they are 40-50 km for the F-22 and 95-105 km for the F-35.
                        31. toguns
                          +4
                          January 17 2013
                          The range is 200 km with the RCS of the target of 1 sq. is achieved when operating coherently along all channels, in a sector of 0,1 of the nominal field of view, and gradual accumulation of P = 0,9 in the "azimuth-velocity" mode from the first mark. At T = 2 sec.
                          Those. "on your fingers" - if you are shown a specific sector where to look and you use all the channels of neighboring sectors, then you have the opportunity to find the specified target and gradually build its tracer. Due to the small angle of the sector, this is possible only if there is an external indication, say, from the same AWACS. It gives guidance, you squeeze everything out of the radar, work on the specified coordinates. There can be no question of any search for a target at such distances within the tracking zone of the forward channel.

                          A certain completely mythical range of 450 km is indicated for detecting the active radiation of the target in the head-to-head projection, and requires full coincidence of the motion vectors of the target and the aircraft in space and the radar daylight of these objects. By the way, there is no focus in this, the F-22 itself is visible in this situation up to the radio horizon due to the high radiation power of the AFAR in the active mode.

                          Here, one should also take into account the large heat transfer of the PPM at maximum conditions. It has been repeatedly stated that the designers of the 77th had big problems with cooling the MRP gratings. In operating mode on max. range with the involvement of all sectors there is a strong heating of the elements of the AFAR. In order not to burn the canvas AFAR, a certain ratio of max is necessary. and normal modes in a time interval. For highly loaded microwave systems, it is 1 to 5. That is, “on the fingers” for 1 hour, the radar can operate in this mode for no more than 10-12 minutes. Moreover, this segment must be divided into even intervals, i.e., alternate inclusions for 2 minutes. at 10 minute intervals.

                          Radar viewing angles

                          This parameter directly depends on the utilization of the web (instrument) antenna. It is determined by the ratio of the antenna gain (KU) to the coefficient of its directional action (KND), which in turn is determined by the ratio of the product 4 pi by the area of ​​the antenna canvas to the square of the wavelength.
                          A typical radar has an instrumentation of the order of 0,3. It is indicated that in the last generation of AFAR it was possible to raise it by an average of 1,6 times, i.e. we get 0,48.
                          Relatively acceptable values ​​are preserved for an angle of 55-60 g, which corresponds to max. corner at F-22 - 60 gr.
                          But the characteristics corresponding to the ranges presented above are not provided in the 60 gr sector. The existing decline in KU in the sector of e-mail. scanning is determined by the progression, which has at the edges of the detection zone only 50% of the CS of the central sector (as well as the increased non-linear distortions inherent in any antenna array in the same areas).
                          Therefore, the indicated distances are achieved when working at the rate within 28,8 g. If the target is outside this zone, the detection range will decrease, reaching half of the indicated values. With a sector of 60 gr. distance data for the entire field on the F-22 is not provided, on the F-35 only with parallel mech. scanning, and only in azimuth.

                          As a result, you can see that the F-35 will have the advantage of detecting a target over the F-22 in mid-range air combat. His AFAR has a mechanical dovor blade, providing a sector of 120 gr. hence the indicated for him max. distances will be preserved completely at an angle of 57,6 g. at the heading and will be 95-105 km (35) versus 60-70 km (22) at the edges of the sector .. When working at a long distance in the sector ~ 30 gr. there will be no advantage, due to the greater power of the F-22 radar.
                          ps
                          also we don’t need Lalya about super radar at f-35 :)
                        32. 0
                          January 17 2013
                          Well, everything fell into place winked Plus, we can add that in a battle the plane does not fly in a straight line, but maneuvers, so the indicators are even more rude. But the fact that AFAR was done with a twist on the F-35 is certainly good. We seem to be turning too good
                        33. 0
                          January 17 2013
                          The fact that market manufacturers overestimate their product data is understandable.
                          But his radar is still good.
                          But here the problem is in the complex - in front of you is a plane with a very small EPR, a powerful radar station, an integrated electronic warfare station, and behind it is an AWACS aircraft.
                          What will you do ?
                          In my opinion for old planes (Su-27M (Su-35), Mig-29m (Mig-35) there are 2 ways
                          a) Get target designation from an external source, but you need him to see the F-35 from afar and still be able to direct you in real time. Which is very difficult.
                          b) Go to the BVD. It is only unclear how.
                        34. toguns
                          0
                          January 17 2013
                          Quote: Odyssey
                          The fact that market manufacturers overestimate their product data is understandable.
                          But his radar is still good.

                          0_o is already progress, but you can only hear from you the best in the world is cooler than f-35 radar only eggs :)
                          Quote: Odyssey
                          But here the problem is in the complex - in front of you is a plane with a very small EPR, a powerful radar station, an integrated electronic warfare station, and behind it is an AWACS aircraft.
                          What will you do ?

                          I’ll use s-400 and s300b4 on your cunning AWACS :)
                          I think you’re not going to argue that they’ll see you stealth :)

                          Quote: Odyssey
                          In my opinion for old planes (Su-27M (Su-35), Mig-29m (Mig-35) there are 2 ways
                          a) Get target designation from an external source, but you need him to see the F-35 from afar and still be able to direct you in real time. Which is very difficult.
                          b) Go to the BVD. It is only unclear how.

                          wassat your campaign platinum jammed mig-35 and su-35s is a direct competitor to f-35 and say that f-35 is better in all respects at least super-idiocy.
                          Su-27m and MiG-29 exhibit well, this is actually a little face.
                          why not compare let's say with
                          Su-30cm or Su-27SM3 ??
                          so actually reference
                          Su-27M- he is 25 years old f-35 6 years old question and why are you so cunning ???
                        35. 0
                          January 18 2013
                          Quote: toguns
                          0_o is already progress, but you can only hear from you the best in the world is cooler than f-35 radar only eggs :)

                          Where did I state this? I just translated the words of Nastyusha into the rational language that the F-35 will have a significant advantage over the Su-35 in the DMB. We don’t know exactly how it will be, since there is no way to find out the real characteristics of the aircraft, but in my opinion, it's true.
                          In general, I'm not a "big fan" of the F-35, but the PAK FA, and everywhere I wrote that we need to focus on this program and purchase as many aircraft as possible using it.
                          Quote: toguns
                          I’ll use s-400 and s300b4 on your cunning AWACS :)
                          I think you’re not going to argue that they’ll see you stealth :)

                          You burn napalm)) Are you going to fly aviation with the S-400? )))
                          Or are you going to shoot down the S-400 stealth? There is no doubt that the stealth will see the S-400, but we talked about the air battle between the Su-35 and the F-35.

                          Quote: toguns
                          your campaign platinum jammed mig-35 and su-35s is a direct competitor to f-35 and say that f-35 is better in all respects at least super-idiocy.
                          Su-27m and MiG-29 exhibit well, this is actually a little face.

                          Well, you and the tundra)))
                          I am reporting that all of these Su-30,33,35,34,37 are just post-Soviet advertising layouts of Sukhov Design Bureau, made to increase sales to foreign customers from developments of the late 80s. At first, Mikoyan Design Bureau spit for a long time about this. And then they themselves began to do so (though not so brazenly)
                          So you have to upset - the Su-27m and the Su-35 are one and the same plane, and the funniest thing is that it has been rearranged 20 times in 4 years and is called "unparalleled" each time
                          That's just no one is being conducted for this wiring. Foreign customers buy only the modification of the Su-30 brought back in the Union.
                        36. toguns
                          0
                          January 18 2013
                          Quote: Odyssey
                          Where did I state this? I just translated the words of Nastyusha into the rational language that the F-35 will have a significant advantage over the Su-35 in the DMB.

                          I already threw off what represents
                          AGP-81 read what I wrote to you 1 more time.
                          Quote: Odyssey
                          You burn napalm)) Are you going to fly aviation with the S-400? )))
                          Or are you going to shoot down the S-400 stealth? There is no doubt that the stealth will see the S-400, but we talked about the air battle between the Su-35 and the F-35.

                          0_o and what do you think aviation should act on its own without radar, air defense and airfields ???
                          Ruklitsa actually what can I say :)
                          although I'm not surprised as they say less fapayte on f-35 and read more worthwhile literature.
                          Quote: Odyssey
                          Well, you and the tundra)))

                          I hear from the tundra :)
                          if you listen, you can reach the point that all modern aviation is a modification of Me.262 :)
                        37. +1
                          January 19 2013
                          Quote: toguns
                          0_o and what do you think aviation should act on its own without radar, air defense and airfields ???
                          Ruklitsa actually what can I say :)

                          You, as usual, mixed everything up))
                          On the contrary, aviation should operate in a comprehensive manner. Therefore, we categorically need AWACS and EW aircraft.
                          But you spoke specifically about the S-400, and it is technically impossible to use it to control aviation aviation. Although, on the contrary, it can receive data from aviation.
                          Quote: toguns
                          AGP-81 read what I wrote to you 1 more time.

                          So you think that F-35 will not have an advantage in DVB?
                          But you are an optimist)
                          I propose so-Su-35 to the border with China, but to fight the Stealth use the PAK FA.
                        38. +21
                          January 16 2013
                          Nastyusha, even our Tu 160s shine less on radars than their "staves". We still know little, but I read from one American pilot how surprised he was when he fired a rocket at the MiG-19, and it hit the American, although there was no radio electronic interference in the characteristics of the MiG. By the way, in the name of the MiG there are two surnames 6 Mikoyan - the brother of Anastas Mikoyan, a member of Stalin's government, and Gurevich is therefore written MiG, not Mig. "Stealth" is not so much a coating as a structure, when the radar beam is reflected not back to the radar, but away from the receiver antenna of the surface-to-air or air-to-air missile guidance locator.
                          And the main thing is missing in your dispute: during the test flight of the T-50 in supersonic sound, several times released the chassis and opened the bomb bay. AT SUPERSONIC SPEED! All aircraft of the old generations, and even those designed abroad, cannot do this, they were not even incorporated into them. And that means, in order to launch a rocket, they need to open a bomb gate, and in order to open a bomb gate it is necessary to reduce speeds of less than 1000 km an hour. or carry a rocket on a pylon, which is bad for aerodynamics. Now Amers need to redo all their projects in order to open the flaps of bomb bombs on supersonic.
                        39. Eric
                          +3
                          January 16 2013
                          My advantages are clearly not enough for you laughing
                        40. +7
                          January 16 2013
                          Looking at her (his) falling rating, I recall an expression from a joke: Drive me, drive me long
                        41. Old skeptic
                          +3
                          January 17 2013
                          Swift and aggressive, he is only in the picture. Saakashvili also has a swift and aggressive look.
                        42. tolan777
                          +2
                          January 17 2013
                          Nastya, what kind of F-35 is swift and aggressive? It is smooth, and, in comparison with the Su-35, it is also slow-moving, and not even aggressive at all. In addition, all stealths are more or less visible in the decimeter range, which is used by some Russian aircraft, and are clearly visible in the meter range, which, although it gives a lower aiming accuracy, can see anything. Do not forget about passive detection systems such as "Kolchuga", which catch the reflected signal of the Fu-35 from a very long distance - because the "stealth" somewhat absorbs radiation. how much it reflects away from the source - towards the "Kolchuga". Three such stations connected to the network will detect anything.
                      2. Old skeptic
                        +3
                        January 17 2013
                        "Girl" Well, if you follow the PAK FA project, then you should know that these were the engines of the first stage of testing. THOSE. from other models. And that's enough about that. The impression is that you've only heard about the T-50.
                  3. +2
                    January 16 2013
                    And all that you know, and everywhere you have been ...
                2. +2
                  January 16 2013
                  I was not interested in toilets, but the fact that urinals were on all foreign planes already in 42, even on "Aircobra" pilots write about this in their memoirs.
                3. 0
                  January 19 2013
                  Quote: Cavas
                  rivets are visible on a production airplane .....

