Waiting for a miracle that most likely won't happen

86 773 227
Waiting for a miracle that most likely won't happen


"Will it fly or not?" - this question is asked in two countries on both sides of the Pacific Ocean. That is, in the USA and in China. Moreover, they are asking about the same aircraft, meaning not so much the fact of whether it will fly or not, but how it will fly. This point is much more important.



We already reviewed the J-20 when it first appeared, and, it must be said, there was little that was positive.

The Chengdu J-20 is a large (length 23 m) and heavy (takeoff weight up to 40 tons) canard fighter, created far from the most advanced technologies. You could say that "I cobbled it together from what was there." And it was largely from the MiG-1.44/MFI 1.44 prototype, data on which somehow ended up in China.






IFI 1.44



J-20

The fact that the J-20 is in many ways outrageously similar to the MFI 1.44 has been said more than enough. The Chinese aircraft also has a delta wing with extensions and an all-moving canard. The vertical tail is two all-moving vertical stabilizers, widely spaced in terms of inclination to the sides. The layout is the same as the MFI 1.44, and the dimensions are almost the same. But here's what "almost" is.

Our aircraft had a larger wing, which obviously provided better maneuverability. Plus 1.44 was much lighter than the Chinese aircraft, and even the lack of weapons could not be discounted: the difference in maximum weight reached almost 20 tons.

There were some differences: the Chinese made the tail fins collapse, their own configuration of the canard wings and wing extensions. And they ripped off a little from the Americans: the nose section (many noted) was copied from the F-22A, the air intakes and canopy design are from the F-35.


Overall, it turned out to be an ugly aircraft, cobbled together not only from solutions by designers from different countries, but also taken from aircraft of different generations. And the Chinese will clearly have to not only regret many of these borrowings, but rather work hard to correct and modernize them.

Especially if we are talking about the popular stealth. No, the J-20's shape is very similar to something stealthy, but its content... Let's be honest: the aerodynamic design with a canard for a stealth aircraft is not the best solution. The canard and ventral ridges increase the aircraft's radar signature, and there is no easy way to fix this.

The air intakes, "copied" from the F-35, will also cause a desire to redesign them over time. While the J-20 flew on the frankly weak WS-10A, this did not affect it at all, but it was detrimental from the start, because the F-35 was not planned for high speeds, especially at many Machs at supersonic speeds. Yes, the shape of the air intakes will allow for the installation of larger, and therefore more powerful, engines, but this does not mean that the aircraft will immediately fly faster.

Although... it's hard to say what could be worse than the WS-10A with its disgusting dynamics and low stability in different operating modes. Plus, this engine has almost no service life. Because no matter what you put in place of the WS-10A, everything will be fine.

In general, in China, pilots were waiting for the WS-15 like manna from heaven, work on which began in the 90s of the last century, and the refinement was going on from the moment of the first launch in 2006. Let's draw conclusions, because perhaps we have waited for it.


Of course, it is impossible to get a clear picture of the J-20A equipped with Chinese-made WS-15 engines. There, in the Celestial Empire, they know how to keep secrets very well. Although the appearance of a photo of the J-20A with engines different from the original ones in American military magazines suggests that not everything is as wonderful as Comrade Dong Jun would like. Or, on the contrary, everything is going according to plan, it is difficult to say now. But now it is becoming clear that the most significant drawback of the J-20 - its power plant - is on the way to being eliminated. Unless, of course, this is an attempt to deceive and confuse everyone.

The photo in question began to spread widely on social networks last weekend. It shows a prototype J-20A with serial number 2052 on a runway in an unknown location. It is quite possible that this is the main test airfield of the manufacturer Chengdu in the city of Chengdu. Evil tongues in the United States claim that there are two aircraft with the number 2052, one flying, with old engines, the second - with non-existent ones. But in the photo, the fighter is visible from behind, which allows you to examine in detail the nozzles of the turbofan engines, which do not look like WS-10A or even WS-10G. Is this really a WS-15? It is quite possible. The fact that the aircraft is covered with a characteristic yellow primer, which is applied before the final paint, adds credibility. That is, as is, one of the prototypes.

The J-20A is an advanced single-seat version of the baseline J-20, with changes that include a revised fuselage shape, including a reprofiled nose cone, a deeper bulge, and a slightly raised cockpit, as well as WS-15 engines. The extra space in the tail is likely intended to accommodate avionics and/or fuel. Meanwhile, the new engines will definitely require modified intakes with a slightly smaller bulge (DSI intake design) on the leading edge to optimize airflow, at least according to the American specialists who designed the original intake.

The thrust-to-weight ratio of the J-20 is low, and it clearly lags behind the Su-57, the F-22A, the Su-35S, and even the Su-30. The chances that Russia will sell more powerful engines for the J-20 are slim. Unless, perhaps, within a solid batch of Su-35s. Here, of course, there are options - Russia can supply more engines than aircraft if the deal is concluded. And turn a blind eye to the fact that some of them are not being used for their intended purpose.

But this will not solve the Chinese problems, because more than 20 J-300s with “first period” engines have already been produced.


And this, by the way, is 600 engines. With a limited resource, and in general the resource of any engine is limited to a certain number of working hours. And such a huge number of engines will have to be replaced as their resource ends. Accordingly, supplies from Russia will not solve this problem. So until there is a reliable and powerful Chinese engine, any developments on the new generation will be nothing more than child's play.

So the actual appearance of the WS-15 is a real step forward for the Chinese aviation. If this really happened, because it has been noted that this is often the case: Chinese aviation photos are published several months or even a year after they were taken. What is, is.

Regardless of when the photo was taken, it certainly gives a good view of the J-20A's WS-15 turbofan engines, engines that are expected to significantly close the gap between Chinese fighters and their newest Western counterparts.

As early as March 2022, reports said that a J-20 with a WS-15 engine had flown, although it was known that only one of these engines was installed, which is common for early tests. The second was a Russian AL-31, which is generally understandable, and in the event of something happening, it was our engine that was hoped to save the prototype.

In December 2022, images of serial number 2051 emerged online, an example of a J-20A variant that was expected to receive the WS-15. However, J-20A serial number 2052 was reported to have flown with WS-15 engines installed in June 2023, when photos and videos of the test flight began circulating on social media.


The first photographs of the J-20A with the WS-15 engine were of poor quality, with the exhaust stacks darkened, making it difficult to definitively determine whether the aircraft actually had new engines installed or whether it retained the previously installed WS-10 series turbofans.

Or, in general, it is worth remembering that the J-20 prototypes and the first production models were equipped with Russian-made AL-31 turbofan engines. That is, one model was equipped with a whole bunch of engines: WS-10A, WS-10B, WS-10C, WS-10G, AL-31 and, finally, WS-15. And it is not always possible to distinguish one from the other.

As for the WS-15, there are few reliable facts about it. So far, no photos or videos demonstrating the engine, or even a full-scale model, have appeared publicly. The media operate exclusively with figures, also of unclear origin (links lead to the School of Mechanical Engineering of Shandong University), which indicate that the WS-15 thrust should be from 150 kN, which is generally less than that of Russian and American engines, but more than that of Chinese ones (there, depending on the modification, from 120 to 140 kN).

By the way, it is absolutely impossible to see the mechanization controlling the thrust vector change in the WS-15 in the photo, despite the fact that the WS-10G variant already had a thrust vector control. And the pictures show an engine with a standard nozzle.

This does not mean that the WS-15 does not have a UVT, the initial tests (although - since 2006, so to speak) can be carried out without a UVT, installing all the control mechanics later is not a big problem, the only question is exactly what was not installed right away.

And it turns out that the only advantage of the WS-15 over the WS-10 is its greater thrust. Yes, 2 kgf is quite decent, it is at the level of the F-000, whose Pratt & Whitney F22-PW-119 produces approximately the same 100 kgf, but has a vertical thrust booster and a non-afterburning mode of 15 kgf for the so-called "supercruise". So the Chinese comrades have something to think about: the F-000, with all its disadvantages, can fly for quite a long time with a full combat load at supersonic speeds without using afterburners. Whether the J-10 will be able to fly like that is a big question for a large aircraft.

Thrust at the level of the Raptor and Su-57 is quite good, but in terms of efficiency/range, stealth and maneuverability - here there are more questions than answers.

Kind of a side note, but thrust is not what makes an engine good for supersonic cruising. It's all in the package. But what sets the F119 apart from other engines for the better is that it has very high exhaust velocity/energy without afterburner, meaning it gets the aircraft up to high speed and beyond with relatively low fuel consumption, and even into supersonic flight. This in turn allows it to have a small engine and intake area and achieve high supersonic speeds with normal thrust.

To achieve this, the engine must have very low bypass (since the bypass air moves very slowly), and this requires very high turbine inlet pressures and temperatures while achieving decent efficiency. The F119 has one of the lowest bypass ratios of any modern fighter engine, at 0,3:1.

And here the main question is not whether China has created an engine with a thrust of more than 15 kgf. This is not the most difficult thing, the question is whether they did it on a reliable and sufficiently efficient engine with a sufficiently "hot" exhaust for high-speed (M000+) cruising flight. And here there are many doubts.

If you look at the American assessments, and at the beginning of each year the Pentagon publishes a report, including on the military power of China, as its main potential adversary, then this year there were expectations that due to the WS-15 engines the J-20 will be able to obtain that very coveted ability for supersonic cruising flight and increase the capabilities in terms of combat load of the internal compartments.

But overall, the generals are calm. “It’s not something to lose a lot of sleep over,” U.S. Air Force Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach, head of Pacific Air Forces, told reporters in September 2022. “We’re certainly watching them closely and seeing how they evolve.”

But we know that a certain degree of self-confidence is characteristic of the American military. However, cases of deep disappointment, starting from the same 2022, have occurred among the US military,

At the same time, the J-20 engine upgrade is not the only program underway to expand the aircraft's capabilities. The two-seat J-20B is currently undergoing testing, and information has leaked regarding this aircraft that one of its functions will be to control drones. It all looks quite logical, adding a second crew member would make the J-20 more suitable for this task. There is no doubt that China will be able to develop and build wingman drones, and upgrading the aircraft to control a flock of wingmen would place the J-20B in a unique niche among existing fifth-generation fighters, because the only one that has demonstrated anything in this direction so far is the Russian Su-57. And the American NGAD platform so far looks more like a goose with broken wings.

The development of the WS-15 is critically important for China. Significant achievements in the country's aircraft engine industry are the key to the development of aviation in particular and the country's defense capability in general. The development of modern, highly efficient jet engines has long been the Achilles heel of China's aerospace industry. The aircraft industry has long relied on Russian-supplied engines, but if the Chinese industry can put its own engines on stream, this will have an extremely positive effect on China's aviation industry.

And if Chinese engines of their own design can become equal to Russian and American ones in terms of reliability and durability... Then the gates of the world aircraft market will open wide for China, where China has so far sometimes pushed its aircraft in the category "for the poorest".

But for this to happen, a miracle must really happen. And as practice shows, it is not obliged to do so. The fact that the WS-15 seems to have taken its rightful place does not mean that everything is as rosy as we would like. Twenty years of war for the engine among Chinese aircraft engineers indicate that the path is still far from its end.
227 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. + 16
    12 September 2024 04: 10
    The Chinese also like to surprise their partners with not always correct characteristics of their weapons, so it is often difficult to determine the real capabilities and effectiveness of this or that weapon. Time will tell whether the aircraft is good or bad, and the Chinese can already make a new aircraft under the cover of the noise.....
    1. +1
      12 September 2024 09: 06
      The fact that the engine has failed does not mean that it exists. If it needs to be removed and overhauled after almost every flight, it is the same as if it does not exist. And not a word about the resource, and even if the Chinese had named the numbers, it is not at all necessary that they were not lying.
  2. + 20
    12 September 2024 04: 21
    The Chinese will get their way anyway...sooner or later.
    1. +7
      12 September 2024 06: 28
      The Chinese will get their way anyway...sooner or later
      With such persistence as theirs, they will definitely achieve it!
    2. +2
      12 September 2024 12: 08
      I agree,
      but again everything comes down to a resource of no more than 500 hours = 1,5 months
      our AL-41F before PPR = 4 hours
      1. +8
        13 September 2024 10: 46
        Quote: Romario_Argo
        but again everything comes down to a resource of no more than 500 hours = 1,5 months

        We are talking about flight time, not calendar time.
        At one time, the Su-7B engine life was about 50 engine hours, but the aircraft was in service, the engines were simply changed often and taken in for repairs. And 500 hours for a start - the life is not so bad (for the Chinese), considering that they will continue to work on the engine and its life.
        For reference - WS-15 is based on the prototype R-279V-300 purchased from the Russian Federation at an exhibition (developed for the promising VTOL Yak-201, estimated thrust 18 \ t500 kgf). Now we are successfully testing the further development of this engine R-12V-000, and during bench tests it has already developed a thrust of 579 kgf. with afterburner, with an estimated 300 kgf. . Its maximum estimated thrust without afterburner is 24 kgf.
        In addition to the J-20, this engine (WS-15) is planned to be used on the promising Chinese VTOL aircraft, which they have been dreaming about and working on since the late 90s. And it looks like we will soon see this VTOL aircraft. And naval carriers for such VTOL aircraft are already being built in full swing - Type. 075 and Type. 076.
      2. 0
        15 September 2024 10: 53
        That's more than a thousand sorties!
  3. + 30
    12 September 2024 04: 22
    And if Chinese engines of their own design can become equal to Russian and American ones in terms of reliability and durability...

