Killers are coming for the Su-57 or Who is on us with the fifth?

98
Killers are coming for the Su-57 or Who is on us with the fifth?

The fifth generation show continues around the world. Countries are rapidly joining the race, which at any cost want to acquire their own “five” fighter. Probably, soon it will not even be a question of defense capability, but a question of prestige.

Yes, it’s a matter of prestige, like an aircraft carrier. The country has such a trough, even if it’s not really good for anything - that’s one deal, no - that’s where you go, into the backyard.



And in general, no one is even interested in the fact that, in fact, only American aircraft carriers are combat-ready in the world. Conditionally combat-ready - Indian and Chinese. The rest, who are still struggling to get away from the docks and repair plants - alas, no offense, cannot be considered warships. But there is a tick, the aircraft carrier club includes Russia, Great Britain, Italy, France and Thailand. Although the question here is why Thailand, a completely peace-loving country, needs this.


The situation is approximately the same with airplanes, but an airplane is much simpler to implement than an aircraft carrier. Therefore, you can be proud of airplanes, you can fight, or you can, excuse me, trivially make money on the global arms market, because an airplane is an airplane in Africa. That is, the list of potential buyers is much wider than for a ship.

If countries such as Uganda (99th country in the world in terms of GDP and 179th in terms of GDP per capita) purchase modern aircraft such as the Su-30MK2, then what can we say about those who are much higher on the evolutionary ladder ? And to whom he himself aviation God ordered the building of airplanes?

So at the end of the day, many today are trying to portray something like the fifth generation. We, Swedes, Germans, French, Koreans, Chinese, Turks... Forgive me, but a great aviation power with great historical Türkiye's aviation past is also in the picture.

And here one question arises: what should this “fifth generation fighter” be like?


But there are no clear answers to this question. And what’s more, it’s not even expected. No one in the world really knows what this fifth-generation fighter should be like and against whom, most importantly, how it should fight.

They were never able to develop a consensus in the world, because no one can really say what this “fifth” should be. It is clear that the formal reference point is the American F-22, which was simply first on the list. And therefore it became a model, although some features of fifth-generation aircraft are not so new in terms of technology.

Based on the announced characteristics of the fifth generation, these are anti-radar coatings and non-metals in the design, which reduce the radar signature of the aircraft, supersonic flight without afterburner, weapon located in compartments inside the fuselage, and not on external slings. Everything else, like even the radar with AFAR, as they say, is not critical.

Let's figure it out a little.

Supercruise or supersonic flight without afterburner


In general, supercruise is a very old phenomenon. The first combat aircraft that was capable of flying at supersonic speed without afterburner was the British English Electric Lightning F, which made its first flight in August 1954.


And here it is worth remembering two heavyweights, our Tu-144 and the French Concorde, which easily flew in supercruise, and ours was also faster, and the Frenchman flew for a record long time.


So, non-afterburning supersonic flight is from the 50-60s of the last century.

Placing weapons inside the fuselage



This is generally about a hundred years old. After the “Corner of the Sky” was blocked for absolutely idiotic reasons, it became difficult to find reliable information; we will limit ourselves to the fact that by the mid-30s of the last century, bombers carried bombs in the internal compartments, and not on the external sling.

Reduced radar signature



This could perhaps be called new. Radar-absorbing coatings, polymers and carbon fiber reinforced plastics in construction, in general, the replacement of metals with non-metals and the development of special forms that “hide” problem areas such as turbines - this can and should be called new. Plus some new items in avionics, but this is also normal, evolution still does not stand still, especially for combat vehicles.

But, in fact, a lot of “new” in fifth-generation aircraft is just well-developed old. And then everyone just went wild, trying to make their fifth-generation aircraft, and in exactly this style: we declare it the fifth generation, and then we’ll see.

What can be seen?


Well, if you take our Su-57, then it’s declared “five”, although it’s not quite one yet. Yes, its EPR is very decent, the plane is definitely not in the radar of the last century, and many modern ones can easily miss. And the missiles will be in the internal compartments, yes. But supercruise... Yes, everything will happen when the plane has the appropriate engines. And when this will happen, only the god of aviation and Rostec know. Although with the AL-41S, taking into account the airborne power, which not all Western aircraft have in this form, the Su-57 is quite handsome.


In the West, many people say exactly this - when THAT engine is installed, then the Su-57 will become a full-fledged fifth-generation fighter. In the meantime...

In the meantime, by the way, the Su-57 is the most effective fighter, even if not completely “top five”. Incredible, but true: a thousand F-35s cannot boast of anything in terms of combat use, with the exception of the Israeli F-35 Agir, which did an excellent job of smashing houses in Gaza into rubble.


Of course, someone will now say that the destruction of houses is extermination, that is, work for the exterminator. But as for me, a fighter must first of all destroy his own kind, and not houses and other civilian objects. And with this, everything is sad for the 35th.


The F-22 broke the score at least in its third decade, chalking up its first aerial victory – an intelligence bubble launched by China. A big victory for such an aircraft, to say the least.

So even if there are two separate victories of the Su-57 in the skies of Ukraine, despite the fact that only 22 of these aircraft were manufactured and they are in fact still being tested, this is, as it were, more than all the merits of one and a half thousand American “fives”.

Although those who advocate for the Su-57 to finally go into production are definitely right. Currently, this is becoming increasingly important, because Kyiv is acquiring more and more modern air defense systems with all the resulting consequences. And an aircraft with EPR at the fifth-generation level would be more than useful to the army.

What else is on our agenda?

China



Neighbors and partners have a very interesting development, Chengdu J-20. The plane is truly a breakthrough for China, if only because this time the Chinese engineers, to their honor and praise, did not copy anyone. This is not easy for a country that 30 years ago did not even think about its own planes and flew what it could buy or tear apart.

The Chengdu J-20 is also not considered a full-fledged “five” in the world, like our Su-57, however, there is such a nuance - the Chinese have never stated that the J-20 is such.

I wasn’t too lazy, I tried to translate what was written on the website of the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corporation, and so it says that the task was set to create “a stealth fighter capable of resisting any potential enemy in the air and performing the work of a multi-functional combat aircraft.”

No conventions.

In general, if you look at the EPR, it is stated at the level of 0,1 (for the Su-57 it is 0,3). It seems that everything is beautiful, but in reality, if you irradiate the J-20 radar in a side projection, then on the radar screen you will see a Christmas tree in all its glory. That is, the Chinese plane is quite suitable for a frontal attack, but in everything else it is doubtful.

In addition, the “Black Eagle” (that’s what the J-20 is called) has another weak point. And according to Chinese tradition, these are the same engines. The first samples of the J-20 flew on Russian AL-31FM2 engines, but all hopes for the maturity of the J-20 are connected with the new WS-15 engine, which should provide supercruise, super-maneuverability due to the UHT, and efficiency.

However, the WS-15 is confidently approaching its twentieth anniversary since its first launch, and the J-20, more precisely, is still there.


And one more aspect in terms of EPR for the J-20. These are his goals. The aircraft is also designed to work against enemy ships, which is not surprising, given the PRC coastline and the increasingly sympathetic attitude of the United States. However, the problem here is that the PLA simply does not have compact anti-ship missiles that can be hidden in weapons bays.

Accordingly, hello external suspension and goodbye stealth. So the J-20 will be inconspicuous on land, but at sea - alas. But there’s nothing to be done here; absolutely all anti-ship missiles are of such a size that, when hung on airplanes, they “fire” them for many tens of kilometers.

Finding such a plane and, naturally, shooting it down is not as difficult a task as the pilots of the plane would like it to be.

