Ready to meet the F-16: The Russian Ministry of Defense showed the Su-30SM2 with long-range R-37M air-to-air missiles

179
Ready to meet the F-16: The Russian Ministry of Defense showed the Su-30SM2 with long-range R-37M air-to-air missiles

Today, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced the discovery of unmanned enemy boats in one of the sea areas near the coast of Crimea. Su-30SM maritime multirole fighters were lifted into the air aviation Black Sea fleet Russian Navy, which destroyed all naval drones APU. Aircraft sorties on combat missions were shown on the telegram channel of the Russian military department.

In itself, this event in the current conditions of a special operation can be called something even quite routine. However, both Western and Ukrainian military experts drew attention to the armament of the Russian aircraft, which consisted of two R-37M air-to-air missiles and two R-77-1. It was noted that this is the first public appearance of a fighter of this modification with the P-37M. Previously, only Su-35S fighters and MiG-31BM interceptors were carriers of these missiles.



Foreign meticulous observers noted that the flights of the Su-30SM2 with these types of ammunition could be a kind of demonstrative against the background of the expected, though already repeatedly postponed indefinitely, arrival of American F-16 fighters into the Air Force of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Our military pilots seemed to show that they are quite ready for the arrival of NATO aircraft and will greet them appropriately.

The R-77-1 supersonic medium-range air-to-air missile was adopted by the Russian Air Force and Air Defense in 1994. Initially, the ammunition was intended for the then newest light fighter MiG-29. Subsequently, the R-77 and its modifications were received by many combat aircraft of the operational-tactical aviation of the Air Force, and then by the Russian Aerospace Forces. The main feature of the rocket is the implementation of the “fire and forget” principle, which allows the pilot not to accompany it after launch. Its flight range is just over one hundred kilometers.

Much more interesting is the demonstration of the Soviet-Russian long-range air-to-air missile R-37M in a modified version. This means of destroying air targets is the longest-range air-to-air guided missile in the world. The rocket is capable of covering a distance of up to 300 kilometers.

The only close analogues of the R-37M, according to open sources, are the American air-launched missiles AIM-47 Falcon and AAM-N-10 Eagle. Their flight range reaches up to 200 km, but they were never adopted into standard service by the US Air Force.

179 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -14
    22 May 2024 20: 02
    And yet, the Su-30SM2 is not the best candidate for air battles with the F-16, especially the latest modifications with long-range AIM-120D missiles. The Su-30SM2 has a large ESR and the radar is not the most powerful, which, let’s say, gives the F-16 a chance for success It is preferable to use the Su-35S, Mig-31BM, and best of all the Su-57, the latter has stealth technology and a powerful radar.

    . The R-77-1 supersonic medium-range air-to-air missile was adopted by the Russian Air Force and Air Defense in 1994. Initially, the ammunition was intended for the then-newest light fighter MiG-29. Subsequently, the R-77 and its modifications were received by many combat aircraft of the operational-tactical aviation of the Air Force, and then by the Russian Aerospace Forces.


    The R-77-1 is frankly an old missile. Only 110 km. There is the R-77M (Izdeliye 180) with twice the range, which reaches 200 km.
    1. +6
      22 May 2024 20: 06
      Quote: OrangeBigg
      Still, the Su-30SM2 is not the best candidate for air battles with the F-16

      Hindus are indignant. wink
      1. 0
        22 May 2024 20: 07
        Do you mean the Hindus are indignant?
        1. +3
          22 May 2024 20: 08
          How is the Su-30SM2 different from the Su-30MKI?
          1. -5
            22 May 2024 20: 11
            I don’t know such details, but I think that the Russian Aerospace Forces should focus not on export machines from twenty years ago, but on newer fighters. It was 20 years ago that the Su-30MKI was at its best, but we need to look into the future and think what will be competitive in 10- 20 years old and this is not the Su-30SM2, with all due respect to it, it is already not particularly outstanding in its performance characteristics among currently operating aircraft.
            1. +12
              22 May 2024 20: 14
              Quote: OrangeBigg
              I don’t know such details

              They promised to supply the Su-30SM2 with engines and radar from the Su-35.
              Like a two-seat Su-35. Yes
              Do you still think that the F-16 has a chance?

              https://topwar.ru/175067-su-30sm2-nuzhen-li-rossii-super-suhoj.html
              1. -4
                22 May 2024 20: 17
                They promised. Tell me, why not just rely on the Su-35S, this is a multifunctional machine, which the SVO has fully proven, so why then do we need the Su-30SM2? Isn’t it more logical to just buy the Su-35S, rather than install engines from him on the Su-30SM2. Don’t you find a strange solution? Moreover, now the most produced fighter in Russia is the Su-57, a next-generation machine, there is a Su-34M fighter-bomber, so why then is the Su-30SM2 needed?
                1. +11
                  22 May 2024 20: 21
                  Quote: OrangeBigg
                  Isn’t it more logical to simply purchase the Su-35S rather than install its engines on the Su-30SM2? Don’t you think it’s a strange solution?

                  To simplify your question - why have a two-seater car if there is a single-seater? This is where the Indians are indignant. wink
                  It is not logical to simply purchase the Su-35.
                  It’s cheaper and faster to bring the Su-30 up to its level.
                  Both maintenance and logistics are simplified.
                  The number of combat-ready aircraft is increasing.
                  Do you really not understand all of the above?
                  I had a different opinion about you. hi
                  1. +1
                    23 May 2024 10: 25
                    Quote: OrangeBigg
                    Tell me, why not just rely on the Su-35S, it’s a multifunctional machine,
                    Both of these aircraft are multifunctional, but the Su-35S works better with air targets, and the Su-30 is better on the ground, for which it also had a PGO (at low altitude at high speeds it reduces the load on the airframe, and it’s easier for the pilots). Su-30s often replace units in which there were Su-24s before them.
                    1. +1
                      23 May 2024 10: 34
                      I completely agree with you.
                      This is a colleague Orange bigg asks questions. hi
                      1. +1
                        23 May 2024 10: 38
                        Quote: Alex777
                        I completely agree with you.
                        This is OrangeBigg's colleague asking questions.
                        That’s how I answered him (his question is duplicated in the body of my message) hi
                      2. 0
                        23 May 2024 10: 39
                        Quote: Bad_gr
                        That's what I answered him

                        And they answered me. wink
                        He won't see your reply.
                2. +10
                  22 May 2024 20: 23
                  Quote: OrangeBigg
                  Tell me, why not just rely on the Su-35S, this is a multifunctional machine, which the SVO has fully proven, so why then do we need the Su-30SM2?

                  The plant specializes in the production of Su-30SM2; if it is converted to produce the Su-35S, it will be expensive and in the conditions of the Northern Military District we will lose time as the supply of new fighters will be reduced. In addition, the Su-30SM can be upgraded to SM2.
                  1. +7
                    22 May 2024 20: 27
                    Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                    In addition, the Su-30SM can be upgraded to SM2.

                    The article under discussion is specifically about the Su-30SM2.
                    You are absolutely right about different aircraft factories..
                  2. -10
                    22 May 2024 20: 30
                    That is, it is not the plant that adapts to the needs of the Russian Aerospace Forces, but the Russian Aerospace Forces that are forced to adapt to the requirements of the plant? Do I understand you correctly? This is fundamentally wrong. In fact, next year the first flights should take place on the Su-75, Mig-41, PAK YES and we really need all these machines, but because of the needs of the plant we have to buy not new machines, but the Su-30SM2 unnecessary for the Russian Aerospace Forces, and spend money on it?
                    1. +10
                      22 May 2024 20: 46
                      Quote: OrangeBigg
                      Actually, next year the first flights should take place of the Su-75, Mig-41, PAK DA

                      Forgive me Alexander, but:
                      1. I’m looking forward to the Su-75 no less than yours. When and how many will there be?
                      2. Sorry, I don’t believe in the existence of the MIG-41. Those characteristics that are attributed to it are difficult to achieve technologically.
                      3. What do you know about PAK DA to hope that it will fly next year? This is the same phantom as the MIG-41. Have you even seen the preliminary design? Me not.
                      4. PAK DA is not a fighter. And they never will be.

                      Quote: OrangeBigg
                      ... and because of the plant’s consumers, we should not buy new machines, but the Su-30SM2 unnecessary for the Russian Aerospace Forces, and spend money on it?

                      Why did you decide that the Su-30SM2 is not needed?
                      Especially now, when the war is not just around the corner, but is in full swing?
                      We can’t say: hey, at 404, wait a minute, we’ll make a lot of Su-75s here and then we’ll fight?
                      And once again, the Su-30SM2 is being modernized from the existing Su-30SM. This is very correct from all sides.
                      Or have you not read how Su-34 pilots near Kharkov sleep for 4 hours and spend the rest of the time fighting? Quantity matters. hi
                      1. -8
                        22 May 2024 20: 50
                        And what kind of argument is this - I don’t believe it? The other day Bondarev spoke about 2025 and the first flight of the Mig-41. Besides, everything new is well-forgotten old.