    The road will be mastered by the one who walks it. If they mastered electronics, they will master mechanics... They just need to study strength of materials and get involved in nanotechnology in the production of new materials (materials with better characteristics)... There (in China) is an immeasurable amount of money, and the people are countless, and the CPC believes that the people should have the right to benefit from natural resources, and the personal income tax there is up to 45%.
    Moreover, persistence and perseverance allow Chinese industry to produce goods of different quality at different prices, rather than buying at low prices and selling at exorbitant prices...
    But for this to happen, a miracle must actually happen. And as practice shows, it is not obliged to do so.

    It doesn’t have to come true, but haven’t we seen a miracle in the fact that a once great power has become a buyer of the same Chinese consumer goods that our domestic economic luminaries couldn’t crawl or reach?
    1. + 18
      12 September 2024 04: 56
      Quote: ROSS 42
      Didn't we see a miracle in the fact that a once great power became a buyer of the same Chinese consumer goods that our domestic economic luminaries couldn't even crawl or reach?

      Didn't we see a miracle (yes, completely negative and unimaginable, practically impossible, and therefore precisely a miracle), when a great power was brought down below the baseboard and torn apart by its own leadership? And it is not even clear whether it was out of malicious intentions, or "they wanted the best, but it turned out as always" (c).
      1. + 11
        12 September 2024 07: 44
        Quote: Nagan
        And it’s not even clear whether it was out of malicious intentions, or “they wanted the best, but it turned out as always” (c).

        They did it fraudulently, like thieves... If they wanted the best, it was only for themselves (and their whores).
        1. +7
          12 September 2024 09: 01
          If we assume that the marked one did it intentionally, then the question arises "why"? Having unlimited power in one of the only two existing superpowers, and albeit the smaller and worse, but half of the world, deliberately exchange it for the fate of even a billionaire (although whether it was a lard, who knows - it wasn't because he had a good life that he signed up to advertise McDonald's or something, I don't remember anymore), but far from the richest and most influential of them, even in Russia, how much do you have to be [moderated]? Rather, he started out of thoughtlessness, then dug in his heels, not admitting his mistakes, hoping to break through to where there really was no way (like socialism with a "human face"), and when it was already impossible to turn back, that's when he tried to jump from the presidency to the billionaires.
          But Yeltsin and Kravchuk acted deliberately; they had no chance of becoming the first persons without the collapse of the USSR, but they really wanted to, at any cost.
          1. +2
            12 September 2024 10: 55
            The existence of the USSR and the fate of Gorbachev depended on Yeltsin, not on Kravchuk or Shushkevich.
          2. 0
            4 January 2025 08: 12
            The state had systemic problems, no one could solve them, the states offered to surrender - the Soviet leadership could not refuse.
    2. 0
      12 September 2024 08: 28
      Of course it is correct. The Chinese are persistent guys, but it will not replace the school of aircraft engine building. The USSR (Russia) and the USA started in the late 40s of the last century, with British engines, i.e. almost 80 years ago. Do the Chinese want to run this way in 20 years?)))
      1. + 10
        12 September 2024 08: 31
        Quote: TermNachTER
        The Chinese are persistent guys, but they are no substitute for an aviation engine building school.

        Do you think that there are any schools left in Russia? But as for me, everything has long been eradicated and filled with gymnasiums...
        1. -1
          13 September 2024 07: 59
          On the issue of schools:
          TermNachTer
          Yesterday, 11: 10
          New
          ...I am interested myself, since I work at an aircraft engine plant.
      2. +5
        12 September 2024 10: 57
        Do the Chinese want to cover this distance in 20 years?

        We've already run through...
        1. +1
          12 September 2024 11: 10
          We haven't run it yet. Let's see what the real performance characteristics of this engine will be. Then we'll be able to draw some conclusions. Not global ones, of course, but at least rough ones. I'm interested myself, since I work at an aircraft engine plant.
          1. +3
            12 September 2024 11: 13
            So the real data are already given - the thrust at full afterburner is 15 kg, like the F900 engine. And in the future, they plan to increase the thrust of this engine to 119 kg, like the F18...
            1. 0
              12 September 2024 11: 15
              Traction is good))) but what about fuel consumption? but what about engine life? but what about maintainability?
              An experimental model, which was assembled manually by mechanics and jewelers from the institute, and a production engine, which was assembled by ordinary workers at the factory, are not quite the same thing.
              1. +3
                12 September 2024 11: 18
                Traction is good))) but what about fuel consumption? but what about engine life? but what about maintainability?

                There is no doubt that the Chinese are lagging behind the Americans in these parameters. FOR NOW - THEY ARE LAGGING. Here are the data on the F135:
                https://airwar.ru/enc/engines/f135.html
                1. +1
                  12 September 2024 11: 28
                  Why do I need the USA? I already know that Pratt & Whitney makes excellent engines. We are talking about China. It is not just that they are lagging behind, but by how much? Well, they made a super engine with a resource of 100 hours (conditionally). That is, every month we remove two engines from the aircraft and take them for repairs? How many sets of engines do we need for each car - 3? How many people and machines are needed to carry out "major repairs"? How many foundry furnaces are needed to obtain castings? It only seems easy and simple from the outside. From the inside - it is very difficult and expensive.
                  1. +5
                    12 September 2024 11: 33
                    It's not just that they are lagging behind, but by how much?

                    You should ask the CIA. They should know... smile
                    Well, they made a super engine with a resource of 100 hours (conditionally). That is, every month we remove two engines from the board and take them for repairs? How many sets of engines do we need for each machine - 3? How many people and machines are needed to carry out "major repairs"? How many foundry furnaces are needed to obtain castings?

                    And on what basis is this "panic attack"?!
                    It only seems easy and simple from the outside. From the inside, it is very difficult and expensive.

                    The key word is EXPENSIVE. When you have money, then everything is inexpensive. And when you don't have it, then everything is expensive. China has overtaken the US in GDP, and that's why it's "cheap" for it. And since the CPC rules there undividedly, it spends as much as it considers necessary and on what it considers necessary.
                    1. -1
                      12 September 2024 12: 38
                      With the level of secrecy in China, even the CIA, is basically guessing at the tea leaves. This is not a panic attack - this is a tiny piece of problems, with a "raw" engine. As for the money - I have not heard of yuan being installed in an airplane instead of an engine.
                      1. +5
                        12 September 2024 12: 40
                        The best specialists are bought for money all over the world - in the US, the EU, etc. And they are already developing science and technology in China.
                        Everything is more than simple.
                      2. +2
                        12 September 2024 12: 42
                        They buy individual specialists, not a school. A school can only be created, but that takes years and people.
                      3. +2
                        12 September 2024 12: 45
                        When they buy HUNDREDS of specialists, they create schools - in China. The only question is the amount of money available.
                      4. +4
                        12 September 2024 16: 54
                        Well, they don't buy hundreds. Such specialists are rare, they are raised for decades. You can buy young and impetuous ones, but there are still years ahead and again - who will teach them. School is generations that pass on experience from one to another, and not a crowd of yesterday's students.
                      5. +1
                        12 September 2024 16: 55
                        Well, they don't buy hundreds.

                        With a GDP of $31 trillion a year?!
                      6. +3
                        12 September 2024 17: 17
                        I have said more than once that GDP is such a tricky little figure that you can juggle it any way you like. And the Chinese economy is a very closed system, about which only what the Chinese themselves want to voice is known. And what they want - only they know.
                      7. +7
                        12 September 2024 17: 21
                        The Chinese have created two stealth fighters, are building a fleet of 500 J-20 stealths, have built three aircraft carriers and are building a fourth, a fleet of nuclear submarines, have built a manned space station, have landed a device on the far side of the Moon, are planning to land on the surface of the Moon by 2030, etc., etc. If all of this is not an indicator for someone, one can only shrug their shoulders...
                      8. 0
                        12 September 2024 17: 28
                        The Chinese built two aircraft carriers. The hull of the Varyag was made in Nikolaev. That's why the Chinese were able to make aircraft carriers, because along with the Varyag they sold the documentation for both the Varyag and the Ulyanovsk. By the way, the GTZ is Chinese - they are also from Nikolaev. I wrote about the Chinese nuclear submarines, if you want - you can read it. They are still a long way from the world level, although I will not deny - they are progressing a lot. When they build 500 J-20, then we will discuss it, for now - this is from the realm of good intentions. I will not say anything about the Moon, this area is not particularly interesting to me.
                      9. +3
                        12 September 2024 17: 30
                        ...although I won’t deny it - they are progressing a lot.

                        Extrapolate this progress?
                        When they build 500 J-20s, then we'll have a discussion.

                        They have already built more than 200 of them!! There is no doubt that they will fulfill the plan, and the last 200 with new powerful engines.
                      10. +1
                        12 September 2024 17: 41
                        So far, their progress is weak, both qualitatively and quantitatively. Intelligent experts, Western ones, say that they are now somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd generations.
                        In terms of quantity, they are on par with England and France. In terms of quality, they are even weaker. The only thing is that the British "estuaries" are not worth the price of admission, I don't know for what reasons. But "on paper" the English ones are definitely better.
                        Whether they built 200 or not is information from China. Remember how Sun Tzu wrote - if you are weak, pretend to be strong. And I repeat, if you change engines on them every month, how many of them will actually be "in service"? They talk about a thrust of 15 tons, but who has seen this, except for the Chinese themselves?
                      11. +5
                        12 September 2024 17: 52
                        So far, their progress is weak, both qualitatively and quantitatively. Intelligent experts, Western ones, say that they are now somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd generations.

                        ?? Between 2nd and 3rd generation fighters?? It's not even funny - it's an absurd and ridiculous lie. J-20 and FC-31 are 5th generation aircraft, J-10 is 4th. And there are a lot of Russian 4th generation replicants. IMPROVED - IN CHINA, aircraft radars with AESA have long been put "on stream".
                        Whether they built 200 or not is information from China.

                        This is information from the CIA. An airplane is not a needle, they all are counted perfectly from space...
                        Remember how Sun Tzu wrote: if you are weak, pretend to be strong.

                        That's absolutely true! And he also said: "If you are strong, pretend to be weak."
                        And I repeat, if the engines are changed every month, how many of them will actually be “in service”?

                        And who said that they have a resource of 50 hours?? This is a fairy tale.
                        They talk about a 15 ton thrust, but who has seen that except the Chinese themselves?