Turkey



Turkish Fighter Experimental/Turkish experimental fighter is one of the most exciting projects in the world in general. After the Turks bought the Russian S-400 air defense systems, they were logically denied the sale of the F-35, which put the Turkish Air Force in an awkward position. Moreover, problems also arose with the modernization of existing F-16s.

The Turks decided to build an aircraft on their own, which in the future will replace the F-16, and will also meet all NATO standards (do not forget that Turkey is a member of the alliance), but the trouble is that the Turks had no experience of this kind.

It is clear that the whole world is helping here (Sweden, Italy, Pakistan), but there is one problem: Turkish engineers have never had the experience of creating their own aircraft engines from scratch, and the Americans have shown complete brilliance in the pan of their engines.

Negotiations with Pratt & Whitney and General Electric brought negative results, and it is difficult to say how the Turkish aviation industry will overcome this situation. They don’t give you their own, going to your opponents will obviously cost you more.

However, no one is in a hurry here, and they say that the EPR of the Kagan turned out to be at the level of our Su-27, that is, it is worthless.

So there is nowhere for anyone to rush here except the Turks, who really want their “five”, but there are more problems with it than it seemed at first glance.

South Korea



South Korean KF-21 - this is serious. The plane, which was first shown in April 2021, was a surprise to everyone, and for some it may turn out to be an unpleasant surprise. The Korean (relatively, half the world worked on it), which also claims to be a “five,” turned out to be cheaper than our Su-35, which played first fiddle in the “cheap and reliable” segment, which has been our aircraft for centuries.

The Su-35 is exported at a price of 80 to 90 million dollars, depending on the configuration, and the Koreans are making statements that their aircraft will be sold for 65 million dollars. And here the 20 million difference when buying a proven and reliable aircraft of the “4++” and “almost five” generation is a very powerful argument.

The KF-21 is actually very similar to the “five”. It can fly at supersonic speed without afterburner, the missiles are in the internal compartment, and stealth is also a factor. Complete stuffing in terms of avionics: radar with AFAR, infrared search and tracking system, a full set of NATO weapons. Yes, it’s worth saying here that South Korea is not a member of NATO, but its armed forces and equipment have a very high level of standardization according to NATO canons.

If the price really works out, we will witness some serious air battles on the ground. Peru, Poland, and the Philippines are already eyeing the Korean aircraft, and Indonesia has been in the project as a junior partner from the very beginning. And “five with a minus” can oh how to compete for the Asian market with our “four with a plus”.

It is clear and understandable that having poured so much money into the project, the Koreans will go to the foreign market, especially since their equipment is in demand. There, of course, they are waiting for them with batons, but still.

Europe



It’s not even really Europe here; there’s actually something interesting emerging here – a world team or the London-Rome-Tokyo Axis. Well, really, like a century ago, but instead of Berlin there is London.

In general, Great Britain, Italy and Japan, which suddenly joined them, decided that they would make the “five” together.

There is a strange thing here: the Japanese, having experimented to their heart's content with their Mitsubishi X-2 Shinshin, rashly announced that they would immediately proceed to the sixth generation. The project was called the FX, and this aircraft was supposed to replace the Mitsubishi F2 in the Air Force, which was already outdated. But the F2 was supposed to replace the F-22, with which it did not merge. American legislation did not allow it. We had to work on our own, and here, apparently, the Korean situation turned out - it’s very expensive within the framework of “Only for yourself,” and no one will let you sell it to Japan.

And now, apparently, the Japanese will bring all the developments from the “six” to the newly-minted Global Combat Air Program (GCAP) consortium to create a new generation fighter by 2035.

The project of the British fighter Tempest will be taken as a basis and everything that the participants have will be added. Everything is run by companies that need no introduction at all: BAE Systems, Leonardo UK, MBDA UK, Rolls-Royce, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and others. The company is more than reputable, but most importantly, it is self-sufficient and in the future will easily have the opportunity to work on the aircraft theme. This is not Türkiye.

It turns out to be a very interesting assembly. Much more viable and promising than the Chinese or Korean programs, in my opinion. And with a twist, which is undoubtedly Japan.


Yes, joining the GCAP program definitely puts an end to Japanese ambitions, not to mention the sixth - fifth generation. But you can be confident in the results, because they know how to make airplanes together in Europe. And then the Japanese flew into Germany’s place from the latest Eurofighter Typhoon project, which promises them certain benefits.

Rolls-Royce will work on engines, BAE Systems in partnership with the British branches of Leonardo and MBDA on general planning and weapons platform, Italian Leonardo in partnership with Avio Aero, Elettronica and MBDA Italy will work on electronics and avionics, and what to do with such a giant as Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, I'm sure, will come up with it. In any case, joining the Japanese concern to the project will benefit everyone: Europeans will receive Japanese technology and production capacity, and the Japanese will realize their ambitions to create a new aircraft, and at a much lower cost.

In general, the “five” Tempest can be obtained with such a characteristic Asian eye shape.

Europe-2



If anyone was surprised by the absence of such aviation luminaries as Germany and Sweden in the European program, then everything is fine: they have their own bar with blackjack and other pleasures.

More precisely, Germany, which, together with France and Spain (!), is working on the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) project to develop a new next-generation weapon system NGWS, which will include the Next Generation Fighter (NGF).

According to the plan, this aircraft will have to make its first flight by 2027, and by 2040 it will enter service and replace the French Rafale, German Typhoon and Spanish EF-18 Hornet.

The development and implementation of the project will be carried out by Dassault Aviation, Airbus and Indra Sistemas as general coordinators, and then others will follow. In 2023, Belgium joined the project as an observer.

And the NGF project is modestly called the sixth generation aircraft...


True, there is also something that will distinguish the sixth generation aircraft from the fifth: these are remote weapons platforms with weapons, drones-missile carriers that will fly ahead of the fighter, from which control and a swarm of auxiliary drones, possibly kamikaze drones or jammers, will be carried out.

The company of manufacturers is also more than successful: Dassault and Airbus as general contractors and partners MTU Aero Engines, Safran, MBDA and Thales. To be honest, it’s a very decent society.

It is not entirely clear, however, how the delivery of this entire gang of drones will be realized, either in the compartments of a fighter, or a cargo plane will follow it, if necessary, pouring out all this splendor from the ramp, but time, as they say, will tell.


Total for the fifth and other generations: what do we have today and what will happen tomorrow?

1. There are one and a half thousand US aircraft, F-22 and F-35. With a crazy cost of almost $400 million for the 22nd and $100 million for the 35th.

Combat use:
F-22s bombed Arab infantry in Syria and bombed drug laboratories in Afghanistan (Operation Bees vs. Honey). A Chinese reconnaissance balloon, which had previously flown across the entire territory of the United States, was shot down.

Israeli Air Force F-35s attacked targets in Syria, USMC F-35Bs bombed targets from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq.

We emphasize in bold: American fifth-generation aircraft were NOT used against countries that had at least some kind of air defense and aviation. “Syria” and “Iraq” should not confuse anyone; at that time there was really nothing left of the air force and air defense in these countries.

2. The Chinese J-20 was produced in a series of 200 aircraft, but did not take part in hostilities.

3. The Russian Su-57 was manufactured in 22 production copies, took part in hostilities in Syria and Ukraine, according to the Russian Ministry of Defense, has two victories over Ukrainian aircraft.

As for everyone else, the combat use of these aircraft is a matter of a very distant future.

The conclusion suggests itself that the fifth generation aircraft, despite its advantages over aircraft of previous generations, is still absolutely unsuitable for real combat use. Global data suggests that the use of “fives” is justified only in cases where the enemy is unable to provide at least minimal resistance, such as Palestinian terrorists.

