Military Review

Eagle or Bear? Who has the latest fighter aircraft - America or Russia? (People's Daily, China)

139

The other day, the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Air Force issued a statement that Russia had already begun to test the fifth and sixth flight samples of the newest T-50 fighter (PAK FA), and also expressed confidence that by the start of mass production the aircraft would be taken to armament, with the result that the air force units will go from 2015 to 450 fighters. When it comes to aircraft of a new generation, America also does not want to stand aside: a spokesman for the US Department of Defense said that the causes of problems in the newest F-600 have already been identified, in light of which the Pentagon allowed the Air Force to resume flights of these machines. At the same time, the US Army is ready to allocate 35 billions of dollars for the modernization of F-6.9 fighters, the production of which was previously suspended. Bald Eagle and Polar Bear, the US Army and the Russian Army are the best in the world. And their newest fighters F-22, F-22 and T-35, developed using low-visibility technologies (according to Western European standards, these are 50 generation fighters, according to Soviet-Russian standards, these are 4 generation fighters) - a direct reflection real military power of each of these powers. Which planes better show themselves in the sky, what are the advantages and weak points of each model?


Sea claw with steel claws

One F-22 is enough to shoot down the 5 of third-generation aircraft.

In the 80 of the 20th century, the Soviet Union held the leading position in the sky at the expense of such powerful third-generation machines as the MiG-29 and Su-27, which were opposed to American fighters of the third generation F-15 and F-16 at that time. To capture superiority in the sky, the Pentagon was the first to follow the path of developing a new, fourth-generation fighter. In 80, the task was set; by 90, the development plan was approved. The new aircraft received the designation F-22 "Raptor". In 1997, the flight tests of the first model of this aircraft successfully passed; in 2003, the first batch of serial Raptors was already handed over. Distinctive features of the F-22 were its high maneuverability, supersonic cruising speed, compliance with the idea of ​​"first discovered - first struck," and low visibility. Compared to previous generation combat aircraft, this was a huge leap forward.


Pentagon officials have said that one F-22 can handle 10 Soviet 3 generation fighters; later began to talk about 5 aircraft. The development of this fighter closely watched the whole world. The qualities combined in it became a model for all subsequent developments of the 4 generation fighter jets, one way or another, all other military powers began to copy it. Up to 2013, the F-22 remained the only 4 generation fighter in the world to be in service. Since the F-22 is such a great plane, who wouldn't want to have one in its army? However, America strictly forbade the export of these fighters, treating them as a jewel that cannot be sold to the right and left. To sweeten the pill for its allies, the United States began developing another aircraft that could be handed over to others: this is how work began on another 4 generation fighter, the F-35 Lightning. In aerial combat, the new machine showed itself somewhat worse than the F-22, but the Lightnings were better suited to perform such tasks as striking ground targets. The Pentagon’s plan was simple: to capture superiority in the air with the help of the F-22 in the zone of military operations, and to strike the enemy at F-35. A lot of countries participated in the development of Lightnings, including America, the UK, Canada, Australia and Italy. The calculation was initially made on the fact that the F-35 will become the main combat aircraft of the first half of the XXI century for America and all its allies; one US army plans to buy up to 2400 machines, while its NATO allies and Japan are going to buy up to 700 aircraft.

Who better show themselves in the sky?

Air combat between the United States and Russia.

Who will prevail if the newest fighters of Russia and America converge in air combat? In fact, discussing this issue, we can now only make assumptions, since the US F-22 has long been in service, and the Russian T-50 is still in the flight test stage. We do not yet have a clear idea of ​​the real capabilities of the Russian fighter. If we talk about the design, the length of the hull, the span and the wing area of ​​the Russian aircraft is slightly larger than that of the Raptor, however, the T-50 turns out to be quite light, making it possible to conclude that the Russian fighter will be quite maneuverable. The maximum speed of the F-22 is 2400 km / h, and the Russian aircraft can, according to preliminary estimates, reach the speed of 2600 km / h, however, the T-50 can play Raptor at cruising speed. As the Russian side claims, the T-50 can carry a huge amount of fuel, thanks to which it will also surpass the F-22 both in practical range and in combat radius. If we talk about weapons, then the Russian machine, in addition to the cannon for conducting short-range air combat and short-range and medium-range missiles, will also be equipped with ultra-long-range air-to-air missiles capable of hitting targets at a distance over 400 km. It should be remembered that at the moment for the F-22 the main means of dealing with an air enemy are only short-range and medium-range missiles. Such a situation could lead to the fact that in the T-50 fight with the F-22, the Russian fighter will have the advantage of a first strike. However, the Russian plane also has its weak points.

First, it is electronic navigation equipment: in this field, Soviet and Russian developments have always been inferior to their American counterparts. The new T-50 will be equipped with an advanced radar system and will be able to detect targets at a distance of more than 400 km, simultaneously tracking air targets to 60 and hitting more 16, however, despite the fact that Russian developers have some progress in this area, the onboard radio-electronic equipment responsible for the collection and processing of information, active noise protection and auto-adjustment, still leaves much to be desired. On the F-22 put multifunction multifrequency avionics, while the protective systems T-50 do not cover the entire width of the frequency spectrum. If we talk about the use of stealth technology, which has become a feature of all fourth-generation aircraft, here the Russian fighter is also somewhat inferior to its American counterparts. The large wingspan makes the aircraft more maneuverable, but at the same time increases the risk of detection.

The situation is similar with the structure of the tail fairing: for excellent maneuverability, you have to pay less invisibility. Without a doubt, the T-50 is a magnificent aircraft; Having reduced the effective scattering area (ESR) of this fighter to 0.5 m², Russian engineers have done an incredible job. However, it is still more than the F-22: according to official data, when using the same radar, the distance at which the Russian fighter is detected is twice as large as that of the Raptor. There are, however, those specialists who believe that, thanks to the design features of the T-50, in real combat conditions will be less noticeable than the American fighter. Therefore, in general, we can draw the following conclusion: if we take the combat characteristics of the aircraft directly (top speed, fire power), then the T-50 turns out to be the best choice, but if we look at other indicators (stealth, electronic stuffing), the Russian fighter loses to the Raptor ". What will be the outcome of a real battle, while no one can predict. However, we should not forget that the F-22 has been developed and improved for more than a dozen years. Beating out with all my might, and getting an airplane at the exit, which can barely compete with a car twenty years ago, is not the most enviable position for the Russian military.


Lightning F-35 also applies to fifth-generation aircraft, but we need to understand that this is just a cheaper multi-role fighter that was designed to appease allies and strike ground targets. Stealth, speed, fighting efficiency - in all these parameters "Lightning" is not at all like the Raptors. Perhaps, in comparison with the new Russian F-35 fighter, it will be more effective with the defeat of ground and naval targets, but if these fighters converge in a fight, the F-35 is doomed to instant death.

Mighty polar bear

T-50 restore the greatness and authority of the Russian Air Force

While the US captured supremacy in the sky with the help of the newest F-22, Russia was overwhelmed by adversity: the collapse of the Soviet Union sharply reduced the country's military power, the collapse of the entire economic system brought promising military developments to a standstill. After Putin came to power, the economic situation in the country improved, but the Russian army was by no means richer. How in such conditions to find the enormous funds necessary to continue the development of its own fighter of a new generation? And then, fortunately for Russia, India offered its help. India, too, is dreaming of becoming a superpower, so the two countries quickly reached a compromise and began to jointly develop the T-50 fighter. What is the format of this "collaboration"? All key technologies are in the hands of Russian developers, India only needs to pay bills.

The path of the F-22 from the first sketches to the conveyor took 20 years. Russia was pushed by the need to reduce the technological gap, so the development was carried out as soon as possible. Initially, it was assumed that the first samples of fighters will be released for flight tests already in 2008, however, due to economic and technological difficulties, the development was delayed over and over again. Ultimately, the first test sample was made in the 2010 year. The development of T-50 is still at the testing stage, so we can only speculate about its real characteristics. However, due to the fact that this aircraft saw the light on the 10 years later, the Raptor, the world community is inclined to believe that its flight performance is unlikely to be much worse than the American fighter. The T-50 will restore the greatness and prestige of the Russian Air Force: a competitor to American aircraft will reappear in the sky.

Comparing the parameters of the new generation aircraft
ParameterT-50 (PAK FA)F-22  F-35
Start of developmentOK. 1980 OK. 1996OK. 2000
First flight tests201019972006
Adoption2013-20152005Unknown
Length22 m18.92 m15.37 m
Wingspan14.2 m13.56 m10.65 m
Empty weight17.5 t19.7 t12 t
Cruising speed1400 km / h1963 km / h1100 km / h
Speed ​​limit2600 km / h2410 km / h 1930 km / h
Unit cost250 million350 million200 million
nearly invisible    Inferior with F-22HighHigh
Each of the fighters of the new generation has its weak points

The frightening fighters of the new generation - of course, on the battlefields they represent a formidable force. However, it has long been the custom that you have to pay for all the good, and if you want to own such advanced weaponswill have to seriously fork out. Take for example the American F-22 fighter. Already, the cost of manufacturing one aircraft exceeds 150 million dollars, but if we take into account the costs of ensuring production safety and the costs of design work, the cost of one fighter plane will exceed 350 million dollars - money that you can buy more than 10 tons pure gold. However, this is not the last time you have to open a wallet: a constant expense item will be aircraft maintenance. For every hour spent in the air, F-22 has 30 hours of maintenance, which is why one hour of its flight costs the taxpayers in 40 more than thousands of dollars. The cockpit light costs several million dollars, but it also needs to be replaced every 18 months.