                        Intelligence officers of all countries. This is their job.
                        .................................
                        Why go far for examples? When did the generals convince Putin that they would be able to take Ukraine in a matter of weeks? Haven't they read Sun Tzu?!
                        Don't underestimate your opponent, it's more than harmful! am
                      12. +2
                        12 September 2024 19: 07
                        1. Between 2 and 3 generations - this is about the EPL.
                        2. It is visible from space))) and what is visible? What engines, what electronic filling? Focus is almost 100 years old - before the satellite flyby, either everything is removed, or, on the contrary, everything is rolled out, depending on what effect is achieved.
                        And how do you know what their resource is? For example, I know that VK - 2500 has a designated resource of 5000 hours, Zaporozhye TV - 3 - 117 - 6000 hours, the Chinese analogue has 1000 hours, but in reality they last 800 - 900 hours. So it has been copied for 30 years. And it is a little simpler from a design point of view.
                      13. +1
                        12 September 2024 20: 29
                        If you are convinced that the Chinese have not made any progress in the resource over the past 30 years, 20 years, 10 years, 5 years - "there is no help for the grief"...
                      14. +1
                        12 September 2024 21: 23
                        I'm sure it's because it's a Chinese "designer with crazy hands", the last time we took it apart was a few months ago - all the same defects. Nothing has changed.
                      15. 0
                        12 September 2024 21: 25
                        Where was the package addressed? Was it by any chance "Houston, Texas"? NO?!
                      16. -1
                        12 September 2024 21: 45
                        What parcel are you talking about?
                      17. +1
                        12 September 2024 21: 47
                        Which Chinese "constructor" did you disassemble and where?
                      18. 0
                        13 September 2024 09: 01
                        I'll tell you about this a little later, it's not worth it now.
                      19. 0
                        13 September 2024 00: 20
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        ?? Between 2nd and 3rd generation fighters?? It's not even funny - it's an absurd and ridiculous lie. J-20 and FC-31 are 5th generation aircraft

                        What is there except for the semblance of the 5th generation form? The Chinese do not know how to make aviation composites, do not know how to make engines. Does the PRC army have a satellite group to provide an analogue of GPS, broadband communications similar to Link 16, network centricity of all branches of the armed forces? By the way, the Chinese in Tibet burned their "5th generation" to the Indians, who observed their maneuvers from their Sukhoi 30s, noted that the Chinese are very clearly visible on the Bars radar. The AFAR of the J-20 is also far from AN / APG-77. I believe that the Chinese are certainly working full steam ahead on their program and developing individual elements for the future 5th generation. But those 200 that they made are not the 5th generation, most likely the Chinese decided to do what is possible and can be used as a fighter if necessary. But in the future they will put radars and engines and everything else on them of a different level.
                      20. 0
                        13 September 2024 00: 42
                        By the way, the Chinese in Tibet burned their "5th generation" to the Indians, who were watching their maneuvers from their Sukhoi 30s, and noted that the Chinese were very clearly visible on the Bars radar.

                        This is what the Indians saw in Tibet - the Luneberg lens clusters that are on every Chinese J-20 (and every American F-32, F-35 and B-2) - but for some reason they are not on the Su-57 images?
                      21. +1
                        13 September 2024 00: 46
                        The J-20's AESA is also far from the AN/APG-77.

                        Who said? APG-77 was created almost 30 years ago, it is a whole era for the development of radio electronics. It was time to steal.
                        But those 200 that they made are not the 5th generation.

                        Who said? Americans say 5th.
                        But in the future they will install radars, engines and everything else on a different level.

                        In the future, everything will be different for everyone.
                      22. +1
                        22 September 2024 00: 15
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        Who said? APG-77 was created almost 30 years ago

                        Stop writing simply. Because everything you write is kindergarten. The picture of the F-35 radar can be seen on the Internet, if you find me a similar picture from 30 years ago, where we will see on the screens essentially a video picture in real time of the BBT at a distance of over 200 km generated by the radar, I will delete my account on VO. It's the same as comparing the latest B92 engine with the B2, because it was invented 100 years ago, or engines based on a 40-year-old 2,5L block on the latest E-Class MB. And this is the essence of all your comments. Chinese aircraft of the 5th generation type are not the 5th generation. Because the criteria of the 5th generation are not the kindergarten that you and others like you are building, but this, I repeat, is a radar with AFAR, this is broadband communication, this is network centricity of all branches of the armed forces and, of course, maximum stealth. The Chinese still can't master the construction of a medium-range passenger aircraft, even with engines from the West, what the hell is the 5th generation.
                      23. +1
                        21 September 2024 23: 04
                        The fans of Chinese consumer goods have crawled out, having seen modern production only in their dreams. And was the photo of the Chinese on the right taken in Tibet too? These lenses are installed on each one when there are many eyes, so that the signature is not removed. In Tibet, as I understand it, they conducted exercises and they needed to simulate combat conditions. At least you cannot claim that these lenses were installed on the Chinese counterfeit of the 5th generation.
                      24. -1
                        13 September 2024 00: 02
                        As for the submarines, they are now squeezing the Russian Federation for technology, today I listened to one rather competent German uncle on this issue. In his opinion, the Russian Federation has already left them everything else, submarine technology remains, where they are really decades behind the West, or at the 2nd generation. The Russian Federation is 3rd, maybe the USA, Germany 4th. The PRC fleet is large only in terms of quantity, it has even caught up with the USA, but in terms of tonnage it is 2 times smaller, or on average each PRC ship is 2 times lighter than an American one.
                      25. +1
                        13 September 2024 00: 51
                        As for the submarines, they are now squeezing the Russian Federation for technology, today I listened to one rather competent German uncle on this issue. In his opinion, the Russian Federation has already left them everything else, the submarine technologies are left,

                        Who is this amazing specialist, can you provide a link?
                      26. 0
                        22 September 2024 00: 19
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        Who is this amazing specialist?

                        This is Torsten Heinrich. Politician, Military historian. But to listen to him you need to understand German. But if you understand German, you will quickly understand his level of competence.
                      27. -4
                        12 September 2024 16: 58
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        When they buy HUNDREDS of specialists, they create schools - in China. The only question is the amount of money available.

                        laughing laughing laughing What field of activity do you work in? In trade or in a bank? You have no engineering education, no idea about engineering activity, not even a word, since you have such a fairy-tale idea in your head about it... wassat
                      28. +3
                        12 September 2024 17: 01
                        Smiled! laughing It is always a pleasure to deal with an academician, even if he is wearing Pavka Korchagin's Budyonovka... lol Do you have a saber on your side? And a Mauser?!
                      29. -4
                        12 September 2024 17: 04
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        Made me smile! It's always nice to deal with an academician, even if he's wearing Pavka Korchagin's Budenovka... Do you have a saber on your side? And a Mauser?!

                        I am a surveyor engineer by my first education and a mining engineer (mine surveyor) by my second. I work as a chief surveyor. And you?
                      30. +4
                        12 September 2024 17: 09
                        I graduated from the Barnaul Higher Military Pilot School in 1973, spent the next 15 years as a pilot instructor at the Chelyabinsk Higher Military Pilot School, and the last 7 years as a teacher at the Department of Aviation Radio-Electronic Equipment at the same school. Now, naturally, I am retired. Oh, and before the school, I spent two years as a student at the Kemerovo KuzPI, GR, development of mineral ore deposits, a colleague... lol
                      31. -1
                        13 September 2024 06: 18
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        colleague...

                        It's strange... And you seriously think that all the issues can be resolved by simply throwing money at them? And an engineering school will immediately appear out of nowhere?
                      32. +3
                        13 September 2024 06: 41
                        And you seriously think that all the issues can be resolved by simply throwing money at them? And an engineering school will immediately appear out of nowhere?

                        I can repeat my opinion personally for you once again: China, 30-40 years ago, began to purposefully, constantly and throughout the civilized world to hire/invite/recruit highly qualified scientists and engineers, creating excellent working and living conditions for them, paying them salaries much higher than they could earn in their countries of origin. And thus, DOZENS of new research institutes, new laboratories, new pilot production facilities, NEW SCIENTIFIC SCHOOLS were created. The invited scientists began to teach at Chinese universities and prepare scientific and engineering personnel for China. And over the past 40-35 years, this has yielded magnificent, brilliant results. Which is completely natural and very wise. And not at all "STUPIDLY", as you for some reason believe.
                        There were not even HUNDREDS of such scientists and engineers. There were THOUSANDS of them. And this process is not finished, it continues, although with less intensity - a lot of our own highly professional personnel has been trained. And yes, of course, our own scientific and engineering schools have been created - how could it be otherwise?!
                        ......................
                        If you still disagree with me, well, please accept my deepest and most sincere condolences, colleague... lol
                      33. -1
                        13 September 2024 07: 13
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        And over the past 40-35 years this has given magnificent results

                        So this is the creation of our own engineering school! You forgot to mention the thousands of Chinese students who received an education in the best universities in the West and returned to work in the country!
                      34. +1
                        13 September 2024 07: 42
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        And over the past 40-35 years this has produced magnificent...

                        So this is the creation of our own engineering school! You forgot to mention the thousands of Chinese students who received an education in the best universities in the West and returned to work in the country!

                        So this is a trivial, understandable and self-evident thing.
                        But this is incomprehensible:
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        When they buy HUNDREDS of specialists, they create schools - in China. The only question is the amount of money available.

                        laughing laughing laughing What field of activity do you work in? In trade or in a bank? You have no engineering education, no idea about engineering activity, not even a word, since you have such a fairy-tale idea in your head about it...
                      35. 0
                        13 September 2024 08: 23
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        But this is incomprehensible:

                        laughing There was a misunderstanding. I understood your words as - we will now buy hundreds of engineers at a high price, who will create an aviation industry for us in a year, on their knees! wassat
                        hi
                      36. +1
                        13 September 2024 08: 39
                        There are no words... Okay, it happens, let's move on...
                    2. 0
                      12 September 2024 16: 55
                      Quote: Strelkin
                      And since the CPC rules there undividedly, it spends as much as it considers necessary and on what it considers necessary.

                      Are you by any chance confusing the PRC with the DPRK?
                      1. +1
                        12 September 2024 16: 58
                        The joke is funny! laughing NO, I am not confused - in the PRC there is no other power except the supreme body of the CPC:
                        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%82_%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B1%D1%8E%D1%80%D0%BE_%D0%A6%D0%9A_%D0%9A%D0%9F%D0%9A
                    3. -1
                      12 September 2024 23: 55
                      Quote: Strelkin
                      China's GDP has overtaken the US

                      When did they overtake the US in GDP? If China's GDP per capita is not even in the top 30. If in general, then in second place after the US, but only due to 1,5 billion people, and if you take the EU, which has 3 times less people, then China's GDP is less. Maybe it's time to stop admiring the Chinese so much? Their entire economy will collapse as soon as the West stops buying Chinese consumer goods, their entire development will slow down significantly if the Chinese are no longer allowed into the world's leading universities, which are all located in the West. The Chinese still do not know how to create modern engines, from automobile to aircraft, they are lagging far behind in metallurgy, composite materials, mechanical engineering, microelectronics. And this lag will remain and even grow, since China with Xi is increasingly losing the trust of the West, which has not happened since the late 70s, and the Chinese economy has not been able to reach the old growth rates in recent years. The problem of the PRC is its dependence on constant, excessive production and sales markets. That is why the government is trying to stimulate it even where there is no point, which leads to an excess of products that have nowhere to go. They have huge dumps of whatever you want, new, but not sellable. You can’t give it away, you have to destroy it. Of the couple dozen brands of electric cars in China that existed 3 years ago, 90% have already gone bankrupt and left the market. I believe BYD, Xiaomi, some like Geely will be able to break through thanks to the Asian and Russian markets, but the rest are unlikely to survive. China still cannot even lift a medium-range passenger aircraft of its own design into the sky. There are no high-quality tools at the level of Hilti, Makita, Bosch. My opinion about China. Of course, it is a huge, powerful country that is reckoned with and which has influence in the world, but it seems to me that Xi rushed forward too early, China has not yet achieved the competitiveness to really compete with the EU or the USA. It is believed that when more than 10% of the economy is real estate and construction, this is an unhealthy and risky economy. In China, this figure is about 30% and today a gigantic debt has accumulated there, which is sweeping away companies one after another.
      3. +4
        12 September 2024 16: 48
        Quote: TermNachTER
        i.e. almost 80 years already. Do the Chinese want to cover this distance in 20 years?)))

        To slow down means to fall behind. And those who fall behind are beaten. But we don’t want to be beaten. No, we don’t want to! The history of old Russia consisted, among other things, in the fact that it was continually beaten for its backwardness. The Mongol khans beat it. The Turkish beys beat it. The Swedish feudal lords beat it. The Polish-Lithuanian lords beat it. The Anglo-French capitalists beat it. The Japanese barons beat it. Everyone beat it – for backwardness. For military backwardness, for cultural backwardness, for state backwardness, for industrial backwardness, for agricultural backwardness. They beat it because it was profitable and went unpunished… Such is the law of exploiters – to beat the backward and the weak. The wolfish law of capitalism. You have fallen behind, you are weak – that means you are wrong, therefore, you can be beaten and enslaved. You are powerful - that means you are right, therefore, we must beware of you... Do you want our socialist fatherland to be beaten and lose its independence? But if you do not want this, you must eliminate its backwardness in the shortest possible time and develop real Bolshevik tempos in the work of building its socialist economy. There are no other ways. That is why Lenin said on the eve of October: "Either death, or catch up with and overtake the advanced capitalist countries." We lagged behind the advanced countries by 50-100 years. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or they crush us I.V. Stalin
        And what is characteristic - it worked! Why do you think the Chinese won't succeed?
        1. -2
          12 September 2024 17: 13
          Stalin is not an engineer or a designer. Aviation and aircraft engine-building schools took decades to develop. We will leave Yakovlev's story about making the Yak-1 in three months on his conscience. Let's just say that he had the groundwork, all that was left was to refine it.
          1. +3
            13 September 2024 06: 19
            Quote: TermNachTER
            Stalin is not an engineer or a designer.