The loss of a fifth-generation aircraft is, on the one hand, a big financial loss and an even bigger reputational one. Any loss of such an aircraft will lead, first of all, to a decrease in interest in it as a combat unit, for which it is worth paying millions of dollars. Therefore, it is quite natural that all countries that have and will have such aircraft in the future will under no circumstances send them to places where the aircraft can be lost.

Therefore, the question “Who will the fifth generation fighter fight against” does not exactly remain open, but the answer to it is not very beautiful: against infantry with small arms. And nothing more than that.

It is not advisable to field “fives” even against “4+” fighters for the above reasons, because even the modernized third-generation MiG-21 fighter of the Indian Air Force could easily overwhelm the F-16 fighter of the Pakistan Air Force in the recent past. Despite the fact that it was a “four” fighter.

Well, the victory of a “four” fighter (such as the Su-35) costing half as much over the “five” will be great advertising and anti-advertising at the same time.

And if we recall here the level of development of modern air defense...

So we will continue to watch the development show for the “fives” for some time, at least until the “sixes” take to the skies, accompanied by retinues of squire drones. BUT, most likely, the proven “fours” will have to fight, all these Su-30, Su-35, F-16, F-15, F/A-18, “Mirage”, “Tornado” and others.
98 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  2. +2
    26 February 2024 04: 30
    like in advertising, if everything is the same, then why pay more?
    1. +5
      26 February 2024 10: 54
      Quote: lazy
      like in advertising, if everything is the same, then why pay more?

      It seems to me that if we had at least 57 SU-200s, Roman would not have written this article.
      In other words, the fifth generation differs from the fourth only in price, in terms of their combat use, which is why we only have 22 of them. laughing
      1. +5
        26 February 2024 16: 43
        They were never able to develop a consensus in the world, because no one can really say what this “fifth” should be.

        I've been writing about this for 10 years. But Roman can’t move in. Only for VO once again.
        The 5th generation aircraft is a universal element of the Combat Information System. I specifically did not mention the word "network-centric". There are many nuances here. I think the answer is disappointing. And the 6th generation aircraft...But that’s for next time.
        Without going into details, you can easily notice that if there is no BIS, then there is no 5th generation aircraft. Then we can talk about an aircraft with the characteristics of a 5th generation aircraft.
        The only country that has such systems is the United States. Israel has elements of such systems, and Israel has its own... and that's all... The first 5th generation aircraft is the F-35, and the F-22 only recently became like this, it was entered into the Information System after modification... With Su -57 and J-20, I think everything is clear to you!
        1. +1
          27 February 2024 16: 04
          Quote: Vitov
          They were never able to develop a consensus in the world, because no one can really say what this “fifth” should be.

          I've been writing about this for 10 years. But Roman can’t move in. Only for VO once again.
          The 5th generation aircraft is a universal element of the Combat Information System. I specifically did not mention the word "network-centric". There are many nuances here. I think the answer is disappointing. And the 6th generation aircraft...But that’s for next time.
          Without going into details, you can easily notice that if there is no BIS, then there is no 5th generation aircraft. Then we can talk about an aircraft with the characteristics of a 5th generation aircraft.
          The only country that has such systems is the United States. Israel has elements of such systems, and Israel has its own... and that's all... The first 5th generation aircraft is the F-35, and the F-22 only recently became like this, it was entered into the Information System after modification... With Su -57 and J-20, I think everything is clear to you!


          What prevents you from installing LSI elements on a 4th generation fighter? Yes, in principle, nothing, the main thing is that the elements are there and that there are other parts - reconnaissance satellites, reconnaissance drones, etc.
          With the 5th generation, the situation is complicated, and here’s why - the afar radar, like any other, gives out this fighter with giblets and they can easily work on air defense against it. This means that you need to turn it on extremely rarely and carefully, and where do you get the goals from then? But just from satellites if ground-based and some other platforms if airborne
          1. +1
            28 February 2024 10: 04
            Well, let's think about it. Who told you that operating the radar in active mode is the main mode of operation? The 5th generation has a passive operating mode as the main one. The entire work of US aviation is built around AWACS or AWACS aircraft of a smaller design. But the possibility of receiving information from satellites is not excluded. There are channels for information exchange.
            Secondly, the US 4th generation aircraft are included in the BIS, but they are very clearly visible and do not have the same versatility as the 5th. That's why they cost much less. The 5th generation aircraft is such a small hidden AWACS, also with weapons on board and which can conduct reconnaissance, if necessary, in the 1st echelon... This is its versatility as an element of the LSI. It is both a hidden reconnaissance weapon and a means of destruction.
      2. +5
        26 February 2024 18: 01
        Quote: Krasnoyarsk
        if we had at least 57 SU-200s, Roman would not have written this article.

        With the 5th generation, like with battleships in WWI - terribly expensive, which are scary to put out to sea. But in WWII, these same battleships were already used more than actively, even though this war became their “swan song”.
        If a serious war happens, they will fight on all the planes they have. And yes - mainly on the 4th generation, because there are simply many more of them.
  3. +4
    26 February 2024 05: 09
    I don’t know about fifth-generation fighter planes, but a sixth-generation fighter plane should be able to attack targets both in space and on all planets of the solar system just as easily when starting from Earth. . . winked
    1. +11
      26 February 2024 05: 38
      Quote: andrey martov
      and on all the planets of the solar system. . .

      And this is already seven! wink
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. +5
        26 February 2024 08: 56
        Quote from Uncle Lee
        And this is already seven!

        0,7 per tip. Not less!
      3. +4
        26 February 2024 21: 31
        VAZ will produce it. They produced good sevens, reliable and unpretentious!)))
    2. -1
      26 February 2024 18: 39
      Stop worrying about today's troubles. There will be new ones tomorrow! The Russian academician named the timing of the appearance of sixth-generation combat aircraft in service with the Russian Aerospace Forces
  4. +4
    26 February 2024 05: 21
    For some reason, it seems to me that the fifth generation aircraft is just a demonstration of the latest technologies and boasting of some developers over others. Well, something like the boasting of one young man who recently bought a brand new iPhone to another who has the same iPhone, only a previous model. The only breakthrough in such machines is their low radar signature. Otherwise, it’s hard for me to imagine where all the gadgets of the fifth generation can be used in practice
    1. +5
      26 February 2024 07: 02
      ...and boasting...

      And the term “fifth generation” serves as a hopeful cover for managers’ backs from the question of why the F-22 costs as much as a third of an aircraft carrier.
      1. +3
        26 February 2024 08: 03
        Quote: dzvero
        And the term “fifth generation” serves as a hopeful cover for managers’ backs from the question of why the F-22 costs as much as a third of an aircraft carrier
        And that too wink
      2. +4
        26 February 2024 08: 07
        Quote: dzvero
        ...and boasting...

        And the term “fifth generation” serves as a hopeful cover for managers’ backs from the question of why the F-22 costs as much as a third of an aircraft carrier.

        Aircraft carrier costs 10 billion
        1. +4
          26 February 2024 12: 10
          Aircraft carrier costs 10 billion

          Theoretically, even a little more, but in those days - 3~4 billion (without an air wing). So you are right - the cost of the F-22 is somewhere between 1/7 and 1/9 of the cost of an aircraft carrier. But in any case, the price of the F-22 was sky-high (as if not a kg of gold per kg of aircraft) and therefore almost the main condition when creating the F-35 was to make it as cheap as possible while maintaining the goodies of the 22nd. The “we buy the airframe and the engine separately” policy can be considered the pinnacle of marketing.
          1. +3
            26 February 2024 13: 04
            Quote: dzvero
            Theoretically, even a little more, but in those days - 3~4 billion (without an air wing). So you are right - the cost of the F-22 is somewhere between 1/7 and 1/9 of the cost of an aircraft carrier. But in any case, the price of the F-22 was sky-high (as if not a kg of gold per kg of aircraft) and therefore almost the main condition when creating the F-35 was to make it as cheap as possible while maintaining the goodies of the 22nd. The “we buy the airframe and the engine separately” policy can be considered the pinnacle of marketing.