                  So after all, material from composites is fastened with the same thing as something resembling rivets:
                4. Good Ukraine
                  +1
                  January 20 2013
                  lol
                  The pilot on F 22 and especially on F 35 must be in diapers.
                  Suddenly meet with SU or MIG.
                  1. 0
                    January 22 2013
                    I will ask the good man: And if the diaper cannot withstand the load during the ejection? The toilet is needed so that the testimony of "courage" remains on the plane and does not get captured together with the pilot.
            2. barbell
              +4
              January 16 2013
              flat nozzles were abandoned, because rotary nozzles provide super-maneuverability.
              1. 0
                January 16 2013
                Quote: halter
                flat nozzles were abandoned, because rotary nozzles provide super-maneuverability.

                Not refused, but just not ready yet.
                They will be a bit later, and also with a rejected thrust vector.
            3. +3
              January 16 2013
              here the trick is that the back of the F-22 was not at all stealth in the IR spectrum.
              Norm has nothing to do with it. You said that the F-22 is a super stealth, but they showed you clearly (and you didn’t even hear that) that this is not so.
              1. +3
                January 16 2013
                Quote: Snow
                here the trick is that the back of the F-22 is not at all stealth in the IR spectrum

                Flat nozzles form a flat, faster cooling exhaust stream. So in the infrared, visibility is also reduced. That is why our serial T50 will also be equipped with flat exhaust nozzles.

                Stealth is actually not as important as it is portrayed. It is enough to change the wavelength of the radar - and stealth is again in full view. There Kolchuga and old Soviet radars can see invisible people without any problems.

                And further. Since the Americans ripped off mathematics to create their stealth with us (specifically from one article by Ufimtsev), do they really think that our mathematicians will not create a mathematical apparatus now, how can I see it? Naive as children ....

                Read more here:

                Stealth. American stealth plane invented by a Russian scientist. "Dead-end" branch of aviation.
                http://zateevo.ru/?section=page&action=edit&alias=stealth
                1. Alex 241
                  +4
                  January 16 2013
                  America says goodbye to the iconic F-117 stealth aircraft. 27 years ago, when the US Air Force adopted a new fighter-bomber, it seemed to be an attribute of Hollywood films about a fantasy future. The unusual color and broken shape of the hull, which made it possible to remain invisible on the radar screen, made the aircraft very effective.

                  For a long time it was believed that the F-117 was also invulnerable to enemy anti-aircraft weapons (AA). This myth was dispelled at the very end of the 27th century during the war in Yugoslavia. On March 1999, XNUMX, Serbian air defense forces near Belgrade managed to shoot down the "invisibility" with an old Soviet missile.

                  As it turned out, the Soviet anti-aircraft guns of the 1960s, which were supplied to the Yugoslav army, had old low-frequency radars. A chopped case F-117 could reflect only short waves of modern radars, it was for them that it became invisible.

                  Now, 9 years later, those who have served their "invisible" are completely removed from service and will live out their days at the Tonopah military airfield in Nevada.
                  1. Alex 241
                    +4
                    January 16 2013
                    The Stealth Myth and the American Propaganda Industry
                    1. Alex 241
                      +4
                      January 16 2013
                      The Stealth technologies by which the plane was created in America, supposedly invisible for any means and invented in the 60s by the Moscow professor of mathematics, is it really invisible?
                      1. Alex 241
                        +3
                        January 16 2013
                        What is the common idea of ​​“stealth”? They are knocked almost out of slingshots - or, which is practically the same, with the help of the old Soviet C-125 complexes. They are seen by ancient long-wave radars. Their use is possible only against the "Papuans", almost unarmed and unable to effectively handle even what is available. Everything as a whole is an expensive soap bubble, no longer needed by the Americans themselves (hence the removal of the F-117 and the limited circulation of the Raptor). In a more advanced form, the same rhetoric looks a little different: stealth is an unhelpful technology, but this direction is far from important, for a combat aircraft, stealth is a minor feature.

                        The origins of these stamps go back to that distant epoch when customers in uniform discovered that generously funded inhabitants of modern scientific research institutes missed a very promising direction - and this is with a monumental theoretical groundwork in the field of stealth. As a result, the “scientific power” began to make diverse excuses - and succeeded. So, in the middle of 90, Pavel Grachev (obviously, from other authoritative words) stated that the Americans were already disappointed in the stealth technology and were about to refuse it. Since then, much has changed - but bikes fifteen years old are reproduced to the nearest comma. Meanwhile, stamps and truth contact each other very little.
                        1. Alex 241
                          +2
                          January 16 2013
                          Let's look a little more attentively at the F-117 removed from service. Obviously, the well-known principle “about the dead, or good, or nothing” in his case is difficult to observe - the plane was frankly bad. According to the official version, the leading aerodynamics of the Skunk Works (the secret branch of Lockheed, which was developing the Night Hawk), Dick Cantrel, at the sight of the desired configuration of the future F-117A, took a hit. As it turned out later - not in vain.

                          The first car crashed 20 April 1982 d. 11 June 1986 r. Crashed to the top of another F-117A, the pilot died. The third stealth was lost as a result of a collision with the ground of 14 in October 1987, 14 in September, 1997, during an air show near Baltimore, one of the F-117A in flight collapsed wing. The plane crashed to the ground, injuring a 6 man. There is evidence that only up to the middle of 1999, nine F-117A were removed from flight operation, including a few by resource generation.

                          However, even keeping itself in the air, the Nighthok flew slowly, ugly maneuvered, had a limited range with a very moderate payload and monstrous take-off and landing characteristics - when approaching the landing, the aerodynamic quality of the device corresponded to the level of the Mozhaisk aircraft. As a result, the thing was nicknamed "the lame goblin" from its own pilots. As an additional “option”, the extreme sensitivity of the radio-absorbing coating to external influences was present.

                          However, this rubbish heap was in service for 27 for years, went through three wars, hitting up to 40% priority land targets - and with more than two thousand sorties it had one significant loss. In fact, the only trump card of the car was stealth in its pure form - but this trump card turned out to be a killer.
                          However, according to the stamps, there were wars with the "Papuans." Let's look at the "Papuans" more closely. So what was the Iraqi air defense system as of 1991 year?

                          It was a completely modern system at that time. The whole country (plus occupied Kuwait) was divided into 5 districts, each of which had its own control center, connected by underground lines of communication with early warning radars (by the way, long-wave ones). The latter allowed to detect targets at an altitude of 150 meters outside the airspace of Iraq, and targets at altitudes of more than 6 km - far in the depths of the territory of Saudi Arabia (150-300 km)
                        2. Alex 241
                          +3
                          January 16 2013
                          Iraqi air defense counted 300 C-75 and C-125 (approximately equally divided), 114 “Cube”, 80 “Wasp”, 60 “Strela-10”, 100 “Roland”. In addition, armed with Iraq were MANPADS "Strela-2", "Strela-3" and "Needle-1" and several thousand anti-aircraft guns (the vast majority - quite modern automatic guns). Let me remind you that the same "Cubes" and C-125 formed the basis of the then air defense of the Warsaw Pact countries. The Americans themselves belonged to the Iraqi air defense system with a certain respect - it was initially assumed that losses during the execution of tasks would average 3% of the total number of aircraft involved.

                          Thus, in 1991, the number of “slingshots” in service with Iraq was about half a thousand - and none of them worked. Perhaps it is the absolute inability to apply them? Definitely not. Contrary to popular myth, the officially recognized combat losses of the coalition air forces during the “Storm in the Desert” were by no means piece - they amounted to four dozen downed aircraft and almost fifty damaged.

                          One of the most famous examples of the successful actions of the Iraqi air defense against "classical" aviation is the defense of the nuclear research complex in Al-Tuva-ya to the south of Baghdad (the "777 Project"). Of course, the descriptions of the course of attacks on the complex in Western and Iraqi sources are different - but the general “plot” is of the same type, and, what is most strange, Iraqi data on the losses of attacking aircraft are quite consistent with the US ones.

                          First, the "three sevens" tried to destroy the "Tomahawks" - however, the Iraqis more than successfully stopped these attempts, banally shooting low-flying missiles from numerous automatic anti-aircraft guns. Then the Americans tried to crush the air defense of the object with massive raids using anti-radar missiles. According to Coalition Air Force Commander Lieutenant-General Horner, 18 F-32C aircraft armed with conventional unguided bombs, accompanied by 16 F-16C fighters, four EF-15 interference fighters, eight F-111HF fighter jets, eight anti-radar F-4CHF, eight anti-radar EF-15, eight anti-radar F-135CHF, eight anti-radar F-XNUMXC, eight anti-radar EF-XNUMX, eight anti-radar F-XNUMXCHF, etc. XNUMX.
                        3. Alex 241
                          +3
                          January 16 2013
                          However, this rather large group failed to complete the task. Long before the Serbs, the Iraqis used a combination of short radar inclusions (about 10 seconds) with extensive use of radar simulators ("Sarab"). 19 January 1991, the Americans made a decisive massive attack on the air defense system Tuvayty - and for a couple of hours they were completely certain that they had completely suppressed it. However, the F-16C group from the 401 th wing (401st TFW), which attempted to bomb the center itself, to its inconceivable surprise, stumbled upon an ... unaffected air defense. As a result, one aircraft (board No. 87-0228) was shot down (the loss is recognized by the Americans). The rest of the F-16C could not break through to their goal.

                          Two days later, another group of F-16C tried to attack "Project 777" - in the same scenario. One aircraft was damaged and, according to American data, decommissioned after landing at the airport, the rest retired. As a result, January Americans used 22 on Tuva F-117 - with a radically different result. The anti-aircraft gunners, who proved their competence, were helpless, and the center was seriously destroyed.

                          At the same time, the story of the nuclear center is a vivid, but special case. Equally unsuccessful were the actions of non-stealth aviation against other well-defended targets. For example, when attacking strategic bridges, more than a hundred sorties of classic planes ended in nothing - until the "invisibility" was involved. In other words, the Iraqi anti-aircraft gunners showed a good training - however, against the F-117 they were powerless. At the same time, as a rule, the Nighthawks worked without involving electronic warfare aircraft, since jamming could attract the attention of the enemy.

                          But what about long-wave radars? No way. The problem is that the “Eighteenth” were indeed more noticeable for long-wave radar compared to short-wave radar - however, “more visible” does not mean “well visible.” Practically, the radius of action of meter radars is still compressed almost an order of magnitude.
                          What about the "slingshot"? Yes, in the long career of the first “stealth” there was one case when he was shot down with the help of the archaic C-125. However, let us - for the sake of diversity - hear the Serbs themselves. The interview with Colonel Dani Zoltan, who shot down the F-117, leaves no room for demagogy - although the latter is still flourishing. So, what did the circumstances of the “hunt” look like?

                          Near the airbase in Italy, Serbian spies worked, tracking the ascent of the bombers. At the same time, the Americans, confident of their impunity, did not change their flight routes - the downed aircraft flew along the same route for the fourth time in a row. As a result, Colonel Zoltan was able to set up an ambush right on the “Night Hawk” path, while precisely knowing the time of flight. The result is known: the rocket was slapped literally at close range - at the time of its hit, the F-117 was only 13 kilometers from the launcher. However, even at this distance, the “invisibility” was discovered not by the old Soviet radar, but by a completely new thermal imager from Phillips, which was equipped with an anti-aircraft complex (“upgrade” mentioned in the interview).
                        4. Alex 241
                          +1
                          January 16 2013
                          A brilliant operation - but "piece". Having lost one car, the Americans, as expected, began to change flight routes - and the successes of the Serbian anti-aircraft gunners ended there. The “night hawk” was decommissioned nine years after the bombing of Yugoslavia, and the connection between the two events can only be seen with a very developed imagination.