                        The D-30F-6M was designed for the MiG-31M interceptor, which first flew in 1985, and was expected to enter service in the early 1990s as the primary interceptor for Soviet air defense forces. The original MiG-31 Foxhound, which entered service in 1981, remains the heaviest fighter aircraft. ... The improved and much more fuel-efficient MiG-31M fighter with the D-30F-6M was 28 percent more powerful and developed approximately 195 Kn, far superior to any other aircraft in the modern world. ...The rapid deterioration of the Russian economy after the collapse of the Soviet Union ultimately prevented the country from financing serial production of the MiG-31M, despite the fact that its development was completed, and lack of funding until the 2010s even prevented significant modernization of old MiG-31s. The interceptor and its engine were fully ready for mass production by 1994, despite post-Soviet delays.




                        https://military.pravda.ru/1980638-ssha/

                        .PAK YES is not a fighter. And they never will be.


                        Yes, I know that this is a strategic bomber. But the funds that could be spent on it will be consumed by the Su-30SM2.
                      2. +5
                        22 May 2024 21: 00
                        Quote: OrangeBigg
                        Yes, I know that this is a strategic bomber.

                        Until we build caponiers at all the strategic airfields, there is no need to build new ones at all.
                        It is the hegemon who needs strategists, he is overseas. And now fighters are more important. The hegemon has something to get without strategists at all.
                        And when the GDP lifts the moratorium on the deployment of the INF, there may be no more tasks left for strategists on our borders. hi
                      3. -10
                        22 May 2024 21: 03
                        I don’t agree. We need PAK YES and it’s important. And it’s time to end the zoo of fighter jets by limiting ourselves to the production of only the Su-57, Su-34M, Su-75 and Mig-41. The Su-35S and Su-30SM2 already have a worthy replacement in face of the serial Su-57, both in single-seat and double-seat modifications. So I don’t see the point in releasing the Su-35S and Su-30SM2, except for the necessity of force majeure due to wartime, but there is no such force majeure yet .
                      4. +4
                        22 May 2024 21: 06
                        Quote: OrangeBigg
                        The Su-35S and Su-30SM2 already have a worthy replacement in the serial Su-57

                        Please tell me the cost of these aircraft.
                        If you don't know it, then your reasoning loses its support. hi
                      5. -10
                        22 May 2024 21: 08
                        The cost of the Su-57 is equal to the cost of each side of the Su-35S, Su-30SM2, and operation is even cheaper.
                      6. +2
                        22 May 2024 21: 12
                        Quote: OrangeBigg
                        The cost of the Su-57 is equal to the cost of each side of the Su-35S, Su-30SM2, and operation is even cheaper.

                        Boldly. The aviators will come and comment. If they want. hi
                      7. +5
                        23 May 2024 04: 15
                        Quote: OrangeBigg
                        The cost of the Su-57 is equal to the cost of each side of the Su-35S, Su-30SM2, and operation is even cheaper.

                        This is wrong . It should be taken into account that the Su-35S was created as an export product at the expense of the Sukhoi Design Bureau. Those. The money invested in the creation of this aircraft had to be returned through future deliveries (a share of the development cost is included in the price).
                        The Su-30SM was created on the basis of the Su-30MKI at the expense of the Indian customer. Not to mention the fact that the Indian order itself was very large and brought considerable dividends. So the price of the Su-30SM does not include development costs.
                        The Su-34 was created during and with the money of the USSR, it was ready in the early 90s, but it turned out to be unclaimed. After the Five-Day War, it was put into production and brought up to modern standards during the production of the first batch. The price of the aircraft does not include development costs.
                        Su-57 - was created by state order and at public expense. India, as a customer and financial participant in the project, came out of it without paying anything. The price of the Su-57 does not include development costs due to direct government funding.
                        And now to the actual numbers:
                        - Su-34 cost under the first contract is 28 million dollars.
                        - Su-30SM cost under the first contract is 30 million dollars.
                        - Su-35S cost under the first contract is 35 million dollars.
                        - Su-57 cost under the first contract (officially announced) - 37,5 million dollars.
                        If we look at the first three aircraft, we will see something surprising - the most complex in airframe, heavier and two-seater aircraft are for some reason seriously cheaper... simply a modernized airframe of the base Su-27. And the reason here is not only in the more advanced and more expensive AL-41F1S engines and not in the more expensive and advanced avionics.
                        And regarding the cost of the Su-57 initially announced... I do not rule out that the price for these aircraft still had to be raised + fork out for the construction and equipment of a new workshop for their assembly, because when the Ministry of Defense set the price... in Komsomolsk they howled... and I hope you remember what the pace of their production was in the first years of their mass production. Now their construction is proceeding at an increasing pace and starting next year they promise to deliver 30 aircraft per year.
                        Otherwise, I completely agree with the opinion of Alekh777. But I’ll add it on my own behalf. The fact is that for normal operation and maintenance of a specific aircraft model, it is necessary that the total number of such aircraft in service be at least 200 - 240 units. Otherwise, there will be problems with maintaining the fleet, providing spare parts and modernization throughout the entire life cycle. None of these aircraft in our Aerospace Forces have such numbers to this day. Therefore, their production must be continued, increasing the number of each model to 240 units. minimum All these aircraft are good and in demand, especially in the Su-30SM2, Su-34M modifications... and a new modification of the Su-35SM with BRLC and avionics from the Su-57 is on the way. Unification of the engine and avionics composition will ensure increased combat capabilities, simplification of operation, maintenance and training of technical personnel for the Aerospace Forces.
                        In addition, the Su-30SM\SM2 are going to Naval Aviation, and there a two-seat heavy MFI is much preferable to a single-seat one.
                      8. 0
                        23 May 2024 20: 12
                        I apologize, but it seems to me that you got carried away: the SU-34 cannot cost less than a fighter, 30ka is a niche fighter-bomber and is in demand in the Navy... something like this.
                      9. 0
                        24 May 2024 00: 30
                        Quote: 23ronin
                        :SU-34 cannot cost less than a fighter,

                        I don’t know the price of the Su-34M, this is a new, more advanced modification, I clearly indicated that the price under the first contract was exactly that. And I indicated what affects the price of the aircraft. In addition, the Su-34 has unregulated air intakes, which simplifies and reduces the cost of the design.
                        Quote: 23ronin
                        30ka is a fighter-bomber niche

                        This is an MFI - a multirole fighter. The aircraft were developed at different times, but the Su-34 is heavier and has an armored cabin. I think that the prices of the Su-34M and Su-30SM2 will also be close. So the Su-30SM2, in theory, should cost a little more than the Su-35S. For the Su-34M, the price will depend on the composition of the avionics, but I don’t think that it will exceed the cost of the Su-35S.
                      10. 0
                        23 May 2024 20: 13
                        I think that the production of the MiG-41 and Su 75 will require enormous costs. At least a couple of hundred trillion rubles for mass production alone. Even taking into account the fact that mass production reduces the cost of equipment. In addition, it will take a lot of time, another 10 years to reach a state of combat readiness.
                        It is not surprising that they produce old planes, although they are quite functional. However, I agree that there are clearly not enough new fighters. For a modern confrontation with NATO, you need to have at least 500 aircraft of +5 and 6 generations. And 4000 5th generation aircraft.
                      11. 0
                        23 May 2024 20: 51
                        . At least a couple of hundred trillion rubles for mass production alone.


                        You are saying something unthinkable. It’s not Lockheed Martin Corporation that will produce them here, whose price for F-35s is constantly rising.
                      12. 0
                        23 May 2024 20: 57
                        In continuation of the post.

                        . In addition, it will take a lot of time, another 10 years to reach a state of combat readiness.


                        No. Less. Moreover, much less. The same Su-75 is essentially a single-engine modification of the Su-57.

                        . For a modern confrontation with NATO, you need to have at least 500 aircraft of +5 and 6 generations.


                        Oh, Christmas trees. You already have 6th generation fighters. what
                      13. 0
                        16 June 2024 09: 13
                        You didn’t read carefully, at least you need to have 500 aircraft of +5 and 6 generations. And not those that come in single copies. From technology experience, creating an aircraft that is cheap and easy to train is a non-trivial task. Almost 10 years passed for the development of the MiG-25, which appeared only in the 1970s. Although it was created from scratch since 1964. And this is under the USSR, and factories in Russia can’t cope, frankly speaking. There are a lot of orders, but they don’t make it on time. But rebuilding the plant is too expensive and cumbersome. It is cheaper to build a new enterprise.
                      14. +6
                        22 May 2024 21: 28
                        Excuse me, what kind of equipment for the PAK-DA will the Su-30SM "eat"? The factories are different, the people are different, even the materials and avionics are basically different (there is nothing to say about the engines and their factories). Are you proposing to stop the plant producing the Su-30SM2 now? This will not make PAK YES any faster. So I don’t understand what funds from the production of the SU-30SM2 can be used to create the PAK DA. Money cannot replace materials or people.
                        In addition, as I understand it, the PAK DA program may have been pushed forward because of the Tu-214 (and this is exactly the same plant and the same people), with which there are also big problems.
                      15. -3
                        22 May 2024 21: 30
                        .Excuse me, what kind of equipment for the PAK-DA will the Su-30SM "eat"?