Eagle or Bear? Who has the latest fighter aircraft - America or Russia? (People's Daily, China)

The most important thing is the fact that such expenditures do not guarantee perfect combat capability. “Raptor” is the trump card of the American army, but for a hundred thousand hours spent in the sky, there are 4 crashed aircraft. It turns out that the most expensive aircraft in the US Air Force - the aircraft with the highest failure rate. In 2008, the fighter’s crash was due to the fact that a piece of stealth cover got into the aircraft engine, which turned out to be of insufficient quality. It was subsequently discovered that a fighter also had a defect in the oxygen supply system, which could have caused the death of pilots in the 2009 and 2010 years. Because of this, the leadership of the American army was forced to ban flights at a height above 7600 m (while the theoretical fighter ceiling is 18000 m). In the end, in 2011, the high cost of fighter manufacturing forced the US government to suspend the production of Raptors. At this point, the cost of the development program has already reached 65 billion dollars. However, as we know, the modernization program for these fighters was announced in 2013: this means that 6.9 billions more will be thrown into this bottomless pit. The United States learned this lesson well and began developing a cheaper, new-generation universal fighter - the F-35. Initially, the price of one aircraft should not exceed 30 million dollars. Trying to make the plane as cheap as possible, the Americans were ready to go even to reduce its speed and other flight performance. What do we see in the end? The complex construction plus inflation did the trick: the cost of manufacturing Lightnings was constantly growing, approaching 2012 in the year to 200 million dollars. America’s allies spent a long time indulging in empty hopes that they would be able to get a great plane for a low price, but the increasing cost of production led many of them to talk about refusing to participate in the program or cutting the procurement plan. The number of orders decreased, and this again only increased the cost of the fighter.

"Lightning" hit a kind of vicious circle. The Russian T-50 is still at the testing stage, so Russia’s spending is still less than US spending, but in the next ten years Moscow plans to invest about 2-3 billions of dollars in its fighter. At the same time, according to the plan of the Indian side, for twenty years, India will spend 144 planes in the purchase of 35 billions of dollars. It turns out that the price of one fighter hovers around 200 million dollars. This, of course, is cheaper than the F-22, but still more expensive than the F-35, and in general a lot. However, experience shows that when Russia negotiates with India on the sale of any weapons, the product eventually becomes more and more expensive, so you can be sure that 200 million dollars - the price is not final.
Originator:
http://military.people.com.cn
139 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vanek
    Vanek April 12 2013 06: 44
    23
    Eagle or Bear? Who the newest better fighters - America or Russia?

    And there is also such a sign "Comparing the parameters of the new generation aircraft"

    Well, let's start with the fact that by and large, Russia does not even have them. I do not pretend to be anything, but the fact remains. Till.......

    Hello to everyone. hi
    1. Romn
      Romn April 12 2013 06: 53
      0
      I completely agree, even at the time mass production begins, America will have quantitative parity for a long time. And the hour is not far off when there will be talk about the 6 generation aircraft. But now it’s not 90e and Russia is gradually recovering, I think in the near future we will be at least on par with the USA in the technical level of military equipment. In the meantime, wait T 50, perhaps he will please us with the top expectations!
      1. Vadivak
        Vadivak April 12 2013 09: 15
        11
        Quote: ...
        if these fighters converge in battle, the F-35 is doomed to instant death.


        Caresses the ear
        1. eagle11
          eagle11 April 13 2013 16: 12
          +1
          The key word is "if", here the plane will trample into the troops, then we will share the "bear skin"
        2. Siberian German
          Siberian German 31 May 2013 21: 39
          0
          God forbid to start caressing the eye
    2. aktanir
      aktanir April 12 2013 07: 28
      22
      Nevertheless, one cannot blame the Chinese bias, the article is quite good and, most importantly, objective, as if we did not want another reality.
      1. Sirocco
        Sirocco April 12 2013 08: 13
        +7
        You know, the Chinese are certainly well done, touching all the copies of the fighters that they make. But, there is one thing but, they have not yet learned how to make engines, they put the Russians. And this applies to all weapons produced in China, as well as Subplav (recently discussed) and rockets, with artillery. Take the same Grad, they can’t make an exact copy, the whole problem is in the launchers (twisted pipes)
        1. DYMITRY
          DYMITRY April 12 2013 08: 23
          +6
          Quote: Sirocco
          But, there is one thing but, they have not yet learned how to make engines, they put Russian

          They also purchase avionics over 50% from us.
          1. eagle11
            eagle11 April 13 2013 16: 16
            0
            We have such, "avionics" and "electronics" that the ten-year-old Su-30mki, but in performance for the Russian Air Force, will not be launched.
        2. Reasonable, 2,3
          Reasonable, 2,3 April 12 2013 09: 00
          +1
          Che there is molodyetsky. They themselves can’t, our brains are combined, We have a lot of fun. So, and so on.
        3. eagle11
          eagle11 April 13 2013 16: 14
          -2
          As if in the production of MLRS, the Chinese are very strong, and in terms of range in the lead. I explain, I refer to the summary.
      2. Nayhas
        Nayhas April 12 2013 08: 16
        +2
        But they just sidestepped their developments, although they mocked the Indians.
      3. Suhov
        Suhov April 12 2013 16: 12
        +1
        Quote: aktanir
        one cannot blame the Chinese bias, the article is pretty good and, most importantly, objective ...

        I won’t be surprised if I find out that the Chinese have secretly already xeroxed all the above models of new generation aircraft and in practice compared their combat characteristics ...
        What model the Chinese will put into series - the one that’s the best!
        We are watching the Chinese ...
        laughing
      4. Gemar
        Gemar 12 May 2013 09: 52
        0
        Quote: aktanir
        the article is pretty good and, most importantly, objective

        We look at the article ... T-50 \ F-22 \ F-35
        Start of development Ok. 1980 c. 1996 c. 2000
        First flight tests 2010 1997 2006
        First, work on the T-50 began in the early 2000s. The money for the creation began to be allocated in the mid-2000s. In the 1980s, they just started to "compose" the requirements for the fifth generation.
        But, judging by the "objective" information from the Chinese, the F-22 was developed in a year! The most stupid nonsense!
        according to official data, when illuminated by the same radar, the distance at which the Russian fighter is detected is twice as long as that of the Raptor

        Where did they get this "official" information? And with what "one and the same radar" they scanned these planes ??? belay Is it really Chinese ??? laughing
        I won't even write about the cost of 200 million for the T-50 ... I'll wait for an official article about the J-20 and write an "objective article" too. Let the Chinese not be offended only later.
    3. Reasonable, 2,3
      Reasonable, 2,3 April 12 2013 07: 48
      22 th
      Hello, A "Fighter Bear?. Something new. Do we play a lot of tanks?"
      1. Manager
        Manager April 12 2013 09: 44
        +4
        Quote: Reasonable, 2,3
        Hello, A "Fighter Bear ?.

        Exactly the same as "Eagle" Ahahahahahaha
        1. Windbreak
          Windbreak April 12 2013 12: 06
          -4
          The bear is a Tu-95, the Eagle is still an F-15 Eagle fighter
          1. Wedmak
            Wedmak April 12 2013 12: 19
            +9
            Bear - Russia, Eagle - USA. What are you attached to the aircraft?
      2. Reasonable, 2,3
        Reasonable, 2,3 April 13 2013 05: 34
        -3
        Well you give. no comments.
      3. Reasonable, 2,3
        Reasonable, 2,3 April 13 2013 06: 03
        -2
        Oh, how scary it is from -. Understand- a- THEN, SCREAM ON THEME.
    4. self-propelled
      self-propelled April 12 2013 08: 03
      +7
      my hello to you hi here I am about the same. how to compare what is not yet? batch production will then be comparable.
      1. Reasonable, 2,3
        Reasonable, 2,3 April 13 2013 08: 23
        -3
        Whom? Tu-95.
    5. Reddragon
      Reddragon April 12 2013 08: 16
      +1
      Attention: In the Chinese classification, the entire 4 generation of aircraft, while others - 5.
      1. Alexander
        Alexander April 12 2013 08: 32
        +1
        The Chinese have MLRS, and they were designed by our designers in the 90s. So they do not need Grad.
        1. Reasonable, 2,3
          Reasonable, 2,3 April 12 2013 08: 47
          +1
          They have a "Tornado", more blunt, but there is.
        2. Reddragon
          Reddragon April 12 2013 20: 48
          0
          Quote: Alexander
          The Chinese have MLRS, and they were designed by our designers in 90's. So they don’t need Grad

          And here MLRS?
          And if so then: back in 1979 they captured a couple of Grads. This is how Type 81 and 89 appeared.
          1. Reasonable, 2,3
            Reasonable, 2,3 April 13 2013 05: 48
            0
            No need, they then got it from I ................ And the MLRS passed them drunk "Not so sitting" ok ok call.
    6. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov April 12 2013 09: 19
      +4
      Something I did not understand at the cost of T 50, where does the figure in 250 million dollars come from ?????
      The approximate cost of a T-50 fighter aircraft is about $ 100.