            He is an effective manager. wassat
            1. +3
              13 September 2024 09: 27
              Well, in general, yes, because he was thinking about the country, and not about a villa in Italy or an account in a Swiss bank.
        2. 0
          13 September 2024 23: 33
          Here's the question: everyone beat us, but Russia continued to expand in the end... Where's the logic????
    3. +3
      12 September 2024 09: 46
      Quote: ROSS 42
      the once great power has become a buyer of the same Chinese consumer goods

      All countries in the world buy Chinese consumer goods. They are cheaper. Well, a smartphone or a kettle made in Russia will not be competitive. Of course, you can introduce a recycling fee and artificially equate the price of a Chinese kettle to a Russian one. But in the end, the population will pay for it.
      1. +4
        12 September 2024 12: 19
        And, strictly speaking, why can't it? The standard of living (and cost) in China has increased significantly, the labor force is no longer cheap. The same Gloria Jeans (by the way, a Russian company) several years ago moved part of its production from China to Russia - it turned out to be cheaper and better.
        What is cheaper in China? Resources? - the question. Mass production? Here, everything is not so simple. A multiple increase in production cannot be solved by simple scaling. For this, other, more productive (and more expensive) technologies are used. And mass production of something in medium (and even large series) can be more expensive than in more specialized production. Here, as I think, everything is determined by competent management decisions.
        1. +1
          12 September 2024 15: 11
          What is cheaper in China?

          Cost of money. The key rate of the Central Bank is 3,35% against 18% in the Russian Federation.
          1. +1
            12 September 2024 15: 41
            In Russia at the moment, this does not work. When the Central Bank rate was low, there was no strong revival in the creation of industrial production, cheap loans went mainly to speculation (stock exchanges) and consumer purposes. And for real production, there are still various grants and preferential targeted loans, sometimes even lower than these 3,35%. Of course, this is clearly not enough for many things, especially for small projects, but for the most important projects, preferential money is found.
            And in order for cheap loans to go into speculation and mortgages, a reduction in the Central Bank rate alone is clearly not enough; other measures are needed.
    4. 0
      12 September 2024 12: 09
      They stepped on a sore spot.
    5. +1
      12 September 2024 15: 47
      Quote: ROSS 42
      It doesn’t have to come true, but haven’t we seen a miracle in the fact that a once great power has become a buyer of the same Chinese consumer goods that our domestic economic luminaries couldn’t crawl or reach?

      Global division of labor. In another great power the picture is roughly the same: depressed single-industry towns, skeletons of factories and thousands of containers with Chinese consumer goods at terminals. The market has decided...
      1. 0
        6 October 2024 20: 44
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Quote: ROSS 42
        It doesn’t have to come true, but haven’t we seen a miracle in the fact that a once great power has become a buyer of the same Chinese consumer goods that our domestic economic luminaries couldn’t crawl or reach?

        Global division of labor. In another great power the picture is roughly the same: depressed single-industry towns, skeletons of factories and thousands of containers with Chinese consumer goods at terminals. The market has decided...

        Where did you get your information about totally depressed single-industry towns and skeletons of factories? Did you read it in the liberal press? In the Sverdlovsk region, most of the settlements are single-industry towns and nothing, they live and develop just fine. The industrial capitalists you hate have carried out a complete reconstruction of the enterprises, everything works and brings in profit. And yes, the workers of the enterprises do not live in dugouts and do not starve. This does not coincide with your picture of the world? So these are your problems.
        1. 0
          7 October 2024 10: 39
          Quote: Ulum
          Where did you get your information about totally depressed single-industry towns and skeletons of factories? Did you read it in the liberal press?

          Nope. I saw it on the Samsebeskazal channel. wink
          The videos there are soulful... just like the atmosphere of our 90s.
          "There used to be a factory in this city (insert name) that shipped its products all over the country. Now all that's left of the factory are abandoned buildings, and life is only glimmering in the city center. And in the residential areas it's a complete Detroit".
    6. +3
      12 September 2024 16: 44
      Quote: ROSS 42
      It doesn’t have to come true, but haven’t we seen a miracle in the fact that a once great power has become a buyer of the same Chinese consumer goods that our domestic economic luminaries couldn’t crawl or reach?

      It's just that not everyone remembers the mid-80s. What places "in space" did the PRC and the USSR occupy then, respectively. In all respects - from the well-being of the population to industry and R&D!
      At that time the word Chinese was synonymous with the word crappy and this only applied to consumer goods, clothing, shoes... Since the expressions Chinese electronics or Chinese car would have caused nothing but Homeric laughter! wassat And what do we have now?
      1. +4
        12 September 2024 16: 49
        Quote from: AllX_VahhaB
        Because the expressions Chinese electronics or Chinese car would cause nothing but Homeric laughter! And what do we have now?

        Now the expressions: “Russian electronics” or “Russian automobile” evoke a feeling of shame, and the phrases “Russian aviation”, “Russian education”, “Russian healthcare”, etc. simply make you cringe...
        1. 0
          26 October 2024 22: 31
          Russian healthcare is still quite good.
  4. + 39
    12 September 2024 04: 32
    Well, when you have been unable to destroy the Ukrainian air force, which has “no analogues in the world” for the third year (though according to paper reports it has already been destroyed more than 3 times) and endlessly discuss the threat from two dozen old F-16s, of course, it’s high time to discuss the problems of the F-35 or J-20.
    The worse the real situation, the more absurd and pompous the propaganda becomes. The author suggests that the Americans start copying the Su-34, then he fantasizes about the Chinese buying a large batch of Su-35s to solve problems he himself has invented.
    1. -8
      12 September 2024 04: 52
      So the US collected "Ukrainian aviation" all over the world, like everything else. The MiG-29 is now a dying breed - but they are gone, the F-16s have come (they will also end).
      1. + 17
        12 September 2024 05: 58
        You shouldn't write propaganda, but think with your head.
        The F-16s will only end when the "sun goes out"...
        This is the most widely produced aircraft in the world in recent times.
        Almost 5 thousand pieces were produced.
        And it is still being produced. Until now.

        And you've got another hat ready to throw.
        1. -18
          12 September 2024 07: 14
          This is the most widely produced aircraft in the world in recent times.
          Almost 5 thousand pieces were produced
          .
          Ukraine has money - to buy it? No!
          Or does the US give out immeasurable amounts of money? No!
          Even if 50 of them were produced, if there are no pennies, then there are no planes.
          And they will give you 5-10 pieces for free, no more.
          Everything in this world comes down to money...
          1. +7
            12 September 2024 10: 58
            Or does the US give out immeasurable amounts of money? No!

            60 billion is certainly not "immeasurable", but it will be enough for a used F-16.
            1. -9
              12 September 2024 11: 22
              60 billion is certainly not "immeasurable", but it will be enough for a used F-16.
              I don’t know why nowadays it’s “used F-16, not crashed/not painted, 1 owner, documents in order, not driven in Ukraine” - but even if it’s 0.5 billion a piece, then EVERYTHING money is 120 pieces.

              It is a financial ceiling
              supplies - independent of anything.

              Taking into account that 60 billion goes to ALL
              - from Hymars, cartridges and to Patriots - real deliveries will be within 5-10 pieces in the future.
              If the US gives not 60, but 600 billion (or 6 trillion) - naturally, supplies will increase proportionally

              It all comes down to money - but the 5 minusers didn't understand this again
              1. +5
                12 September 2024 12: 00
                but even if it's 0.5 billion each

                You're exaggerating. Even the F-22 didn't cost that much. For a used F-16 sturgeon, you need to cut the price by 5-10 times, that would be closer to the truth. That is, closer to 600-1200 pieces. Of course, they won't give that much, but they don't need that much. But a hundred or two is quite enough. They'll cost 5-10 billion. A completely affordable sum for the Americans. It's understandable if there is a political decision for this, which there isn't. Perhaps not yet.
                1. -3
                  12 September 2024 12: 05
                  Yes, I agree, I was hasty - it’s cheaper.
                  But this does not change the fact that the costs go towards EVERYTHING and they run into the allocated money...
                  1. +1
                    12 September 2024 12: 35
                    For everything, of course. But aviation is the most important element, they can easily allocate part of the total amount for aircraft. And the amount is not that big in their scale, and we are not talking about the production of new aircraft. Another thing is that there is no political decision on this.
                    1. 0
                      12 September 2024 14: 03
                      Another thing is that there is no political decision on this.
                      Any political the decision always depends on resources and money. If you don't have them, then pardon me....
                      The US's ability to bend the EU is also a resource
              2. +2
                12 September 2024 13: 27
                I'm not a minus-er. But I'll get into opposition to your texts.
                Yes, it all comes down to money.
                But you don’t understand how it all comes down to money.
                You reason according to the principle "quickly grabbed and left, that's called finding."
                You reason in quick deals.

                But there are long-term financial games.
                When the result is measured in decades.
                The American elites know this and are playing exactly this game.
                At the same time, they have been demonizing our country and Putin for 15 years.
                And they really succeeded in this.
                In fact, for them, the genocide of Russians is not a crime now. It is the liberation of the planet.
                Ага.
                And so, voters are demanding that their countries, Holland, Greece, Portugal, Colombia, Japan, Australia and hundreds of other countries, help Ukraine.
                Free help.
                Military, energy, food, transport.
                And in most cases, that's what it is.
                And these small, unknown to us, streams of help turn into huge rivers.
                Which are higher than the official US figures. There, in Ukraine, almost half a trillion is already being thrown in. If you count all the parcels, transfers, containers, etc.
                Ukraine received so many machines and equipment, so many materials that in the first 3 quarters it produced 1 million UAVs. And they reached such a pace that in the 4th quarter they will produce another 1 million UAVs.
                I will continue.
                They plan to divide the money later.
                In any case, they want to take this money from us.
                Whether we win or lose.
                The party is being signed for a long time.

                But Ukraine will not pay in any case.
                Destroy? No bribes.
                Will he win? Reparations from Russia.
                1. -4
                  12 September 2024 14: 07
                  that in the first 3 quarters it produced 1 million UAVs. And they reached such a pace that in the 4th quarter it will produce another 1 million UAVs.
                  You believe?
                  Me not.
                  Otherwise, the Russian army would not have remained there in principle.
                  Because in addition to UAVs, the enemy has tanks, artillery, infantry, mines, and so on.

                  And yes, if the US worked in the long term, they wouldn’t be kicking us and China towards each other.
                2. -1
                  13 September 2024 05: 15
                  Quote: SovAr238A
                  Ukraine received so many machines and equipment, so many materials that in the first 3 quarters it produced 1 million UAVs

                  It doesn't produce that much. All Western countries promised to supply that much in a year...
                  1. 0
                    13 September 2024 08: 28
                    Listen to Maxim Klimov's latest performances at Aurora.
                    Klimov is a trusted character.
          2. Aag
            -1
            13 September 2024 18: 38
            "...Everything in this world comes down to money...."
            I won’t argue (even though I don’t fully share your opinion).
            But I really want to joke about this: isn't this connected with your place of work?))
            Well, really, I looked at your messages, almost all of them are about money! feel
            1. -1
              13 September 2024 21: 09
              Well, really, - I looked at your messages, - almost every one is about money! feel
              Well, I'm kind of an "anti-Soviet" - I'm supposed to reduce everything to money. I get paid for this money, yeah-yeah...