                        I meant money, but the fact that the equipment is different is understandable.
                      16. +4
                        23 May 2024 04: 46
                        Quote: OrangeBigg
                        I meant money, but the fact that the equipment is different is understandable.

                        The state has so much money today that they don’t know what to do with it - again, reserve funds are growing - during a war!! There are no problems with financing, there are problems with production capacity and trained personnel. And since the ASZ has set up lines for the construction of the Su-30SM\SM2 MFI, and such aircraft are highly anticipated in Naval Aviation, it is necessary to load all available capacities and, if possible, expand the production area in order to saturate the VKS and MA with the necessary aircraft equipment as quickly as possible.
                        Su-30SM2 is essentially a two-seat Su-35S with PGO.
                        And since this year they promise to begin transferring to the troops a new modification of the Su-35SM with the Belka BRLC and avionics from the Su-57, it is necessary to work now on a new modification of the Su-30SM3 - with the Belka BRLC and avionics from the Su -57. And it is to this version that the previously produced Su-30SM will be upgraded during the “medium overhaul” (when the time comes to change the engines). Because before, even though there was an average repair, they planned to upgrade the SM to SM2. But since there is already a Su-35SM, then the Su-30SM must be immediately upgraded to SM3. This way we will achieve an even greater degree of unification of heavy MFIs in our video conferencing systems.

                        And once again - there is enough money in the country, the production of each type of aircraft at Sukhoi factories will be increased to 30 units. per year, and then gradually increase.
                        A new workshop is being built/built for the Su-75. The new workshop for the Su-57 is already reaching its planned targets. Perhaps there will be another workshop for the two-seat version of the Su-57.
                        Why is the BRLC from the Su-57 used on 4++ generation aircraft?
                        In order to equalize them in combat capabilities with the 5th generation and give them the opportunity to fight almost equally with enemy 5th generation aircraft. RLC "Belka" sees American "invisible" missiles as an ordinary 4th generation. And he confidently points the RVV at them, incl. and DB.
                      17. -2
                        23 May 2024 00: 24
                        Su-35 is better than Su30. It’s not good that the Su35 is produced only in Komsomolsk. It is necessary to repurpose the plant in Irkutsk to produce the Su35. Produce more Su35 instead of Su30. Available Su30 to modernize.
                      18. 0
                        23 May 2024 10: 11
                        Why do you need PAK YES? We do not have a replacement for either the An 12 or the An 24. Pair A 50.
                    2. +4
                      22 May 2024 20: 50
                      Guys, what are you arguing about? Basically nothing. It’s true that rebuilding factories is more expensive than building a new line, but that’s not even the point, let’s just get down to earth and evaluate the need for this or that in the given conditions. Of course, in the future, in terms of performance characteristics, one is needed, but now... And performance characteristics do not mean which is better, depending on how to use it, but now one is needed, but regarding the advantages, I already gave the link in the wrong place https://youtu.be/sizebbisGBo from the 24th minute, I repeat, not all that glitters is gold.
                      1. +7
                        22 May 2024 20: 55
                        Quote: NIKNN
                        Of course, in the long term, in terms of performance characteristics, one is needed, but now...

                        As far as I understand, equipping the Su-35 and Su-30SM2, and Su-34M with the same engines and radars will significantly unify the aircraft fleet and significantly increase their performance characteristics.
                      2. +5
                        22 May 2024 20: 59
                        Yes, I’m not against it, but of course I would like to equip all our aircraft with advanced capabilities, but let’s start with the fact that where can we get them, they don’t lie around unclaimed? And we proceed from what is. Of course, we need to develop industry and supply, but for now this is just necessary, but the Su30SM2 is already there.
                      3. +4
                        22 May 2024 21: 02
                        Quote: NIKNN
                        we already have Su30SM2.

                        That's what I'm talking about. The plane is quite good.
                        It will complement the Su-34 and very soon.
                      4. +1
                        23 May 2024 05: 06
                        Quote: Alex777
                        It will complement the Su-34 and very soon.

                        If you adapt at least half a hundred Su-24Ms to throw FABs with UMPC, it would become much easier for the 34s. It seems they are already doing it, it seems they have already flown. At altitude, the Su-24M reached speeds of up to 2200 - 2300 km/h, so they are very suitable for such work.
                    3. 0
                      24 May 2024 10: 44
                      Quote: OrangeBigg
                      That is, it is not the plant that adapts to the needs of the Russian Aerospace Forces, but the Russian Aerospace Forces that are forced to adapt to the requirements of the plant? Do I understand you correctly? This is fundamentally wrong. In fact, next year the first flights should take place on the Su-75, Mig-41, PAK YES and we really need all these machines, but because of the needs of the plant we have to buy not new machines, but the Su-30SM2 unnecessary for the Russian Aerospace Forces, and spend money on it?

                      Alexander, do you really think that the Russian Defense Ministry, if it had considered it necessary to convert the plant in Irkutsk to produce the SU-35, would not have changed the line?
                3. +2
                  22 May 2024 21: 24
                  Because the SU-35S is produced by KNAAZ and the SU-30SM is produced by Irkutsk. You can’t cram everything into one plant, even the best, but you have to make good airplanes.
                4. +1
                  23 May 2024 01: 11
                  Quote: OrangeBigg
                  Tell me, why not just rely on the Su-35S, this is a multifunctional machine, which the SVO has fully proven, so why then do we need the Su-30SM2?

                  Plant A produces the Su-35, and plant B produces the Su-30SM. To repurpose Plant B to produce the Su-35, it must be stopped, that is, aircraft production must be stopped for a very long time. Enough?
                  1. +1
                    23 May 2024 13: 14
                    I became interested in your profile after commenting on my comment. As I understand it, you are not an amateur in the area you are discussing. hi
                    Quote: Comet
                    Plant A produces the Su-35, and plant B produces the Su-30SM. To repurpose Plant B to produce the Su-35, it must be stopped, that is, aircraft production must be stopped for a very long time. Enough?

                    And here I more than agree with you. Here, for some reason, they are directly calling to stop the production of certain aircraft in favor of some imaginary cheap wunderwaffles and simply not understanding that changing the production from one aircraft to another is the same as building a new plant while ceasing the production of what is already being produced.
              2. +3
                22 May 2024 21: 02
                Do you still think that the F-16 has a chance?

                What other ones? “Awareness” is important now. Fighters themselves generally do not “chirp” in the air, because the SPO will see the working radar of the fighter before the fighter sees the enemy. Therefore, silently, according to the data from AWACS and ground-based radars from below (because against the background of the ground, the enemy’s most luxurious locator range drops by 2-3 times) they reach the detection range of the heat direction finder and launch the missile. Preferably with an IR seeker. This is where you remember about the F-35 and the critics of stealth.
                1. +1
                  22 May 2024 21: 04
                  Quote: dauria
                  What other ones?

                  A colleague was simply comparing 2 aircraft.
                  If ours don’t raise the A-50U and don’t do other important things, then yes, it won’t be easy for us. And on the Su-30SM2, and on the Su-35S, and even on the Su-57.
                  1. +3
                    22 May 2024 21: 14
                    What is there to compare? It will depend on the tasks. Someone will fly to bomb, someone will cover them, and someone will shoot down those who are bombing. If only they could fly, could carry weapons, and be aware, without being very noticeable. Here is a striking example. On our Mig-15 in Korea they installed a primitive receiver on the frequency of the Saber radio rangefinder sight. (First SPO. By the way - thanks to the Soviet Jew wink ) And ours received advance warning of danger and a close enemy.
                    1. 0
                      22 May 2024 21: 17
                      Quote: dauria
                      It will depend on the tasks

                      100% yes.
                    2. +1
                      22 May 2024 22: 30
                      Quote: dauria
                      On our Mig-15 in Korea they installed a primitive receiver on the frequency of the Saber radio rangefinder sight. (First SPO. By the way - thanks to the Soviet Jew wink)

                      What does a “Soviet Jew” have to do with it? In WWII, the British began to install a rear gunner's radar sight on their night bombers to fight off German fighters. The Germans immediately began to install a detection receiver on their night fighters and used it to target British bombers.
                2. +2
                  23 May 2024 01: 15
                  Quote: dauria
                  Therefore, silently, according to the data from AWACS and ground-based radars from below (because against the background of the ground, the enemy’s most luxurious locator range drops by 2-3 times) they reach the detection range of the heat direction finder and launch the missile.

