Su-34: wings for Kim Jong-un

48 306 134
Su-34: wings for Kim Jong-un

A new diplomatic term: "limousine diplomacy." It was coined not long ago by the Russian president, who totes around his Aurus. It's normal practice, especially if the president plans to travel independently around the country he's visiting, although the host country will bend over backwards to provide transportation for the delegation.

But – your own shirt is definitely closer to your body in terms of safety, protection and the absence of extra ears. Therefore, a conversation in your car can be conducted at the level of the highest frankness. And in principle, everyone understands perfectly well that there can be no extra ears in the presidential car, and so far not a single sane person has refused the offer to check out Putin's new toy. Well, and it is indicative: not only Tanks we can do it, do you want the same one, only with the "Berezhok" module at the back? It's not as pretty, but the functionality increases...



Considering how many interesting twists and surprises there have already been for those we don't drink with, "limousine diplomacy" is bearing fruit.

Now you will say: are we talking about airplanes or where?


For now, yes, about limousines, because in limousines it is very convenient to talk face to face, including about airplanes.

Go to historyThe tour will be short but informative.


The DPRK Air Force is considered to have been born on August 20, 1947. Its first combat use occurred on June 25, 1950, with the start of the Korean War. In less than 80 years, the Air Force has gone through three main stages.


First. The stage of formation of the KPA (Korean People's Army) Air Force was characterized by the use of equipment of the Red Army Air Force: Il-10 attack aircraft, Yak-9 fighters, Po-2 training/night bombers. Over time, La-9 and La-11 entered service.


The second stage. Post-war period. The KPA Air Force was armed with MiG-15, Il-28, MiG-17, MiG-19 and MiG-21. Almost all of these aircraft (especially fighters) took part in combat operations.


The third stage. The Air Force was armed with the MiG-23ML, MiG-29, Su-25 and Chinese Q-5. Almost by the 80s, the appearance of the DPRK Air Force had taken shape - fighters and attack aircraft, bombers aviation was practically absent. All that was in service with the DPRK Air Force for many years were Soviet Il-28 bombers and their Chinese unlicensed copies, the Harbin H-5.

Il-28. An aircraft that for some reason was not given as many lines and paragraphs as it deserved. Born in 1947 and put into service with the Soviet Air Force in 1950 (absolutely in parallel with the Korean Air Force, yes), this outstanding aircraft became the successor of the Il-2 for many years. But not in terms of an attack aircraft, but in terms of a frontline bomber, torpedo bomber, aircraft EW and so on. Reliable, versatile, unpretentious, capable of performing a wide variety of combat missions (including carrying nuclear weapons) – that’s what the Il-28 is.


Technical specifications

Crew: 3 person
Normal flight weight: 18 kg
Maximum takeoff weight: 23 200 kg
Engines: 2 x TRD VK-1 (VK-1A) x 2700 kgf

Maximum horizontal flight speed at 4500 m: 902 km/h
Cruising speed: 670 km / h
Maximum flight range: 2455 km
Ceiling: 12 500 m

weaponry
- 1 or 2 × 23 mm NR-23 cannons along the sides at the bottom of the bow, 100 rounds per barrel;
- 2 × 23 mm NR-23 cannons in the aft defensive turret of the Il-K6, 225 rounds per gun;
Bomb load: (in internal bomb bay)
- normal: 1000 kg
- maximum: 3000 kg

A little more food for thought. The last Il-28 rolled out of the assembly hangar in 1955. That is, the youngest Korean Il-28 is "only" 70 years old. And there are about 50 of these machines left in North Korea, of which at least half are completely combat-ready.

Yes, of course, they have the B-52 (produced from 1952 to 1962), we have the Tu-95 (produced from 1954 to 1969)... It's understandable when a country with an aviation history and a design school has such long-lived veterans. But North Korea... However, more on the oddities below.