              It's kind of sad, Maryhlundia. I called all my friends - everyone is sad everywhere...
              1. Aag
                -1
                14 September 2024 15: 10
                "... I called all my friends - everyone was sad..."
                I agree with this... recourse hi
        2. -8
          12 September 2024 08: 34
          The F-16 is a good aircraft, but there is a big BUT. It is good when used in the NATO (Israel) tactical scheme, for which it was actually created. The problem is that it is impossible to implement this scheme in Banderland. Therefore, we see that they are hidden somewhere, no one knows where))) they do not participate in real battles. They were given rather as moral support than a real instrument of war. And, I think, the Banderlogs were strictly warned not to fool around))) otherwise - only frustration. It turned out that the "Patriot" is not as good as it was advertised, and the "Javelin" - let's be honest, showed something completely different from what was expected from it. If the F-16 also "falls into a puddle", it will fall with it the entire Western military-industrial complex.
          1. +9
            12 September 2024 08: 52
            The Patriot isn't as good as advertised, and the Javelin, let's be honest, hasn't performed as well as expected.
            Well, we "know" how Patriot and Javelin showed themselves from the words of "storyteller" Konoshenkov. More or less truthful information leaks from direct participants with LBS, and not even from war correspondents, who are part of the state ideological system.
            1. 0
              12 September 2024 08: 58
              Well, voice such information? I can remind you that the "javelin" was advertised at one time as a wunderwolf that would completely remove armored vehicles from the battlefield, which justified its cosmic price. However, armored vehicles continue to roll around the battlefields and their main problem is not the "javelin" at all and it costs orders of magnitude less. The "Patriot", in theory, should have covered all important areas of the territory from attacks, again, theoretically - everything. In practice, we see that they create certain problems for the Russian Air Force and nothing more.
              1. +9
                12 September 2024 10: 34
                In the first year of the war there were no such numbers of anti-tank FPVs, mostly the "Baba Yaga" type, foreign artillery too, until late autumn 22 it was the Javelins that worked, and already at the beginning of 23 we see T-55s at the front, although there were a lot of T-64s, 72s, 80s in the troops, where did they go? The Patriot was never positioned as protection "from everything", it should work in conjunction with aviation, AWACS, which is not the case, and nevertheless, in the last year of the war, even the destruction of a bridge 10 km from the LBS is presented to us as an unprecedented success and isolation of the battlefield. In fact, all the successful tactics of our troops boiled down to throwing cannons from the extreme distance, then a run of small groups and motorcyclists, there were even cases on Chinese golf carts, tanks, if they appear, then singly in the "king-barbecue" body kit.
                1. -5
                  12 September 2024 11: 08
                  But there were countless Javelins and other RPGs of foreign manufacture, and where is the result?
                  1. +9
                    12 September 2024 11: 18
                    The result is the appearance of the T-55 on the battlefield at the beginning of 23. There are a lot of videos in Telegram for 22 about how javelins work against columns of armored vehicles, then ours took measures against electronic warfare, and in general the use of armored vehicles in LBS has sharply decreased, and they are dismantled at a distance exceeding the action of javelins, either by artillery or drones. It is clear that the javelin is far from a "silver bullet", but no one expected that it would become the only means of destroying armored vehicles.
                    1. -6
                      12 September 2024 11: 22
                      In TG I have seen both high-quality cartoons and not so high-quality ones. From the latest, how F-16 shoots down "geranium")))
                      1. +4
                        12 September 2024 11: 33
                        Well, this is a clear bummer, everyone knows it is impossible to shoot down a Shahed, they say that it was true that all sorts of Americans, Jews, Jordanians and Saudis in the Middle East recently succeeded in doing this, but not in Ukraine, the air there is different.
                      2. -2
                        12 September 2024 12: 35
                        The cartoon is crap, everything else is reality. They even said what toy the cartoon was taken from.
                  2. +4
                    12 September 2024 12: 38
                    Javelin is a close combat weapon, up to 2 km. They played a significant role in the spring of 2022 against supply columns of troops in the Kyiv area and elsewhere.
                    1. -1
                      12 September 2024 12: 43
                      A supply column or armored vehicles on the battlefield? What are we talking about? Burning ZILs that cost several times less than a missile - explain the point?
                      1. -1
                        12 September 2024 13: 46
                        The point is to destroy the enemy.
                        We destroy 150 UAVs a night, or what?
                        We destroy with missiles that cost tens and hundreds of times more than those same UAVs.
                      2. +1
                        12 September 2024 17: 07
                        Do you know the cost price of the 57E6E missile? Please state it.
                      3. +2
                        12 September 2024 17: 59
                        APCs and BMPs for escorting columns. For ZILs, a machine gun is enough after that.
                        On the battlefield, tanks also disappeared from ATGM firing range for a long time.
                      4. -2
                        12 September 2024 19: 14
                        Somewhere they disappeared, and somewhere they never disappeared. And why is there complete silence now? What, have the wonder weapons run out or are they not giving them out anymore?
                        For the previous speaker, regarding the T-55. Any tank is good if it is used correctly and vice versa - "Abram", Leopard, etc.
                        T-55 - firstly, it is as simple as a door and as reliable as a crowbar. Secondly,
                        There were a lot of ammunition for it - why not use it? Thirdly, they were used in secondary areas, where the probability of encountering enemy tanks was practically zero. In such a situation, even the worst tank was better than nothing at all.
                      5. -1
                        12 September 2024 19: 32
                        Somewhere they disappeared, and somewhere they didn't disappear. And why is there complete silence now?

                        Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not there.
                        There was a video from Volchansk, Avdeevka, etc.
                        It's just that more hyped weapons have appeared, like Bradleys and Leopards.
                      6. 0
                        12 September 2024 21: 05
                        So what are we talking about? Hype or weapon effectiveness? If a weapon is effective, like the Su-34, for example, it doesn't need advertising. I repeat - there was an installation, all armored vehicles, no matter what destroyed them, should be attributed to "javelin", because "Lockheed" and "Raytheon" needed advertising. How much is real, we will not know soon, and then we will talk about effectiveness. Regarding Volchansk, it became clear back in WWII that a tank has no business in the city.
                      7. +1
                        12 September 2024 19: 29
                        The point is that there are people sitting in ZILs, but there are no people in the rocket. And also that this ZIL is carrying something for other people who are sitting on the LBS. To understand this, you don't need much intelligence, just minimal common sense. Therefore, it makes sense to shoot even a Niva with 2 fighters and a trunk with water from an ATGM
                      8. 0
                        12 September 2024 19: 40
                        The point is that you can hit a Niva with two fighters with a Tomahawk. War is a confrontation of resources. If an ATGM worth 100 kilobucks is spent on a Niva with two fighters, no budget will withstand it, not even a mattress one.
                      9. -2
                        12 September 2024 19: 50
                        Do you value the lives of two fighters, and the lives of those fighters who depend on the delivery of ammunition/water/food, at less than $100.000?
                        Think like the worst representatives of the officer corps, unfortunately.
                        Well, since you value hardware more than people, you should think about the fact that the execution of an order may depend on things like a Niva arriving on time.
                      10. +1
                        12 September 2024 21: 19
                        Let's separate the flies and the cutlets. We talked about the effectiveness of the Javelin. According to the advertising brochures of Lockheed-Raytheon, there will be no armored vehicles on the battlefield after it. This did not happen. Now about the people. War is a confrontation of resources. Whoever uses resources more effectively, wins. If Banderland fought for his own money, would the Javelin operator shoot at the Niva? No way, his own commander killed him for wasting valuable resources on secondary targets. If Banderland fought himself, the war would have ended long ago, because the resources to wage this war would have run out. Why do I say that it is premature to talk about the highest effectiveness of the Javelin. The Banderlogs are not fighting for their own, they do not feel sorry for anything and anyone. And their own soldiers first of all.
                      11. 0
                        12 September 2024 22: 37
                        Nobody talks about the wild efficiency of the Javelin, I completely agree with that, but it is also impossible to say that it is complete crap. Cons: expensive, heavy (although the Kornet is not lighter), objectively shoots not far. Pros: defeat from above and heat guidance. It was clear that it will not become some kind of wonder weapon, but the fact that it is a good weapon, especially in maneuver warfare, when a column can be burned from a landing and no one will see you, is also a fact.
                      12. 0
                        13 September 2024 09: 20
                        Maybe you didn't say it, but "Lockheed-Raytheon" and the Bandar-logs did. We'll be able to talk about some specific results and efficiency when we have at least some normal statistics for analysis.
              2. +2
                12 September 2024 11: 21
                Who advertised the Javelin? If by bloggers and journalists, then the same Skomorokhov also advertises something as a miracle weapon. Or remember the general delight over Khibiny.
                1. -3
                  12 September 2024 11: 23
                  By the manufacturer and the USA.
                  1. +4
                    12 September 2024 11: 31
                    Well, I can also find a speech online by some of our MPs, I don’t remember whose speech it was, but not Vanka from Worsted, about how our electronic warfare systems will land everyone if anything happens, disrupt the power supply, and shut down all the engines
                    1. -2
                      12 September 2024 12: 34
                      There is a lot to find on the net. Go to the official Raytheon website.
              3. -1
                12 September 2024 19: 26
                To be honest, the Javelins have chopped up a lot of our equipment there... that's why tanks now operate mainly from closed positions.
                But the FPV turned out to be cheaper and better, it hits beyond the horizon, weighs little, can be assembled on the knee, destroys effectively. Therefore, javelins and ATGMs in general began to play a much smaller role.
                Patriot is also not as bad as they wrote here, it is destroyed only by caliber and dagger, the rest is shot down. Yes, it is not such a wonder weapon, of course, as the West advertised, but you can't call it a bad weapon either.
                1. -2
                  12 September 2024 19: 37
                  How much exactly. The weapon is assessed by its effectiveness, there are no specifics yet. I read reviews from Bandarlogs - they scolded it. The Patriot is destroyed by a caliber or a dagger. The cost and production cycle of the Patriot and Caliber - compare and you have answered your question.
                  1. 0
                    12 September 2024 19: 44
                    Your comparison of effectiveness is very far from reality. Do you realize that due to the presence of Patriots and other air defense systems provided by the West (and the USSR), our aviation does not fly over Ukraine? And do you realize that if it did, the war would already be over? So compare taking this into account, and not just the price of a Kalibr missile and the price of a Patriot missile. That is, take into account the number of lost soldiers and the amount of wasted material resources due to the fact that our aviation can only fly up to the LBS.
                    And there weren't even any rumors about a defeat of this caliber
                    1. 0
                      12 September 2024 21: 10
                      The war ends when the infantry enters the streets of enemy cities. During WWII, Japan and Germany were reduced to almost zero, and what prevented them from fighting? In addition to the "patriot", the Bandar-logs also have the S-300 and the "Buk", so the effectiveness of the "patriot" will be clear when the war is over. Let's count the number of downed planes, spent SAMs, UR and destroyed "patriots". By the way, the "Patrick" had some failures even during the Gulf War, when it was generally considered super-duper. And it was fought against very old systems.
                      1. 0
                        12 September 2024 22: 41
                        There are simply two poles here: the Yankees shouted that the Patriot is an uber-weapon, the Zvezda TV channel said that it won't even shoot down a crop duster. Well, the truth is in the middle, with the presence of Western intelligence, due to the AWACS and large drones - a normal complex, just too expensive. If there was no intelligence, there would be no sense in them. But if they give the pigs 30 of them, we will clearly have problems.
                      2. 0
                        13 September 2024 09: 22
                        Well, AWACS doesn't help them much either. The AWACS doesn't enter Ukrainian airspace. The Swedes can give it, but it's not really an AWACS.
          2. -2
            12 September 2024 10: 01
            They were given more as moral support than as a real instrument of war.

            I agree with you. The F-16s were given on roughly the same terms as the Challengers. This is simply a PR stunt to support the pot-headed spirit, both at the front and in the rear. If we assume that the war drags on for a long time (God forbid), the Americans will also give a dozen F-22s, just so that the natives can fight.
            1. +3
              12 September 2024 10: 06
              Even if the war in Ukraine ends, the confrontation will continue. In other places, perhaps in other forms. There is a struggle for a new world order in which the US will no longer be the hegemon. I think it will last 5-10 years, until a new "status quo" is established. I believe that by that time the F-22s will be written off. The pilots would have written them off already, but Congress does not allow it.
              1. +3
                12 September 2024 11: 04
                Even if the war in Ukraine ends, the confrontation will continue. In other places, perhaps in other forms. There is a struggle for a new world order in which the US will no longer be the hegemon.

                Of course the US won't, especially under the leadership of democrats. China will be the hegemon, and everyone else will be its vassals. Or slaves.
                I believe that by that time the F-22 will be decommissioned.

                They will be written off by 2045. Unless their service life is extended.
                The pilots would have written them off already, but Congress won't allow it.

                It wasn't the "flyers" who wrote them off, but some stoned general who keeps trying to write them off. But "who's going to give it to him?!"
                1. 0
                  12 September 2024 11: 13
                  China can't handle the role of hegemon. Economy means a lot, but not everything.
                  I think they will be written off much earlier. It is clear that all generals are stupid, but it is not clear how they became generals)))
                  1. +1
                    12 September 2024 11: 16
                    China cannot handle the role of hegemon.

                    And who will interfere?
                    "Will you please read out the entire list?"

                    Economics means a lot, but it is not everything.