                  1. At what range will this missile be launched with this tactic?
                  2. Where will AWACS aircraft patrol and where will they detect enemy aircraft?
                  1. 0
                    23 May 2024 11: 16
                    Yes, I don’t know modern numbers. If the old fashioned way, it looked like the E-3s were spinning along the front line on their side at a distance of 200 km, looking at ours at the same depth. Of course, not alone, but covered by fighters. And the tactical formations were classics. “Goose” (group below, one or two above), or F-15 with sparrow from above behind with the locator turned on, and F-16 “silent” with sidewinders near the ground in front of the first. The Jews tried all this with the Arabs. So they fought with the MiG-23 and R-23r, including luring the enemy to the maximum radius and setting up “ambushes” with bait. So they cut down the Mig-25p.
                    1. +2
                      24 May 2024 00: 43
                      Quote: dauria
                      If the old fashioned way, it looked like the E-3s were spinning along the front line on their side at a distance of 200 km, looking at ours at the same depth.

                      And now this is when we have 40N6 and 9M82MD?
                      Quote: dauria
                      So they fought with the MiG-23 and R-23r

                      Arab MiG-23s (MF and MS) did not see the target against the background of the ground and could not use the R-23 at all. Why remember this in the realities of our time?
                      1. 0
                        24 May 2024 01: 25
                        Read this. Even MLs with R-24 “were” in Syria in 82. And even the old S-23D3 had SDC lines for selection against the background of the earth.
                        http://samlib.ru/s/shitjakow_andrej_aleksandrowich/warinlie-1.shtml
                      2. +1
                        24 May 2024 01: 39
                        Quote: dauria
                        Read this. Even MLs with R-24 “were” in Syria in 82

                        They received the ML after the events you mentioned.
                        Quote: dauria
                        had SDC lines for selection against the background of the earth

                        You are confusing entities. “Have SDC” and “see against the background of the earth.” MF and MS did not see the target against the background of the ground.
            2. +3
              22 May 2024 20: 45
              Do you think if they give the Piglets F16 they will be the latest modification? I strongly doubt it and don’t forget that the Su-35 works and mainly deals with air targets
              1. +1
                23 May 2024 00: 30
                We have too few Su35s. Need three times more. They will receive f-16 mlu. This is a major modernization allowing old F16s to carry a wide range of modern weapons. We need to prepare for a more serious confrontation with NATO countries where there are a lot of aircraft.
            3. 0
              22 May 2024 21: 30
              Isn't the F16 a 20 year old plane?
              1. 0
                22 May 2024 21: 36
                20 years old, but greatly updated and upgraded. And we don’t need to compete on equal terms with the F-16 so that the losses are 50/50, but to maintain dominance in the skies over used Ukraine, which we received thanks to the difference in characteristics of Russian Aerospace Forces fighters and fighters Ukrainian Air Force. This difference in the characteristics of fighters needs to be preserved, and for this, the Su-16, Su-57S, Mig-35BM must be fielded against the F-31.

                Kyiv is waiting for supplies of F-16 fighters from its Western allies, hoping that they will help in the fight against Russian aircraft, writes the American magazine Newsweek.

                “Ukraine hopes that these F-16s will help its armed forces match the capabilities of the Russian fleet of Su-57 fighters, which have been in use since the very beginning of the conflict,” the publication notes.

                The publication's columnist adds that “The advanced stealth technology of the Su-57 poses a serious challenge.” In turn, the F-16 was created 50 years ago and was initially developed as a light day fighter. The F-16 is inferior to the more modern Su-57 in a number of characteristics, as emphasized in the material.
                1. 0
                  23 May 2024 18: 25
                  Do you think they’ll give the Piglets a very pumped up one? Even taking the highly upgraded F16, it can’t hold a candle to the Su-35, and this is the main fighter in the Northern Military District zone
              2. +2
                22 May 2024 22: 33
                Quote from incoggnoto
                Isn't the F16 a 20 year old plane?

                The F-16 has been going strong for five decades since 1978...
            4. +1
              22 May 2024 22: 59
              The Russian Aerospace Forces must solve the problem of detecting enemy aircraft taking off, first of all. And which fighter will come out to intercept is a secondary matter. The Aerospace Forces lack airborne radars, long-range ground-based radars, and electronic reconnaissance equipment. Without this, fighters are blind.
          2. 0
            23 May 2024 09: 14
            CM2 itself should be unified with 35C. But I don’t know about the batch that has already been delivered to the SM2 troops several pieces. There was no information.
            1. 0
              23 May 2024 09: 40
              Quote: Zaurbek
              But I don’t know about the batch of which several have already been delivered to the SM2 troops. There was no information.

              I don’t know either, so I wrote: “they promised.”
        2. +3
          22 May 2024 20: 22
          Do you mean the Hindus are indignant?
          It’s like the Indians bought dry goods, and then they’re shitting on them
          1. 0
            22 May 2024 21: 26
            Quote: Victal
            Like the Indians bought dry goods

            And the packs have the main fleet of F-16s.
      2. 0
        23 May 2024 08: 28
        Hindus are indignant. wink

        Rather, "the Indians confirm."
        1. +1
          23 May 2024 10: 38
          Quote from solar
          Rather, "the Indians confirm."

          I answered in the sense that the Indians chose the Su-30MKI, among other things, to confront Pakistani F-16s. And happy.
          1. 0
            23 May 2024 11: 19
            Judging by the results of the story with the mustache, not very well. Interested in Rafal.:((
            1. +1
              23 May 2024 12: 30
              Quote from solar
              Judging by the results of the story with the mustache, not very well. Interested in Rafal.:((

              There was a moment when the West became convinced by the Indians that Russia was in ruins and was not capable of producing modern weapons.
              To this tune, the Indians withdrew from the program to create the FGFA.
              The air marshal who lobbied for the exit now says it was a mistake. Everyone gets smarter in retirement. ))
              They were completely satisfied with the Mirage 2000, so they took the Rafal.
              We ate quite enough with him. The technology has failed.
              I don’t follow them closely, but I’ve heard that deep modernization of the Su-30MKI is being actively discussed. Approximately to the level of the Su-30SM2.
              Israel should have taken part in it, but now the Israelis have no time for that. Yes, and we are still busy with our own affairs.
              The Indian aircraft fleet is shrinking rapidly.
              Let's see how everything goes. hi
              1. -1
                23 May 2024 13: 08
                The air marshal who lobbied for the exit now says it was a mistake.

                This is a journalistic invention, he did not say this.
                The Indians suspended participation in the project because, in their opinion, it did not meet the stated characteristics, was moving too slowly and was too expensive.
                1. +2
                  23 May 2024 13: 58
                  Quote from solar
                  This is a journalistic invention, he did not say this.

                  According to my information, he said. At the end of last year.
                  Around the time Modi flew in Tejas.

                  ...retired Indian Air Force Marshal and test pilot Anil Chopra, who at one time led the company in the press against the Russian-Indian “fifth generation” fighter program, suddenly told the Indian Defense News portal that it looks like he was wrong about the Su-57, believing Americans that sanctions will ruin this project.

                  November 2023.
                  1. 0
                    23 May 2024 14: 20
                    I know this has been replicated
                    This is a journalistic invention, he did not say this.

                    The words of the marshal himself are not given anywhere and there is no reference to his statement.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. +4
      22 May 2024 20: 20
      Quote: OrangeBigg
      The Su-30SM2 has a large ESR and the radar is not the most powerful

      Which radar is more powerful than the Irbis?
      Against the F-16, the Su-30 in the SM2 version is an excellent option.
      1. -4
        22 May 2024 20: 20
        The squirrel from the 5th generation fighter Su-57. Plus the Su-30SM2 will be visible from afar.
        1. +1
          22 May 2024 20: 22
          What is its power and detection range?
          1. +1
            22 May 2024 20: 24
            There is data on the Internet about 400 km, but who knows what it really is. The radar is new, classified as secret.
            1. +2
              22 May 2024 20: 29
              That is, you don’t know the characteristics, but you claim that it is better?

              But the characteristics of the Irbis are known. And they are the best ones made public. There is indeed a minus. The fact that this is an outdated PFAR.
              1. 0
                22 May 2024 20: 44
                You probably know the characteristics of the secret Belka radar? Well, share the information.
              2. +2
                22 May 2024 20: 50
                Quote: Stas157
                But the characteristics of the Irbis are known. And they are the best ones made public. There is indeed a minus. The fact that this is an outdated PFAR.

                The F-16 will not be very happy about this. 404 transfer modifications for write-off.
              3. +2
                23 May 2024 01: 18
                Quote: Stas157
                There is indeed a minus. The fact that this is an outdated PFAR.