      FIGHTER T-50 CHARACTERISTICS


      Man in a carriage 1 person and 2 people
      22 meters length
      Width 14.8 meters
      Height 5.48 meters
      Normal weight 100% fuel 30 t 610 kg
      Maximum weight 35 t 480 kg
      Fuel weight 11 t 100 kg
      Two turbojet engines with afterburners and controlled thrust vectors
      Engine model 2 turbofan Saturn or under the brand name (product)
      Engine weight Approximately 1.5 tones
      FLIGHT CHARACTERISTICS
      Cruising speed 1800 km / h
      The maximum speed of 2500 km / h or 2.3 Mach
      Range of flight
      4400 km without refueling
      Refueling 5500 km
      Speed ​​range 2100 km
      Flight altitude limit 20 km
      Climbing Speed ​​350 m / s
      ARMAMENT
      Dual 30 mm gun (upgraded) 100 shells
      14 rocket suspension points
      Arms load weight 10 tons
      Hanging weapons Guided air-to-air, air-to-surface missiles in excess of long, long, medium and short range with a laser and television sight. Mines and bombs.
      1. JonnyT
        JonnyT April 12 2013 09: 44
        +8
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Something I did not understand at the cost of T 50, where does the figure in 250 million dollars come from ?????

        The Chinese are turning to loot)))) Most likely, the Chinese leadership has already cast fishing rods about the purchase of T-50 so they were told the price, a little overpriced)))))
      2. patsantre
        patsantre April 12 2013 10: 31
        +5
        Get used to comparing under equal conditions. And then the Su-35 will always shout, it costs 80 lyam, and the raptor 300 lyalyalya. Just do not care for everyone that R&D was included in the price of the raptor, but not in the drying cost.
        The T-50 will never cost a hundred. If you take data on Indian exports, then it is already under 150, and R&D is not included in this price. And also take inflation into account.
    7. Vovka levka
      Vovka levka April 12 2013 14: 11
      +1
      Even if there was, then any comparison is relative. Because there are a lot of factors, but in real life there are even more.
      1. 755962
        755962 April 12 2013 15: 26
        0
        Australian military analysts from Air Power Australia conducted a comparative analysis of the fifth generation T-50 KB Sukhoi fighter, the prototype of which is currently undergoing flight tests, with its American counterparts F-22 “Raptor” and F-35 “Lightning II” .

        According to a published report, the new Russian fighter surpasses existing foreign counterparts in a number of characteristics. Developed since the end of the 90s as part of the Front-End Aviation Complex Advanced Aviation Complex (PAK-FA) program, the T-50 multipurpose fighter was created according to a new aerodynamic scheme with the maximum reduction in thermal and optical visibility.

        The use of a large number of composite materials, up to 70% in the skin and up to 40% in the entire structure of the aircraft, makes it difficult to detect by radar. The fighter itself is equipped with the latest radars developed by the Scientific Research Institute named after V.V. Tikhomirova, which in combination with two BTsVM (On-board Digital Computing Machine) provide him with the detection of targets at a distance of up to 400 km, simultaneous tracking of up to 60 air targets and firing of 16 of them. And the systems of Radio Electronic Fighting (EW) and suppression of Infrared Homing Heads (IR seeker) effectively protect the T-50 from air defense systems. Moreover, as noted in the report, it is the radars that are in the arsenal of the US Army that are experiencing the most problems.

        Experts noted the outstanding flight characteristics of the T-50. At the moment, the device is equipped with two AL-41F-1A turbojet engines with an integrated digital control system and a thrust vector deflected in two planes. The use of engines with increased efficiency ensured an exceptionally effective ratio of thrust and mass of the fighter, which resulted in “over-maneuverability”, an increase in the missile and bomb load, practical ceiling and speed characteristics.

        Another feature of the T-50 is its fuel tank, unusually large for aircraft of this class. This allows the fighter to conduct combat operations for a much longer time and provides it with a significantly greater radius of action than the F-22 and F-35, wordscience.org reports.

        Comparing similar characteristics of the T-50 with the similar performance of fifth-generation American fighters, Australian expert Dr. Carlo Kopp recognized the Russian novelty as the undoubted leader among competitors.

        http://nnm.ru/blogs/prikol200/
        1. Vovka levka
          Vovka levka April 12 2013 19: 23
          -3
          How can you compare something without studying it. But the characteristics, how beautiful they are written, there is a certain experience, but there are nuances. Why should everyone know?
          There is a good joke on this subject.
          A man could not sell a cow, and hired a gypsy. The gypsy praised the cow in the market so much that the sea gathered for buyers and the price went up. Then the man says, if she is so good, then I will not sell her.
          The moral of that fable is this: time will tell. And the best thing is that these comparisons are peaceful.
        2. maxon106
          maxon106 April 14 2013 08: 55
          0
          I did not expect such a comparison from the Australians
          1. Vovka levka
            Vovka levka April 14 2013 12: 23
            0
            And you ask who Dr. Carlo Kopp is and what he writes.
  2. Nesvet Nezar
    Nesvet Nezar April 12 2013 06: 53
    +1
    The Chinese vkurse ... The Americans are finalizing Mig-141. The Chinese are finalizing Mig-1.44. Everything is fine.
    1. demon ada
      demon ada April 12 2013 07: 30
      +5
      did you mean Yak-141
      1. Reasonable, 2,3
        Reasonable, 2,3 April 12 2013 08: 29
        +1
        WE DON'T HAVE SUCH CAR. 1 is in Monino, in the museum. Sold, along with honor-. Flight of the car-officially-only 1- "La Bourget", 1991. There is a video.
  3. Wedmak
    Wedmak April 12 2013 06: 55
    +3
    Seeing in the signature that the authors are Chinese, I expected a brief comparison, and then "but still China is making its own fighter ... la-la-la, he is also in no way inferior ...".
    And then I even found out the news
    A cab lantern costs several million dollars, but it also needs to be replaced every 18 months.

    Seriously??? The first time I hear this.
    But in general the article summarizes the current "state of affairs" quite well.
    1. Sirocco
      Sirocco April 12 2013 07: 49
      0
      Here is an article about the Chinese diamonds. http://rus.ruvr.ru/2012_05_24/75856193/
    2. Reddragon
      Reddragon April 12 2013 08: 24
      0
      Quote: Wedmak
      Seriously???

      I am sure that the translation is clumsy.
      1. Beck
        Beck April 12 2013 11: 16
        +2
        Equal 1972 respond and read the article. And then you populated me on the topic of Izhevsk bulpups.

        However, we should not forget that the F-22 has been developed and improved for more than a dozen years. It is not the most enviable position for the Russian military to get out of their way, and at the exit to get an airplane that can barely compete with a machine twenty years ago.
        1. dmitreach
          dmitreach April 12 2013 14: 54
          +2
          And here the Omerians themselves answered why it It has been developed for decades ... Only in cinema is Bradley theme, but the essence is the same ...
          Vidyuha, as Max Golopolosov says: megaBAYAN, but somehow I do ***! fellow The topic is accurate. good
          1. maxon106
            maxon106 April 14 2013 09: 09
            0
            Video class, neighing to the end. If this is a movie then what ??
      2. Sergey_K
        Sergey_K April 12 2013 12: 15
        +1
        I read somewhere that a flashlight is a rather high-tech and expensive thing.
  4. cobalt
    cobalt April 12 2013 07: 03
    0
    I don’t understand one thing, why the author classifies the F-22 as a 4th generation aircraft, not the fifth, and the SU-27 and MiG-29 as a 3rd generation aircraft. In fact, they belong to 4 generation aircraft.
    1. Dangerous
      Dangerous April 12 2013 07: 33
      0
      the latest F-22, F-35 and T-50 fighters, developed using low visibility technologies (according to Western European standards, these are 4th generation fighters, according to Soviet-Russian standards, these are 5th generation fighters)
      1. Windbreak
        Windbreak April 12 2013 12: 25
        +1
        translators apparently awakened. These are Chinese, not Western European standards.
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm April 12 2013 15: 36
          0
          Quote: Burel
          translators apparently awakened. These are Chinese, not Western European standards.

          Eagle or Bear? Who has the latest fighter aircraft - America or Russia? ("People's Daily", China)
          Conscientiously translated from Chinese, a large nation has its own classification.
    2. engineer74
      engineer74 April 12 2013 07: 44
      0
      The division of fighters into generations is very arbitrary. The Americans did not have a third generation (according to our classification), respectively, their 4th is our 5th, and our 4th is their 3rd. And how the generation is determined by the Chinese is a mystery. smile Something like this...
    3. evgenii67
      evgenii67 April 12 2013 07: 50
      +1
      Hello everyone!
      Quote: cobalt
      I don’t understand one thing, why the author classifies the F-22 as a 4th generation aircraft, not the fifth, and the SU-27 and MiG-29 as a 3rd generation aircraft. In fact, they belong to 4 generation aircraft.