                    EVERYTHING depends on the economy. Napoleon once said: "For war, first of all, money is needed, secondly, money, and thirdly, money!"
                    1. +1
                      12 September 2024 11: 20
                      There are many who want to interfere. The closest ones are India, Japan, South Korea.
                      Actually, this phrase is attributed not to Napoleon, but to the Italian condottiere Trevulzio (or something like that). For medieval Italy, this is more than fair. Mercenary units (armies) fought there, and accordingly, whoever had more money could hire more soldiers. Applied to today - how many kilograms of dollars do you need to stuff into a special warhead to cause an explosion with a power of 150 kilotons?
                      1. +1
                        12 September 2024 11: 22
                        There are many who want to interfere. The closest ones are India, Japan, South Korea.

                        Indians have absolutely different mentality. And Japan and UK are tiny! (Compared to China)
                      2. 0
                        12 September 2024 12: 33
                        Ask the Germans who fought with them in WWII about their mentality.
                      3. +1
                        12 September 2024 12: 37
                        Do we really need Germans for this? Without them, no one knows how the mentality of the average Indian differs from the mentality of the average Chinese? How Confucianism differs from Hinduism and Buddhism?
                        And why will Indians NEVER catch up with the Chinese...
                      4. 0
                        12 September 2024 12: 40
                        You can ask the Japanese, you can ask the Pakistanis - who else did the Indians fight with? Some British lord even introduced a classification of warlike nationalities in India. The Bible also says that you shall not kill, but for some reason they kill.
                      5. 0
                        12 September 2024 12: 44
                        You can ask the Japanese, you can ask the Pakistanis - who else did the Indians fight with?

                        ?? Nowhere in the world do we hear about "great warriors from India".
                        The Bible also says that you shall not kill, but for some reason they kill.

                        The Bible, in the original, does not say "Thou shalt not kill!" This is not the correct translation. The Bible says "Thou shalt not kill criminally!" These are two very different things. A soldier who kills an enemy, a policeman who kills a criminal during an arrest, an executioner who executes a criminal by court order - none of them obey the commandment "Thou shalt not kill criminally" - Does not violate.
                      6. 0
                        12 September 2024 16: 51
                        There are Rajputs - whose mentality, ideology and philosophy are no different from the samurai. Sikhs - also guys, not fools, fight, Dogras - also fierce guys, Gurkhas. I tell you, the British lord listed a dozen of them, so out of 1,5 billion mugs, a couple of million combat-ready will be collected.
                      7. -1
                        12 September 2024 16: 54
                        They constitute an extremely small percentage of the total population of India...
                      8. 0
                        12 September 2024 17: 14
                        There are more than 20 million Sikhs, I am not ready to answer about other numbers, but I think there are also more than one million.
                      9. -1
                        12 September 2024 17: 16
                        There are "a few" more Chinese, don't you think?!
                      10. 0
                        12 September 2024 17: 19
                        Well, not all Chinese are "in the ranks" - agree. And if you add to the Indians the Japanese, South Koreans, Taiwanese, Filipinos, and behind them are the mattress makers. Then there is a big question - who is more?
                      11. 0
                        12 September 2024 17: 24
                        The Chinese state model allows for the conscription of 200 million people, 300 million...
                        And if you add to the Indians the Japanese, South Koreans, Taiwanese, Filipinos, and behind them are the mattress makers. Then there is a big question - who is more?

                        Yeah, if aliens from Tau Ceti arrive to organize them all! So far the US can't even force its poor NATO to pay 2% of GDP to the general budget... And under the leadership of democrats they will be in deep trouble...
                      12. 0
                        12 September 2024 17: 34
                        I don't know how much the Chinese model allows. But my common sense tells me that even the Chinese economy won't be able to feed an army of 100 million. I don't know about aliens, but I've heard about AUKUS and QUAD. Why do the Australians need this, for whom China was their main trading partner? If I were told that Ukraine would be set against Russia, I wouldn't believe it, but they managed it. Those guys aren't bad guys, I don't mean cans and flounders, but those who analyze and plan. Yes, Mattressland will die someday, but they will still cause grief.
                      13. -1
                        12 September 2024 17: 37
                        But my common sense tells me that even the Chinese economy cannot feed an army of 100 million.

                        No one is going to keep a 100 million strong army under arms all the time. It can be wonderfully prepared optionally, "without interrupting production". Not to mention that:
                        In China, all men between the ages of 18 and 22 are subject to conscription, and the service period is two years. In certain cases, women are also called up to serve in the People's Liberation Army of China (PLA) and the People's Armed Police.

                        There are reserves, there are - up to 60 years... And there is something to equip and arm, families will not have to buy bulletproof vests at their own expense...
                      14. -1
                        12 September 2024 17: 46
                        Yes, 60 year olds are fighting now, not very much, but pretending to be a target in a trench, in principle, works. They are subject to conscription, but not everyone is called up. The Chinese Armed Forces, at a guess, are about 2 million, that is, the mobilization reserve there is by no means unlimited. Unlike the Bandar-logs who catch heroes on the street, I served my compulsory military service in the Soviet Army and I understand the difference between the mobilization reserve and meat caught on the street)))
                      15. 0
                        12 September 2024 17: 57
                        Comrade Lin Biao, the Chinese Minister of Defense when I was young, said: "The Chinese soldier is invincible at a distance of 200 meters!" And it wasn't a witty joke, there for many decades now They take military training so seriously that it can only be compared to the training in the Japanese army before World War II...
                      16. 0
                        12 September 2024 19: 08
                        When they land in Taiwan, then we'll see how well prepared they are.
                      17. 0
                        12 September 2024 20: 30
                        China's history goes back about 3500 years. They can wait a little longer... wink
                      18. -1
                        12 September 2024 21: 44
                        Even a little more. Of course they can, which is what they do. But the situation may change. Some mattress general said that the Taiwan problem should be solved by 2027. After that, it will be much more difficult.
                      19. 0
                        12 September 2024 21: 46
                        Why would that happen? Well, yes, somewhere there the asteroid "Apophis" will fly close... lol I think the opposite: Things will get easier for China as time goes on, the Western world is steadily deteriorating.
                      20. 0
                        12 September 2024 23: 06
                        Nice video, something to admire:

                2. 0
                  12 September 2024 15: 22
                  Quote: Strelkin
                  Of course the US won't, especially under the leadership of democrats. China will be the hegemon, and everyone else will be its vassals. Or slaves.


                  About 5 years ago, I would have fully supported this interpretation, but in recent years, China has been losing ground, starting with a slowdown in economic growth and it would seem that, well, so what, they will grow not by 9-8% but by 5-3%, but there are already problems (debt servicing, indebtedness in the real estate sector, etc.) + an aging population, + external pressure: sanctions, restrictions on technology exports, etc., + deterioration of financial indicators and investment conditions, when Western investors take their money and invest in the same Japan, South Korea, India, again, taking into account the young population, a promising market, and so on.

                  And there is no light at the end of the tunnel for the Chinese economy...

                  Under such conditions, China will not be able to become a hegemon and push the US off its pedestal + many wrote off the West too early, here, surprisingly, the US economy has been doing relatively well in recent years, when almost a recession was predicted, but still not happening. There is also a political moment, when all of Europe + the countries of the Anglo-Saxon group are oriented towards the Americans, does China have a chance to pull them over to its side? Very unlikely... a different culture, strong ties between Western countries, etc.

                  Let's see how the situation develops further, for us (Russia) there is no particular alternative to China right now anyway, but objectively the economic situation in our neighbor is not simple, and the media's position that the West is running out of steam and the future belongs to China does not really correspond to reality.
                  1. -1
                    12 September 2024 15: 32
                    There is a very good and publicly available reference book, from whom do you think? - From the CIA! wink It is enough to open it and look at the dynamics of the two countries' economies,
                    U.S.:
                    https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/united-states/#economy
                    Real GDP (purchasing power parity)
                    $ 24.662 trillion (2023 est.)
                    $ 24.051 trillion (2022 est.)
                    $ 23.594 trillion (2021 est.)

                    note: data in 2021 dollars

                    comparison ranking: 2

                    Real GDP growth rate
                    2.54% (2023 est.)
                    1.94% (2022 est.)
                    5.8% (2021 est.)

                    и China:
                    https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/china/#economy
                    Real GDP (purchasing power parity)
                    $ 31.227 trillion (2023 est.)
                    $ 29.683 trillion (2022 est.)
                    $ 28.822 trillion (2021 est.)

                    note: data in 2021 dollars

                    comparison ranking: 1

                    Real GDP growth rate
                    5.2% (2023 est.)
                    2.99% (2022 est.)
                    8.45% (2021 est.)
                    ...............................
                    If you compare these figures carefully, it turns out that many people are holding memorial services for China in vain!
                    1. -1
                      12 September 2024 15: 39
                      And this graph doesn't look like science fiction at all:
                    2. 0
                      12 September 2024 15: 40
                      Quote: Strelkin
                      There is a very good and publicly available reference book...


                      So there are figures on GDP (PPP), by the way, Vladimir Vladimirovich likes to use it as an example, and says how China is growing, and how Russia is rising in the rankings.

                      Why not calculate GDP in nominal terms?

                      https://infoselection.ru/infokatalog/biznes-i-finansy/ekonomika-i-rynki/item/755-vvp-stran-mira

                      So compare the indicators) but this is only part of the overall picture.
                      1. 0
                        12 September 2024 15: 59
                        N Страна 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
                        1 США 23 594,1 25 744,1 27 357,8 28 781,1 29 839,7
                        2 PRC 17 759,3 17 848,5 17
                        ..........................
                        It's a complete horror! For China, the gap is growing!
                        But when I further saw how, according to this table, Turkmenistan ($94.79 billion) is ahead of Saudi Arabia ($1.845 trillion), Switzerland ($733.779 billion) and Sweden ($676.353 billion), something about this seemed very, very suspicious to me?! laughing
                        When both Turkmenistan and Saudi Arabia trade mainly in energy resources. Only Saudi Arabia's GDP is 20 (!!) times larger than Turkmenistan's, but Turkmenistan is placed before Saudi Arabia - should we laugh or cry at this point?
                      2. 0
                        12 September 2024 16: 09
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        Something here seemed very, very suspicious to me?!


                        Well, this is the data provided by the IMF, if you don’t like this table, there is another one from them.

                        https://svspb.net/danmark/vvp-stran-nominal.php

                        And no matter how you look at it, there is a difference of 10 trillion between the USA and China, but I repeat, this is only part of the overall picture, and there are many other indicators that are not reflected in the GDP.
                      3. -1
                        12 September 2024 16: 13
                        But there are three more tables there, not so funny, and in two of them China is ahead of the USA... wink
                      4. 0
                        12 September 2024 16: 29
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        But there are three more tables there, not so funny, and in two of them China is ahead of the USA...


                        Let's return to the initial topic, where the formation of a new hegemon in the person of the PRC was discussed, I described to you the current problems in the Chinese economy, which do not allow it to take world leadership, in response you tried to give statistics on GDP (PPP), saying that the old hegemon is no longer a cake, look at the indicators.

                        Is that correct? But GDP (PPP) is only part of the overall picture, in terms of nominal GDP China still has a long way to go to catch up with the US, and even more so in terms of per capita income, there is the factor of aging and labor force, when in the US the population grows every year + due to migrants from neighboring countries, in China the situation is different, there is a simply crazy decline, and in addition, the entire nation is aging. There is a technological factor, when the US owns the technology (processors, chips, software - their patents are everywhere), in China everything is in the initial stage, and when they will create domestic equipment for the production of chips, on Chinese technology is a question (Dutch equipment is currently used). And so on, there are many indicators by which China still has a lot to grow, but there are a lot of problems.

                        But even this is not the main thing in world dominance... because Western countries are connected by a common history (especially the Anglo-Saxon group), a common security system (NATO), a common market, when there is cooperation in the production of goods (USA + EU), etc. + culture).

                        China will never be able to pull the countries of the Western coalition over to itself... because of a different culture/views/political system, etc. - so world leadership and replacement of the hegemon are in great question.
                      5. 0
                        12 September 2024 16: 53
                        But even this is not the main thing in world dominance... because Western countries are connected by a common history (especially the Anglo-Saxon group), a common security system (NATO), a common market, when there is cooperation in the production of goods (USA + EU), etc. + culture).

                        And you try to extrapolate the graphs that I provided? For 40 years, 60 years, 80 years? Taking into account current US trends?
                      6. -1
                        12 September 2024 17: 05
                        Quote: Strelkin
                        And you try to extrapolate the graphs that I provided? For 40 years, 60 years, 80 years? Taking into account current US trends?


                        According to the graphs, China will sooner or later overtake the US in all indicators (GDP PPP already), nominal in the long term, I don’t know by 2050 or later, but most likely it will be so... provided that the Chinese economy grows at all, and doesn’t get stuck at 1-2% per year or lower.