                Modern PFAR, not outdated. And why is this a minus?
        2. +3
          22 May 2024 20: 25
          Quote: OrangeBigg
          The squirrel from the 5th generation fighter Su-57. Plus the Su-30SM2 will be visible from afar.

          The Irbis has a maximum detection range of 400 km, the F-16, depending on modifications, is somewhere around 200-250 km, perhaps in the Block 70 modification it is higher, but these will not be supplied to Ukraine.
          1. -5
            22 May 2024 20: 26
            Are you so sure that they won’t deliver?
          2. 0
            22 May 2024 20: 48
            400 kilometers is for targets like AWACS, a fighter with an EPR of 3 square meters will see it at a range of less than 100, I read the opinion of an engineer from this field, he says that the F22-35 radar is certainly better, but they have a detection range of a modern non-stealth fighter at the level of 120-130 km, and ours are correspondingly lower, add another element of stealth here and the distance will be even lower. So the first one to see the concept - if it was shot down it would not work in our favor.
            1. +4
              22 May 2024 20: 56
              Quote: ibadid1999
              a fighter with an EPR of 3 square meters will see it at a range of less than 100

              Stealth will see 100, not stealth is clearly higher, but still the most powerful PFAR radar, peak power 20 kilowatts. From open sources data on the Irbis radar:
              Target Detection Range:
              with EPR 0,01 m² at the opposite angles 100 km;
              with EPR 0,1 m² at the opposite angles 160 km;
              with EPR 1 m² at the opposite angles 270 km;
              with an EPR of 3 m² at opposite angles of 350-400 km, at catch-up angles up to 150 km;
              1. -1
                22 May 2024 21: 22
                This is incorrect information from the advertising brochure. The engineer quite reasonably explained the real numbers for fighter radars. I already wrote above. At 400, only a modern AWACS like the Americans can see; the fighter’s radar does not provide such power and the distance is much lower.
                1. 0
                  22 May 2024 21: 41
                  Quote: ibadid1999
                  This is incorrect information from the advertising brochure. The engineer quite reasonably explained the real numbers for fighter radars. I already wrote above. At 400, only a modern AWACS like the Americans can see; the fighter’s radar does not provide such power and the distance is much lower.
                  Here are the discussions on the topic https://vk.com/wall-173678697_3544

                  • There is a strong opinion that the technical characteristics of the radar with the Irbis-E PFAR are greatly overestimated. The point is that it can detect targets measuring 3 square meters at a distance of 400 km. To be precise, with a view of 300 square degrees, the detection range will be only 200 km. With long-range detection at a distance of 400 km, the visibility will be only 100 sq. degrees. So, many can say that with a view of 60 degrees left and right, the detection range will be only a few tens of kilometers.
                  • Therefore, many consider the characteristics of the Irbis-E radar to be greatly exaggerated, although in reality this is not the case. Today, Northern Defense columnist Yang Zhi Wei will look into this issue.
                  • The basic principle of operation of a phased array radar is to change the direction of the radio beam by changing the phase of each transmitting module with a stationary antenna. When the deflection angle becomes too large, the effective aperture in that direction decreases and the wave can either dissipate, weaken, or change direction. Therefore, an acceptable viewing range (i.e., scanning area) is selected for the radar. For example, for the radar of the Su-30MKI Bars fighter, the scanning area is 45 degrees; for the Irbis-E it can reach a maximum of 70 degrees, but is limited to 60 degrees. Most phased array radars have a scan area of ​​60 degrees. Typically, in this angular range in the main direction, the intensity of external radiation is 80-90%. Because the detection distance is in direct proportion to the fourth power of the radiation power, so its influence (power) on the detection distance is small (??!)). Therefore, they usually do not focus on the dependence of the detection range on the direction of radiation. In other words, if straight ahead the detection range is 400 km, then at an angle of 60 degrees it is also approximately 400 km. So how can the range sharply decrease to 200 km with a slight deviation from the main direction of radiation?!
                  • So what do 100 sq degrees at 400 km and 300 sq degrees at 200 km mean?
                  • The radar does not need to be in long-range detection mode all the time. It can operate in normal mode, and for greater efficiency in some directions, turn on the long-range detection mode.
                  • Thus, for the Irbis-E radar, a review of 3600 sq. degrees (up-down, left-right 60 degrees) can consist of a review of 300 and 100 sq. degrees. When scanning, the same narrow wave beam is used (for example, 2x2 degrees). The difference is that scanning a space of 100 square degrees will take some time and may even require the use of additional computational means.
                  • When scanning at long distances, data acquisition is slow, but to quickly obtain information, you need to scan at close distances. In any case, the radar will have to wait for the signal to return. For example, at distances over 300 km, you will have to wait 1 millisecond for the signal to return, and at distances over 30 km, only 0,1 milliseconds. This depends only on the speed of light and does not depend in any way on the type of radar (mechanical scanning, PFAR, AFAR).
                  • Of course, if you scan the entire space in long-range mode, then nearby targets can also be detected, but for this you will have to spend too much time with one scan. On the other hand, when scanning in close mode, you can quickly scan a large range, but not see distant targets...
                  • In this case, if the combat aircraft has preliminary data about the target, then you can use the long-range radar operating mode to scan the entire available space once in a few seconds. After obtaining general information about the air situation, it is not necessary to use radar so ineffectively. You can use different scanning modes in different directions. In this way, it will be possible to quickly obtain information and see at long distances.
                  • Let's take an extreme case as an example. If for scanning in the range of 120*120 degrees using a wave beam wide of 2 degrees, for a radar with fur. scanning will take 1 minute, regardless of the distance, because for it, the time the signal remains at each scanning point is several milliseconds. And you need to wait until the signal returns to the receiver. Both at a distance of 400 km and at short distances, scanning does not occur quickly due to the limited capabilities of mechanical scanning. As for the Irbis-E radar, it will take 0,4 milliseconds to create each wave beam, the time for the wave to return from a distance of 400 km is 1,3 milliseconds, a total of at least 1,7 milliseconds. It will take 6,12 seconds to completely scan the airspace.
                  • And if you use a radar with AFAR, then the time for creating a wave beam is less than 0,4 milliseconds, i.e. it approaches zero. It takes 1,3 milliseconds to return a radio wave, and 4,6 seconds to scan the entire airspace. It turns out that a radar with AFAR is not much better than with PFAR?! But, on the other hand, if you flexibly use different scanning modes, then the advantage in data update speed of the radar with AFAR will be visible and its superiority over the radar with PFAR will be more obvious.
                  • So why are 300 and 100 sq. scan views usually chosen? degrees?
                  • In fact, traditional radar works much the same way. Those. a mechanical scanning radar does not actually scan the entire field of view, but scans a certain range in accordance with operational need, but this range cannot exceed a range of +-60 degrees.
                  • For example, in aerial combat on verticals (“dog dump”), this scanning range will be left-right equal to 20 degrees, up-down +-60. And in long-range air combat - several hundred square degrees. As for the missile launch mode, the scanning range under these conditions will be approximately 100 sq. degrees.
                  • Therefore, it is likely that the Irbis-E was created on traditional principles of radar operation, with the need to configure each scanning range mode in accordance with old operating experience. And an AESA radar can quickly switch between different modes, so it looks like it can solve a large number of problems simultaneously.
                  • To summarize, it should be said that the opinion that the review of the Irbis-E radar is limited only to a range of 100 kV degrees and that it is practically useless is completely biased.
                2. +2
                  23 May 2024 01: 27
                  Quote: ibadid1999
                  This is incorrect information from the advertising brochure.

                  This is real data. There is an export version of the Su-35 in China.
                  Quote: ibadid1999
                  The engineer quite reasonably explained the real numbers for fighter radars.

                  Where is this engineer from? What kind of radar did he make?
                  1. 0
                    23 May 2024 12: 35
                    Where is this engineer from?
                    Yes, this is not an engineer, he doesn’t even understand what he’s writing about.
                    The point is that it can detect targets measuring 3 square meters at a distance of 400 km. To be precise, with a view of 300 square degrees, the detection range will be only 200 km. With long-range detection at a distance of 400 km, the visibility will be only 100 sq. degrees.
                    It’s enough to pick up an engineering calculator to understand that at a distance of 400 km, 3 degrees in elevation will cover the altitude range of 20 km, planes just don’t fly higher, so the long-range search zone will essentially be 33x3 degrees, or more than two hundred kilometers in altitude. front and 20 km in altitude, quite normal for ONE fighter. But if you take the elevation angle 10 degrees upward from the radio horizon line, then a target at a distance of 400 km will already be in near space, and fighters do not fight such targets. Therefore, for an area of ​​300 sq. degrees there cannot be targets at a range of 400 km, except for this narrow long-range search area, and a 200 km detection range is quite normal, everything further is either in near space or underground.
                    1. +1
                      24 May 2024 00: 49
                      Quote: Hexenmeister
                      Yes, this is not an engineer, he doesn’t even understand what he’s writing about.