                          Equally free-running chronology is also needed for the “limited edition of the Raptor” argument as a sign of disappointment in stealth — this aircraft was brought to the series after the 1999 of the year. It is hardly worth recalling that F-22 was “defeated” by another “stealth”, which is scheduled to be produced in thousands of copies.

                          In other words, in reality, the problem of “slingshots” is facing just “normal” airplanes - alas, but the quite modern “classic” is quite successfully being knocked down with the help of ancient anti-aircraft systems. When confronted with truly modern air defense, non-mustered aircraft are simply doomed. Stealth is not the Pentagon’s whim, but a key requirement for a modern aircraft. At the same time, the long-wave radars of the new generation, thermal imagers (for example, they are equipped with the new Swedish Grippen fighter), etc. few reduce the effectiveness of stealth technologies - but they do not make them useless.
                        5. 0
                          January 22 2013
                          Alex: The best defense for your aircraft is to know the enemy's "friend or foe" signal. Everything that you write is interesting, but in the Russian news it was reported in plain text that Shevardnadze, the future president of Georgia, and then the prime minister - minister, flew to the United States to send the codes "Friend or Foe" with the blessing of the President of Russia. These codes were set on aircraft delivered to Iraq. So for most of the Iraqi missiles, American planes were "Own" in the board, and you cannot shoot at it. The most interesting thing is that our instructors in the Iraqi air defense system wrote about this, and they did not manage to evacuate them due to the "conflict". And after that! Iraq is letting in our intelligence officers to remove everything that is possible from the 117th shot down over the territory of Iraq. The Amers did something similar when they transferred data from American fighters delivered to Argentina, before the Falklands conflict began. True, it did not say about the code "friend or foe", but only indicated the most subtle sides of the aircraft put into service in Argentina.
                        6. +2
                          January 17 2013
                          alex 241,
                        7. Alex 241
                          +1
                          January 17 2013
                          One word lame goblin, damn it laughing
                        8. +2
                          January 17 2013
                          alex 241,
                          I watched a movie about him about Shrek117 laughing , so all by rubbing against the air, heating of the surface took place, and he left a thermal mark on any one, I don’t remember the details
                        9. Alex 241
                          0
                          January 17 2013
                          All right, he is not flying in an airless environment, there is also a tangled trace.
                        10. 0
                          January 21 2013
                          And the pilot worked correctly
                2. OSTAP BENDER
                  +5
                  January 17 2013
                  Quote: Skating rink
                  Stealth. American invisible plane

                  American invisible - invisible only to American taxpayers !!!
                3. 0
                  January 19 2013
                  Quote: Skating rink
                  That is why our serial T50 will also be equipped with flat exhaust nozzles ....

                  I came across an interview with the designers of the engine for PAKFA: they answered the question about flat nozzles that such a task was not posed to them.
                  Although there are developments in this area, flat nozzles are the same, not ideal, they have their own shortcomings.
                  1. 0
                    January 22 2013
                    Quote: Bad_gr
                    I came across an interview with the designers of the engine for PAKFA: they answered the question about flat nozzles that such a task was not posed to them.
                    Although there are developments in this area, flat nozzles are the same, not ideal, they have their own shortcomings.

                    In the same way, I came across an interview in which, when asked about the engines, it was said that the "native" engines for the T50 on a production aircraft would be with flat nozzles.
                    Wait and see. Ours will make the car better than the Raptor in any way.
            4. Vasily79
              +6
              January 16 2013
              Quote: Nastya
              And what should I see here? But PAK FA hardly glows worse

              Sory looked at your komenty and polemic, but you just got tired of this or something or you can’t tell a simple perversion from the video from the original, then at least I pay you for the trolling.
        2. Cavas
          +8
          January 16 2013
          Quote: Nastya
          the latest multifunctional radar, a full helmet-mounted helmet-mounted system

          F-22 fighters are not yet equipped with some types of equipment that are characteristic of modern fighters, in particular a passive infrared detection station, as well as a helmet-mounted target designation system.

          And finally, another event that raised questions. This exercise "Red Flag" (Red Flag), in which the Americans learn to fight with the planes of a potential enemy. Who their opponent is is clear from the name. In 2008, the Indian Su-30MKI took part in them for the first time. They are as similar as possible to the Russian Su-35 fighters, which are considered to be the likely enemy of the F-22 and F-35. F-16s and F-15s of the US Air Force were deployed against them, not counting the French on the Mirage-2000. Result? The Indians won the overwhelming number of battles, although the exact number is still not particularly advertised for some reason.

          What were the Americans to do? Unique chance: test the F-22 in training battles against a real enemy. Moreover, on the territory of the United States, where the Indians obviously do not have any intelligence assets. And even after such a shame in battles with the "oldies". But ... the Americans swallowed the grievance and did not deploy the F-22. Do you believe the Americans just swallowed a crushing defeat? The question is rhetorical.
          1. +3
            January 16 2013
            they didn’t want to shine their plane on our Russian radars .. because the F-15 can lose, the F-16 can ... and the F-22 is invincible .. and will remain invincible. Because it will not participate anywhere. And then they will be destroyed at a secret training ground when they decompose from time to time.
            1. 0
              January 17 2013
              I completely agree. f-22 is dangerous as long as his opponents believe in it. ett his main weapon))
        3. +2
          January 16 2013

          Nastyusha
          Yes. F-22 in service for 20 years. Only two accidents during this time + a torn keel, it seems.

          Two is only fatal for pilots. And so 5 serious and keel is the sixth, under which a couple of million $ repair of which. I think of all such incidents are not notified.
        4. Igorboss16
          +13
          January 16 2013
          all this respected Nastyusha, pure water FUFLO!
          there can be no talk of any correspondence to these data.
          Transfer of abstracts of raptorobredovtsev from the array:
          According to the expansion - it is simultaneously
          -Has an EPR of a war block - an ideal body,
          - carried on cruising supersonic at an altitude equal to MIG-31, with approximately the same speed,
          - maneuvers on its semi-stationary nozzle, even on the subset that is not optimal for its engine, it is better to OVT SU-35,
          - with a glider, like a pregnant cockroach - has a smaller cross section and better aerodynamics,
          - being equipped with some bits, instead of ailerons and rudders - it has better maneuverability than a specially tailored plane for this, and
          - The radar sees everything further away than even AWACS, and in passive mode.
          - in the end, this mega-device is capable of destroying 140 SU-35s performed by the F-15, flying at the height of Messerschmidt, with the radars turned off and under the conditions of counteraction of the Russian air defense in the performance of thick-skinned hamsters from the national guard.
          All these crazy fables are confirmed by absolutely accurate data from Jewish forums from the same trolls, advertising booklets and the highly intelligent DISCOVERY program, where the same trolls are equipped with movie cameras and microphones.

          But at the same time - the miracle-pepelats is carefully hiding from everyone. Including from measurements of its EPR, such a device that specifically increases visibility is attached to f 22 and from comparative maneuvering.
          honestly, he does not reach the 5th generation
          1. Nastyusha
            -11
            January 16 2013
            And where does the murzilki like "Discovery"? I look at the declared performance characteristics from Lockheed and the US Department of Defense. I am not criticizing anyone and I also believe the statements of Poghosyan or the Russian Defense Ministry.

            No problem, I see no reason not to believe them.
            1. bask
              +13
              January 16 2013
              Quote: Nastya
              Nastyusha

              Eat better than ice cream. laughing
              1. rolik
                +2
                January 16 2013
                LLCOOOOOOOOOOOOO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
                And "Nastyusha" can do that ??????????????
                Quote: bask
                bask
          2. +11
            January 16 2013
            Igorboss16 laughing + to you!
            on f 22 is attached here such a device specifically increasing visibility
            it's a can of Coca-Cola like ...
          3. rolik
            +3
            January 16 2013
            Quote: Igorboss16
            Igorboss16

            A hundred times like this good
            and a thousand like that laughing
            So much, I haven’t laughed for a long time. Thanks for the comment!
        5. evil hamster
          +8
          January 16 2013
          Quote: Nastya
          Yes. F-22 in service for 20 years
          - Only in your dreams
          Quote: Nastya
          PAK FA - for now, just a prototype.
          And what is characteristic is not a single serial aircraft in this world has escaped this fate laughing
          Quote: Nastya
          F-22 over 200
          - Again fantasies, support the domestic manufacturer ask Yandex
          Quote: Nastya
          They are the only fifth generation fighter in the world
          Oh and sho F35 too?
          Quote: Nastya
          Stealth, advanced avionics, cruising supersonic on the F-22
          It remains only to note that all this wealth between them is divided not equally between one thing, but the other by another, so one wonders how they both crawled into the 5th generation? It smacks of mutually exclusive paragraphs laughing
          Quote: Nastya
          many new multifunctional systems like optical and infrared
          God bless you, what terrible words you know, you poke on the picture the very systems on F22 together admire the superiority of democratic design ideas
          Quote: Nastya
          latest multifunctional radar
          Well, clearly no one has that anymore laughing
          Quote: Nastya
          full helmet helmet system
          Well, nifiga is straight to itself, like at 9-12, that’s what democracy and freedom of speech lead to, well, we ehh ...
          Quote: Nastya
          what we only dream about and show at air shows.
          No, no, no, it won’t work, very weak stuffing. He is neither thin nor naughty, does not catch at all either. Trolling should be specific, if the thin PCBM doesn’t have enough power, sculpt too thick, so that about rusty Russian technologies, about starving pensioners in a cold workshop, making wardrobe by means of a mallet and a file from a whole piece of cast iron, one should not forget about skolkovo, about glonass necessarily, you can add statistics on the production of stormtroopers in 1943 and steam fans in 1913. Where is all this? Do not modify, hack straightforwardly ... urgently correct
          1. +3
            January 16 2013
            It seems to me that this is not a girl at all, but a guy (troll).
            1. evil hamster
              +2
              January 16 2013
              Here, in general, there can be no two opinions laughing
        6. +2
          January 16 2013
          Quote: Nastya
          Yes. F-22 in service for 20 years. Only two accidents during this time + a torn keel, it seems.

          The requirements for the new fighter were formed in 1981, in 1986 a tender for development was held. Two tender winners built two prototypes by 1990. In 1994, the first experimental Raptor was assembled. Serial production began in 2001, and they began to enter the troops only in December 2005.
          We consider: from 2006 to 2012 - a total of ONLY SIX YEARS in the ranks, not 20 ... Lying, "Nastyusha", right? well admit it! .... wink

          And as for accidents, then ... in a quick way, this was found:

          Accidents and catastrophes of the F-22 Raptor fighter

          On the night of November 16, 2012, an F-22 Raptor fighter crashed onto a highway in Florida in the southeastern United States. The incident took place near the Tyndall Air Force Base south of Panama City, Florida. The pilot managed to eject, he was hospitalized. No other casualties or casualties were reported.

          On November 16, 2010, an F-22A Raptor with tail number 06-4125 crashed in Alaska. The aircraft, assigned to the 525th Squadron of the 3rd Air Wing (Elmendorf-Richardson base, Alaska), crashed 160 km from Anchorage during a training flight. The pilot Jeffrey Haney did not manage to eject and was killed.