                        But again, what about the aging and declining population? The Americans will take young migrants from Mexico, South America + the population is growing steadily year after year, and how the Chinese will get out of this situation, no idea... migrants from Asia? Perhaps, but the Han do not particularly welcome migrants, and their migration policy is somewhat different (now).

                        There is also India, which according to the graphs will also overtake the US in GDP, but will be in 2nd place after China... a young population and a huge sales market is a huge advantage, i.e. there will be regional rivalry between China and India for neighbors and sales markets in Asia + Africa.

                        Let's see how events will develop... But it is hard to believe in China's dominance in the world, because the Western coalition (USA + EU + Great Britain with Anglo-Saxon countries: Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc. + Japan + South Korea + other allies in Asia) will try to maintain dominance until 2100 for sure... Will the Chinese be able to create a similar coalition that will help them maintain leadership? Time will tell.
                      7. +2
                        12 September 2024 17: 14
                        According to the graphs, China will sooner or later overtake the US in all indicators (GDP PPP already), nominal in the long term, I don’t know by 2050 or later, but most likely it will be so... provided that the Chinese economy grows at all, and doesn’t get stuck at 1-2% per year or lower.

                        It won't get stuck and do you know why? Because comrade Deng Xiaoping found (or rather reproduced) the most perfect socio-economic system on this planet and in world history, it was invented, by the way, in the USSR - NEP - a combination of all the advantages of socialism and capitalism. That's why for the last 45 years China's growth rate has CONSTANTLY outpaced the growth rate of the US economy. And so it will be in the future. Alas and alack, this does not make me happy at all, but rather horrifies me - the Chinese are merciless and the word humanism is absolutely alien to them.
                3. -1
                  13 September 2024 05: 23
                  Quote: Strelkin
                  They will be written off by 2045. Unless their service life is extended.

                  By 2045, a new 6th generation aircraft will be made
                  1. 0
                    13 September 2024 06: 29
                    Maybe. But setting up serial production of several hundred aircraft is not a quick matter. Therefore, those who predict the rapid retirement of the F-22 are most likely mistaken.
          3. 0
            12 September 2024 13: 41
            I can say that our real military suffers greatly from the control system, from the communications system, from the intelligence distribution system that the Ukrainians have, although not in full.
            In the same way, Ukrainians will be retrained to control aircraft.

            And the Patriots showed themselves excellently, let's not forget the losses of our planes, when they rained down in clusters over our territory. Sometimes 4-5 at a time.
            When the A-50s fell.
            Go, your memory is short.
            And the Javelins, in the first months of this non-war, practically completely cleared out all of our equipment.
            Thousands of units were destroyed.
            Is your memory short too?

            Over time, of course, some forget, and then write the same thing as you.

            It's like a toothache. At the "moment" it's unbearable, but after six months: "oh, come on, it's all bullshit".
            1. 0
              12 September 2024 17: 04
              Fell in bunches?))) Let's not hyperbole. Do you have specific information - how many exactly were shot down by the "patriots"? Voice it, but only with links, and not me thinking so. Why the A-50 fell - I don't know, but I don't think that it was stupidly driven into the "patriot's" zone of action. I'm not delighted with our generals, as well as others. All generals are always the same. But they are not complete idiots - they pass the medical commission.
              Please, be specific about the "javelins". For example, I read reviews from the Bandar-logs - strictly negative. And also - the SVO from the West is a huge advertising campaign. They gave the command - and all armored vehicles were "written down" as "javelins", they gave the command and all aviation was "written down" as "patriots". If the Bandar-logs had submarines, then everything sunk would be written down as them)))
        3. +1
          13 September 2024 07: 28
          And the MiG-29 was the most widely produced Soviet fighter. Now it's a long shot.
          1. -1
            13 September 2024 07: 49
            And the MiG-29 was the most widely produced Soviet fighter. Now it's a long shot.

            When I was at the Samara Aviagregat plant in the early 2000s, the director remembered that in Soviet times they made 30 sets of chassis for the MiG-29... per month!!! Of course, this was when all the plant's capacities were directed to this. But it's impressive.
            1. 0
              13 September 2024 08: 31
              It's just that in Soviet times this plant was called "Gidroavtomatika".
              The word "Automatic" was apparently a factor in the quantity of production.
              As soon as they became a unit, individual production began.
              As you name the ship, so it will sail!
              Joke, sarcasm...
              1. -1
                13 September 2024 08: 41
                The word "Automatic" was apparently a factor in the quantity of production.

                Yes, turning chevron seals from a fluoroplastic round on an ancient lathe DiP 300, converting 90% of the material into shavings, is automation... eh. But it turned out to be a very high-quality seal, it held up to 5 thousand atm.
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. +4
    12 September 2024 05: 11
    But this will not solve the Chinese problems, because more than 20 J-300s with “first period” engines have already been produced.

    How many aircraft of this class does Russia have? You don't even need to mention the Su-57 - "all three", as they used to say about Chinese tanks in a joke.
    How about something proven, but not too old - like the Su-35?
    1. 0
      17 September 2024 15: 34
      Yeah, well, maybe we with our thieving generals won't have to buy these 300 "first stage" from the Chinese if we suddenly have to sharply increase the fighter fleet. Because with such "production rates" - 150 units by 2030, we will be left without modern fighters at all, like the Soviet Union in June 1941
  7. +6
    12 September 2024 05: 25
    J-20 is a Chinese experience, the son of difficult mistakes. They do not sit with their legs dangling and their arms folded like we do. This is evident in both military and civil aviation in China. bully
  8. + 10
    12 September 2024 05: 29
    A person can first throw mud at the Chinese with all his might and then become indignant that payments are not going through in Chinese banks, because we are standing "back to back". what
  9. + 11
    12 September 2024 05: 44
    It's better to build bad airplanes and learn by analyzing the mistakes, testing different engine models. This is how scientific experience is accumulated and solutions to problems are found. Then bam, and a new working good engine and immediately good airplanes will appear.
    Than making loud statements, showing models of airplanes and saying that in 10 years they might be produced.
  10. +6
    12 September 2024 06: 24
    More than 300 pieces have already been released. How many Su 57s with "first period" engines were produced? Wow! So there's no point in looking under a microscope at the "speck" in someone else's eye.
    1. -7
      12 September 2024 10: 05
      .How many Su 57s with "first period" engines were produced?

      By the way, the VKS recently received another batch of SU-57, not many and not fast, but the process is underway. A very complex machine and the best in the world, today. Yes, the capacity and personnel do not allow them to be produced in hundreds per year, but still, well done.
      1. -1
        12 September 2024 10: 41
        Quote: South Ukrainian
        By the way, the VKS recently received another batch of SU-57s.

        How much? In pieces?
        1. -2
          12 September 2024 10: 50
          .They build more nuclear power plants than Russia and their number is greater than in Russia...

          No less than 3 for sure)
      2. +1
        12 September 2024 11: 06
        A very complex machine and moreover the best in the world, to date.

        It is impossible to be such a layman and ignoramus "for today"?
  11. +5
    12 September 2024 07: 05
    Real data is a minimum of zero, and arguments are a maximum of infinity. In general, useless reading.
    1. -4
      12 September 2024 08: 27
      Real data is at minimum zero

      Google works 24/7... smile
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-20#Specifications_(J-20A)
      1. +2
        12 September 2024 10: 17
        Couldn't you find anything better than Wikipedia?
        1. -4
          12 September 2024 10: 51
          Is there something missing for complete happiness? Original technical description books in Chinese?
          1. -1
            13 September 2024 09: 26
            If you can't talk about technology in the technical language of the originals, then it's better not to take on this task.
            1. -2
              13 September 2024 13: 08
              And how to decipher the meaning of this wise phrase?
  12. +1
    12 September 2024 07: 23
    ...high thrust is quite decent, it is at the level of the F-22, whose Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 produces approximately the same 15 kgf

    "Approximately" 15 900 kgf (156 kN).
    ...but they have a vertical thruster and a non-afterburning mode at 10 kgf for the so-called “supercruise”.

    "About" 11 825 kg (116 kN).
    WS-15 accordingly the same 15 kg (900 kN) at full afterburner.
    AL-41F1 (117) — 8 kg (800 kN) at maximum, 86.30 kg (14 kN) at full afterburner.
    The F-22, despite all its disadvantages, can fly for quite a long time with a full combat load at supersonic speeds without using afterburners.

    Fuel consumption of two F-22 engines:
    (fuel in internal tanks 8 kg, with PTB - 200 kg)
    Supersonic without afterburner:
    M = 1,5 N = 9000m - 11,6 kg / km.
    M = 1,5 N = 12000m - 7,2 kg / km
    M = 1,5 N = 13500m - 6,12 kg / km
    At subsonic:
    M = 0,8 N = 12000m - 3,1 kg / km
    M=0,9 N = 9000m - 3.65 kg/km
    M = 0,9 N = 12000m - 3.22 kg / km
    M = 0,9 N = 15000m - 2,91 kg / km.
    Whether the J-20 can fly like this is a big question for a large aircraft.

    Where else would he go with WS-15 engines...
    J-20:
    Empty weight: 17 kg
    Maximum takeoff: 37 kg
    Fuel in internal tanks: 12 kg
    F-22:
    Empty weight: 19 kg
    Maximum takeoff: 38 kg
  13. -1
    12 September 2024 07: 43
    Judging by the Chinese machines, they can write the performance characteristics that anyone likes, they are masters here! And they can bring gloss both outside and inside, they have also learned to please the eye. But as for the technology, there are big doubts not only in theory, which is confirmed by practice. Therefore, they can rivet a lot of gliders, but the favorite copying of everything else does not help
    1. +7
      12 September 2024 08: 54
      The Chinese fly in space, the Chinese have their own space station, satellite systems, successful flights to the Moon. They build more nuclear power plants than Russia and their number is greater than in Russia... Cars or other equipment - which modern Russian (not Soviet) equipment is better than Chinese???
      And it’s not the Chinese who write, but the customer...
      The Chinese can sell the same "model" to a customer for different amounts. But! If you want it cheaper - here's the cheaper material, even cheaper - here's some simpler electronics, even cheaper - here's a sticker in the form of buttons...
      1. +2
        12 September 2024 10: 11
        .They build more nuclear power plants than Russia and their number is greater than in Russia...

        I am not in any way belittling their achievements, but we should not forget that there are one and a half billion of them there. Each took a shovel and you can dig a sea in a month. We do not have enough people and, accordingly, specialists, for such a huge territory.
        1. +1
          12 September 2024 11: 27
          10 million population does not prevent Israel from developing high technologies.
  14. +2
    12 September 2024 09: 30
    There was an article here that the Chinese improve engine performance characteristics by 2-5% in 10 years.
    That is, when replacing a worn-out one/repairing it, they will simply replace the old ones with new ones.

    If they are already installing these, it means they have reached some condition. If you just fly, without afterburner, they are probably good...
  15. 0
    12 September 2024 09: 38
    How can I like the author of the article? hi
  16. The comment was deleted.
  17. +1
    12 September 2024 10: 09
    The Chinese themselves are shady citizens. They could have easily concluded a contract for AL41 and equipped them with Su30 and I10 and I20... and when large deliveries start, they would have acquired some kind of license. First limited, then full. And a ton of money. But they always and at all stages run ahead of the locomotive and want to bypass rights and licenses.
  18. -2
    12 September 2024 10: 16
    They produced 300 units and now the question is whether it is worth continuing to produce an imperfect machine. China also has an armada of Su-27/30/35 and J-10/11/15, which are generations 4 and 4+, and are quite in the know. I do not think that the production with the new engine will be massive - rather, a gradual re-motorization of the aircraft is ahead when they are put in for major repairs and modernization.
    1. +2
      12 September 2024 18: 13
      I don’t think that the production with the new engine will be widespread - rather, what lies ahead is a gradual re-motorization of aircraft when they are put in for major repairs and modernization.