            10 \000=146.2 aircraft carrier is 1 F-68
  5. +7
    26 February 2024 05: 32
    From everything that has been written, we can conclude that there will be no solid concept indicating that this airplane is definitely a “five”, but that one is a “four” with a certain number of pluses, but there they make a “six” with two minuses.
    Moreover, the battlefield in different parts of the world is also different. In Sinai you need to establish the headquarters of Arab field commanders, conduct long-range patrols in Alaska, and in the center of Europe intercept enemy air groups rushing, well, let’s say, to the Rota naval base.
    Therefore, each subject will measure.. uh, “achieved achievements” in their own way.
    Moreover, the tactics of using aviation began to change quite rapidly.
    What should we do?
    Just persistently achieve the goals you set for yourself. And finally finish off the engine.
    1. +4
      26 February 2024 06: 10
      Quote: U-58
      Moreover, the tactics of using aviation began to change quite rapidly

      It has already changed a lot and continues to change further...
    2. +6
      26 February 2024 11: 31
      I think generations differ conceptually! The 4th generation is superior to the 3rd generation in terms of maneuverability. A sophisticated radar from 4 can be plugged into an airframe of 3, but in terms of maneuverability, a 3rd generation aircraft cannot compare with 4!
      The 5th generation is distinguished by a glider and avionics with reduced visibility! Without upgrading the avionics of a 4th generation fighter, in terms of ESR it will always be radically inferior to the 5th.
      I think the 6th generation is a network-centric war, the fundamental difference from the 5th will be that it will not be the aircraft itself that will fight (they are already very expensive and difficult to produce today), but drones of various kinds and perhaps some kind of long-range missiles (the meaning of this generation reduce the cost of impact platforms to a reasonable cost, in order to be able to mass use and quickly reproduce
  6. 0
    26 February 2024 05: 44
    1. Russia has no aircraft carriers at all. There is a heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser. And these are two big differences. Stop self-deprecation. 2.Who determined what corresponds to the 5th generation and what does not? Who determined these very characteristics? Striped? That they have 5e and everything that differs even by a centimeter no longer corresponds? What a servile habit it is to always consider yourself lagging behind and adapt to someone else. Who tested and compared all these parameters and characteristics in real life, on hardware? Nobody, all in words. Or maybe take the cost for the 5th generation? All that is cheaper is 3e, 4e, 4,5, 4 and 3/4... Then there are no questions.
    1. +5
      26 February 2024 08: 07
      Quote from Voronezh
      Who tested and compared all these parameters and characteristics in real life, on hardware? Nobody, everything is in words
      On paper they compared and continue to compare to this day. A real comparison can only be in real combat conditions, with the same equal enemy
  7. +8
    26 February 2024 05: 51
    EPR assessment - where does the firewood come from? Surely from some Chinese Sun Wyn Vpen, because even from the appearance you can understand that the EPR of the Chinese cannot possibly be lower than the Su-57, and neither of them has official data (as in the joke - the doctor, the neighbor said that he could... so you say that too...). Regarding supersonic cruising with the AL-41F1 - why are you not satisfied with the M 1,25? Both the F-35 and the Su-57 and the J-20 will naturally be widely used in the database, the first and the last at least due to their mass production, and the Su-57 - because it is not our method not to use it.
  8. -11
    26 February 2024 06: 32
    Please check the cost of the F-35, it seems to cost about $100 million excluding engines, and engines add about another $50 million... Well, some countries have “super discounts”, I don’t remember everything, but you should have checked in advance.
    1. +9
      26 February 2024 06: 57
      So can you clarify this and not engage in balabolism? A fully equipped F-35 version A costs $87 lyams. Nobody sells the plane and the engine separately. Where you got this nonsense, we can only guess.
      1. +7
        26 February 2024 16: 25
        So, I came to the car dealership - Wow! What prices are cheap, let's get on credit quickly!
        Done? Now let's talk about what engine and transmission we will install.... wassat
  9. 0
    26 February 2024 06: 43
    All this, of course, is true... All this is true, yes, yes, true, yes, the paper is written correctly, everything, everything is fine

    What is the situation with the shelter of aircraft at military airfields or are they still parked in open parking lots?
    1. +1
      26 February 2024 15: 59
      Quote: ROSS 42
      What is the situation with the shelter of aircraft at military airfields or are they still parked in open parking lots?

      Previously, all small aircraft (fighters and attack aircraft) were located in special arched structures. There were no shelters provided for YES transport workers and aircraft. Now I do not know...
  10. +1
    26 February 2024 07: 22
    Author, as a specialist, please explain to me, a teapot, why the Su-57’s engine axes are located at an ANGLE to the axis of symmetry of the airframe (i.e., “fan-shaped”), and not parallel? With what intent was such an “analogue” solution used in aircraft construction? After all, even if it’s small, part of the total thrust is lost in this case!
    Thank you in advance!
    1. 0
      26 February 2024 08: 47
      because even the modernized third-generation MiG-21 fighter of the Indian Air Force could easily overwhelm the F-16 fighter of the Pakistan Air Force in the recent past.
      Well, this story has long been refuted! It wasn’t an F-16 there, but some kind of junk.
    2. +3
      26 February 2024 08: 51
      Michael hi ! It seems to me that this is due to two things. The area rule, which requires a transonic aircraft to have a cross-section like a spindle with an aspect ratio of 8-10, for minimal resistance to movement at transonic speeds, therefore the engine input channels are located as close as possible to each other. And secondly, the presence of a voluminous “tail” of the fuselage with equipment, which forced the engine nozzles to be somewhat “pulled apart”. Well, also - a good article and easy to read.
      1. +1
        27 February 2024 09: 28
        My address Thank you. It looks like it is.
    3. 0
      26 February 2024 11: 08
      So you ask questions, the answers to which lead to the disclosure of state secrets. After all, serious designers make airplanes from the best materials, not modelers in a barn made of shit and sticks....
    4. +2
      26 February 2024 11: 45
      Quote: MBRBS
      Why are the Su-57 engine axes located AT AN ANGLE to the axis of symmetry of the airframe (i.e., “fan-shaped”), and not parallel?

      These are nozzles that can change their vector
    5. +3
      26 February 2024 14: 52
      Think about engine failure. With parallel axes, the remaining one-way thrust creates a sudden moment about the vertical axis and the aircraft can spin out of control. One angle reduces the leverage of the lever and hence the torque is greatly reduced. On the other hand, the loss of effective thrust is negligible.

      I am not the author or an expert, but the principle is ancient and is not a state secret
  11. +6
    26 February 2024 07: 24
    Somehow all this reminds me of the epic with battleships before the Second World War, as a result of which battleships became expensive toys over which the command was shaking, God forbid they drown. Airplanes are also becoming more and more expensive; at this rate, won’t we reach a similar situation?
    1. +1
      26 February 2024 11: 12
      Airplanes are also becoming more and more expensive.