The Koreans also have a Chinese unlicensed copy of the Il-28. The Harbin H-5. This is an Il-28 copied from the original, which was among 250 such aircraft supplied to China from the USSR. In China, they wanted to start licensed production, but Mao quarreled with Khrushchev and in 1966 a "Xerox" took to the skies, which was called the H-5.


The most recent H-5 may be from 1974, but here's an interesting point: the DPRK Air Force has far fewer H-5s (about 30) than the older Il-28s (about 50).

And here we can only applaud the engineers and technicians of the DPRK Air Force, who were able to maintain the combat capability of Soviet bombers in such conditions. This is a feat.

However, sooner or later everything tends to end. And the resource of a flying antique, no matter how well-deserved an aircraft it is, is not infinite. The Il-28 has been through many military conflicts in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, but further exploitation, and especially combat use of these aircraft carries more danger for those using them than for the enemy.

In general, the leaders had something to talk about “without prying ears.”


It must be said that there were "ears" after all. Otherwise, how did the information about the Su-34 deal come out of South Korea? And in South Korea, all the military are really on edge, because this information is very unpleasant for them.

Defending your borders is good. Active defense, that is, attack, is very important, especially in a modern conflict.

South Korean intelligence claims that the DPRK Air Force will start receiving Su-34s even earlier than Algeria. But that's normal: Algeria is a very old Russian client in terms of weapons, and this country has very big advantages over other buyers of Russian weapon, but the DPRK is a completely different matter.

Korean shells in the barrels of Russian guns, Korean MLRS in firing positions towards Ukraine, Korean soldiers and officers hand in hand with their Russian comrades in arms.

This is not a payment. Normal people, thinking with their heads, understand, and the rest are obliged to understand that this is not a payment. This is respect for a fighting ally. I emphasize: for a real fighting ally who helped not with money, not with supplies. Trusted people.

Yes, I had a conversation with an instructor who trained Korean soldiers at our training grounds before they were sent to the Kursk region. His opinion was very interesting: the training was at the level of the last century, but in terms of moral character, these are excellent soldiers. Ready to carry out any tasks. And in general, the return of North Korean soldiers and officers who participated in the SVO perfectly demonstrated Kim Jong-un's assessment of their actions first and foremost.

Did the leader of the DPRK have the right to ask for the delivery of modern aircraft, simulators, and instructors? Definitely yes. Should Putin help his ally in this matter? Also yes.

South Korean intelligence officials claim that the issue of deliveries of Su-34s has been effectively resolved and that the delivery of the first batch of aircraft is a matter of the coming months.


As the latest report from the National Intelligence Service (NIS), South Korea's national intelligence service, writes, we are talking about a small batch of 6 to 12 aircraft.

True, the effectiveness of this service can be questioned, NIS employees are more often behind bars in connection with corruption scandals than for normal, befitting espionage. And NIS already distinguished itself two years ago with reports about deliveries of either Su-30 or Su-35 to the DPRK, which in fact did not happen. Recently, NIS has stopped issuing outright rumors and gossip, apparently, the wave of reforms has finally reached the offices and something has changed there.

"Since October 2024, North Korean combat pilots have been deployed to Vladivostok in Russia's Far East, where they have begun training on advanced fighter jets. For a long time, the main source of uncertainty was the classes of fighters that could be purchased: Russia could supply more than ten different types of tactical combat aircraft of different classes. Now it is known that the first to be deployed will be six of the world's heaviest fighters, the Su-6."

Why the Republic of Korea stubbornly calls the Su-34 a heavy fighter is a great mystery. Either there is no corresponding hieroglyph yet, or there is no understanding of the concept of use. However, let's not focus on this, the Su-34 is indeed a fighter, and is capable of destroying anything on the ground or on the water. And it can also complicate the life of what is in the air. This is, no matter how you look at it, the best tactical strike aircraft in the world, which is proven not on paper, but by combat operations.

In general, the hysteria in the intelligence offices (and I'm sure not only the intelligence ones) is understandable. The Su-34 could become a simply terrible tool in the hands of Kim Jong-un.