          On March 25, 2009, the F-22A (serial number 91-4008) crashed in the Mojave Desert of California, 35 kilometers northeast of the Edwards Air Force Base during a test flight. Pilot David Cooley, a 49-year-old veteran with 21 years of piloting experience, died.

          On December 20, 2004, the F-22A (serial number 00-4014) crashed during takeoff from the Nellis Air Base (Nevada), and the pilot ejected.

          On April 25, 1992, the prototype YF-22A (serial number 87-0701) crashed while landing at Edwards Air Force Base and was decommissioned. The accident occurred due to deficiencies in the aircraft control system.


          Total for six years - five accidents that the Pentagon could not hide. Moreover, this is not an accident - it is a disaster: the airplane is full of kapets! And how many accidents were there - you can search ... Or do you yourself know that F22 breaks with the same regularity as ZAZ-968?

          Summary:
          Nastia, you lied twice in two sentences.

          It turns out that you either do not understand at all what you are trying to discuss - and then why do you need it?!, Or you intentionally and purposefully lie. I personally am inclined to the second, in general, judging by the awkward perseverance with which you stomp here, although you will soon be told in person where to go ....
          1. SSR
            +1
            January 17 2013
            Quote: Skating rink
            On the night of 16 November 2012

            Quote: Skating rink
            16 November 2010 in Alaska

            Quote: Skating rink
            25 March 2009 years

            Quote: Skating rink
            25 April 1992 of the year

            Quote: Skating rink
            20 декабря 2004 года

            It’s the magic of numbers ..... probably they should be prohibited from flying these days.
      2. 0
        January 22 2013
        Quote: Nikolko
        Nastyusha
        And can you imagine the arguments or is there something else that the T-50 is worse than the f-35, and even more so of some kind of smelly Raptor?

        No, he cannot even if he wants to. And not because I went to the bathhouse, but because the Raptor is sniffy. The Germans and those are surprised that the "super-plane" of something badly flies!

        The German pilots found out that it was not difficult to defeat the American F-22

        .... In mid-June, 150 German pilots and eight 2-engine Typhoons arrived at the Ailson Air Force Base in Alaska for planned exercises, in which, in addition to Germany, the United States, Japan, Australia and Poland participated. Eight times during a 2-week exercise, individual German Typhoons converged against single F-22s during basic fighter maneuvers aimed at simulating close-range air combat. .....
        The results were unexpected for the Germans, and for the Americans, perhaps, too. “We were equal,” says Major General Mark Grün. The main thing, says Grun, was to approach the F-22 as close as possible ... and stay there. ..... ".
        Grün says that the Raptor is superior in combat at a distance out of range with its high speed and altitude capabilities, high-tech radar and AMRAAM long-range missiles. But at close range, which the pilots call the “merger,” the larger and heavier F-22 is at a disadvantage. .......
        These, of course, are not the results that were expected from the F-22. For many years, the Air Force believed that the Raptor in air combat had no equal.

        ........ suggest that most air battles will have to take place over long distances, avoiding close combat. However, in reality, despite the wishes of the manufacturers of combat aircraft, most of the battles took place over short distances, which could promise the F-22 not much chance during future conflicts.

        A 2008 study by the Air Force-sponsored RAND research center said that after examining 588 cases of aircraft shot down in aerial combat since the 1950s, only 24 occurred over a long distance when the attacker opened fire on the target out of sight. RAND claims that historically long-range air-to-air missiles were 90 percent less effective than predicted.

        It remains to be seen whether Raptor and its AMRAAM rockets can reverse this trend. If long-range combat tactics do not justify themselves, F-22 pilots will suddenly be able to find themselves fighting at close range with the latest fighters made in China, Russia or other competing countries. And if the experience of the German pilots speaks about something, then the vaunted F-22-e can fight such a battle.


        Source (translated) http://mixednews.ru/archives/21616 , in original http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/f-22-germans/
    11. Volkhov
      0
      January 16 2013
      The T-50 is a unique vehicle - 5th generation in front, 3th behind - created for a victorious attack on air defense, so that the pilot does not even think to turn to the enemy with bare motors ... a bayonet or a fork made of nanotubes must be attached, since "not a step back" ...
    12. StrateG
      +4
      January 16 2013
      NastyushaI don’t like people like you. May be enough? And then after all, soon patience can end for users ...

      As for the overhead of having different types of aircraft. I will explain, although I am not an expert. Each aircraft is designed in its own narrow specialty - a bomber, at least a fighter. And what you say is utter nonsense. And why did you stick to Fu ?! So do you like the car? Advertise it on another site.

      what we only dream about and show at air shows.


      Often we did later than the Americans ... but oddly enough - BETTER THEM.
      1. Nastyusha
        -24
        January 16 2013
        And what has been done better than the Americans? Fki I do not advertise. Simply, they are objectively the best in the world.
        1. Nikolko
          +11
          January 16 2013
          MY GOD, do you think that if an airplane is part of the Air Force then it has no equal? ​​Then tell me about the specialist of what the hell was the f-22 taken out of production? And why was the f-117 stealth aircraft removed from production and armament? -22 as well as f-35 can fly only in good cloudless weather? Do you know that any of our radar can detect these MEGASUPER MODERNLY INVISIBLE F22 and f35? And you know that even the Americans themselves called f22 an expensive toy, no more? And you know what Do their so-called 5th generation planes fly like logs only forward to the left and right? They are worse than our 4th generation planes !!! democratic country in the world called the United States of America "Well, or in our tana!
          1. Nastyusha
            -11
            January 16 2013
            Amazing By the way, here's the fact that F-35 radar can detect you do not tell me. Nothing is clear about his EPR.

            Stealth can detect any modern meter radar. And with PAK, Foy will be the same.
        2. +4
          January 16 2013
          Objectively, they cannot be better, because each car has weaknesses and strengths.
          For example, the F-22 is rotting iron. And this, by the way, is the most important, given the fact that now is not 1941 and planes serve for 20-30 years.
          1. Nastyusha
            -9
            January 16 2013
            They can. On TTX they have no analogues.
            1. +2
              January 16 2013
              and on which TTX there is no analogue?
        3. +8
          January 16 2013
          Quote: Nastya
          .... Fki I do not advertise. Simply, they are objectively the best in the world.

          Nastya (unless, of course, that is your name. ... although "I am tormented by vague doubts"), do not believe the American propaganda.
          Remember, our fighters, unlike American irons, have always been able to to flyand pindocs always had better advertising specialists.

          States jumped from second generation to fourth. Is it right?

          Even during the Cold War, the Americans stole from all over the world the MIGs obtained by honest and dishonest means and equipped them with the 57th Fighter Weapons Wing, stationed at Nellis airbase - they later became famous "aggressors" from Top Gun ... The task is to find out the capabilities of MIGs and to develop instructions for the combat use of their own equipment.
          With small cuts, the opinion of the "aggressors" themselves about our technique:

          ... Major Oberli spoke about the 21st this way: "The MiG-21 is a super-aircraft. It looks great and flies great. Even with 7d overload you feel comfortable. ....".
          All Americans flying in the 21's noted a high angular roll speed and excellent horizontal maneuverability, in which not a single US fighter could compare with the MiG until the appearance of the F-16including F-5. ......
          According to the pilots of the 4477th, a good pilot on a MiG-21 will always "make" an F-4... When attacking the Phantom, the MiG pilot usually turned his fighter into a climb and laid a right turn with a large overload, after which he found himself on the tail of the F-4. .......
          Robert Sheffield ("bandit 16") generally believed that on bends with the MiG-21 is able to compete only F-16 due to a larger available overload of 9g (in the MiG-21, according to the Americans, 7,33g).

          It turned out, in the battle with the F-15, the MiG-21 had certain chances to win. ...
          One-on-one battles were fought in the range of speeds from 0 to 1500 km / h and heights from several meters to 15000 m. In such research, and not indicative for combat pilots, the "red eagles" often took over the F-15 due to a sharp braking on a bend, after which the attacking Eagle, unable to repeat such a maneuver, jumped forward, substituting its tail under the MiG's missiles and cannons: the world, except for the MiG-900, is not capable of doing this. " ..... MiG much more willingly "Needle" lifted its nose: "I turn on the afterburner, release the flaps and put the plane on the tail. The speed drops to 180 km / h. Then I lower my nose and go into the sun. Bend, and I go into tail to the enemy We told the F-21 pilots about such a maneuver in pre-flight preparation, they never believed it was possible. They didn’t believe in vain".

          On the F-14, only very experienced pilots could compete with the MiG-21 in a maneuvering battle. ...... James Robb, after serving in 4477, took over the VF-51 squadron armed with Tomcat. In his opinion, the MiG-21 should have been hit with missiles and in no case got involved in a maneuvering battle.


          Like this...
          And we must remember that the Americans compared their Needles and Tomkets with the Egyptian MIG, export option not the coolest to the same modification.

          Therefore, we can safely assume that our fifth generation of fighters can be equated with their sixth. Because the American fifth bears the number undeservedly, and only because their fighters are approximately equal to our third for marketing purposes called the fourth generation.
          Americans are PR masters.
          1. -2
            January 17 2013
            The results of the air battles in the Iraq war: 36-1 (5 MiGs -29) in favor of NATO, complete air supremacy.
            In Yugoslavia: 5-0 (all 5 Migi-29) complete air supremacy.
            Does this even tell you anything?
            Do not consider Americans dumber than yourself. And they are primarily specialists in manipulating consciousness. For their own, they say that Russian planes are full UG, and for the enemy, that they are the best in the world.
            By the way, for reference, the F-14 is in principle not intended for close maneuverable combat, the F-15 enters it only in case of emergency.
            Downed by 21 instants F-15 in reality was not observed.
            1. +1
              January 17 2013
              Quote: Odyssey
              .... F-21s shot down by 15 instants were not actually observed.

              As for NATO’s superiority in Iraq, it was not provided with the technical characteristics of their equipment.

              And about Yugoslavia and NOT Needles that didn’t stray with 21 MIGs ... Please:

              March 26, 1999 in the area of ​​Donja Trnova, 15 km southwest of the city of Bielena (Republika Srpska), the US Air Force F-17 fell in 20-15, the pilot died. NATO representatives claimed that it was the MiG-21 of the UNA Air Force.

              06.04.99/23/30 at XNUMX:XNUMX p.m. Vozdovac, Belgrade. Air battle between the MiG-21 and the American F-15, American shot down.


              Read more about NATO losses in Yugoslavia here. http://topwar.ru/15180-poteri-nato-v-yugoslavii.html


              The situation is all the more disgraceful for the Americans that the Iglov pilots already prepared for battle with the MIGs, besides flying on much more modern F15 modifications than those used to run the stolen MIGs in TopGan, in Yugoslavia still dealt with old export MIG- 21 and pilots who had not met with the F15 before.

              In addition, NATO almost completely suppressed the air defense of Yugoslavia (largely thanks to communications systems purchased in France - before the outbreak of hostilities, the French remotely using these backdoors simply turned off these systems, almost destroying the control of the troops of Yugoslavia). In any case, the south did not have guidance and targeting, unlike the NATO, who also had an overwhelming numerical superiority.
              Nonetheless, NATO in Yugoslavia received a solid thrashing.

              They will never officially acknowledge their losses - it would not even be a shame, but simply a complete discredit of the NATO military machine.

              In Iraq, the situation is similar. There, too, it did not work out such an easy walk, as the States claim. Some "super" -tanks of theirs, how many Iraqis have pounded there ... In spite of the fact that American propaganda presented him as generally invincible for Soviet technology.