      How can I say it? The F-35 is a relatively inexpensive aircraft. Rafal and Eurofighter will be noticeably more expensive.
      1. +3
        26 February 2024 11: 42
        I meant more expensive from generation to generation, whatever one may say, the Su 35 is more expensive than the Su-30, and the Su 57 is more expensive combined. It’s the same in the West.
        1. +2
          26 February 2024 12: 53
          Rafale and Eurofighter are 4th generation, F-35 - 5th. F-35 is cheaper, so we can certainly say about such a dependence. In the 5th generation, integrated electronics costs a fair amount; what in the 4th generation they get with hanging containers for some money, and that is far from complete.
  12. +1
    26 February 2024 07: 38
    All our planes and rockets fly on internal combustion engines, roughly speaking. So, for me, the fifth, sixth, etc., will be considered an aircraft that will not care about these missiles and, accordingly, invisibility. And so, this is just the modernization of aircraft. That is, completely new technologies must be used that do not allow the aircraft to be destroyed and detected with currently available weapons. Well, it’s like shooting down an SU-40 with a weapon from the 35s.
  13. +1
    26 February 2024 08: 19
    So it seems like there was news that the new engine for the S-57 went into production and from 24 onwards fighters would only be supplied with it?
  14. -1
    26 February 2024 08: 35
    The respected author seems to be busy repeating his earlier articles? Or it seemed to me... Although in the era of "chat gpt" it is difficult to come up with something new on your own...
  15. -6
    26 February 2024 09: 30
    Scientists and engineers have accumulated enough knowledge and skill to create aircraft in an environment near sonic flight. High speeds, maneuverability and many efficiency parameters require knowledge of the behavior of the environment at a new level. Therefore, there must be engines of a new and fundamentally different architecture, and external forms must be developed not at the level of aerodynamics, but at the level of distribution of electromagnetic forces.
    1. +2
      26 February 2024 16: 23
      Quote: gridasov
      Therefore, there must be engines of a new and fundamentally different architecture, and external forms must be developed not at the level of aerodynamics, but at the level of distribution of electromagnetic forces

      Not a single turbojet engine can operate without the aerodynamics of its components - compressor and turbine blades, combustion chamber and nozzle. And if the nozzle also has a controlled thrust vector, then it also has its own special aerodynamics. Well, the external shape of the engine covers scales fuselage...

      P.S. What is the level of distribution of electromagnetic forces? wink
      1. 0
        28 February 2024 10: 35
        We have a fundamentally different attitude to the analysis of the entire set of processes in a turbine or elementary blades. We transform the energy of the external environment in an optimized way, and all modern science works with iron. Without understanding the algorithms for changing the energy of this environment. You calculate large data arrays, and we work with variable data that we optimize and build algorithms for variable processes. The elementary Laval nozzle is not subject to full understanding using modern methods of analysis and justification.
        1. 0
          28 February 2024 15: 02
          Viktor Schauberger, is that you?! :)
  16. +2
    26 February 2024 10: 06
    KF-21 is definitely a breakthrough! The Koreans made a plane no worse than the F-35! The same Turks are terribly jealous: they will never have this and they are desperately begging for obsolete F16s from NATO!
    1. -1
      26 February 2024 19: 45
      Quote: Rand-76
      KF-21 is definitely a breakthrough!

      For Korea - yes, for the world - no, it is only 4,5. Super Hornet with reduced visibility.
      Quote: Rand-76
      The same Turks are terribly jealous: they will never have this

      So the Turkish five recently made their first flight.
  17. -6
    26 February 2024 10: 32
    They have their doubts about the Europeans. Something from there pulls from chronic impotence. Something happened in the brain - green
    1. -3
      26 February 2024 15: 18
      Yes, uh... I wrote a comment. They called. And the comment ended and the Internet ended. Everything was hanged. I didn't finish writing. And to hell with him laughing
  18. +7
    26 February 2024 10: 34
    And here it’s worth remembering two heavyweights, our Tu-144 and the French Concorde, which easily flew in supercruise, and ours was also faster, and the Frenchman flew for a record long time

    “Our Tu-144” did not fly “supercruise”, literally at all. Only in afterburner. The NK-144 engines did not have the necessary thrust. Only the Tu-144D with RD-36-51 engines, of which five were built, could fly as a “Supercruise” and which never entered passenger service. The Tu-144D flew slower than the Concorde, although by a very tiny amount - 2120 versus 2150 km per hour.
    1. +3
      26 February 2024 10: 42
      160, in my opinion, also does not work on supercruise without afterburner. With updated turbojet engines - I don’t know.
  19. +5
    26 February 2024 10: 41
    For the 5th generation to be the 5th, in addition to everything else, we need AWACS systems (massive in the army) and real-time data transmission systems between AWACS - ground (sea) systems and UAVs (aircraft size). With such systems, the 4e++ generation will still fly and shoot.
    1. +2
      26 February 2024 20: 54
      During normal reconnaissance, AWACS and MIG-21bis can set the temperature
  20. +4
    26 February 2024 10: 51
    Everything else, like even the radar with AFAR, as they say, is not critical.

    Here the author, to put it mildly, is mistaken, since without a “radar with a low probability of interception” - low-probability-of-intercept radar (LPIR), a fighter in the “fifth generation” is not accepted by any criteria.
    1. +1
      26 February 2024 12: 46
      not accepted according to any criteria
      As always, a substitution of concepts, there is no concept of “lpir” in radar, there is a division of signals into simple and complex, for which the concept of “Signal Base” is introduced. The larger the signal base value, the closer the signal is to noise-like, and the more difficult it is to detect. However, apart from the “magic set of sounds”, no technical real parameters are given for it, not even a possible range of values ​​for this very base, on the basis of which we can conclude that there is “nothing outstanding” there. Complex signals were also used in the radars of fourth-generation fighters.
      In addition, I note that the problem of “find something without knowing what” has been solved mathematically for a long time, and it looks like there are real results in hardware.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. +2
          26 February 2024 13: 42
          Oddball! Have you read it yourself??? At least the signal parameters? The radar must be used on board a fighter!!! Wavelength 23 cm!!! There are no dimensions on fighter jets for an antenna in this range, so goodbye spatial resolution!
          In addition, based on the selected signal duration and repetition period values, you will immediately receive:
          - The inability to realize detection ranges in free space radars of even the fourth generation of fighters from low signal energy!!!
          - The inability to realize the detection range of the same fourth generation against the background of the underlying surface, I repeat, the radar on the ISTREBITEL!!! Well, the Uncertainty Function of such a signal will not allow this to be done for a moving carrier!
          So here’s another poem, instead of a head, this is the same ass!
          In total, a “fashionable” signal is proposed, which cannot even replicate the detection ranges of “old” fighter radars.
          1. +1
            26 February 2024 13: 51
            With you, everything is generally clear. You didn’t even understand the essence of the comment and immediately began to puff out your cheeks. You are one of those specialists about whom the classics wrote.
            1. +1
              26 February 2024 13: 59
              Apparently, you are one of the theorists, but you have no idea how the development of fighter radars went, including in terms of the signals used, what moved you in this direction.
              1. +1
                26 February 2024 14: 00
                See previous comment.
                1. 0
                  26 February 2024 14: 34
                  By posting a scan of an article from an educational institution that has never had anything to do with the development of fighter radars, you yourself have determined your level.
                  1. +1
                    26 February 2024 14: 39
                    See previous comment.
          2. +1
            26 February 2024 16: 00
            there is no concept of "lpir" in radar

            Wasn't it you who wrote this?
            Ph.D., Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Radar and Transceiver Devices, Military Academy of the Republic of Belarus (Minsk) Gorshkov, as you can see, completely disagrees with you. There is such a concept.
            Please announce your credentials on this issue; you need to understand who is arguing with him and who is an expert and who is not.
            1. 0
              26 February 2024 16: 54
              Ph.D., Associate Professor, Head
              And what? And I am a participant in the development of these same fighter radars at the system level. And no military personnel, especially from Belarus, have ever participated in this process, and I have my own “people-guides”, and I remember the classic Soviet textbook “Theoretical Foundations of Radar” very well. And I don’t accept the substitution of basic concepts (simple/complex signal) with super fashionable lpi!
              1. +1
                26 February 2024 17: 10
                And I am a participant in the development of these same fighter radars at the system level.