      So this is verbiage performed by the author,"(according to Western European standards, these are 4th generation fighters, according to Soviet-Russian standards, these are 5th generation fighters)" allegedly F-15, F-16, as well as the Russian MiG-29 and Su-27
      generation-3. This is the question, why did the author in the article adhere to "Western European standards" and not "Soviet-Russian"? Well, according to the article itself, an attempt to analyze and compare what already exists and what will be adopted in service at best in 15, as they say, do you need comments? hi
    4. gas
      gas April 12 2013 10: 23
      +2
      Read carefully there it is said there is a Western, and there is a Soviet-Russian classification.
    5. romb
      romb April 12 2013 12: 25
      0
      Due to the fact that the Chinese aviation industry began to develop relatively recently, they use a slightly different "gradation" for generations. In general, all these "generations" are a purely subjective concept.
  5. svp67
    svp67 April 12 2013 07: 03
    +3
    The People's Daily is the central newspaper of the Chinese Communist Party, and the articles published in it are primarily political material. It remains only to understand what the Chinese leadership wants by doing this.
    1. Odysseus
      Odysseus April 13 2013 19: 11
      0
      Quote: svp67
      The People's Daily is the central newspaper of the Chinese Communist Party, and the articles published in it are primarily political material. It remains only to understand what the Chinese leadership wants by doing this.

      Absolutely. And they want to convince society of the need to accelerate the work on the creation of the Chinese 5-generation fighter.
  6. Sirocco
    Sirocco April 12 2013 07: 20
    +7
    we can now only speculate, since the American F-22 has long been in service. We emphasize that it’s worth it. laughing Has he been involved in military conflicts in recent decades? or as always stood. Like U.S. Aircraft Carriers in the Libyan War lol. The raptor may be good, but raw... In our case, we are in the black, I hope our constructors have taken into account all the shortcomings in the Raptor, so that they can not be allowed at home. So let the United States grieve, it is more difficult to make structural changes to hundreds of ready-made and STANDING machines on the ground. At the expense of everything else (performance characteristics of aircraft), it's no secret, our manufacturers always underestimate the performance characteristics of our weapons, and the countries of the West and the United States overestimate. Remembering 1992, our pilots beat American aces in the USA, in a training battle, in all positions. For which the "good" Yankees nearly killed our pilots and planes. http://bulochnikov.livejournal.com/710675.html?thread=12233747
    1. DYMITRY
      DYMITRY April 12 2013 08: 38
      11
      Quote: Sirocco
      A raptor may be good but raw.

      There is an opinion that amers, in order to bring the raptor to the level of a combat vehicle, need to invest at least as much as has already been invested in it. Today the raptor can be regarded as a "serial prototype". In fact, the raptor has three serious problems: 1. The outer coating is extremely short-lived and requires partial replacement after each flight. 2. The radar does not detect targets against the background of the earth. They have no other radar, they have not been able to modify the existing one for more than 10 years, and it is not known how much more they will modify. The radar of the last generation is stupidly not included in size. As a result, we have a "blind" plane from the lower hemisphere. 3. Complex problems of the life support system. They seem to be regularly solved, but the pilots do not like this plane very much, since the solution of one problem, for some reason, leads to the emergence of a new one. Plus, there are a lot of minor problems that can be attributed to childhood diseases. Although this is also an interesting question. Usually childhood diseases are treated within 3-5 years of operation. The Raptor is in operation for almost 15. In general, it is promising, the car is great, but in its current version it is not capable of fighting, which is one ban on operation in wet weather.
      As for the TTX T-50, here in my opinion there’s nothing to talk about. Only the dimensions of the machine are reliably known, the rest is assumptions. He personally worked on avionics for the T-50. But I know about TTX a little less than nothing)))) What can I say about journalists.
      1. TRAFFIC
        TRAFFIC April 12 2013 13: 26
        -3
        Yes, there’s a collection of myths and legends. laughing
        external coating is extremely short-lived and requires partial replacement after each departure
        can I find out the source of information? wassat
        The radar does not detect targets on the background of the earth.
        And this is where it comes from, why would AFAR not detect targets on the background of the earth? what .Point 3
        and so today flight restrictions have been removed, sort of. The sea of ​​children's problems is certainly strong.
        what is one prohibition of exploitation in wet weather

        good to be interesting it would be for a plane that can’t fly in wet weather, is it sugar? laughing I hope this video is enough for you, damp enough? Watch from 2:00.
    2. TRAFFIC
      TRAFFIC April 12 2013 12: 41
      -1
      And in which, interestingly, the combat conflict could the f-22 have been in service with since 2005-6?
      1. Joker
        Joker April 12 2013 15: 11
        +1
        In Libya, he could take part, but the Americans were afraid of losses among them.
        1. TRAFFIC
          TRAFFIC April 12 2013 15: 21
          +1
          And in Libya there was at least one air battle? What should a fighter gain air superiority in Libya?
          1. Joker
            Joker April 12 2013 15: 30
            +3
            And Libya did not have aircraft? So why were the US allies indignant, saying the Americans cherish their F-22? And the war in Iraq? It ended in 2011, for which there was not a single F-22 noticed.
            1. TRAFFIC
              TRAFFIC April 12 2013 17: 21
              0
              Because of the aviation that Libya had, it makes no sense to drive the F-22 through the floor of the world, when the F-15 and F-16 are based in Europe, plus a bunch of Allied aircraft. And in Iraq that "war" lasted about a month, after which the Iraqi Air Force and Air Defense ceased to exist. What's the F-22 to do there? Chasing militants?
  7. shinobi
    shinobi April 12 2013 07: 21
    11
    Oh, Chinese comrades are cunning. According to an independent expert assessment of the Americans themselves, the Su-35, generation 4 ++, is inferior to the F-22 only in radio visibility.
  8. Fost325
    Fost325 April 12 2013 07: 22
    +1
    Maybe not in the subject, but the main thing is WHO is flying, I am for Russian aces drinks
  9. Irbis9
    Irbis9 April 12 2013 07: 32
    -2
    Isn't the F-22 the 5th generation?
    1. NickitaDembelnulsa
      NickitaDembelnulsa April 12 2013 07: 39
      0
      And what else if not the 5th?
    2. Nayhas
      Nayhas April 12 2013 08: 14
      +1
      Each country considers in its own way, it does not matter.
  10. demon ada
    demon ada April 12 2013 07: 33
    -5
    the article is messed up with generations of aircraft
    Of course, the division into generations is purely arbitrary, but this is a confusion
    then F-22 4th generation, then 5th.
    author decide.
    1. Dangerous
      Dangerous April 12 2013 07: 34
      +5
      Read carefully - the latest F-22, F-35 and T-50 fighters developed using low visibility technologies (according to Western European standards, these are 4th generation fighters, according to Soviet-Russian standards, these are 5th generation fighters)
      1. saymonz
        saymonz April 12 2013 08: 35
        14 th
        Quote: Dangerous
        T-50

        Quote: Dangerous
        5 generation

        T-50 is not the fifth generation. 4+ at best. Now his prototypes do not have a full avionics, no engine, no radar, no weapons, and a glider with right angles, which significantly increases the EPR.
        1. Dangerous
          Dangerous April 12 2013 09: 59
          +1
          Listen, the previous forum member asked why about F22 in one place it is written that this is a plane of the 5th generation, and in the 4th. I gave him a quote from an article where everything is explained. And here is the avionics, engine and glider angles?
        2. patsantre
          patsantre April 12 2013 18: 08
          0
          Quote: saymonz
          no engine


          And how does he fly?

          Quote: saymonz
          no radar


          Yes

          Quote: saymonz
          no weapons


          And what, he can go into a series without him?
  11. alexng
    alexng April 12 2013 08: 27
    -1
    The author of the article did not lead to a common denominator of the generation of aircraft, i.e. it was necessary to take for counting in one of the countries, and so, if for the Russian readers, then on the Russian scale. For this, first of all, the article turned into an information flood. And independent experts are very biased. I wanted to ask, but independent of whom?
  12. ed65b
    ed65b April 12 2013 08: 36
    +7
    all these comparisons are just idle talk. Raptor and T-50 will never converge in battle. For the most part, they are demonstrators of the strength, technology and capabilities of the military-industrial complex and can be used in battle only against countries that do not have strong air defense. The loss of even one car will hurt not only the prestige of technology, but also the military themselves who have allowed it to be lost. I think so.
  13. ImPerts
    ImPerts April 12 2013 08: 49
    +2
    The Chinese have their own classification (like the Americans). They do not have the 5 generation.
    Why was the main Chinese newspaper so frantic? Why hint to the Indians about the price? Wasn't the dog rummaging around here? They are in 62 and 67. fought. I do not think that the conflict has been resolved. Moreover, they themselves are building an aircraft of the 5 (4) generation. I think that the main goal of this article is India and its intentions to buy technology from Russia. In any case, Russia will create a strong Indian army. Ideas about a multipolar world have not lost their relevance.
    I find it incorrect to compare the T-50 and F-22. One flies, but is very secret and has not been used anywhere (maybe its performance characteristics and capabilities are swollen?). The second is used with prototypes of equipment and will probably be much better in terms of performance characteristics than is now assumed by analysts. In any case, I expect that the tendency, existing for many years, is that American planes are inferior to Soviet / Russian planes, which affects the results of imitation or training battles.
  14. igor36
    igor36 April 12 2013 08: 52
    0
    Flight performance is also affected by flight support: guidance, target designation, and aerodrome maintenance. In terms of ease of maintenance, our aircraft are usually inferior to Western ones, but in terms of ease of maintenance they surpass them. Reliability in various climatic zones of the F-22 and F-35 has serious problems, the Russian aviation has serious problems due to wear and tear, well, the fact that our Su-35s can tear one place even to the vaunted Raptor is recognized by the Americans themselves. The conclusion from this article is this: the Chinese are following, comparing, working and trying to catch up with all means.
    1. saymonz
      saymonz April 12 2013 08: 58
      +3
      Quote: igor36
      Americans themselves recognized