                      It's clear. I was just wondering what else he would come up with. Looks like there's a Ukrainian raid on this thread.
                      Quote: Hexenmeister
                      It is enough to pick up an engineering calculator to understand

                      This is also understandable, although there may be 2.5 rather than 3 degrees. Hence the range is 350-400 km: the target may be in free space, or it may be against the background of the Earth’s surface.
            2. +3
              22 May 2024 21: 44
              Will F22-35 see better with the radar in active mode? Or passive with external lighting? And if the F-35 and Su-35S fly close to the ground with the radar operating in passive mode, then who will see whom first and at what distance? It seems to me that all these numbers have little to do with such situations. In addition, in such cases they mean “dueling” situations, which has nothing to do with real databases, when there are many more different participants.
      2. 0
        22 May 2024 20: 45
        It does not matter. It all depends on the range of the missiles. The H37V specified in the article is only suitable against targets such as tankers and AWACS; it was created against them. Maneuvering up to 5g gives it absolutely no chance against a fighter. And the effective firing range will also be much lower due to fuel burnout. So in reality, everything will be within 50-100 kilometers - this is a medium-long destruction zone. Ours use p37, but only to disrupt attacks without the possibility of getting closer; it’s not good for more, although it works.
        1. +1
          23 May 2024 01: 36
          Quote: ibadid1999
          The H37V specified in the article is only suitable against targets such as tankers and AWACS; it was created against them. Maneuvering up to 5g gives it absolutely no chance against a fighter.

          Why the designation H37V? There is no such designation in either the Russian or English version. Maneuvering up to 5g anyone? Where does the data about 5g come from?
          Quote: ibadid1999
          Ours use p37, but only to disrupt attacks without the possibility of getting closer; it’s not good for more, although it works.

          This is an incorrect statement. And your phrase “Ours use p37” (with a lowercase letter p), like your phrase “H37V” (a non-existent designation), shows that you are not ours.
      3. The comment was deleted.
    4. +3
      22 May 2024 20: 30
      What kind of radar is on the Su30SM2? Have you heard about Irbis-E? Do you think the F16 is inconspicuous? A heavy fighter is always better than a light one.
    5. -1
      22 May 2024 20: 34
      Quote: OrangeBigg
      The Su-30SM2 is not the best candidate for air combat with the F-16, especially the latest modifications with long-range AIM-120D missiles. The Su-30SM2 has a large ESR and the radar is not the most powerful

      Well, the EPR of the F-16 is also not small - the plane is from the seventies, when they didn’t even think about stealth. And the radar is not particularly powerful, simply due to the small size of the aircraft itself, and the range of the AIM-120D is 180 km.
      Somehow, there are no particularly bright prospects in the clash with Sushki.
      1. +1
        23 May 2024 16: 53
        Range of real use of aim 120 amraam - no more than 30 km
        1. -1
          23 May 2024 20: 04
          Quote: Calm_type
          Range of real use of aim 120 amraam - no more than 30 km

          I’m speaking purely from the performance characteristics, where 180 km is indicated for the longest-range modification.
          1. 0
            23 May 2024 20: 23
            180 - this is provided that the target is flying towards, and we are also flying towards, and even at supersonic speed and even several kilometers higher than the target. Under such conditions it can fly away 180 degrees.
            1. 0
              23 May 2024 20: 30
              Quote: Calm_type
              180 - this is provided that the target is flying towards, and we are also flying towards, and even at supersonic speed

              I didn’t go into it, but I fully admit it, because with the same dimensions, the difference in range between the first and last modifications is three and a half times - 50 km versus 180. Which looks somewhat doubtful.
              Well, with such reservations, a duel against Sushka for the F-16 looks suicidal.
              1. +1
                24 May 2024 01: 15
                Quote from: nik-mazur
                I didn’t go into it, but I fully admit it, because with the same dimensions, the difference in range between the first and last modifications is three and a half times - 50 km versus 180. Which looks somewhat doubtful.

                Reducing the mass and dimensions of electronics -> increasing on-board energy -> increasing the time of controlled flight, using appropriate trajectories, increasing the accuracy of stabilization (saving kinetic energy).
    6. +3
      22 May 2024 21: 19
      The Su-30SM2 is not the best candidate for dogfights with the F-16

      Well, what kind of “air battles”?! It was said, R-37M. Fire and forget. Range up to 300 km. If you patrol the sky from the airspace over the Brest region, then the entire Western Ukraine is guaranteed to be covered..
  2. +5
    22 May 2024 20: 03
    It would be better not
    Ready to meet the F-16
    , rather than let the f-16 take off
  3. 0
    22 May 2024 20: 10
    As if the existing Storm Shadow carriers with a flight range of 300-500 km are not enough for us.
    1. 0
      23 May 2024 05: 17
      the problem is not in the carriers but in the small number of missiles, about 10 per month can be launched
  4. +2
    22 May 2024 20: 11
    We'll see what happens, but in the meantime, be prepared for any situation...
    1. -1
      22 May 2024 20: 28
      I look. Once again, they killed everyone in one fell swoop... They still have MIGs and Su27s and Su24s with the French SCALP flying.
      1. +2
        22 May 2024 20: 41
        The territory is not small, a combat zone, too...
        The intelligence assets of their sponsors are well developed, they cover them as best they can...
        And all the same, they didn’t have much aviation equipment left, and this is against the backdrop of the fact that they collected for them everything they could and where they got it.
  5. +2
    22 May 2024 20: 11
    Again, stupid bravado, only recently the planes were destroyed at the airfield, learn to cover your planes at the airfields, the third year of the SVO is already underway... no words
    1. -5
      22 May 2024 20: 14
      Which? Nothing arrived from us. All the planes are intact.
      1. +1
        22 May 2024 21: 30
        In Crimea, Belbek, 2 MiG-31 and little things...
        1. 0
          23 May 2024 05: 19
          No planes have been based there for a year now
        2. +1
          23 May 2024 09: 40
          I won’t repeat it, go to my comments from the 17th and 19th, and read it, and don’t believe the hacky stuff.
          1. +1
            23 May 2024 10: 02
            Quote: Olesya Lesya
            go to my comments from the 17th and 19th

            I looked at your comments. Our person. good
            I filter out IPsO and watch the channels of our pilots in the cart.
            They wrote that the burned MIG-29 was captured from 2014.
            They and I only had questions about two MIG-31s.
            If your information is correct, then many people were wrong. hi
            1. +1
              23 May 2024 10: 07
              Of course, I am Russian and I worry about my Motherland. ))) We don’t even have pilots for SUs and MiGs in Crimea, they all relocated a long time ago. Because planes don’t take off, they simply don’t exist. There's only one piece of trash. And NATO members know this very well. They keep track of the fact that at airfields the stationary airplanes have not even moved for many, many months; their satellite reconnaissance works perfectly. And the hacks need this blow as media exposure. )) Good luck to you. We will win, it will be difficult, bloody, with losses, but there is no other way.
              1. +1
                23 May 2024 10: 15
                Quote: Olesya Lesya
                We will win, it will be difficult, bloody, with losses, but there is no other way.

                I am confident of victory. And it will happen sooner than many people think.
                A friend of mine is fighting near Kharkov now. Shares information.
                He says that there is a big difference between 2022 and 2024. Heaven and earth.
                1. -1
                  23 May 2024 10: 39
                  There is a difference. But literally the day before yesterday I learned some news about what scum in uniform are doing - my soul still hurts. There is too much rot among senior officers and juniors. In 2 years this will be cleaned, we hope that not only the passengers will be removed, but also the pests among them. It doesn't work quickly, because... the rotten on top covers the same rotten ones below. She would have strangled them herself.
                  I also get information from the guys at the front, and I have a relative, a colonel, who served on the headquarters of Prigozhin, the Wagnerites. After disbandment, I trained guys for reconnaissance. Sometimes I went with them myself, although I was old, but very literate. He has been in all the wars since he was young. Now he is in Africa, commanding units and a security group for their president, but even there they are chopping dill (and they are there, carrying out the orders of their British masters). And an officer who is familiar with GRU is from military intelligence, and he can say what he can, but only in general phrases and a little, and figure out the rest yourself, % 99 you can’t say. He is confident that the main phase will end by the end of the year or in the spring, and that we will have enough strength for Moldova. Although in my heart I don’t believe something. )) He knows a lot. If something happens to us (for example, an arrival), if the real damage is true, then it will grunt with a growl, if there is a reset, it writes: calmly.
                  1. +1
                    23 May 2024 12: 56
                    Hello Olesya!
                    I wrote you a private letter. hi
    2. 0
      23 May 2024 09: 41
      The airfield has not been operational since 22, and we had no planes there in Belbek. And there were several long-damaged planes that were not working, from which everything had been removed a long time ago, and also mock-ups that were delivered in May 23
      1. +1
        23 May 2024 14: 41
        The airfield has not been operational since 22

        Just not working. October 20, 2023.
        The command of the Russian Aerospace Forces promptly carried out the order of the head of state to begin patrolling the Black Sea with MiG-31I interceptors. Satellite images of the Belbek airfield in Crimea, distributed on the Internet, show the presence of four such aircraft in the parking lot.
        In addition, Su-30 and Su-27 fighters are based at this airfield, regularly preventing NATO reconnaissance aircraft from violating Russian air borders.

        https://topcor.ru/40479-perehvatchiki-mig-31k-i-uzhe-perebazirovany-na-ajerodrom-v-krymu.html
        1. 0
          23 May 2024 16: 07
          Do you believe everything that is written in the press? You are a naive person. Who will correctly indicate the strategic location? Do you think this was written by information from the Moscow Region, and not simple bloggers-journalists? In October 23, we didn’t have any moments. Everyone was based at other airfields deep in the rear, you know where.
          Intercept? Instantly it needs to take off and have time to gain speed and altitude, under the gaze of a NATO reconnaissance officer and two steps away from air defense in Odessa. Are you serious?))) There hasn’t been a single takeoff from a belbek for 1,5 years, not one. And continue to believe the pictures, naive Chukchi boy
          1. +1
            23 May 2024 16: 46
            Do you believe everything that is written in the press?