                You are changing concepts. You wrote about radar, and not about “fighter radar.”
                So what about your regalia?
                1. 0
                  26 February 2024 18: 29
                  So what about your regalia?
                  For regalia, admission is not enough. And it looks like you haven’t even seen the textbook “Theoretical Fundamentals of Radar”; you don’t know anything about the actual specifics of how airborne radars work; if you had read and known it, you wouldn’t have shared “Fundamentals and Radars”.
                  1. +1
                    26 February 2024 19: 55
                    For regalia, admission is not enough.

                    The answer is short and comprehensive, fully covering the level of "belching". Thanks for the info.
                  2. +1
                    27 February 2024 00: 30
                    Am I arguing with you? Gorshkov, candidate of technical sciences, associate professor, head of the department of radar and transceiver devices, Military Academy of the Republic of Belarus (Minsk), is arguing with you. Maybe he personally didn’t do radar (or maybe he did, who knows what he did before). But in the field of terminology, he is clearly an expert, as can be seen from his position, academic title and scientific degree; he works in a specialized institution. But who you are is unclear.
                    As for the use of the term, the Iranians use it in an article in Elsevier, you can argue with them, write your article in Aerospace Science and Technology and bring them to light https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs /pii/S1270963817305904,
                    here are the Chinese https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3424978.3425053, https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/12/24/4934
                    Yes, even in Russia they know about him
                    https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/vozmozhnosti-obnaruzheniya-izlucheniya-morskih-radiolokatorov-s-nizkoy-veroyatnostyu-perehvata-ih-izlucheniya/viewer
                    They are the ones arguing with you, not me.
                    hi
                    1. 0
                      27 February 2024 08: 47
                      Gorshkov, candidate of technical sciences, associate professor, head of the department of radar and transceiver devices, Military Academy of the Republic of Belarus (Minsk), is arguing with you.
                      Where did you get the idea that he was arguing??? People like you even deleted the message with a scan of his article!!! Further, just looking at the list of authors of this article, you can see that the list is not in alphabetical order, respectively, he is first on the list because he is the “boss”, and he is not the author! This is a general principle of authorship in such scientific articles, didn’t you know???
                      Besides, where did you get the idea that “PhD and Associate Professor” is cool??? For example, during our training, Radar was read by “DTN, professor”! Do you feel how low the scientific and educational level of this head from the Academy is???
                      They are the ones arguing with you, not me.
                      This is understandable, you are a complete zero on this issue and cannot have your own opinion.
                      1. 0
                        28 February 2024 00: 58
                        This is not cool, this is an indicator of his high qualifications in this matter.
                        What is an indicator of your qualifications?
                        Accordingly, he is first on the list because he is the “boss” and he is not the author!

                        I understand that you have never written scientific articles. He is one of the authors of the article.
                        The Chinese, the Iranians from Scopus, the Russian article, as I understand it, you didn’t notice?
      2. +2
        26 February 2024 20: 31
        Quote: Hexenmeister
        As always, a substitution of concepts, there is no concept of “lpir” in radar, there is a division of signals into simple and complex, for which the concept of “Signal Base” is introduced. The larger the signal base value, the closer the signal is to noise-like, and the more “difficult” it is to detect.

        Hexenmeister, You are talking about signals, and Dekabrist is about radars. A radar with an LPI signal is not necessarily an LPI radar, and vice versa. The abbreviation and decoding of LPI are the same, but the concepts are different.
        1. -1
          26 February 2024 21: 02
          So the fact of the matter is that in any form this Americanism completely lacks real scientific terminology. A “low level of interception” is enough for them. And what about interception? With the help of Bereza open source software, or the cunning modern “find something without knowing what”, which will detect anything??? And why does the solution lie in the area of ​​“broadband”? Use a 1W transmitter, and wow, you will detect it from 400 km! Hence the conclusion that all this relates to the area of ​​ensuring the secrecy of radar operation, as a set of measures, and not just the type of signal. And in any radar, this set of measures is involved to one degree or another!
          1. 0
            28 February 2024 23: 50
            Quote: Hexenmeister
            So the fact of the matter is that in any form this Americanism completely lacks real scientific terminology. A “low level of interception” is enough for them. And what about interception? With the help of Bereza open source software, or the cunning modern “find something without knowing what”, which will detect anything???

            Here, IMO, we have problems because of the lax use of this terminology. LPI means that the PTP detects the signal and can determine its statistical characteristics, but does not determine its parameters. LPD (detection) - RTP does not detect the signal. In a probabilistic sense, of course.
            Quote: Hexenmeister
            And why does the solution lie in the area of ​​“broadband”? Use a 1W transmitter, and wow, you will detect it from 400 km!

            And with 1W pulse power you will have to use a very long pulse. You have to withstand average power. And since the product of the error (RMS) in determining the delay and the error (RMS) in determining the frequency is inversely proportional to the base of the signal, the signal must also expand its spectrum. As a result, for a long range we will have a long signal accumulation and processing time. For example, such a radar is Limit-E: 400 km range, wide-base quasi-continuous signal, 15 W pulse power and target information output cycle 1 min. Over-the-horizon radar for detection of surface targets.
            Quote: Hexenmeister
            Hence the conclusion that all this relates to the area of ​​ensuring the secrecy of radar operation, as a set of measures, and not just the type of signal. And in any radar, this set of measures is involved to one degree or another!

            That’s right, LPIR and LPDR are just a set of measures, and AFAR is not required here. By the way, the mentioned Limit-E is LPDR.
    2. +1
      26 February 2024 20: 27
      Quote: Dekabrist
      Everything else, like even the radar with AFAR, as they say, is not critical.

      Here the author, to put it mildly, is mistaken, since without a “radar with a low probability of interception” - low-probability-of-intercept radar (LPIR), a fighter in the “fifth generation” is not accepted by any criteria.

      LPIR is not necessarily AFAR (AESA), and AFAR is not necessarily LPIR.
  21. +2
    26 February 2024 11: 04
    For some reason, the author ignored UAC information, according to which the experimental second-stage engine “product 30” passed all the necessary tests, received the serial designation AL-51F1, and all newly produced SU-57s will go into production with these engines. That is, it will already be a fully-fledged 5th generation aircraft, even by Western criteria.
    https://aftershock.news/?q=node/1337640&full
    It was interesting about the other planes...
  22. +2
    26 February 2024 11: 10
    The Turks decided to build an aircraft on their own, which in the future will replace the F-16, and will also meet all NATO standards (do not forget that Turkey is a member of the alliance), but the trouble is that the Turks had no experience of this kind.

    Wrong statement. The Turks are building their aircraft not on their own, but in cooperation with well-known aircraft manufacturing companies - BAE Systems, Rolls-Royce and others.
    Taking into account the fact that BAE Systems is seriously working on the 6th generation aircraft, for them the Turkish fighter is an intermediate stage of work.
  23. +4
    26 February 2024 11: 59
    Yes, it’s a matter of prestige, like an aircraft carrier. The country has such a trough, even if it’s not really good for anything - that’s one deal, no - that’s where you go, into the backyard.