      Link to this Murzilka, please. Preferably from the .mil or .gov zone
      1. Atrix
        Atrix April 12 2013 10: 59
        0
        Yes, I also want to see a link to the fact that the Raptor was recognized as worse than the SU-35, just not forum trolls like you who are here describing "having no analogues in the world" but how a person wrote official data from the .mil or .gov zone
  15. HAM
    HAM April 12 2013 08: 54
    0
    (to reassure allies and strike at ground targets.)
    Normal move is what the F-35 allies are for "calming"
  16. Stiletto
    Stiletto April 12 2013 09: 33
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    The People's Daily is the central newspaper of the Chinese Communist Party, and the articles published in it are primarily political material. It remains only to understand what the Chinese leadership wants by doing this.


    Why is it incomprehensible? Choose which of the three fighters is better to copy :-))))
  17. Suhov
    Suhov April 12 2013 10: 00
    +5
    Do you know how much we have aircraft ... machine guns? Seven! No, six ... One bites, the other bounces like a madman, and the third bastard bullets in his own. And the seventh I secretly from the chieftain ataman traded for these pants.
  18. newcomer
    newcomer April 12 2013 10: 16
    -5
    "generation" is a conventionally meaningless concept. it is important when the aircraft was put into service, how many are in service, and of course the operational and combat characteristics. what have we done recently? su-30, su-33, su-34 ... and a lot of them? what we already have we can not produce by conveyor, but there too - pack fa! in the end, the pak fa will turn out to be the same bunch in a puddle to the fanfare, and they will carry it for 15 years as a demonstration model in farnborough and le bourget ...
    1. DYMITRY
      DYMITRY April 12 2013 11: 48
      +3
      Su-34 is produced quite commercially. So a bunch in a puddle of fanfare, this is your alarmist post.
  19. erased
    erased April 12 2013 10: 17
    +3
    One thing you can borrow from amers - they do not sell their F-22 to anyone. And we are ready to drive the T-50 even to the Indians, even the Chinas. And it does not please.
    1. gas
      gas April 12 2013 10: 24
      -2
      Yeah, both those and others will have many more units than the Russian Federation.
  20. svp67
    svp67 April 12 2013 10: 27
    -2
    Quote: erased
    One thing you can borrow from amers - they do not sell their F-22 to anyone. And we are ready to drive the T-50 even to the Indians, even the Chinas. And it does not please.


    You are wrong, they are also ready to sell it, of the same India, for example. But this is just the question that India is beneficial ... and that we
  21. UFO
    UFO April 12 2013 10: 30
    0
    When, finally, they will take on those who leaked our technologies (according to Yak-141 and others), no one canceled the articles in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation! am
    1. saymonz
      saymonz April 12 2013 11: 10
      -2
      There was no drain of technology. Yakovlev Design Bureau and Lockheed-Martin jointly worked on the VTOL aircraft in the mid-90s, but in view of the total mockery of the Jacobites, LM left the project.
  22. gregor6549
    gregor6549 April 12 2013 10: 34
    +4
    I like all these comparisons of what has long been in the arsenal of the US Air Force (Ф22) with what is unknown when it will still be in service with the Russian Air Force (Т50). Moreover, the comparison in terms of those indicators that are given in the article gives nothing to anyone. Such complex systems can only be compared by the effectiveness of these systems performing various combat missions (interception, attack, air combat, etc.) related to the cost of the system. Moreover, in each of the tasks this indicator will be different, which is obvious.
    In addition, comparing T50 with F35 is generally incorrect. If only because the T50 is capable of only vertical fall, but not of any kind for vertical take-off and landing, like the F35. A joke, of course. But seriously, the F35 and T50 aircraft are completely different in both class and range of possible combat use. As for the absolute cost of aircraft, it should nevertheless be correlated with the size of budgets and the financial capabilities of the countries of aircraft manufacturers. Do not forget also that not only the United States but also its allies are participating in the financing of the F35 project.
    And now my personal opinion about the F35. He, of course, will somehow bring to mind, because There’s nowhere to retreat, but on the whole this project seems erroneous to me, and above all because the United States and its allies decided to put all their eggs in one basket, forgetting that the dear chicks hatching from these eggs will also crash from heaven, like much cheaper ones, all the more so since it will be difficult to plant many expensive chicks.
    The picture is similar to the history of the German Tigers during the 2 World War. Yes, the cars were powerful for their time, but there were relatively few of them because of the high cost and complexity of manufacturing, so they could not significantly affect the outcome of the war. The outcome was decided even by weaker but cheaper and larger tanks.
    In addition, betting on one dominant type of aircraft and its manufacturer ruins the competition in the aviation industry, and, consequently, the aircraft industry itself. This concerns, as it seems to me, not only the United States but also Russia.
    1. Joker
      Joker April 12 2013 15: 17
      0
      Hmm, well, in general, the United States will buy a couple of thousand F-35 of various modifications. They will replace all previous generations with them. So let's say that they have an entire army of Tigers.
      1. gregor6549
        gregor6549 April 12 2013 18: 14
        +1
        When they have this couple of thousand, then there will be something to talk about. In the meantime, their task is more modest. Bring the prototypes to mind and hand the delivered "product" to the allies and accomplices. And those already shy away from F35, realizing what hole they have climbed into and are trying to urgently find a replacement for F35, tk. it is unclear when this F35 will be ready to serve, but it is necessary to serve on something already today. Another illustration of the difference between "will" and "is." Therefore, when on this site they begin to publish without measure enthusiastic articles about what will happen in 10 20 years, I want to calm down these enthusiasm and wait until "will" turn into "is" And until this happens, urgently bring to mind what has already shown its suitability for service. The Armed Forces must be prepared for all possible options here and today, not there and tomorrow.
  23. Vitali-46
    Vitali-46 April 12 2013 10: 41
    +3
    And how did they calculate that the raptor would destroy our five planes ????? In general, gentlemen, it is embarrassing that they spent a lot of money on the development of this aircraft, 65 billion plus another 6,9, and it has stealth coating falling off, some difficulties with oxygen, the flashlight is designed for 18 months, but it wasn’t still at war! So I think this is just the beginning, all the main jambs are yet to come !! Amers naturally are silent about many things! It’s not for nothing that they again swell seven billion into it!
  24. patsantre
    patsantre April 12 2013 10: 42
    0
    The article seems unbiased, and that's good. But most of the data is some kind of water.
    "but in the next ten years, Moscow plans to invest about $ 2-3 billion in its fighter."
    Only until 2020 they want to buy 60, but this money is enough for 15. Brad.
    Where did they get the information about avionics and electronics? Even we don’t really know anything. I don’t think the T-50 will give way to the raptor, given the time between them. To write the range of target detection by the radar without indicating the EPR of this target is also nonsense.
    It is said that a missile with a range of 50 km will be on the T-400. As far as I know, it does not climb into the internal compartments. Then, I think, everything is clear.
    "with the same radar, the distance at which the Russian fighter is detected is twice that of the Raptor."
    It's just blatant nonsense. Here, the Chinese reporters were taken and drove there the raptor and PAK FA to check. If we take the EPR of the raptor 0.1m2, then it will be detected at a distance 3 times smaller than the 4th generation aircraft with EPR 10m2 (divide 10 / 0.1 and we extract the root of degree 4). And here it turns out that the T-50 is essentially not invisible. In general, some kind of nonsense.
    1. Atrix
      Atrix April 12 2013 11: 15
      -5
      Quote: patsantre
      Where did they get the information about avionics and electronics? Even we don’t really know anything. I don’t think the T-50 will give way to the raptor, given the time between them

      Have you heard about the new microelectronics factories in Russia? Even if thermal imagers buy tanks from France.
      http://www.vz.ru/economy/2012/10/4/601120.html
      LOOK: Sources in the defense industry say that about 60–70%, and for a number of items and 90–95%, the elemental base is purchased abroad. Is this really so?
      ES: To a large extent, this is precisely so, since all the 20 years that have passed since the collapse of the Soviet Union, our electronic industry stood still, and today there are very few modern products that are in serial production. True, the state now pays a lot of attention and funds to this. But it is now.
      Now many modern and promising products are at the stage of origin, i.e. at the stage of research and development. The process of developing such products will take another three to seven years. Only when modern products are developed will their mass production begin. It is necessary to create modern systems and complexes now.
      1. patsantre
        patsantre April 12 2013 16: 21
        -2
        Quote: Atrix
        Have you heard about the new microelectronics factories in Russia? Even if thermal imagers buy tanks from France.