              The United States conceals its losses in the most severe way. It is proven!
              1. -1
                January 18 2013
                Quote: Skating rink
                And about Yugoslavia and NOT Needles that didn’t stray with 21 MIGs ... Please:

                Alas, these are just your fantasies. Not proof.
                The article was watched by the grandfather Mazay’s tale, like the one that was recently published here, that a Soviet officer (!) In Iraq from a non-existent S-200 (!!), knocked down a tornado while riding on rails (!!!), and !!! Galaxy
                Where are the wreckage of these aircraft "shot down" in Yugoslavia, where are the pilots?
                If you are not interested in fairy tales, but in reality, on the use of the Mig-29 (the old Mig-21 did not participate in air battles at all) in the war in Yugoslavia, see here: http: //artofwar.ru/z/zhirohow_m_a/text_0410-2.shtml
                , the general course of the war in the monograph of Drozhzhin and Altukhov.
                I myself am a fan of Soviet technology, but you need to balance your fantasies with reality
              2. +1
                January 22 2013
                Katku: I must remember how on our TV, one bastard, portraying a specialist, pointed at a whole column of broken tanks, shouted into the microphone: “It remains to ask our government: why do we need such tanks that the Americans are destroying in whole columns?” And behind him is a whole column "Challengers" and some other tanks, you can't figure it out in the wreckage, and even the speed of the camera didn't let you figure it out, but the closest ones were the "Challengers." Can't I tell our chassis from a foreign one? "You can't tell the difference from the" Ukrainian ", and the" Foreigners "in many ways copy our" 64 "or" 72 ". They even tried to say later that these were the" Challengers "purchased by Iraq. As if the Iraqi" Challengers "were cans!
            2. +1
              January 17 2013
              Quote: Odyssey
              ... for reference, the F-14 is in principle not intended for close maneuverable combat, the F-15 enters it only in case of emergency. ....

              Do you have any authority to issue certificates? I somehow did not finish what you wrote here.

              Both aircraft - both F14 and F15 - were built on assignment as "air superiority fighters" and their main job is CAP (Combat Air Patrol) - escort, security and Air Superiority - superiority, air domination.
              Tell me, how can one dominate without engaging in a maneuverable battle ?! Or do you think Americans love to step on the same rake repeatedly?

              Yes, they had at one time such a doctrine: "remote" gaining air superiority, when their "super" fighters were supposed to shoot enemy aircraft like kittens with missiles from outside of detection. Like, "flew, shot and without loss home, for dinner ...." So they built their "Sabers" without guns at all, with one rocket armament and radio sights.
              And then they stuck with them in Korea, to win supremacy.

              Remind the result? It turned out that it was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines. Our MIGs easily dodged rocket fire, after which the Sabers, which had shot the ammunition (and without guns!), Turned from tigers into kittens. MIGs, which had excellent maneuverability, showed these "tourists" how to fly and what "close air combat" is. The losses of the Americans in Korea were enormous, read about Kozhedub's regiment in Korea. American strategists quickly forgot the stupid doctrine, and guns appeared on their planes quickly. It was still difficult for them to compete only with MIGs - MIGs, unlike them could fly!

              They already burned on it and again built fighters, not intended for close maneuverable combat? Indeed, do not consider Americans more stupid than yourself. They are of course stupid (c) M. Zadornov, but not so much.

              It just didn't work out, and then they began to say that they didn't want to. And you hung your ears, believe them. So after all, they are "experts ... primarily in the manipulation of consciousness"! Do not forget what you yourself say.

              The fact that the Americans later reconfigured them into multipurpose, and even shock (F15E "Strike Eagle") says only one thing - they cannot cope with the task of gaining air superiority.
              Their "super" fighters turned out to be weaklings, although they copied their Eagle from our MiG-25.
              1. 0
                January 18 2013
                1) F-14 air defense aircraft carrier fighter is heavy, with a powerful locator and long-range missiles. Its relative analogues are Mig-25, Mig-31. Such fighters are not intended for close combat.
                F-15 heavy fighter of the Air Force, it is possible to conduct a BVD on it, but according to the concept of its use, it should destroy the enemy in the Far East
                To conduct BVB, amers have F-16, F-18, although they generally prefer not to bring it to work.
                3) Then you have, in general, a thrash burnout: Sabers (F-86) is equipped with machine guns, which missiles you found for us, only you know.
                What did you find the "doctrine of remote missile combat" during the Korean War, too?
                4) F-15 did not copy from MiG-25
                In general, you need a snack)))
                1. 0
                  January 22 2013
                  Odiseyu: In fact, Skating Rink confused Korea with Vietnam. There, after all, ours, too, at first relied on missiles, precisely because the amers shouted about the Boeing shot down in Kamchatka, that the Russians could not open warning fire from the cannons, because they did not have cannons, but only missiles. After all, we have Khrushchev's missiles, they almost destroyed the entire aviation.
                  In Korea, the Sabers carried eight machine guns, which is why the MiGs returned looking like drushlags. But the first use of missiles in an instant was in Korea and the missiles were for radio guidance heads. But the very first MiG-19s moved away from such missiles, I already wrote above, how surprised the amers - missile weapons testers. I must say that even in Vietnam, when our 21st forced the phantoms to leave from high altitudes to low ones, the 17th and 19th MiGs tamed them as they wanted, because the high-altitude Phantoms lost everything to us at low altitudes. And at high altitudes the 21st were waiting for them. Roughly the same was in the USSR in V, O, the war with the "Airacobra".
                  One episode: 4 Yaks accompanied the Pe-2 after the bombing and saw the Fw-109 being driven at low altitude by 4 Cobras. The 2 Yaks separated from the convoy, drove the Masses away from the Aircobras and returned to the convoy before the Cobras joined the Peshki, under the protection of the Yaks. A yak above 5000 could lose to the Aircobra, but below 4000 it was the "king of the sky", it was not me who said that, but the commander of Normandy - Neman.
                2. 0
                  January 22 2013
                  Quote: Odyssey
                  1) F-14 fighter air defense aircraft carrier-heavy ..... F-15 heavy fighter of the Air Force, it is possible to conduct a BVD on it, but according to the concept of its use, it must destroy the enemy in the Far East

                  "Heavy" is American. but in our opinion "they fly badly." The tomkets were re-equipped for interception, for reconnaissance - it is true. That Eagle later became the F15E 'Strike Eagle "is also true.
                  But were under construction they were initially positioned as a "air superiority fighter" - THIS was their purpose. It is easily checked on the same Internet, look. I still have somewhere (if my son has not dragged) a pocket book for our flight crew, once it was marked with a particle board - there are silhouettes and flight characteristics of NATO aircraft. It also says in black and white: the purpose is to gain air superiority.

                  To conduct BVB, amers have F-16, F-18, although they generally prefer not to bring it to work.

                  Dreaming is not harmful. But I have already quoted here, and I repeat again:
                  In the 2008 study of the Air Force-funded RAND Research Center, it was said that after studying 588 incidents of shooting aircraft in aerial combat since 1950, only 24 occurred over a long distance when the attacker opened fire on the target out of sight. RAND claims that, historically, long-range air-to-air missiles proved to be 90 percent less effective than predicted.
                  (Note that this is not our research and not our statistics.)

                  3) Then you have, in general, a thrash burnout: Sabers (F-86) is equipped with machine guns, which missiles you found for us, only you know.
                  What did you find the "doctrine of remote missile combat" during the Korean War, too?

                  Well, if "HZ" - can you study the question, read something about Korean? By the way, our Khrushchov was also a "rocketman" - under the influence of the same doctrine of the WB, he demanded from our design bureaus to remove "obsolete" guns and to make completely rocket armament, like the Americans have. Ours barely fought off the "maize", otherwise the MiG-15 would have been without guns.

                  And the fact that later on Sabers (F86) already during the war in Korea guns appeared, does not mean that they were always there - there were more than twenty modifications of these machines.

                  F-15 not copied from Mig-25

                  I did not quite accurately put it. Of course, they did not copy how the Chinese are now tearing up our "drying". But the general layout and two-fin tail was chosen under the impression of intelligence and spy photos of the 25th MIGs. This was also written in the press (of course, not ours. In ours, there is only one "propaganda").

                  You do not know the history of combat aircraft.
                  Read at your leisure before you rush at the ready with a spear.

                  In general, you need a snack)))

                  Duc, this is .. With great pleasure. Pour it in! wink
    13. Arthurian
      +17
      January 16 2013
      God, how I like his vidok. No one will ever convince me that the best aircraft for design, combat readiness were, are and will be only in Russia! At the sight of our airplanes, my heart simply trembles, I don’t know how to explain this condition, some euphoria .. :)
      And I wish Bogdan quiet winds and a successful flight!
      1. 0
        January 22 2013
        And they are more and more like the intergallactic ships that we call UFOs. Beauties!
    14. biglow
      +10
      January 16 2013
      the blogger’s dialogue at the Kazan Helicopter Plant, he wanted to shoot there, but he was refused
      - Why are you so strict about filming?
      - Why take us off? We have a regime factory.
      - Well ... how many thousands of readers would know and see what the plant lives and breathes ...
      - And we do not need advertising. We work in three shifts, they barely have time to execute the program.
      - Che, so straight loaded?
      - Yes strong. Contracts are already concluded for 2015, and even for 2016. We are doing as many helicopters now as ever!
      - But the plant is from the Soviet era? Are you really doing more than under the USSR ???
      - (a little thought) ... no, the Union does not surpass us. Then there was Afghanistan, helicopters riveted like sausages. But now the cars are not typical, with them more fuss - we only have about twenty cabin sets. And then everything was simple, military. But in 20 years they have never done so much.
      “I see ... and how many cars are you doing?”
      - Well, now somewhere around 130-135 ... that's a lot. Seven years ago they did a lot less than a hundred. And the program is very large, we have deliveries to 31 countries, except us. A repair! Repair and recompilation is also very much! Our service shop can barely cope.
      - And during the USSR?
      - Uuu ... then, probably, about two hundred and fifty ... But in those days it was just, basically a new production, and the salons are very simple, military. Less fuss with a complete set.
    15. barbell
      +5
      January 16 2013
      Hooray! my Russia! Hooray is my beloved Soviet Union!
    16. Nastyusha
      -30
      January 16 2013
      Just look at this handsome man. Tense athlete. Nobility. He looks like the real 5th generation. Athletic, lean, sexy.

      Oh! And this coloring. Immediately felt chic and rumbling power of the car.

      A true fighter of the twenty-first century. I want to touch it.
      1. Nikolko
        +16
        January 16 2013
        With PAK FA and F-35 will be about the same as in this picture;)
        1. garik404
          +5
          January 17 2013
          or by analogy something like this lol
        2. 0
          January 22 2013
          Nikolke: Abrams! come out a sneaky coward! or Abrams come out! ... sneaky coward!
          How important it is to correctly place punctuation marks!
      2. +9
        January 16 2013
        Quote: Nastya
        Athletic, lean, sexy.

        Perhaps comments are unnecessary ..... No, you look at ryushechki wassat
        1. Nastyusha
          -18
          January 16 2013
          It is not only beautiful, but also truly multifunctional. STOVL, VTOL, CTOL - these abbreviations caress the ears of customers. The possibility of a short take-off and landing.

          Arrrr ... Aggressive predator ... RRRRR
          1. PLO
            +12
            January 16 2013
            Arrrr ... Aggressive predator ... RRRRR

            aha Yes
            Fu-35 has long been nicknamed a penguin, even in English-language forums,

            him with his barrel-shaped fuselage to the grace of the Su-27 as to the sky
            1. Nastyusha
              -13
              January 16 2013
              The real dominator. And so? From this angle, it is even more elegant. I like the coloring. Steel ebb.
              1. +10
                January 16 2013
                Quote: Nastya
                I like the coloring.