            No, I believe an anonymous character on the Internet (sarcasm, if anything).
            Don't make people laugh. You prove that the airfield in Belbek has not been operational since 2022. Although everyone knows very well that the 38th Fighter Regiment is based there, and it was its planes that dropped the American Reaper over the Black Sea last year in the spring.
            hi
            1. +1
              23 May 2024 16: 57
              The fighter regiment was based before the first strike on Belbek; after the strike they were all relocated, because their presence was no longer practical in terms of carrying out combat missions. Have you ever read the news in 1,5 years that “such and such a plane took off from Crimea to intercept or launch missiles”??? There was none, only news from Engels, Alanya, etc. There was always deathly silence in Belbek. According to the ripper, it was dropped at the beginning of 23. Do you know where our interceptor took off from? ))) If you so want to calm your soul, then believe that a couple of whole regiments were destroyed there, warehouses with missiles, all the ships, submarines, at the same time our spaceships and a branch of the Kremlin. Good luck.
              1. 0
                23 May 2024 17: 07
                The 38th Regiment in Belbek has Su-27 and Mig-29 in service; they are not directly involved in battles on the front line.
                Have you ever read the news in 1,5 years that “such and such a plane took off from Crimea

                Su-27s of the 38th regiment destroyed Reaper, as I wrote above. But you pretend not to read.
                hi
                1. +1
                  23 May 2024 17: 13
                  The 38th Regiment has not been based in Belbek for a long time. Can you read Russian? Pilots of this regiment take off from other airfields. Lord....
  6. +4
    22 May 2024 20: 14
    The R-77-1 supersonic medium-range air-to-air missile was adopted by the Russian Air Force and Air Defense in 1994. Initially, the ammunition was intended for the then newest light fighter MiG-29.

    Was it the newest MiG-1994 in 29?
    1. +1
      22 May 2024 21: 09
      And this:
      The main feature of the rocket is the implementation of the “fire and forget” principle, which allows the pilot not to accompany it after launch.

      The missile has a target acquisition range with EPR of 5 square meters. m. (bomber) is 16 km. What if the capture fails? So the carrier aircraft did not “shoot and go home,” but accompanies the target on the campaign and guides the missile until it hits the target.
      So don't shoot the pianist.
      1. -1
        22 May 2024 21: 55
        Guidance system: inertial with radio correction and active radar homing at the final part of the trajectory, guidance head 9B-1388
        GOS capture range (in PPS), km: 30
        Well, what are they rich in... The EPR of the target is not indicated. I don’t know what kind of correction it is. But clearly not constant illumination like a semi-active seeker, since there is an inertial one. Most likely, they simply report the changing coordinates of the target. In the words “fly there, you’ll figure it out on the spot.” And the calculation for speed - they say, “it won’t go anywhere from the area.” Then it searches with its active locator. It’s interesting, of course, who didn’t hide, it’s not my fault.
        1. +1
          23 May 2024 01: 41
          Quote: dauria
          GOS capture range (in PPS), km: 30
          Well, what are they rich in... The EPR of the target is not indicated.

          ARGSN 9B-1103M-350 - target acquisition range with EPR 5m^2 - >= 40 km.
  7. +3
    22 May 2024 20: 16
    To meet the f-16, and everything else that flies, you first need AWACS aircraft
    1. -1
      22 May 2024 20: 49
      Quote: Victal
      To meet the f-16, and everything else that flies, you first need AWACS aircraft
      Why risk AWACS aircraft, of which there are only a few left, when there is a Mig-31BM, whose radar (Zaslon-M) is enough to detect and destroy F-16s even at long-range approaches?
      1. 0
        22 May 2024 21: 32
        On “distant approaches” - at what distance? I hope you won’t talk about 400 km and copy paste the mantra that 4 MiG-31s ​​are holding a front of 1000 km....

        I am against throwing hats.
        Everything is complicated and the F-16 is a serious adversary.
        And the photo is not particularly relevant to the case, but it carries information.
        1. -1
          22 May 2024 22: 19
          No one has verified the veracity of the writings in these pictures in practice, and the F-16 is far from being a Raptor, which no one is going to give to the Ukrainians, just like the F-35. The Western sponsors of the Kyiv junta also had high hopes for leopards, Abrams and other bayraktars, but in reality everything turned out to be very sad for them. I think history will repeat itself with the F-16.
        2. +1
          23 May 2024 01: 48
          Quote: Neo-9947
          And the photo is not particularly relevant to the case, but it carries information.

          What information does this photo convey?
  8. +1
    22 May 2024 20: 21
    The issue is not the missile's range. and in the radar and detection and tracking range of such a target as the F16.
    1. +1
      22 May 2024 20: 38
      Quote: Victor Sergeev
      The issue is not the missile's range. and in radar and detection and tracking range

      On the other side there are exactly the same questions.
  9. +3
    22 May 2024 20: 38
    Sorry, off topic.
    “The 33-year-old press secretary of the Russian Defense Minister Rossiyana Markovskaya left her post after seven years of work.”
    “In November 2017, at the age of 26, she took the post of press secretary of the former Minister of Defense - Secretary of the Russian Security Council Sergei Shoigu. At the same time, Markovskaya received the rank of State Advisor of the Russian Federation, 2nd class, which corresponds to the military ranks of lieutenant colonel and captain 2nd class. rank XNUMX."
    1. 0
      22 May 2024 21: 17
      That there is already a queue of people willing to employ such a valuable personnel?
    2. -1
      22 May 2024 21: 33
      Quote: Kotofeich
      the rank of State Advisor of the Russian Federation, 2nd class, which corresponds to the military ranks of lieutenant colonel and captain of the 2nd rank.

      This rank corresponds to Colonel General.
      Since this slippery topic has already been raised, write the truth.
      1. +1
        22 May 2024 21: 45
        Quote: Alex777
        so write the truth.

        Do you see the quotation marks? I quote the media. All questions to them.
        1. 0
          22 May 2024 22: 05
          Just count the stars on your shoulder straps. I have attached a photo.
          1. +1
            22 May 2024 22: 12
            I see the stars and I see the media:
            “Markovskaya has the rank of State Councilor of the Russian Federation, 2nd class, according to her page on the website of the Ministry of Defense.”
      2. +1
        22 May 2024 21: 54
        Quote: Alex777
        This rank corresponds to Colonel General.

        Read carefully
        application
        to the Presidential Decree
        Russian Federation
        dated February 1, 2005 N 113
        Colonel General is
        Valid State Advisor to the Russian Federation, Class 1
        1. -1
          22 May 2024 22: 09
          According to the table approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of February 1, 2005 No. 113, the class rank of an active state adviser of the Russian Federation 1st class corresponds to the military rank of army general (fleet admiral).

          You should not confuse Ruslan Ivanov (1st grade) with the press secretary (2nd grade).
          Not only is the topic not aviation, but you’re still being stubborn...
          1. +3
            22 May 2024 22: 28
            Alexander, I'm not stubborn But...
            Eats Actual State Advisor of the Russian Federation, 2nd class
            this is lieutenant general, vice admiral
            And, there is a State Advisor of the Russian Federation, 2nd class
            This is a lieutenant colonel, captain 2nd rank.
            Feel the difference.
            Oh, I already apologized for the topic.
            Will he apologize again?
            1. -1
              22 May 2024 22: 45
              The lady in the photo has 3 stars on her shoulder straps.
              If it's photoshop, then I'm glad. hi
            2. +1
              22 May 2024 23: 57
              Quote: Kotofeich
              Feel the difference.