        They are going to do electronics in India, of course, until leadership in this area is like cancer to China, but if you look at the T-50 cockpit and its radar complex, then in this regard it looks more solid than a raptor.
    2. Odysseus
      Odysseus April 13 2013 19: 18
      -1
      Quote: patsantre
      The article seems unbiased, which is good. But most of the data is some kind of water.

      This article is primarily political, not technical.
      Only the T-50 EPR rating is annoying. It is close to the evaluation of the T-50 designer and it is very large.
  25. svp67
    svp67 April 12 2013 10: 42
    -1
    Quote: Vitaliy-46
    And how did they calculate that the raptor would destroy our five planes?



    Through "mathematical modeling" ...
    1. Vitali-46
      Vitali-46 April 12 2013 11: 00
      0
      So the first time they modeled, they got 10 of our cars! The second time they modeled, it turned out already five cars !! So let them simulate the third time ...... And it turns out 0 cars !!
      1. svp67
        svp67 April 12 2013 11: 03
        -1
        Quote: Vitaliy-46
        So let them simulate for the third time ...... And you get 0 cars !!



        More likely 1 to 1, but it is also possible ...
      2. svp67
        svp67 April 13 2013 13: 55
        +1
        And in general, if you follow your logic, then what is the point in the hasty work that is now being carried out on the topic of T50, because we are doing well. Apparently military experts and aircraft designers do not agree with you
    2. Wedmak
      Wedmak April 12 2013 11: 03
      0
      By "mathematical modeling"

      Yeah. The raptor carries 8 missiles, the hit percentage is 90%, we multiply, divide, it turns out about 5. Here is such an interesting math. And do not care about radars, do not care about electronic warfare, do not care about possible maneuvers, low-profile flight, etc. ... And most importantly, do not care about pilot experience. All this mathematical modeling is far-fetched ...
      Although, on the other hand, their annual exercises with hundreds of airplanes, including imitating our airplanes, help to understand at least approximately the alignment.
  26. vladkust
    vladkust April 12 2013 10: 43
    -1
    For me it’s so important who manages these aircraft, remember the Second World War how many heroes of pilots we have Pokryshkin A.I. Talalikhin V.V. Kozhedub I.N ..... the list goes on ... there are hundreds if not thousands !!!! Although the Germans had advanced technology, they were afraid of ours ..... so in a real battle the amers will know how our aces can !!!!
    1. Check
      Check April 12 2013 13: 13
      +2
      I agree, even to recall the war on the Korean peninsula, among the amers, the cybers were crammed with radio electronics while ours were guided in an instant by sight.

      Soviet aces of the Korean War,
      shot down five or more aircraft

      First name
      The number of air victories
      Notes
      Evgeny Georgievich Pepelyaev
      23
      Hero of the Soviet Union
      He lived to be 94 years old. Died January 4, 2013
      Nikolay Vasilyevich Sutyagin
      21 or 22
      Hero of the Soviet Union
      Dmitry Pavlovich Oskin
      15
      Hero of the Soviet Union
      Lev Kirillovich Schukin
      15
      Hero of the Soviet Union
      Sergey Makarovich Kramarenko
      13
      Hero of the Soviet Union
      Alexander Pavlovich Smorchkov
      12 or 15
      Hero of the Soviet Union
      Konstantin Yakovlevich Sheberstov
      12-14

      Stepan Antonovich Bakhaev
      11
      Hero of the Soviet Union
      Pyotr Semyonovich Milaushkin
      11

      Grigory Ulyanovich Ohai
      11
      Ace of World War II (6 victories). The hero of the USSR
      Mikhail Sergeevich Ponomarev
      10, 12 or 14
      Hero of the Soviet Union
      Dmitry Alexandrovich Samoilov
      10
      Hero of the Soviet Union
      Ivan Afanasevich Suchkov
      10

      Nikolay Grigoryevich Dokashenko
      9 or 11
      Hero of the Soviet Union
      Vladimir Nikolaevich Zabelin
      9

      Mikhail Ivanovich Mikhin
      9 or 11

      Serafim Pavlovich Subbotin
      9
      It is believed that on June 18, 1951 he made the first jet ram in the history of aviation. The hero of the USSR. He was killed by cops in Ukraine on April 22, 1996 at the age of 75 for refusing to remove the star of the Hero.
      Grigory Ivanovich Ges
      8 or 9
      Ace of World War II (5 victories). The hero of the USSR
      Grigory Ivanovich Pulov
      8 or 10
      Hero of the Soviet Union
      Vladimir Ivanovich Alfeev
      7 or 8

      Lev Nikolaevich Ivanov
      7 or 8

      Ivan Mitrofanovich Zaplavnev
      7
      Ace of the Great Patriotic War (6 victories)
      Alexey Ivanovich Mitusov
      7
      Ace of the Great Patriotic War (5 victories)
      Victor Grigorievich Muravyov
      7
      In addition, by mistake he shot down two Chinese MiG-15s.
      Porfiry Borisovich Ovsyannikov
      7

      Semyon Alekseevich Fedorets
      7

      Arkady Sergeevich Boytsov
      6 or 10

      Boris Vasilievich Bokach
      6 or 7

      Sergey Fedorovich Vishnyakov
      6

      Nikolai Mikhailovich Zameskin
      6 or 7

      Fedor Akimovich Shebanov
      6
      He died in battle on October 26, 1951. The hero of the USSR
      Boris Sergeevich Abakumov
      5

      Anatoly Tarasovich Bashman
      5

      Grigory Nesterovich Berelidze
      5

      Grigory Fedoseevich Dmitryuk
      5

      Anatoly Mikhailovich Karelin
      5 or 6
      All victories are nightly. Sun downed planes - B-29 bombers. The hero of the USSR
      Nikolai Lukich Kornienko
      5

      Stepan Ivanovich Naumenko
      5
      The first successful air battle in Korea: December 4, 1950 Naumenko shot down two American F-80s. Another 6 victories won in the group. After retiring at age 45, he graduated from the Pedagogical Institute and until his death in 2004 taught physics at school number 23 in Podolsk.
      Athanasius Afanasevich Olenitsa
      5

      Boris Nikolaevich Syskov
      5

      Vasily Ivanovich Stepanov
      5
      Killed on January 6, 1952
      German Timofeevich Shatalov
      5
      Killed on November 28, 1951
      Nikolai Konstantinovich Shelamonov
      5

      Victor Ivanovich Kolyadin
      5
      Ace of the Great Patriotic War (12 victories). Hero of the Soviet Union
    2. patsantre
      patsantre April 12 2013 16: 23
      -2
      Although you don’t understand, I don’t understand shouting about aces, what kind of aces do we have when they have 3 times more raids? Now the ability to control aircraft equipment plays a much bigger role than before.
  27. krokodil25
    krokodil25 April 12 2013 10: 53
    -1
    It’s strange how the Chinas didn’t set their J-20 as an example, and the T-50 as soon as it goes into series will be no worse and even better than a raptor, because the Su-35 is second only to it in radio visibility and it’s after all the 4th generation T-50 5 draw conclusions.
    1. Kyrgyz
      Kyrgyz April 12 2013 11: 11
      -1
      Quote: krokodil25
      It’s strange how I didn’t put my J-20 as an example,

      In China, the J20 is probably secret
      1. Roll
        Roll April 12 2013 11: 51
        -2
        am Ji 20 is an analogue of the su 30 fighter bomber, and the f 22 is a pure fighter like the su 27 so it is not correct to compare them, but with ji 31 ​​it is almost right although the ji 31 ​​is a light fighter and f 22 is heavy. and Pak fa and f22 are one class.
  28. Kyrgyz
    Kyrgyz April 12 2013 11: 06
    14
    If T50 and F22 converge, then Poplars and Minutmen will go to separate them
    1. TRAFFIC
      TRAFFIC April 12 2013 13: 32
      -1
      Ha ha ha "That's for sure!" ©
  29. Zubr
    Zubr April 12 2013 11: 32
    +1
    GUD article, well done author, made it clear, think, draw conclusions .. smile winked
    It's okay, they will bring it back during operation, all the same a completely new machine.
    Normal working hours. And the fact that the T-50 has a higher combat load and a larger combat radius will make the "COMRADE IN ARMS" think ... smile And this is primarily a gain in time.
    Remember the first MIGs and Sushki, and then when these machines have matured ... so let potential "BROTHERS IN MIND" break out there, and we are like old experienced bulls like in that joke: "LET'S SLOWLY DOWN AND GET THE WHOLE HERD" .. lol
  30. Vtel
    Vtel April 12 2013 11: 33
    -1
    Anyway, our T-50 is better! And about stealth, so in a few years the F-22 and F-35 will also be visible in the palm of your hand - radio electronics are jumping like a horse, there will be new radars.
    Inhny vaunted F117 also thought in Yugoslavia that it was not visible, but no feathers were plucked.
    1. saymonz
      saymonz April 12 2013 11: 36
      -4
      Quote: Vtel
      Anyway, our T-50 is better!