    Prestige in the forest. The weapon should "damage", it should not be a dummy, because the dummy does not "damage". There is real power, and there is virtual power - in reality it is “NWO has been going on for 2 years”, but in reality it is “Kyiv in 72 hours”.
    Now, virtually "Admiral Kuznetsov" is an aircraft carrier and it is needed, important and generally prestigious. But in reality, this is just one ship (one copy, that is) with not the newest aircraft fleet, not the largest deck, archaic control system, ancient conceptually and physically. A real war will begin - and like the Tirpitz, it will while away its hours and days waiting for a massive arrival, because the experience of the same Northern Military District clearly demonstrates to us how even an enemy incommensurate with NATO (Ukraine) can control and influence a large fleet. Even if this massive arrival does not overwhelm him, it will incapacitate him. The chances that in a real war "Kuznetsov" will sail somewhere far away and do something there are negligible.

    Unlike the United States, our task in a major war is rather defensive, with tying up and causing unacceptable damage to the enemy. Because neither the economy nor the demographics will allow us to play differently in conditions larger than a major local conflict. In the EU, for example, threefold more people than us.
    In America - more than double.
    So even if we consider an aircraft carrier as a really worthwhile weapon for us, we need more than one of it, and according to a modern design, taking into account the specifics of the actions. "Kuznetsov" is a Soviet project, since then a lot of water has passed under the bridge and the specifics have changed. Having one for such a huge country as ours is absolutely “ceremonial clothing” that does not carry any useful functions.
    1. +2
      26 February 2024 17: 50
      "Admiral Kuznetsov" is an aircraft carrier and it is needed and important

      The main purpose of the construction of aircraft-carrying cruisers was to cover the deployment areas of our nuclear submarines from the air. So that enemy aircraft would not work there and, on the contrary, our anti-submarine aircraft would work and there would be a chance to identify at least some of the nuclear submarine hunters.

      No tasks comparable to the US AUG have ever been set. And this is not even directly connected with aircraft carriers, but also with escort ships, carrier-based aircraft, etc. For example, there was no carrier-based AWACS aircraft, and this is a key point for the stability of the AUG.
      1. +2
        26 February 2024 18: 11
        This is an old and hackneyed story. Since then, a lot of things have changed, including aircraft engines, and the range and quality of air defense. And “Admiral” has not been in areas accessible to perform this task for a long time. In general, as a rule, it is already undergoing repairs, which have no end.
        For real defense (including the one you indicated), he is no longer suitable, he is old, weak and not ready for combat, and although this can be portrayed, so to speak, nothing good will come of it.
        Perhaps for these tasks its functions should be transferred to standard ships of smaller displacement with surface-to-air missiles, of which more can be built and which will sculpt this same A2/AD where it is required.
        In the current situation, yes, we don’t need a “supercarrier” like “Storm” and others like them, except in certain situations, as I once wrote 2-3 for the Pacific Fleet and for the far, far future, precisely because this is the most unpleasant a region where the interests of a bunch of powerful fleets converge. But at the moment we don’t have the money and we don’t need it because there are more affordable and universal variations.
        1. +2
          26 February 2024 18: 38
          Perhaps for these tasks its functions should be transferred to standard ships of smaller displacement with surface-to-air guided missiles

          It's difficult to shift. The aircraft carrier controls a conventional radius of 1000 km, and our best naval air defense, Fort-M, conventionally controls 150 km. And even then, low-flying targets won’t see it.

          But even so, to replace 1 aircraft carrier to control the same area, more than 45 Fort-M carriers are required. And they are quite big, cruisers after all. Expensive and less effective. request
    2. -1
      26 February 2024 19: 34
      “Kyiv in 72 hours” what are you talking about?!
      1. -1
        26 February 2024 19: 46
        Have you learned to write? Now learn to read!
  24. -1
    26 February 2024 14: 10
    Dear author, emphasizing that the NATO planes did not destroy or shoot down anything, and the Su-57 recorded two hits. When NATO planes shoot down several planes, it will mean that World War III has just begun. Personally, I would like these planes to never shoot down anything again in my life.
  25. 0
    26 February 2024 15: 37
    I wonder what could be done with camouflage techniques?..

    It is primarily based on suppressing the reflection of signals in the direction of the transmitter and instead emitting them in other directions...

    If the radar transmitters and receivers are sufficiently spatially separated, this principle is ineffective. The recipient network can even figure out the location of the destination if the sender's location is unknown.

    Mandatory conditions are a very accurate time base (via GPS / GLONASS) and a very fast and secure from eavesdropping(!) connection for data transfer between recipients.

    This eliminates the need for complex and expensive electronic AFAR/PFAR beam aiming - simple and cheap sector antennas will suffice... stupid idea?
  26. VlK
    +1
    26 February 2024 16: 19
    The difference between the 4th and 5th generations is not in the performance characteristics, but in the concept of application. If for the 4th generation it was an increase in individual parameters in all directions on a new technical basis in comparison with the “fighters” of the previous generation, “faster, higher, stronger” to gain decisive superiority in a head-to-head meeting, then the fifth generation, by design, is not fighters, but hunters or assassins - quickly go undetected to the launch point according to external target designation, launch missiles from a long distance at an air or ground target and go to the base without engaging in close combat - that is their task. And the aircraft here is only part of an integrated strike system, starting from collecting and processing information in real time from diverse sources to issuing target designation to specific units or their groups. That is, it is advisable to consider the performance characteristics of the 5th generation primarily for compliance with the solution of such problems, and not simply in comparison with previous samples. But it seems, unfortunately, that in our country the 5th generation as a whole is considered simply as a continuation of the fourth with improved characteristics, at least according to many articles and comments on VO one gets the feeling. And the time for individually strong fighters on the battlefield is finally passing, it seems, the future lies in the coordinated actions of the elements of a unified control system.
  27. -2
    26 February 2024 17: 25
    Question to the author, but the F 22 and F35 engines are all right with their engines, they didn’t even bother, they stuck in the old engine and called this miracle of theirs the 5th generation, but the Su57 is essentially creating a new engine, and while it flies on the old one, it’s not the 5th generation because Western experts don’t think so, why should we consider the F 35 and F22 the fifth generation? where did you get the idea that these planes are the fifth generation?
    1. 0
      29 February 2024 11: 51
      Ale, the F-135 reaches 22 tons, what old engine is this? The thrust to weight ratio is 1:11/12. With a large diameter it weighs less than 2 tons. This is a very specific, but masterpiece of engineering. This is what it is.
      1. 0
        4 March 2024 12: 27
        Well, of course, let it be a masterpiece according to you, only this masterpiece didn’t participate anywhere, one thing you can say is flying None is falling, although in recent years it has already fallen more than once, this ratio is probably a bad ratio that falls apart in flight, that is, the coating is invisible, if it is invisible then it is not there, but it’s not visible and there’s a lot of other things, well, a lot of other things that break very often, and we don’t forget that it’s easy to remember that titanium was used there, I wonder what will replace it now, probably with sticks from the forest
  28. -2
    26 February 2024 18: 43
    Quote from Voronezh
    Stop self-deprecation.