              I already regretted getting involved in this discussion. feel
              I gave you advantages.
              1. +1
                23 May 2024 11: 16
                In short: hi drinks
                The text of your comment is too short and in the opinion of the site administration does not carry useful information.
                1. 0
                  23 May 2024 12: 18
                  Quote: Kotofeich
                  In short: hi drinks

                  drinks
          2. +1
            23 May 2024 01: 07
            He seemed to be Timur...
            1. +1
              23 May 2024 01: 23
              Quote: al3x
              He seemed to be Timur...

              You're right. When I realized that I was mistaken, it was no longer possible to correct it.
      3. 0
        23 May 2024 08: 38
        The uniform without a bra looks piquant. :))
    3. +4
      22 May 2024 21: 44
      If you want to take part in the fate of a lady, go to a dating site. This is about planes, not flights.
      1. 0
        22 May 2024 22: 05
        Quote: Captive
        This is about planes, not flights.

        Do you have trouble seeing without glasses?
        Quote: Kotofeich
        Sorry, off topic.
    4. +3
      23 May 2024 01: 10
      Naso...served, such things happen in this world. Cute cupcake secretary. Yes clearly a valuable shot
  10. -2
    22 May 2024 21: 08
    It would be better to first “met” the drones that are correcting the attacks on Crimea. Then the F-16s weren’t scary either. The Houthis somehow manage without the SU-30 just fine.
    1. -2
      22 May 2024 21: 47
      And guess what, they won’t be allowed to hit the F-16 either, so as not to upset their partners? This is tough.
      1. -1
        22 May 2024 22: 15
        Quite a non-zero probability.
  11. -1
    22 May 2024 21: 41
    They say the native repairmen have already been brought to the “Ridna Nenka”. The pilots are apparently still being caught in Europe. laughing
  12. 0
    22 May 2024 23: 29
    Quote: Victor Sergeev
    The issue is not the missile's range. and in the radar and detection and tracking range of such a target as the F16.

    Britons write that flyers with
    404 reported, P77-1, shot down even 100 km away. And the F-16 is American. will be supplied with AIM-120, range 100 of their miles
    1. 0
      23 May 2024 01: 59
      Quote: Strannik96
      And the F-16 is American. will be supplied with AIM-120, range 100 of their miles

      And the R-37M has a range of more than 170 miles.
    2. 0
      23 May 2024 16: 58
      A hundred or more km for p 77 and aim 120 is possible only if the target is attacked on a collision course and with a large excess over the target.
      1. +1
        24 May 2024 01: 08
        Quote: Calm_type
        A hundred or more km for p 77 and aim 120 is possible only if the target is attacked on a collision course and with a large excess over the target.

        On the contrary, with a slight excess of the target or at the same height. The launch, naturally, is at a high altitude. A rocket with a solid propellant rocket gains altitude over 30 km, flies there, and dives from there to the target. The lower the target, the denser the air, and the shorter the range.
        But here we are talking about the fact that if we compare, then we need to compare the same characteristics.
  13. 0
    22 May 2024 23: 40
    how many missiles are on the plane in the first photo?... 4?... 5?...
  14. +2
    23 May 2024 01: 03
    It’s high time to send a “hello” to the NATO intelligence officers circling the World Cup. NATO members will swallow it 100%.
  15. +1
    23 May 2024 03: 23
    When will they start building airfield caponiers? We are losing planes at their bases... Will anyone be responsible for this at all? Isn’t the negligence of officials too costly?
    1. -1
      23 May 2024 05: 22
      they will not be built, there is no such task
      1. +1
        23 May 2024 06: 48
        Thank you, cap)) Yes, it’s clear that no, otherwise they would have been built. But apparently there is a task to lose planes at airfields. They cope with this successfully
        1. 0
          23 May 2024 08: 01
          and there are no attempts to build it, so this decision has been made
  16. -1
    23 May 2024 06: 22
    Hello
    Here's an expert's opinion:

    I would like to comment on the news that the Russian Air Force is preparing Su-30SM2 fighters with R-37M missiles with a range of 300 km to combat F-16 fighters. But, there is a nuance on the Su-30 SM2 there is an on-board radar with a passive phased antenna array “Irbis-E” from the Su-35S. According to my data, during the entire period of the war there were no cases of Ukrainian fighters being shot down by Russian Su-35S at a distance of more than 120-140 km. According to experts, this circumstance is caused by the insufficient range of the Irbis-E radars. And, if the on-board radars of the “dryers” have not been modernized, then even a launch range of 150 km is a big problem. After all, in order to hit a target with an R-37M missile at a distance of 300 km, a fighter must detect the target at such a distance and fire the missile at the target area.
    I will say from experience that the characteristics from the manufacturer are very different from the real ones.
    1. 2al
      0
      23 May 2024 14: 47
      Ministry of Defense report dated 21.10.23/24/200 “A Ukrainian Su-XNUMX aircraft was shot down by fighter aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces near the city of Odessa.” This is more than XNUMX km from LBS.
    2. 0
      23 May 2024 17: 02
      Three hundred kilometers is the range of a non-targeted launch.
      1. +1
        24 May 2024 01: 00
        Quote: Calm_type
        Three hundred kilometers is the range of a non-targeted launch.

        “Non-targeted launch” - what is this essence?
    3. +1
      24 May 2024 00: 58
      Quote: Buskan
      Here's an expert's opinion:

      The expert is that you? The expert is full of mistakes.
      Blooper No. 1:
      Quote: Buskan
      with R-37M missiles, the destruction range of which is 300 km

      Blooper No. 2:
      Quote: Buskan
      The Su-30 SM2 has an onboard radar with a passive phased antenna array "Irbis-E"

      Blooper No. 3:
      Quote: Buskan
      According to experts, this circumstance is caused by the insufficient range of the Irbis-E radars.

      Please bring at least one of these specialists. I wonder who it is.
      Blooper No. 4:
      Quote: Buskan
      After all, in order to hit a target with an R-37M missile at a distance of 300 km, a fighter must detect the target at such a distance and fire the missile at the target area.
  17. 0
    23 May 2024 08: 53
    Whoever sees who the fastest, AWACS aircraft or something else, while remaining unnoticed, is a great guy. And so a rocket can have any excellent characteristics, but if you don’t see anyone, then you won’t be able to use it.
  18. 2al
    -1
    23 May 2024 15: 04
    Long-range explosive missiles, like missile defense systems, can be aimed at radiation sources in a passive detection mode. So the aircraft may simply be a platform for launching missiles, for example, the Indians are now working to modernize the air-based BrahMos on the Su-30MKI for use as a long-range explosive missile, using it as the first stage to deliver missiles with a seeker to the target area.
  19. 0
    24 May 2024 01: 26
    As everyone understands, the one who sees the enemy first will win in an air battle. Surely the F-16 is being prepared for a meeting with Russian aircraft, and the quality of the radars is decisive in this matter.
    1. +1
      16 June 2024 09: 21
      It is unlikely that it will come to air combat laughing. Somewhere there is an OTRK operator Iskander M, aiming a cluster warhead at the airfield. I see the goal! Start confirmation! Start and presses the red button, and after a couple of seconds the main engine starts, the rocket soars up 500 km along a quasi-ballistic trajectory. It's gone and there is no airfield or F-16 pilot training center with instructors lol
  20. -2
    24 May 2024 06: 23
    Quote: Comet
    Quote: Buskan
    Here's an expert's opinion:

    The expert is that you? The expert is full of mistakes.
    Blooper No. 1:
    Quote: Buskan
    with R-37M missiles, the destruction range of which is 300 km

    Blooper No. 2:
    Quote: Buskan
    The Su-30 SM2 has an onboard radar with a passive phased antenna array "Irbis-E"

    Blooper No. 3:
    Quote: Buskan
    According to experts, this circumstance is caused by the insufficient range of the Irbis-E radars.

    Please bring at least one of these specialists. I wonder who it is.
    Blooper No. 4:
    Quote: Buskan
    After all, in order to hit a target with an R-37M missile at a distance of 300 km, a fighter must detect the target at such a distance and fire the missile at the target area.

    The expert is Agil Rustam Zadeh.
    1. +2
      24 May 2024 23: 46
      Quote: Buskan
      The expert is Agil Rustam Zadeh

      What kind of an expert is he, if you can see from his mistakes
      that he doesn’t understand anything about this topic? And who are the mentioned “specialists”?
      Z.Y. Do the listed blunders need to be sorted out? Or is everything clear?
  21. 0
    24 May 2024 15: 21
    I wonder, in those air battles that happen on our own, do they all take place at the maximum missile launch range, or did it come down to maneuver combat?
    1. +1
      24 May 2024 23: 51
      Quote: lazy
      and in those air battles that happen on their own, they all take place at the maximum missile launch range

      The missiles are launched in the zone in which the PR command is issued - launch is permitted.
      Quote: lazy
      or it came down to maneuverable combat

      It came to pass.