      From your mantras, engines, avionics, stealth and weapons will not appear. T-50 will be a 4+ aircraft.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak April 12 2013 11: 41
        0
        From your mantras nothing will appear at all. You yourself are not tired of spoiling wherever you fall?
        1. saymonz
          saymonz April 12 2013 11: 43
          -4
          I just open my eyes.
          1. DYMITRY
            DYMITRY April 12 2013 11: 53
            0
            Quote: saymonz
            I just open my eyes

            No, you just troll, and it’s thick.
          2. ultra
            ultra April 13 2013 12: 56
            -1
            Quote: saymonz
            I just open my eyes.
            Remove from your "blinders"! negative
    2. patsantre
      patsantre April 12 2013 16: 28
      -2
      Quote: Vtel
      And about stealth, so in a few years the F-22 and F-35 will also be visible in the palm of your hand - radio electronics are jumping like a horse, there will be new radars.


      Bullshit, it doesn’t jump so fast, and no matter how it leaps, the advantage of stealth planes will not go anywhere. They will always be detected at a shorter distance than ordinary planes.


      Quote: Vtel
      Inhny vaunted F117 also thought in Yugoslavia that it was not visible, but no feathers were plucked.


      And what? Just one thing. Yes, and then, not knowing the many factors that influenced its detection, I would not stutter about it.
  31. Roll
    Roll April 12 2013 11: 38
    -3
    tongue As for China. Aircraft is primarily determined by the application. Why do the Chinese need an artisanal supersound if, upon hitting a feast harl harbor, the entire flight passes over the ocean. Here the stealth is optimal, which the Chinese are doing on JI 20. As for super maneuverability, who will win f 22 loaded to the eyeballs or JI 10b with 1/3 fuel in the tanks ??? and a pair of rockets air-to-air, then f22 terrible if the enemy fights with him, and if he cuts down the afterburner and winds off on a shaver in its air defense zone? Well, the Chinese will not have to fight rappers in a duel fight in the instructions. Then the Chinese will fight with the support of the AWACS aircraft and the pilot will receive instructions for the J-10b, similar to a rapper. Potm rapper does not have to be destroyed in a dogfight, it can also be at the time of landing on the airfield, a cruise missile.
  32. adg76
    adg76 April 12 2013 11: 43
    +1
    In real battles, the country that will master the mass and cheap production of aircraft, massively deploy flight schools will win. Will create the prerequisites for the productive work of design bureaus. Will our factories be able to mass-produce high-quality components for assembly shops? Can Americans organize logistics and delivery of components from around the world? The Americans do not have all the components of domestic production. Will China support America in the supply of rare earth metals? It is in the sky that the pilot's skill and knowledge of his car affects one on one in a duel! As an example, the T-34 tank, which in shape of the hull and composition of the armor surpassed German tanks. But the quality of components that were produced by hungry children, women and the elderly due to objective reasons was very low. But the T-34 crushed the Germans with its quantity and ease of maintenance. I do not take into account the courage and heroism of the crews ....
    1. patsantre
      patsantre April 12 2013 16: 31
      0
      Quote: adg76
      In real battles


      All will be erased into powder within a few hours.

      And if we hypothetically imagine a local conflict without threatening the statehood of any of the powers that possess nuclear weapons, and assume that nuclear weapons do not reach it, then everything will be very fleeting there, and there will be enough available quantity.

      Even assuming 3MB without nuclear weapons, all plants and airfields are quickly pecked with cruise missiles, etc. And no one will produce anything, train anything, etc.
  33. Andy
    Andy April 12 2013 11: 45
    0
    Pentagon officials said one F-22 could handle 10 Soviet 3rd generation fighters; later they began to talk about 5 aircraft.

    but in fact, one F-22 can handle one pilot ... and your own!
  34. Roll
    Roll April 12 2013 11: 48
    -1
    bully But it is interesting when the B 1 and f 22 flew to Korea. Did the Chinese spot them or not ??? As the combat experience shows, the Yugoslavs shot down f 117 even with an indicative air defense system.
  35. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city April 12 2013 11: 54
    +2
    Dear critics of T 50. I ask you to take into account modern design methods that differ from the methods of the 80-90s. They are carried out several times faster if desired. Therefore, we can see serial aircraft in 16-17. Replace the engines if they are attached to this aircraft not a problem at all.
    1. Sirocco
      Sirocco April 12 2013 16: 15
      +1
      These are not critics, these are high-class Western experts in the field of acid cabbage.
  36. Sergey_K
    Sergey_K April 12 2013 12: 07
    0
    T50 handsome, but the MiG 31 is a top model among aircraft))
  37. nod739
    nod739 April 12 2013 12: 57
    0
    with what fright the Raptor's cruising speed is supersonic ???
    any source indicates cruising 0,9M, and afterburning maximum - more than 1,5M
    but these are different things
    1. patsantre
      patsantre April 12 2013 16: 34
      -2
      Which Murzilka indicates that it has a cruising speed of 0.9M? Show me it.
      1. patsantre
        patsantre April 14 2013 10: 32
        0
        Ahahah, in the absence of arguments, the mongrels began to minus :)
  38. Nitup
    Nitup April 12 2013 14: 15
    -1
    The article did not like. The authors themselves admit that little is known about the real characteristics of the T-50. But at the same time they assure the superiority of the F-22 in many respects.
  39. ImPerts
    ImPerts April 12 2013 14: 18
    0
    I will repeat again. Why is the main Chinese newspaper concerned about the latest generation of aircraft? And why is the emphasis placed on India and its desire to have such a plane? Maybe the Chinese want to dissuade the Indians from this venture? Maybe they don’t want ... there are many options, but what difference does it make, how much will the T-50 cost, how much does it mimic and what is it (possibly) weaker than the F-22? What does it take? What prevents them from sawing such a plane (problems with their own?)?
  40. SHOGUN
    SHOGUN April 12 2013 15: 33
    +1
    Questions to avionics? Which Chinese have seen her? Who ever saw her to write about her quality? Is the ESR big? But we know about the EPR of the raptor and 35th, only according to the statements of the same Americans. Who says they are telling the truth? The most thankless job is to make predictions ...
    1. Sirocco
      Sirocco April 12 2013 16: 18
      +2
      USSR - Russia always underestimate their performance characteristics, USA - EU always overstate their performance characteristics. Let me remind you that in 1992, our guests in the United States tore at their Su 27, American aces like a Tusik heating pad, and in all positions. Google it.
      1. patsantre
        patsantre April 12 2013 16: 36
        -2
        Show examples, a few, where Russia underestimated the performance characteristics.
        1. ImPerts
          ImPerts April 12 2013 16: 41
          0
          Until 1989, more precisely before Le Bourget, NATO did not know the performance characteristics of the MiG - 29 and Su - 27 at all. Until now, no one knows all the characteristics of the Voevoda, Topol, Bulava and air defense systems. Which I am glad. Do you know thoroughly the parameters and capabilities of the A - 50? Can you tell me the EPR T-50?
          1. patsantre
            patsantre April 12 2013 17: 57
            0
            He doesn’t speak and understates that things are completely different, so by. The main characteristics of everything that you have listed here have long been known to everyone. What specific characteristics of voivode, poplar and maces do you say? ours, what about amersky technique.
            1. ImPerts
              ImPerts April 12 2013 18: 25
              0
              Quote: patsantre
              The main characteristics of everything that you have listed here have long been known to everyone.

              And how did the US "strategic partners" measure the EPR of the T-50? Give a link to this action.
              Quote: patsantre
              And in the details the horse-radish is clear nobody will ever tell anything about ours, about the Amer’s technique.

              And what is there to wave fists about
              Quote: patsantre
              Show examples, a few, where Russia underestimated the performance characteristics.

              Need more details with these things? Maybe you still have a list of numbers and pin codes of Abramovich’s cards, and in the appendage a direct channel of communication with Et?
              1. patsantre
                patsantre April 12 2013 19: 02
                0
                Quote: ImPerts
                And how did the US "strategic partners" measure the EPR of the T-50? Give a link to this action.


                Did I say that they measured it? Can you still bother to read before answering?


                Quote: ImPerts
                Need more details with these things? Maybe you still have a list of numbers and pin codes of Abramovich’s cards, and in the appendage a direct channel of communication with Et?


                What kind of insanity is it? I asked to justify your position, according to which our underestimates the performance characteristics. You can’t do it? Then you would not talk about what you don’t know.
                1. ImPerts
                  ImPerts April 12 2013 19: 28
                  0
                  Quote: patsantre
                  What kind of insanity is it? I asked to justify your position, according to which our underestimates the performance characteristics. You can’t do it? Then you would not talk about what you don’t know.

                  Fortunately, this is not only my position. There are things that you do not need to know or you can know approximately. I hope you have an idea of ​​the degrees of secrecy. If you have, you must understand what specifically to answer the question.
                  Quote: patsantre
                  Show examples, a few, where Russia underestimated the performance characteristics.

                  very problematic and reluctant. Data on the T-50 are approximate, as are the characteristics of the equipment that is being prepared for the fighter. The same applies to the nomenclature of weapons, which will be. I don’t want any problems, and you can continue to persist in trying to measure kilograms and kilometers.
                  Quote: patsantre
                  Our underestimated performance characteristics.