                Well, this color does not suit him, penguins have a white breast .... Yes, and flies like a penguin ...
                1. Nastyusha
                  -13
                  January 16 2013
                  And so? Ah, my breath caught in my breath.

                  F-35 - a wide range of weapons, functionality, the best serial avionics, refueling in the air, stealth.

                  F-35 - the choice of successful people.
                  1. +4
                    January 17 2013
                    F-35 - the choice of successful people.

                    Forgot to add - glamorous civilians.
                  2. +5
                    January 17 2013
                    Quote: Nastya
                    And so? Ah, my breath caught in my breath.

                    F-35 - a wide range of weapons, functionality, the best serial avionics, refueling in the air, stealth.

                    F-35 - the choice of successful people.

                    Yes this "Nastyusha"- an ordinary troll!
                    Enough to feed her, that it’s a provocateur has long been clear.

                    "Nastyusha"! Advice you friendly: read these abbreviations a little longer - can you finally suffocate?
                    1. +3
                      January 17 2013
                      Quote: Skating rink

                      Rink

                      Well, brother, finally ..... you moved !!!!! laughing drinks
              2. PLO
                +21
                January 16 2013
                The real dominator. And so? From this angle, it is even more elegant. I like the coloring. Steel ebb.

                I agree with this angle the penguin is less ugly, but he is far from handsome

                that's the ideal that the fu-35 will never reach
                1. Nastyusha
                  -15
                  January 16 2013
                  Overly artsy.
                  1. PLO
                    +6
                    January 16 2013
                    Overly artsy.

                    Well, so Americans can’t be without pathos, the Fu-35 is no exception
                  2. OSTAP BENDER
                    +5
                    January 16 2013
                    Quote: Nastya
                    Overly artsy.

                    Troll? A worthy student (possibly student) of the Jewish kagala!
                2. 0
                  January 17 2013
                  Well, this is FALCON !!! OWNER OF SKY !! ..
                3. 0
                  January 22 2013
                  At us on Kola such just started to fly. It stands out with a long fuselage from old cars.
              3. +5
                January 16 2013
                And do you know that this modelka (as long as the language doesn’t turn out differently) half the world scratched turnips, invented and developed ...? Oh, that’s, excuse me, they are still developing .. Although the peak of the noisy advertising campaign has already faded away, and the model is still not flying, despite the tons of funds poured .. So admire - admire, but that's the point in it .. .
                ... "Dominator" - Haaah haa
                1. Nastyusha
                  -12
                  January 16 2013
                  You shouldn’t be so. TTX is the highest. Steeper than just the Raptor. Little is known about PAK FA.

                  [img] http://www.google.by/imgres?imgurl=http://www.militaryparitet.com/editor/as

                  sets / new / 00021.jpg & imgrefurl = http: //www.militaryparitet.com/perevodnie/data/i
                  c_perevodnie/1638/&usg=__-ssEMRfURQsJBLBk0V9ycEJZ50E=&h=501&w=800&sz=119&hl=ru&s

                  tart=24&zoom=1&tbnid=IE9AS5dbZoeQ2M:&tbnh=90&tbnw=143&ei=d-j2UOalOMq1tAb774DgDg&

                  prev = / search? q = f-35 & start = 20 & hl = ru & client = opera & sa = N & tbo = d & rls = ru & channel = s
                  uggest & biw = 1440 & bih = 783 & tbm = isch & itbs = 1 [/ img]
                  1. tolan777
                    +1
                    January 17 2013
                    It has less range, less speed, less combat capabilities than the Su-35 and PAK-FA.

                    Have you decided to work as a clown?
              4. +2
                January 16 2013
                beautiful photoshop, I also knew how when I was at school
              5. 0
                January 17 2013
                There is no such thing as a bird that is not beautiful .. He looks like a Vulture .. He is a conditional "Master of the Sky" until the Falcon appeared in the sky.
          2. +4
            January 16 2013
            Quote: Nastya
            The possibility of a short take-off and landing.
            Well of course against this background 350 m on non-native engines yet, the T-50 has so many .... wassat
          3. evil hamster
            +2
            January 16 2013
            This is when it is a penguin, and even in the situation in Hysnyki crap ?? lol
          4. +1
            January 16 2013
            aggressive penguin? This is something new
      3. +5
        January 16 2013
        Quote: Nastya
        Just look at this handsome man. Tense athlete. Nobility. He looks like the real 5th generation. Athletic, lean, sexy.

        Oh! And this coloring. Immediately felt chic and rumbling power of the car.

        A true fighter of the twenty-first century. I want to touch it.

        This is exactly reminiscent of the words of the troll. Sorry, but it looks like you made a mistake on the site.
        1. Nastyusha
          -12
          January 16 2013
          Someone like PAK FA, I like the F-35. Why does someone praise the handsome T-50, and the F-35 is something bad in your opinion. I like this plane, I tell you about its advantages and its advantages. That's all.
          1. +5
            January 16 2013
            I read, read the comments of the girl (??) and it became clear that the young lady just likes to bring honest people to white heat, and the minuses, in a sense, "turn on", so I did not minus, so as not to bring more pleasure. I am not well versed in aviation, but even to me why do amers respect and fear our fighters, for example, do not accept a challenge even for a training battle.
          2. -1
            January 17 2013
            I agree, f 35 is a cool plane, especially in "Die Hard 4", but in a direct collision with the moment 35 ... the Russians will win again, on the hike you breed guys generals, respect ... how they all pounced on you hungry probably laughing , drop the phone and I want to call ... bully
      4. -6
        January 16 2013
        There is no doubt when the amers bring the 35th — there will be a beautiful airplane (and most importantly there will be a lot of them), and the 22nd is good.
        But I don't understand your logic. Since the United States will have many 5th generation aircraft, and Europe has very good Rafali and Typhoons with active AFAR, plus the "eastern front" against China and Japan, all the more we need to devote all our efforts to the development and production of the PAK FA.
        Moreover, there should be not 10, and not 20, but at least 800-1000.
        But the need for the Su-35 and Su-30 is just extremely doubtful.
        1. nagi
          +4
          January 16 2013
          Why is there so much? Actually, the stealth technology makes invisible aircraft only over long distances. In close combat, there is no sense in him. If you plan to fly hundreds to hundreds of planes, then it’s much easier to keep in the background 4-generation fighters from which to launch long-range missiles, and enemy aircraft to flare AWACS, from the ground or the same PAK FA.
          1. 0
            January 17 2013
            Quote: nagi

            Why is there so much?

            Consider yourself the volume of purchases of F-35 3100 units, plus 190 raptors. Plus 800 superhornites, plus at least 500 Rafale and Typhoons. This is the case with NATO-4500
            China now has about 700 istr. 4 generations, and there will be significantly more than 1000, in addition, Japan with its claims to the Kuril Islands.
            And we need to close both the Western and Eastern and Northern (through the Arctic) directions.
            Quote: nagi
            If you plan to fly hundreds to hundreds of planes, then it’s much easier to keep in the background 4-generation fighters from which to launch long-range missiles, and enemy aircraft to flare AWACS, from the ground or the same PAK FA.

            Duc, they also "fade", a generic flaw in the family of 27-x large EPR, stealth will shoot them from afar. Plus, amers never fly without AWACS and electronic warfare behind their backs.
            Therefore, in fact, PAK FA is needed.
            1. nagi
              +1
              January 17 2013
              Quote: Odyssey
              Duc, they also "fade", a generic flaw in the family of 27-x large EPR, stealth will shoot them from afar. Plus, amers never fly without AWACS and electronic warfare behind their backs.
              Therefore, in fact, PAK FA is needed.

              In the sense of being shot from afar? If on Russian aircraft of the 4th generation there are long-range missiles that are not inferior to the missiles standing on amer aircraft, then the salvo will be fired simultaneously. Among our aircraft it is also cheaper to have aircraft with electronic warfare. As you put it, "firing" is not a problem, since from a distance greater than the range of the missile they still will not be fired, and if we have the same firing range, they see us, we see them.
              In the bottom line, if we say 100 4+ planes are firing ammunition, according to the amers, and amers are firing at them, then the losses of the planes will be about the same on both sides, as already mentioned, if we see them stealth then it’s not easier for him to get away from the rocket than ours 4 +. As a result, we lost 50% and they are the same, but in our money equivalent it will be 10 times cheaper.
              1. 0
                January 18 2013
                In the sense that the line of detection for them will vary greatly, in principle, if you imagine that it is really possible to compensate for this difference using external target designation, then your logic works.
                However, it is extremely difficult to do this, and based on the state of our Air Force, I do not believe in this possibility.
                And then then you need a lot of 4 + generation aircraft, and 90 (!!!) Su-35s are bought from us right up to 2020.
                PS Missiles in combat units are still old.
                1. nagi
                  0
                  January 19 2013
                  Quote: Odyssey
                  in principle, if you imagine that it will really be possible to compensate for this difference using external target designation, then your logic works

                  So this is exactly the moment that you want to be puzzled.
                  I fasted earlier and pointed out that 4+ is the second tier. External target designation will be either from the AWACS or from the ground or from the PAK FA. At the moment, there is no question of intervention in other states, and the ground forces should help with the defense of the Russian borders of the Air Force. In mass battles, the aircraft will act more like a platform for launching missiles, even as a single fighter.
                  In case of war there should always be equipment that can be stamped in bulk.
                  Say, during WWII, UVZ produced a tank per hour. That is, you can talk endlessly how cool the 2th generation planes are, but if due to sophisticated technology they can only be produced piece by piece, then in the war they are of little use.
                  1. +1
                    January 20 2013
                    Quote: nagi
                    So this is exactly the moment that you want to be puzzled.

                    In any case, they need to be puzzled, the lack of AWACS and EW aircraft, the lack of modern fighters, along with a decrease in the number of ground-based radars and their obsolescence, have already led to the fact that Russia's air defense is essentially a focal character.
                    Quote: nagi
                    I fasted earlier and pointed out that 4+ is the second tier. External target designation will be either from the AWACS or from the ground or from the PAK FA.

                    If the PAK FA will be in the first echelon, they are unlikely to be able to direct the Su-35, I don’t know about the AWACS planes, the question is interesting. From the ground if upgrading the radar is likely to be possible. But in any case, at your proposal, you need to purchase a sufficient number of 4 + aircraft. And we are stuck in some kind of half position, first we bought a little Su-30, then Su-35 (why 2 different types-xs), and then they plan to buy a little PAK FA.This is more like a show and a cut in the budget than for rearmament.
                    Quote: nagi
                    At the moment, there is no question of intervention in other states,

                    True, but hypothetically 2 situations may arise that require the Air Force to carry out offensive operations.
                    1) If Azerbaijan is not satisfied with the return of the NKAR, it will begin the occupation of Armenia.
                    2) If Japan begins the occupation of the Kuril and Sakhalin.
                    And in fact, and in another case, the hope is only on the Air Force.
                    Quote: nagi
                    Say, during WWII, UVZ produced a tank per hour. That is, you can talk endlessly how cool the 2th generation planes are, but if due to sophisticated technology they can only be produced piece by piece, then in the war they are of little use.