    This is buffoonery, what did you want from him? I was actually surprised that there was at least some praise addressed to our people. True, he got better by promoting the Koreans, but still.
    Oh yes, the same name laughing
  29. 0
    26 February 2024 19: 08
    First flight of the Turkish promising fighter Kaan[
    February 21st, 23:47
    On February 21, 2024, at the airfield of the Turkish state aircraft manufacturing association Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI, TUSAŞ) and the Turkish Air Force Mürted airbase in Ankara, the first prototype of the promising Turkish Kaan fighter (TF-X program) made its first flight.
    The first prototype of the promising Turkish fighter Kaan (TF-X program) on its first flight. Mürted (Ankara), 21.02.2024/XNUMX/XNUMX (c) Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI)
    The program to create the national fighter TF-X (Turkish designation for the Milli Muharip Uçak - MMU program), officially named Kaan ("Khan") in 2023, has been carried out in Turkey since 2010. The contract for the full-scale development of the TF-X was awarded by the Turkish Defense Industry Authority (SSM, now SSB) to the TAI association in August 2016. In January 2017, TAI signed a cooperation agreement to create the TF-X with the British corporation BAE Systems. In May 2017, the British Rolls-Royce group created a joint venture TAES with the Turkish Kale group to develop and produce engines for the TF-X aircraft. In 2022, Turkey's Defense Industry Bureau (SSB) confirmed that the "national" engine for the TF-X will be built jointly with Rolls-Royce, although prototypes and first production of the fighter will be powered by American General Electric F110-GE-129 engines. It is known that the Turkish aircraft engine manufacturing company Tusaş Engine Industries (TEI), controlled by TAI, has signed a contract with General Electric for the purchase of 10 F110-GE-129 engines to equip TF-X prototypes.
    Currently, it is planned to build four prototypes of Kaan for the first stage of testing the design - the lead one (was officially presented on March 18, 2023 and made its first flight on February 21, 2024) and three so-called Block 0, which should begin flight tests before 2026. After this, it is planned to begin preparations for mass production of the first production configuration of Block 1. In May 2023, TAI CEO Temel Kotil very optimistically stated that the company plans to deliver 20 Block 1 aircraft to the Turkish Air Force by 2028, and then move to a production rate of two aircraft per month from 2029. However, according to a 2021 Turkish Air Force presentation, they plan to receive 10 pre-production Block 1 aircraft only from 2030 to 2034, and only begin production purchases from 2034.
    In 2022, plans were announced to create a two-seat version of the TF-X, but in January 2023, TAI announced the abandonment of the two-seat version.
    The Kaan is a very large twin-engine single-seat aircraft made using stealth technology. Its stated maximum take-off weight exceeds 27 tons, which is apparently an underestimate. The length of the aircraft is 21 m, the wingspan is 14 m and the height is 6 m - thus, geometrically, the Kaan is slightly larger than the American Lockheed Martin F-22A (length 18,92 m, wingspan 13,56 m and height 5,08 m) and the Russian Su-57 (length 20,1 m, wingspan 14,1 m and height 4,6 m).

    The electronic equipment of the Kaan fighter should be mainly of Turkish design and include the BÜRFİS airborne radar with Aselsan AFAR, the KARAT and TOYGUN electro-optical systems, the Yıldırım-300 airborne defense system, and a helmet-mounted target designation system. Weapons must be placed in internal compartments.
  30. +4
    26 February 2024 20: 42
    The conclusion suggests itself that the fifth generation aircraft, despite its advantages over aircraft of previous generations, is still absolutely unsuitable for real combat use. Global data suggests that the use of “fives” is justified only in cases where the enemy is unable to provide at least minimal resistance, such as Palestinian terrorists.

    The author forgot something. "Desert Storm"

    Two F-117 squadrons took out the Iraqi air defense control core in 3 nights, and in total there were 3000 anti-aircraft positions and 16 missiles around Baghdad alone.

    1271 sorties, 2% of the sorties of the entire coalition, with 40% of all targets hit from the air with 75% hit accuracy.
    And not a single one was shot down. wink



    “The Saudis provided us with a first-class base for fighter jets with fortified hangars from which bats came out at night to hunt for insects. In the morning we found corpses in the hangars around our planes. To “see” at night, bats used echolocation, and they simply crashed into planes with low RCS.”

    “The skies over Baghdad looked like three dozen Independence Day celebrations on one day. But all this was just blind shooting. They understood that we were nearby, but could not understand where exactly. We were like buzzing mosquitoes flying around their ears, and they were furiously trying to swat us blindly. They were simply hoping for a lucky shot, one in a million, that would hit the target.”

    “I dropped the bombs, but the bomb bay doors did not close. This was very bad, because the right angle was like a searchlight for ground radar, and the open flap was a perfect right angle. And out of the corner of my eye I saw a rocket flying towards me. I kept one hand on the catapult lever, and with the other I tried to manually close the jammed bomb bay doors. When the rocket was already nearby, the doors finally closed. I watched the curved trajectory of a missile with broken homing, fired at me. After about an hour I could breathe again.”

    STEALTH, damn it, that's what the 5th generation is.
    And the F-22 and 35 are much cooler than the 117.
    We still don't know what landed our A-50s. request

  31. 0
    26 February 2024 22: 14
    Most of the so-called 5th generation fighters are aircraft that are similar in appearance to 5th generation fighters. He put together something similar to the F-22, F-23 or F-35 and passed it off as the “5th generation”.
    What is the 6th generation? This is not the 5th generation. Etc.
  32. 0
    26 February 2024 22: 41
    Zaluzhny is right: at present there are no non-nuclear weapons that can radically change the course of the war.
  33. +3
    27 February 2024 01: 16
    The SVO showed that 1377 combat aircraft of the Aerospace Forces and 78 aircraft of the Ukrainian Armed Forces (Military balance data for 2024) are equally unable to overcome enemy air defenses. At the same time, the use of guided munitions from an aircraft is significantly cheaper, since it allows you to replace missiles with glide bombs.
    Let's look at the example of the United States, since there is open data for it.
    Himars GMLRS missile with 90 kg warhead. and a range of 90 km. in 2023 it cost $168 thousand
    Glide bomb GBU39 with warhead 90 kg. and a range of 110 km. costs 40 thousand $.
    F-16/A10 are theoretically capable of lifting 16 bombs, F-35: 24 bombs, so one combat flight of an old A10 (cost of a flight hour is $23 thousand) at maximum load will save $2 million.

    Taking into account the SVO, we no longer need 5th generation fighters, but heavy jet drones with a bomb load close to single-engine fighters. By eliminating the need for a pilot, the payload will increase and the cost of operation will decrease.
  34. 0
    28 February 2024 13: 24
    How can there be 22 production aircraft if there is no standard (main) engine?
  35. +1
    29 February 2024 10: 36
    IMHO, again nothing about the 5th generation, a lot of stretches.

    The F35, for example, is a bomber first and foremost. He should not fight to conquer the air. He must bomb and fight off enemy fighters. And here it is small, single-engine, but draws weapons like our heavy twin-engine. That's why everyone orders a lot.
    And no one wants to reveal the technical characteristics and fight. Teaching is enough.

    It would be better to speculate about the possible benefits of stealth when breaking through air defense or evading enemy missiles using decoys. Using physics.
    It would be more useful IMHO
  36. 0
    29 February 2024 11: 48
    "if you irradiate the J-20 radar in a lateral projection, then on the radar screen you will see a Christmas tree in all its glory"
    Why did Skomorokhov think that: 1. Is this so? 2. Why will it be so critical? Without any evidence this is unfounded. The Chinese, if anything, know how to design inconspicuously, they have supercomputers. Calculating the EPR was not a problem for them even 15-20 years ago.
    After all, if we judge this way, then the Su-57 from the lower hemisphere is like a “Christmas tree,” which makes it vulnerable to air defense systems. This is noticeable in any simulation. Another question is what non-standard measures were taken to avoid this.
  37. 0
    6 March 2024 23: 11
    An An-2 aircraft in stealth mode, i.e. when more than one radar does not see it, what generation is it: 1, 4, 5, 6 or seventh. What is taken as an assessment, invisibility or weapons, or what else???