                  Here are the data from various sources. Find 10 differences and where is the truth from this:
                  EPR area in the frontal projection:
                  - no more than 0.5 sq.m;
                  - at the F-22 level - 0.3-0.4 sq. m (And what do the Americans say about the EPR of their "miracle"?).
                  Quote: patsantre
                  What is this for insanity?

                  No insanity. "I sing what I know."
                  And the patsantre (2) will tell the whole community that from the published data on F-22 is true and will bring data from independent sources?
                  1. patsantre
                    patsantre April 12 2013 21: 13
                    -3
                    All of what you said only says that in open sources the data are approximate, and sometimes even taken from the ceiling. Nobody argues with this. Can we go back to the original topic?
                    1. ImPerts
                      ImPerts April 12 2013 21: 55
                      -1
                      Quote: patsantre
                      Show examples, a few, where Russia underestimated the performance characteristics.

                      To this one?
                      http://otvet.mail.ru/question/25541895
                      1. patsantre
                        patsantre April 12 2013 22: 08
                        0
                        Hand face.............
            2. Sirocco
              Sirocco April 13 2013 02: 08
              -2
              Quote: patsantre
              Doesn't say, and understates things

              You as a child by golly just ridiculous laughing Have you been to at least one weapon technology exhibition? if not then to get started at least go to Wikipedia, there is a technical characteristics of any military equipment. And at the exhibition, next to any provided sample, there will be such a poster on which the TTX is written in black letters on a white background. laughing Something like that. performance characteristics of the MiG-31
              TECH SPECS

              Crew: 2 person
              Length: 21,62 m
              Wingspan: 13,45 m
              Height: 6,50 m
              Wing area: 61,60 m²
              Empty weight: 21820 kg
              Fully refilled: 39150 kg
              Maximum takeoff weight: 46750 kg
              Weight Fuel: 17330 kg
              Engine type: TRDDF D-30F6
              Link:
              Maximum: 2 × 9500 kg
              afterburner: 2 × 15500 kg
              Engine weight: 2416 kg

              Flight characteristics

              Maximum allowable speed at height: 3000 km / h (2,82 M)
              At low altitude 1500 km / h
              Cruising speed:
              supersonic: 2500 km / h (2,35 M)
              Subsonic: 950 km / h (0,9 M)
              Practical range:
              afterburning cruising speed: 1500 km
              at cruising speed:
              without refueling with 2 PTB: up to 3000 km
              with one refueling: up to 5400 km
              Combat radius: 720 km
              Flight Duration: up to 3,3 h
              Service ceiling: 20600 m
              Wing load:
              with maximum take-off weight: 759 kg / m²
              fully charged: 635 kg / m²
              Thrust:
              with maximum take-off weight: 0,66
              with full refueling: 0,79
              Maximum operational overload: + 5

              weaponry

              gun: six-barrel GSh-6-23
              Ammunition: 260 rounds
              rate of fire:
              at NU: not less than 8000 rds / min
              at t = -60 ° С: not less than 6400 rds / min
              Suspension points: 6 suspension points for missiles + 2 for PTB
              Air-to-air missiles:
              P-33
              P-37
              P-40T (TD)
              P-60 (M)
              1. patsantre
                patsantre April 13 2013 13: 38
                -4
                I saw them, then what? Do you think they are understated? Then what are the real ones, and why did you decide that the wiki is understated?
                1. Sirocco
                  Sirocco April 14 2013 13: 53
                  0
                  I know the pilot who visited this machine an order of magnitude higher than what is stated. And there is no reason to disbelieve him.
                  1. patsantre
                    patsantre April 16 2013 18: 05
                    0
                    Again, just words. Up to their distortion. Maybe he wanted to say that a lot about the moment is not written on the Internet. Or a lot about its capabilities. I can also say right now that I know an American pilot who says that the technical characteristics of their equipment on the Internet underestimated.
      2. ImPerts
        ImPerts April 12 2013 16: 36
        -1
        There is one.
      3. Misantrop
        Misantrop April 12 2013 19: 57
        +3
        Quote: Sirocco
        USA - EU always overstate the performance characteristics of their products.
        For example, take the performance characteristics of the same submarine, which (judging by the declared performance characteristics) only pray for. Yes, that same Los Angeles. You don't need much, dimensions, displacement, maximum underwater speed and ... reactor power. It is not difficult to estimate that the efficiency of this NPU is somewhere under 400%. And in terms of diving depth, these nuclear submarines, it seems, will soon overtake the Trieste bathyscaphe laughing And for some reason this does not surprise anyone, we continue to sacredly believe in all this garbage lol
  41. radio operator
    radio operator April 12 2013 16: 29
    +1
    In the end, in 2011, the high cost of manufacturing fighter jets forced the US government to suspend the production of "Raptor".

    It is very important that we do not slip onto this slippery path.
  42. Clueless
    Clueless April 12 2013 16: 42
    0
    Quote: ImPerts
    I will repeat again. Why is the main Chinese newspaper concerned about the latest generation of aircraft? And why is the emphasis placed on India and its desire to have such a plane? Maybe the Chinese want to dissuade the Indians from this venture? Maybe they don’t want ... there are many options, but what difference does it make, how much will the T-50 cost, how much does it mimic and what is it (possibly) weaker than the F-22? What does it take? What prevents them from sawing such a plane (problems with their own?)?


    1. Dissuade
    2. Prove to your elite that you need to allocate more money for your prototypes
    3. Kick the Americans once again
    4. Or maybe they want to help us in the development, how India helps, the option is also possible - here is the current, will we go for it?
  43. ImPerts
    ImPerts April 12 2013 20: 30
    0
    Quote: Bad
    1. Discourage2. Prove to your elite that you need to allocate more money for your 3 prototypes. Kick the Americans once again4. Or maybe they want to help us in the development, how India helps, the option is also possible - here is the current, will we push for this?

    It seems to me (crossed) that they tried:
    1) To dissuade the Indians from selling Rosaviaprom with this product (I agree with you);
    2) In China, nothing depends on the newspaper, there they are just a shout;
    3) If we wanted to kick the Americans, we would talk about a bad or flightless brick;
    4) Do they help? It's easier for them to "borrow" lol
    I think the Chinese understand that Indians will still cross their paths. And they do not want the spread of modern technology on the Hindu peninsula. So they are trying to break / ruin technological assistance in this way. Why do they need another splinter, we and the United States already have.
  44. elmi
    elmi April 12 2013 21: 07
    +3
    Take for example the American F-22 fighter. Already, the cost of manufacturing one aircraft exceeds 150 million dollars, but if we take into account the costs of ensuring production safety and the costs of design and development, the cost of one fighter will exceed the mark of 350 million dollars - money for which you can buy more than 10 tons of pure gold.

    This is probably why the Chinese prefer to copy rather than develop from scratch
    1. patsantre
      patsantre April 12 2013 21: 16
      -2
      Probably because they themselves could not.
      1. elmi
        elmi April 12 2013 21: 36
        +4
        They succeeded with high-speed trains, I heard that Chinese modern high-speed trains are by far one of the best. They took the best from everyone and embodied it in one project.
        1. Beck
          Beck April 13 2013 10: 54
          0
          Quote: elmi
          They succeeded with high-speed trains, I heard that Chinese modern high-speed trains are by far one of the best. They took the best from everyone and embodied it in one project.


          The Chinese did not take the best from everyone. It is more expensive to pull pieces from everywhere. They just threw the Germans. How Russia was thrown with planes and Ukraine with "Varyag".

          They made some kind of tricky contract with a German firm. As they say, the Germans did not read everything in the contract "in small print". And they built what they thought was a 50-kilometer experimental section of the magnetic levitation high-speed railway and provided about 3 trains of the latest technology. This section, it seems, connected Shanghai with the suburbs.

          The Chinese of the Germans thanked them from the bottom of their hearts, solemnly cut the ribbon, presented flowers to German engineers, smiled in full mouth and bowed deeply. The Germans left, waiting for new contracts for laying high-speed lines throughout China. Six months later, having studied everything, the Chinese themselves began to build high-speed lines across the country and produce the appropriate trains.

          The Germans were dumbfounded, then indignant, ran to the international court. And there the Chinese were waiting for them and showed everyone the "fine print".
  45. Khamsin
    Khamsin April 12 2013 21: 21
    -1
    Only duels of these aircraft can give ratings. You can argue on paper endlessly ...
  46. darksoul
    darksoul April 12 2013 23: 17
    -1
    the air battles that took place between F-15 and SU-27 in America and the Mig-29 with the F-16, in my opinion, showed Germany who the daddy was bear, and we saw their stealth aircraft in Yugoslavia using the example of the F-117. Our birds have always been famous for their maneuverability.
  47. ImPerts
    ImPerts April 12 2013 23: 37
    0
    Please:
    http://suavia.info/page/64
    и
    http://voprosik.net/amerikanskoe-kovarstvo/
    A little bit about the birds)))