                    If you leave out the war with nuclear weapons, then your logic is impeccable. But only with respect to old wars (before 1991), what do you write correctly for long wars with the use of large ground forces comparable in combat effectiveness. Now for the Russian Federation, the situation has fundamentally changed. At the moment, there are two real external threats to the existence of Russia
                    1) A massive invasion from the PRC. But it’s never a matter of what kind of fighters we will have there, and what kind of aviation in general. We have nothing to stop China, more precisely, there is the only way to do this — strike nuclear weapons.
                    2) An aerospace attack by NATO. It will be short in duration (no more than a month), using a huge number of missiles and UAVs in the first echelon, and no less than the number of aircraft in the second. Moreover, the main blow will be inflicted on infrastructure facilities. There will be no ground invasion.
                    Extremely exaggerated, it will look like this-now in Moscow -15, if a couple of Stealths arrive with humanitarian aid tomorrow and bomb the Kapotnya refineries and the main Moscow TPPs, then in a week any government of Russia (except, perhaps, communist) will sign a surrender agreement. and the whole war.
                    And to repel such a threat, you need to have many of the best aircraft before the war rather than a simple, but technologically advanced aircraft, for mass production during the war. Moreover, these aircraft should be able to strike back at enemy territory.
      5. +7
        January 16 2013
        Athletic, lean, sexy.

        Oh! And this coloring. Immediately felt chic and rumbling power of the car.

        A true fighter of the twenty-first century. I want to touch it.
        This is called a psychosexual disorder. Unhealthy Fetishism! negative
        I can find a model and give a touch !!!
        1. Nastyusha
          -7
          January 16 2013
          But you want to feel the PAK FA?
      6. +4
        January 16 2013
        well ..
        you are sick. You need to see a specialist as soon as possible
      7. OSTAP BENDER
        0
        January 16 2013
        Quote: Nastya
        I want to touch it.

        Sorry to get a warning! feel
      8. wax
        +1
        January 16 2013
        Sexual! Where is he about? It is perfectly visible, so as not to mix up, otmakazhazhena!
      9. +2
        January 16 2013
        But if it were covered with varnish and rhinestones, then you probably would have blown off the roof.
      10. 0
        January 16 2013
        some kind of sad
      11. 0
        January 16 2013
        some kind of sad
        1. +3
          January 17 2013
          AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
          !!!!!! Where did you get Nastenka? It was so much fun with her.
          1. +2
            January 17 2013
            Quote: Mechanic
            Where did you get Nastenka?

            In the bath she, washed away, alone and without clothes wink
            Hi Zhen, do you want to see her? laughing
            1. Vanek
              +2
              January 17 2013
              Quote: Alexander Romanov
              In the bath she


              Here I am about the same.

              Quote: Mechanic
              It was so much fun with her.
              1. Cavas
                +6
                January 17 2013
                Quote: Vanek
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                In the bath she

                Here I am about the same.

                Quote: Mechanic
                It was so much fun with her.


                Bath bath, but soap apart .... laughing
                1. Vanek
                  +2
                  January 17 2013
                  Quote: Cavas

                  Cavas


                  Ohhhhhhhhhh
    17. StrateG
      +10
      January 16 2013
      And what has been done better than the Americans? Fki I do not advertise. Simply, they are objectively the best in the world.



      Just look at this handsome man. Tense athlete. Nobility. He looks like the real 5th generation. Athletic, lean, sexy.

      Oh! And this coloring. Immediately felt chic and rumbling power of the car.

      A true fighter of the twenty-first century. I want to touch it.


      Touch it better ... but I won’t say it, otherwise the ban will be slapped.

      You are like a stubborn sheep, honestly. And your judgment is neither objective, nor even more adequate. Do you know why our cars are the best, subject to the most objectivity? Because Russia has a greater place in history, given as a country - which was in the war. I can’t be right, but in my opinion, it was the war that made progress in the development of all military equipment. I’m thinking why Russia succeeded in the military, and not with each in the auto industry, like the Germans or Americans? Yes, because Russia fought most of its existence.
      1. Alex 241
        +6
        January 16 2013
        Guys, don’t bite you with this character, a pure troll, I used to remember his comments under a male nickname.
        1. +5
          January 16 2013
          Quote: Alex 241
          yeah don't bite you

          Sasha, hello !!! I told you that the troll, but they don’t believe me ... It's a shame ... drinks
          1. Alex 241
            +4
            January 16 2013
            Hi buddy, you can’t call it anything else, they pushed such ideas there until Sashka Romanov broke it off, just being too lazy to search the site, familiar handwriting, you can’t confuse anyone with anyone.
            1. +4
              January 16 2013
              Quote: Alex 241
              , you can’t call it any other way

              What do we need ??? They are afraid of trolls, do not go to sites !!! drinks
              1. Alex 241
                +3
                January 16 2013
                What is there to be afraid of! drinks
                1. 0
                  January 16 2013
                  Quote: Alex 241
                  afraid of him there!

                  Yes and we will not !!! While you are responsible for our sky, I’m calm !!! drinks
            2. 0
              January 16 2013
              alex 241,
              Hello Sasha!!!!!
              1. Alex 241
                +1
                January 16 2013
                Hi Igor, where have you been?
                1. +1
                  January 16 2013
                  alex 241,
                  Work house wife children laughing
    18. Nikolko
      +1
      January 16 2013
      Nastyusha
      F-35 reminds me of a can feel
    19. StrateG
      +4
      January 16 2013
      As I understand it, Nastyusha is it you slapped me minus?))) So it’s hurt for a living anyway) Or it turned out to be true ^^
      1. 0
        January 16 2013
        Quote: StrateG
        minus slapped?))

        This is not order .... Hold on, brother, + !!! For my taste, very correct comments!
      2. Nastyusha
        -10
        January 16 2013
        Of course not. I’m not minus anyone here.
    20. Arthurian
      0
      January 16 2013
      Yes, her, at the sight of ameroplanes, my heart does not tremble, which means they are worse than ours!
      1. +2
        January 16 2013
        Amers have a big plus in that they do not count money (you can print as many pieces of paper on a FRS printer as you like) when allocated for all sorts of needs such as: "writing pen in space", "assistance to democratic forces in countries with dictatorships", etc. etc. And all the others hawala it and buy on "these dirty green papers" (V. Zhirinovsky).
    21. 0
      January 16 2013
      Quote: StrateG
      I can’t be right, but in my opinion, it was the war that made progress in the development of all military equipment

      You are right, Alexander, and not only military equipment. And the bird is really good (I'm talking about a fighter).
      1. +1
        January 16 2013
        And not only military equipment. And industry is all countries. The main thing is to win. Otherwise, what will happen to East Germany is immediately the field of surrender.
    22. StrateG
      +1
      January 16 2013
      Quote: sniper
      This is not order .... Hold on, brother, + !!! For my taste, very correct comments!


      Thank you! feel
      1. +3
        January 16 2013
        Yes, nothing, I'm for adequate people! drinks
    23. StrateG
      +1
      January 16 2013
      sniper, then the partisans showed up, anonymously put the cons))) Did you see the insolent by chance?)))
      1. Nastyusha
        -1
        January 16 2013
        I see that you are hinting at me, but I give you my word of honor that it is not me.

        I don’t put any cons to anyone.
        1. satellite
          -1
          January 16 2013
          let's go nails paint yourself a baby, in short go troll sideways from here
      2. +2
        January 16 2013
        Quote: StrateG
        , then the partisans showed up, anonymously put the cons))

        Are these partisans? So the anonymous vulgaris ... nothing to say, that’s it ...
    24. toguns
      -1
      January 16 2013
      The title of the article's title, as always, is funny "Russian fifth generation fighter went on its first long flight" in general, this is a prototype, when the series goes on then we can honestly call it the fifth fighter of that generation.
      ps
      comments on the article
      Nastyusha is a fat troll.
      and so on about the f-22 imba (cool) or still a fail (failure) ...
      I certainly appreciate open sources, but it turns out that the raptor is a basin with bolts and it belongs to the same row as the 4 ++ generation.
      its main disadvantages are suspension, range, maximum detection range, price and hike speed.
    25. StrateG
      +1
      January 16 2013
      NastyushaI hope you can believe at least that.
      1. +7
        January 16 2013
        Quote: StrateG
        I hope you can believe

        You can’t believe it, but you can hope ... I’m the same a little wolf, on another resource. Here, brother, this is about us and about our T-50:

        WOLVES

        I don’t advise you to consider us puppies,
        Because we are free wolves!
        We knock down the flags and tear the shooters' throats,
        And just raise the hair at the withers .....

        There is ahead for us, only the will is open
        And for the will we will fight!
        Even a point blank shot cannot hold us back
        I do not advise even trying ...

        We are jumping in the cold distance
        Leading behind the whole flock ...
        My coat is full of blood, my teeth are like steel
        And I do not consider deaths for myself ....
        1. +1
          January 16 2013
          Well written! Vysotsky blew and present. So could write a real man, a warrior. I'm in a pack.
          1. +1
            January 16 2013
            Quote: jungar
            I'm in a pack.

            I am glad !!! Welcome ! drinks
        2. Alex 241
          +2
          January 16 2013
          Well, this is my favorite !!!!!
          1. 0
            January 17 2013

            Well, this is my favorite !!!!

            ABOUT! good little girl.
    26. 0
      January 16 2013
      Yo-mayo, so it means it’s flying over my city right now !!!
    27. max-02215
      -4
      January 16 2013
      What did the girl stand? Well, this is a very crude aircraft, I would also like to see it in the forefront, but so far this is a project. They will bring it, they will not bring it, time will cry, and they missed him during the first drunk - the president, and now he will not add the wish for valid defense. Well, a beautiful airplane, and then what? It is necessary to bring down these raptors and others like him, but for now there is only SUKHARI ....
      1. satellite
        +4
        January 16 2013
        How long have girls become interested in technology? This is an ordinary troll.
    28. StrateG
      +1
      January 16 2013
      You can’t believe it, but you can hope ... I’m the same a little wolf, on another resource. Here, brother, this is about us and about our T-50:

      WOLVES

      I don’t advise you to consider us puppies,
      Because we are free wolves!
      We knock down the flags and tear the shooters' throats,
      And just raise the hair at the withers .....

      There is ahead for us, only the will is open
      And for the will we will fight!
      Even a point blank shot cannot hold us back
      I do not advise even trying ...

      We are jumping in the cold distance
      Leading behind the whole flock ...
      My coat is full of blood, my teeth are like steel
      And I do not consider deaths for myself ....


      I love beautiful poetry))) Where did they get it from? I would love to listen to a song with these words))

      I'm also a little wolf


      I have such a surname))) And the wolves themselves as animals, I simply adore)
      1. +4
        January 16 2013
        Quote: StrateG
        Where did you get it?

        These are mine .... Thanks for the appreciation! drinks
    29. StrateG
      0
      January 16 2013
      sniper, I'm sorry) But poetry is something) Catch respect! good
      1. +1
        January 16 2013
        Quote: StrateG
        Catch Respect!

        Thanks, caught !!!! laughing And come on you! Huh? drinks
    30. StrateG
      +2
      January 16 2013
      How long have girls become interested in technology? This is an ordinary troll.


      You opened our eyes, dear)

      [media = https: //vk.com/video76662484_163142646]

      You can say that this aircraft, although a beginner, but it is clear that it is holding very confidently! Epic, beautiful, cool!
    31. gribnik777
      +7
      January 16 2013
      Tired of reading a Coy-faq ad in a shiny wrapper.
      I am not special in aviation and decided to find out for myself what is wrong here. I found a lot of materials, but I will give only two as an example:

      http://www.arms-expo.ru/049051124053055057048.html
      http://www.odnako.org/blogs/show_19150/


      I recommend that you familiarize yourself, especially with the first link.
      And for the seed, a few quotes:

      Quote: Nastya
      F-35 - choice successshnyh people.


      These people are no longer anywhere successyut.