      It will not just be mass produced – in the future, all 500 J-20s will receive new WS-15 engines.
  19. +2
    12 September 2024 10: 34
    The subhuman Chinese "ripped off" something, "copied" something, and of course, nothing worked out for them.
    Nobody knows the characteristics of their engines... and therefore they are worse than Russian and American ones, whose real characteristics have also not been checked.
    The author's analysis is very good and thanks to such analyses, today Russia has reached the point where it buys many things that are vital on the battlefield not only from China, but also from the DPRK and Iran.
    But the Su-57, into which so many resources were spent, is not noticeable in the SVO. It turned out to be "low-profile" in both the direct and figurative sense of the word.
  20. -5
    12 September 2024 11: 42
    There really is no need to go to a granny, they will start to get their fingers in there and eventually they will come running to us. This has happened before and more than once. An aircraft engine is far from being an MLRS.
  21. +2
    12 September 2024 11: 56
    Airplanes are built in many places, but the engines are COMPLETELY their own - even if at least on a foreign base, but: further development, production of ALL components, assembly and maintenance up to write-off and subsequent disposal - where? Only the Russian Federation, the USA, China, Great Britain, France. Moreover, China is only at the beginning of the path, the main problem is the resource. But the road is mastered by the one who walks it. And for "ours" - not ours, it has already become a tradition to make huge plans with a subsequent shift to the right; and no one gets anything for it (( ...
    You can find reasons for criticism in everyone. I remember being very surprised when I found out. During WWII, the US began to develop the production of licensed Rolls-Royce Merlin engines. But until highly qualified workers were sent from England and they trained the locals properly, there was no sense. So much for an industrial country with traditions.
  22. +1
    12 September 2024 12: 28
    Apparently, China is betting on a logic similar to the American one - that the "fighter" will be armed with long-range high-precision homing missiles of various types and its task will be to detect (the target) earlier than the enemy and launch it with a suitable built-in target designation. A sort of bomb-missile carrier, and since AFAR and modern gadgets eat up a lot of generation, and in the future, everything will probably be even worse - they were not too embarrassed by the size, believing that this would be a justified reserve for modernization.
    Here it is necessary to understand that in the PLA there is a paradigm of thinking that most types of weapons will be used extremely massively, and, in view of this, individual dueling qualities of individual models do not play such a significant role in the event that in mass use their shortcomings will be compensated by the presence of neighbors. Accordingly, both the aviation and the navy of the PRC are planned to be used precisely massively, there is no (apparently) such a fetish for special operations as in the same USA, hence some differences in the schemes and approaches.
    1. +2
      12 September 2024 18: 23
      Apparently, China is betting on a logic similar to the American one - that the "fighter" will be armed with long-range high-precision homing missiles of various types and its task will be to detect (the target) before the enemy and launch it with suitable built-in target designation.

      This is not "American logic", this is the only normal logic. THERE IS NO OTHER.
      Here we must understand that in the PLA there is a paradigm of thinking that most types of weapons will be used extremely massively, and, in view of this, the individual dueling qualities of individual models do not play such a significant role if, in mass use, their shortcomings will be compensated for by the presence of neighbors.

      A categorically incorrect thesis: look at the same J-20, the only aircraft in the world to which it is inferior is the F-22 (Let's leave the F-35 aside, it was created primarily as a strike aircraft)
      Accordingly, the PRC plans to use both aviation and the navy on a massive scale; they do not (apparently) have the same fetish for special operations as the US, hence some differences in the schemes and approaches.

      Nonsense. If a combat unit is crap in itself, then a division made up of such units is also crap, and a unit made up of them is crap, and a formation made up of them is crap.
      There is no difference in the military construction schemes of the US and China, on the contrary: the Chinese borrow and implement the best with their hands and feet.
      1. -1
        12 September 2024 18: 51
        If a combat unit itself is crap, then a unit made up of such units is also crap.

        Guderian with his tanks would not agree with you.
        Very much depends on tactics - and whether it is crap or not is a flexible concept, there is a range of "sufficient quality", there is a range where quantity turns into quality, there is a purely quantitative range. For example, cheap Ukrainian drones penetrate our expensive air defense and do their job, can we say that they are crap? Well, or, for example, we often praise the Su-34 and it is customary to compare its capabilities with the capabilities of 5th generation aircraft, while this is still the 4th generation +, not stealth and many other "nots". However, despite these "nots" no one says that the aircraft is bad or insufficient to perform a properly assigned task. This is the essence of what I meant - the Chinese, when wanting to provide suitable performance characteristics, DO NOT put a sharp gap in the totality of qualities at the forefront. It is enough for them to have them in sufficient quantities, they plan to compensate for the rest by various means.

        There is no difference in the military construction schemes of the US and China

        The difference is significant - the PRC relies less on lobbying in the manufacture of products, it is less interested in the mad race for performance characteristics. They need (at the moment) workhorses with the potential for modernization. And for the Americans, the lobbying factor is very important, the painful desire for superiority and overtaking the enemy, they pour a lot into "promising" directions, even if these directions are unpromising. For them, however, the dueling qualities of the product, its comprehensive perfection superiority, are extremely important, even to the detriment of its "wide working capacity".

        This is not "American logic", this is the only normal logic. THERE IS NO OTHER

        You are wrong - there are several logics on this matter, and the West's desire to pour into NGAD indicates that they understand this.
        1. +1
          12 September 2024 20: 03
          For example, cheap Ukrainian drones penetrate our expensive air defense and do their job, can we say that they are sh*t?

          No, of course not. IT'S NOT ALWAYS ABOUT PRICE.
          This is the essence of what I meant - the Chinese, when they want to provide good performance characteristics, do NOT put a hard gap in the totality of qualities at the forefront. It is enough for them to have them in sufficient quantity, and they plan to compensate for the rest by various means.

          Who told you that the Chinese "don't care about quality and are pushing for quantity"?! Today's Chinese fighters are better than Russian ones - isn't this a fight for quality?
          The difference is significant - China relies less on lobbying in the manufacture of products, and is less interested in the mad race for performance characteristics.

          The Chinese military-industrial complex does not rely on lobbying at all, I completely agree, but the "mad race for performance characteristics" - I categorically disagree! Where did this ridiculous thesis penetrate so deeply into the broad masses of the people?! Both the newest Chinese aircraft and the newest Chinese air-to-air missiles are a "mad race for performance characteristics"!
          The Americans have a very important lobbying factor, a morbid desire for superiority and overtaking the enemy, They invest a lot in "promising" directions, even if these directions are unpromising.

          Where does this "nonsense" come from?? Who is introducing it into public consciousness and why?! WHO ALLOWED THAT A PROBABLE ENEMY BE TAKEN FOR A BUNCH OF IDIOTS?!
          This is not "American logic", this is the only normal logic. THERE IS NO OTHER

          You are wrong - there are several logics on this matter, and the West's desire to pour into NGAD indicates that they understand this.

          There are no several logics, only one can be correct, the rest will be incorrect to one degree or another! smile
  23. +2
    12 September 2024 15: 18
    At least they made 300 of them with "first period engines". And we only see the Su57 at the May 9 parade.
  24. -4
    12 September 2024 17: 18
    Overall, it turned out to be an ugly plane.

    Tupolev said:
    "Ugly planes don't fly."

    But the ash-plane is really not pretty. The MiG-1.44 looks better.
  25. +1
    13 September 2024 00: 21
    I recommend a Chinese military action movie about the testing and implementation of this fighter: 长空之王 "King of the Sky" or Born to Fly (Born to Fly) 2023. https://www.kinopoisk.ru/film/5106374/
    There is a lot of time devoted to problems with Chinese engines. You could say that this is the main problem in the film.
    By the way, this film features... Gorbachev. In the form of a Chinese.
    More details here: https://virshi-v-stol.livejournal.com/2724.html - why is Gorbachev there and what is this hinting at...
  26. 0
    14 September 2024 04: 25
    It's not that simple!!! - you can't copy it, buy it like penguins. That's also a bummer, because only we have technologies under the "SS" label, all that's left is to hammer it out with your own mind, and that takes decades and your own developments - we'll live and see. There is still no real fifth generation, all 4++++++++++
    1. 0
      14 September 2024 07: 49
      there is still no real fifth generation, all 4++++++++++

      YF-22, YF-23, F-22, X-32, X-35, F-35, J-20, FC-31 - that's it fifth generation.
      1. 0
        16 September 2024 14: 57
        Why isn't there a Su 57? How is it not the 5th generation?
        1. -1
          16 September 2024 15: 02
          So, its frontal RCS is ~0.1 m², average (from the front at a 3/4 angle) 0.5 m². He is not stealth. With such invisibility, they don't accept into this club. When the Indians found out about this data, they turned up their noses and ran away...
          1. 0
            16 September 2024 22: 13
            Where can I read about these performance characteristics? I don't think this will be published online.
            1. -1
              16 September 2024 22: 19
              "If you suffer long enough, something will come of it." It was also on the Internet, signed by Pogosyan himself and a group of comrades. I can't find it right away.
  27. The comment was deleted.
  28. +1
    15 September 2024 11: 55
    The Chinese, unlike Putin's defective managers, carry out their tasks without loud promises; they shoot for theft there, so we need to worry about our aircraft industry and not only.
  29. 0
    17 September 2024 15: 27
    Why only Su-57? On the MiG-31 the weapons operator
    STANDARD has existed since the aircraft was designed, and in general, almost any two-seater aircraft can be “re-sawed” for this function - even an ancient Su-24, or any two-seater training fighter with a suitable flight range.
    The ideal option for the Aerospace Forces is the Su-37 with a set of attack drones, which will not only be able to control them, but will also deliver them to the launch site, saving them a lot of fuel...
  30. 0
    17 September 2024 21: 16
    The most important thing in an airplane is the engine. It is impossible to copy. It is more complex than a rocket engine. It will be a long time before the Chinese make a real 5th generation fighter. It is much easier to copy microprocessors, cars and much more. Heat-resistant engine parts can be made. You can also find out the composition of the product, but it is extremely difficult to find out the technology. Temperature conditions, the order of creating an alloy. Processing technology. At what temperature. This requires a lot of experience and a lot of time. And competitors will not wait. The Chinese currently do not have a reliable and economical engine for 4th generation fighters. The Chinese have not revealed their secret of making porcelain to the world. And the whole world has been unraveling this mystery for several centuries.
    1. -1
      18 September 2024 18: 49
      The most important thing in an airplane is the engine. It is impossible to copy. It is more complex than a rocket engine. It will be a long time before the Chinese make a real 5th generation fighter.

      This ridiculous self-soothing mantra will be repeated and harped on endlessly here.
      The Chinese will actually produce 300 (out of 500) J-20 aircraft with the old WS-10 engines, but the remaining 200 will be equipped with the new WS-15 engines, with exactly the same thrust as the F-119's F22 engine - 15 kg:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_WS-15
      The plant has been producing them in series for two years now.
      But what kind of bastard has hammered into the public consciousness that “the most important thing in a 5th generation aircraft is the engine”?! Swap the engines of the F-15EX and F-22 - the first will not become a 5th generation aircraft, although it will be able to fly a little faster and higher, the second will not cease to be a 5th generation aircraft and the best fighter in the world, although it will now fly a little slower and a little lower...
      And of course, the engine can first be copied and then improved, if the country reaches the appropriate level of technology.
      1. 0
        19 September 2024 13: 16
        That's the point. China can do quantity, but it's bad with quality. Wikipedia is a real truth-teller. Especially the English version. Apparently, the Chinese themselves gave them the data on the secret engine. The engine dimensions are specified with an accuracy of 1 cm. The Chinese can't even create competitive engines for commercial passenger aircraft. Although civilian engines are simpler than military ones in terms of extreme loads. No matter how ridiculous it may seem, you can improve it endlessly and still not do it as needed.
        1. -1
          19 September 2024 13: 32
          Apart from complete nonsense, are you able to rip off anything else?
          1. 0
            19 September 2024 16: 18
            And that's all? Not much! I expected a more interesting discussion!
            1. -1
              19 September 2024 18: 55
              What kind of "discussion" could there be in response to unsubstantiated nonsense? China has already created 300 stealth aircraft and will increase their number to 500, and the Russian Aerospace Forces have 24 Su-57 aircraft "with reduced radar visibility" - is there a difference or not?
              1. 0
                21 September 2024 09: 44
                What is a fifth-generation fighter with fourth-generation engines worth? Even 4 units. A waste of money for show. Just think about a fifth-generation Chinese aircraft with a Russian AL-1000FN engine (from the Su-31). The most important thing is the engine. It is much easier to make a coating. A Ferrari with a Zhiguli engine is not a Ferrari. Even if 27 units are produced. And the Su-10000 is being created specifically as a fifth-generation fighter. That is why they are not making many yet. Well, what could be more unproven! From empty to empty.
                1. -1
                  30 September 2024 09: 19
                  The most important thing is the engine.

                  Who told you that anyway? "The most important thing in a 5th generation aircraft is the engine"?!
  31. -2
    27 September 2024 08: 42
    The Chinese have so-so metal. There is a lot to do there - optimize the mass, introduce carbon fiber, automate and optimize the steering wheels. The engine resource is small due to the inability to smelt tungsten-molybdenum alloys. The kosorylym (pre-revolutionary term) still have a lot to learn.