      At high speeds (more than 1100 km / h), the importance of the inductive component of the drag decreases, and the weight of X0 increases and the F-35C loses the ability to maneuver vigorously without loss of speed.
      The obtained characteristics close to the maneuverability indicators of the MiG-23ML fighterwithdrawn from service of the Russian Air Force in the early 1990s and about half the maneuverability of the 5th generation F-22A fighter.

      F-35 is persistently called a fifth-generation fighter; its combat capabilities in solving fighter missions were evaluated using mathematical modeling of close air combat conditions. As an adversary for the F-35, the commercial design bureau named after BY. Sukhoi - Su-35 with engines "117С" NPO "Saturn". Both aircraft have four short-range air-to-air missiles and standard artillery mounts as armaments.


      Quote: Nastya
      A true fighter of the twenty-first century. I want to touch it.


      Touch the wreckage! Just do not burn yourself.

      The results showed that the Su-35 as a fighter has an overwhelming superiority over its competitor. Possessing better maneuvering characteristics, it was more often than once in 2,55 – 3,39 in terms of the use of missile weapons, and in 3,54 – 5,24 times more often these attacks ended with the defeat of the target. The probability of successful completion of a duel with Su-35 for F-35 does not exceed 0,21 – 0,28.

      In August 2008, in Hawaii, an F-35 aerial combat was simulated with Russian vehicles (having characteristics similar to those of the Su-30). The virtual air war was attended by Australians, as customers of the F-35. Of course, the simulation results are closed, and the Americans repeatedly denied the failure of the F-35. However, the results led to a freeze on the purchase of these aircraft by Australia, and Dennis Jensen, a member of the liberal party, who was acquainted with the report, without disclosing details, said that "Dry" beat the F-35, like penguins! "

      Perhaps the chances of the F-35 against the Su-30 are slightly higher than that of the not very modern Australian aircraft configuration, which led only to the freezing, but not cancellation of the purchase. Nonetheless, it is clear that the F-35 is not able to surpass even the fourth generation aircraft in air combat, despite the perfection of the on-board systems and low visibility.


      I am, of course, an amateur, but such examples are calming, and you simply stop paying attention to advertising "koi-faq".
    32. StrateG
      +2
      January 16 2013
      And come on you! Huh?


      As you say! fellow
    33. +2
      January 16 2013
      Hello everyone !!!! Beautiful aircraft, everything is going according to plan, even if not as fast as we wanted, because most of us want to see this aircraft in service this year ....., but let this technique go as it should. " running in "so that an emergency does not occur, for example, as with an oxygen system on a raptor, and you never know stocks on the same raptor that are not spoken about to the general public, who knows ... in general, this is not even a question, and I am not interested in the raptor either a lot has already been read about him, told, shown, if the pakfa is faster, stronger, smarter than the American, then what do we care about their problems, we will just continue to be proud of our aviation! Yes, an interesting fact that the plane was again piloted by Hero of Russia Sergei Bogdan, while the cars are piece, one of them could have been given the name "Hero of Russia Sergei Bogdan" as a sign of respect, but this is so, thoughts out loud !!!!
    34. stranik72
      -6
      January 16 2013
      The lady is not a troll, the lady, unlike some "computer strategists", can analyze and think. On what basis do you think that the T-50 will be better than the conventional F-35, Russia is now losing out to foreign competitors in almost all industries, except for mining. What kind of breakthrough technologies and innovations can be in the conditions when the level of simple secondary education fell below the plinth? What are you talking about, gentlemen, look at whose keyboard you are typing the letters (I'm not talking about the manufacturer), but about the developer, whose GA planes plow the skies of Russia, and radio traffic in our sky, even of Russian crews, is more often conducted in English. But in the end, the T-50 is still the only really existing project of the 5th generation, and according to those announced plans for the development of Russia, another is not visible in the near future. Let's just be happy about it.
      1. +1
        January 17 2013
        Ale, men, I’m catching up with something. Are you going to discuss the plane or a woman? If a woman - let's go to other sites ...
    35. StrateG
      +4
      January 16 2013
      evgenii67, true thoughts. And the direction chosen by our designers is also right - we act after the enemy, study his mistakes, avoid them and do better. And let the Americans walk on their rake, we will get around them better.
    36. +10
      January 16 2013
      but I generally like golden eagle wassat
      1. Cavas
        +6
        January 16 2013
        Junkers Ju-287



        MiG-23 with KOS



        Experimental Northrop Grumman X-29



        Well, this

        1. +4
          January 16 2013
          why did the last bird break its wings? recourse
          and what kind of aircraft model is it in general?

          but here is my unconditional favorite:
          1. Cavas
            +3
            January 16 2013
            Quote: rpek32
            and what kind of aircraft model is it in general?

            Su-27KM

          2. terp 50
            +1
            January 17 2013
            ... yeah - uzhzhzhzhzh! ... Ah, D.I. Mendeleev, the same tanks, tried to design!
            1. 0
              January 22 2013
              Not Mendeleev but his nephew - Arkhangelsk, designer of Ar-2. and Tupolev's assistant for general calculations.
          3. 0
            January 22 2013
            This is the project of the designer Kalinin. You can see the aircraft entrance through the door of the landing gear gondola, with vertical windows above the staircase in the fuselages - the wing. In the gondolas of the chassis, arrows with machine guns in the military version. All that with grilles on the wings is a two-story cabin for passengers, even at the far left engine and the far right. If memory fails: Ka-22 was called a project. But in those days, Tupolev, even with Maxim Gorky, was tormented with his 8 engines. And here ... Why raise the plane so high? If his chassis only a meter out of the fuselage, he would not hook the earth with screws, save 3-4 tons on the chassis and fairings of the nacelles.
            1. 0
              January 23 2013
              Flying prototype (flight time 5 days) K-7. Wingspan 53 meters fuselage length 28 m. 7 engines (6 in the wing edge and one pushing from behind) Passengers 128. The mass of 2100 is empty and 40000 is full. speed 234 km.
              But it was inferior to the Do -x seaplane of Germany with a length of 40 m and a span of 48 m. weighing 20 and 000 tons with a range of 56 km.
      2. 0
        January 17 2013
        me too, but upon closer inspection ... it’s kind of rumpled ... they tested it hard, he passed crash tests or something, somewhere I remember such a photo.
      3. terp 50
        +1
        January 17 2013
        ... sorry, the car didn't go into production. And how he flew! ... Handsome !!!
    37. +13
      January 16 2013
      At the plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, the construction of the fifth T-50 flight model continues


      It’s very good news for me - my father built this plant, and my mother worked as a designer. There I was born - in the village of Dzemgi in 1937.
      A big hello to everyone and a wish for good health. Live long, men!
    38. StrateG
      +1
      January 16 2013
      stranik72You are a pessimist. Learn to enjoy the little things)
    39. Eric
      0
      January 16 2013
      [img] http://vk.com/albums164966353?z=photo164966353_295901405/photos164966353 [/ i
      mg]
    40. 0
      January 17 2013
      The simple news is that someone / something flew somewhere. Everything from air defense to escorting will be responsible for this.

      But what kind of flood did people who did not build It develop. not flying on airplanes - but aviation lovers and experts .... :) :). You come to build this miracle - do not tremble with your tongue. In Komsomolsk, it’s been -34 ...- 40 months already (judging by gismeteo)
      It’s a miracle of engineering to just learn to fly .... and then .. such .... !!!

      Dear Crambol - Your life campaign has been 75 years old! ??? You also use a computer.?)? :))))

      --------------------------------------
      You know, sometimes you really want to tell how this miracle is built ... how irrational, bureaucratic, disregard and mockery. How amazed citizens Muscovites coming on business to KnAAZ - on technological processes and toilets from which pours .... back.
      -------------------------------------
      1. terp 50
        +2
        January 17 2013
        Quote: Takashi

        Dear Crambol - Your life campaign has been 75 years old! ??? You also use a computer.?)? :))))

        ... love - all ages are submissive, its impulses are beneficial, and ...
        (and, to be rude, it’s not beautiful anymore. Mmmm- yes)
    41. terp 50
      -4
      January 17 2013
      ... gentlemen! And, from which “door”, you decided that the PAK 50 is a 5th generation machine, when the developers themselves recognize it (him) for 4 ++?
      1. 0
        January 17 2013
        What kind of PAK50 is this? If this is all the same PAK FA or T50, then you can proof as they say in the studio, where the developers say that the T50 is 4 ++.
        1. terp 50
          0
          January 18 2013
          ... no difference. We’ll recognize him, even if we’ll cover them! Anyway, we're talking about the same thing ...
    42. dmn2
      +1
      January 17 2013
      Quote: terp 50
      ... gentlemen! And, from which “door”, you decided that the PAK 50 is a 5th generation machine, when the developers themselves recognize it (him) for 4 ++?


      4 ++ is the Su-35, and PAKFA is already the 5th.

      Although, by and large - the division into generations is very conditional.
      The Americans, when promoting the F-22, introduced the following items that define the 5th generation aircraft:

      - stealth
      - afterburning supersonic
      - super maneuverability
      - "advanced" electronics

      If we compare the T-50 project with the same requirements, then it fully corresponds to them.
      If we compare the Su-35, then it meets all the requirements, with the exception of stealth. Therefore, 4 ++ is positioned
      If you compare the F-35, then he does not match requirements afterburning supersonic и over-maneuverability, i.e., in fact, the Su-35 is closer to the 5th generation than the F-35. However, the first is not positioned as a fighter of the 5th, and the second is positioned. So "generations" are a very conditional thing. The Chinese, for example, have their own system in general - their planes are considered 1 generation less, i.e. Chinese aircraft of the 4th generation corresponds to the 5th generation (in the generally accepted classification). And nothing - the Chinese do not really complex about this;)
    43. wax
      0
      January 17 2013
      No, I do not support the removal of "Nastya". On this site, there are quite mature commentators (in my opinion, the only site where you can talk) to answer or ignore themselves. In my opinion, it did not violate the general requirements arising from the law on mass media. You can't create greenhouse conditions for yourself.
    44. +2
      January 17 2013
      Dear Crambol - Your life campaign has been 75 years old! ??? You also use a computer.?)? :))))


      Dear Takashi! Thanks for the valuable remark, it didn’t confuse me at all, but rather amused me. In addition to the computer, I also use a shovel, a lawn mower, a soldering iron, a washing machine, an iron, a vacuum cleaner and many other things that my wife cannot tolerate - women should be protected!
      And in my specialty, I scientific employee of the former very large Central Research Institute.
      Successes and health!
      1. terp 50
        0
        January 18 2013
        ... so, him, by the tinsel ,, puppy ,,. (you can also mention embroidery, “cross” - like a cat Leopold). Schaub does not bury ...
    45. 0
      January 17 2013
      The news is hurt. We look forward to continuing.
    46. vedruss
      0
      January 17 2013
      rpek32,
      "What kind of airplane model is this in general?"
      Actually SU 47.
      A carrier-based fighter, composite materials, a non-catapult take-off, a pilot's catapult - the entire sphere with a lantern, maintaining life on water for 3 days. weapons hidden in hatches. the most maneuverable in the Russian Federation at low and medium altitudes. due to the design of the airframe the most economical.
      This was our prototype of the 5th generation.
    47. stalker
      0
      January 17 2013
      the plane is great! made its first long flight and landed in Zhukovsky. Who doubts that he is a fifth-generation aircraft, let his head hit the wall.
    48. bandit154657
      0
      January 17 2013
      you also need the pilots corresponding to the car
    49. 0
      January 20 2013
      I didn’t find it in the comments: did 054 reach afterburning supersonic on this flight? And if you reached, then how much flew by?
      1. 0
        January 20 2013
        What for? This is just a flight to the test site.

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

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