First, let's look at the map. South Korea stretches 450 kilometers from north to south. The Su-34 is capable of hitting targets 200-250 kilometers away, so by simply flying up to the border, half of South Korea's territory can already be in its sights. They understand this.


However, this is far from the worst thing, although it is unpleasant. The successes of the DPRK missilemen are what really worries the neighbors. Already today, the DPRK Air Force is trying to test aeroballistic missiles air-based on the existing Il-28. Not very good yet, apparently there is a conflict between the weight of the missile and the capabilities of the Soviet veterans. In the best times, the Il-28, when overloaded, carried 3 kg of bombs. The Su-000 carries 34, but the highlight is that the Drake will carry 8 when overloaded. It's just not far.

Oh, excuse me, why so far? It's about 40 km from the center of Seoul to the border. A so-so place for a capital, to be honest. You can artillery get it, but you understand, artillery or MLRS in border areas - this can be neutralized. But an aeroballistic missile launched almost immediately after takeoff - this is a slightly different matter.


Yes, the ROK Air Force is armed with domestically produced F-16s (not the newest models, C and D) and foreign-made F-15s. These are good planes, there are many of them (150+), and they will be able to repel any aggressor that invades South Korean airspace.

И Defense in the Republic of Korea, quite well: American Patriots and their own KM-SAM, which, we note, our specialists from Almaz-Antey and Fakel helped make. That is, these are good SAM systems, if the Koreans did not screw something up themselves. What ours gave to the South Koreans in the early 2000s was later implemented as the S-350 Vityaz. Well, it is true that the Vityaz shoots a little further and more accurately, but let's not nitpick. The South Koreans have quite decent SAM systems.


So Seoul can sleep soundly for its air borders. However, what if the enemy, which they believe to be the DPRK, does not attack these very borders, but starts working from its own territory? That's where the problems begin.

According to American experts, the DPRK has one of the densest air defense systems in the world. In reality, the country is small, the number of launchers and barrels is simply enormous. And given the presence of the S-300, even such good aircraft as the F-15 and F-16 are quite dangerous to go there. And it turns out that the Su-34, having taken off and accelerated an aeroballistic missile as much as possible (well, it is not a MiG-31 after all), will calmly launch it from its airspace absolutely fearlessly. Just like the Tu-95 does today with cruise missiles, for example, in our country.


Let's admit, the Patriot is terrible at intercepting high-speed targets like the Kinzhal. More precisely, it practically doesn't intercept, no evidence has been presented yet. KM-SAM - it's hard to say, Block 2 should intercept ballistics, but the test results, if any, have not been announced. Considering Russian technology - it should. The question is - how. And so far the RK Armed Forces are armed with only one battery of 4 PUs with 8 missiles each. That is - not that many in reality.

So the Su-34 with an aeroballistic missile can easily be transformed from a tactical strike aircraft into a strategic one, and given the DPRK's nuclear warheads, there's a lot of room for thought. And not just in South Korea. There's another country there, towards which something... unfriendly flies from time to time.

Yes, the question may arise: why all this, if the DPRK has quite sensible ballistic missiles? Moreover, so good that other countries actually acquire the technology.

It's simple. The launch of a ballistic missile is a very noticeable thing. While the missile is taking off, while it's on the trajectory, while it's accelerating - it's noticeable. There's time to react. Accordingly, there's a chance to try to shoot it down. An aircraft with an aeroballistic missile - this can be more effective than a quiet launch of a cruise missile. A cruise missile can fly at a low altitude, camouflaged by folds of the terrain, but at subsonic speed. The cruise missile can be supersonic, then there's less maneuvering, more speed. Or it can be aeroballistic, with a speed of 8-10M, breaking through the enemy's air defense precisely due to its enormous speed.

So the reaction in South Korea and, potentially, Japan, is understandable: Kim Jong-un can get at his disposal an aircraft that can easily play the role of a strategic bomber-missile carrier. Not as big as the B-2 or Tu-160, but unnoticeable compared to the flying mastodons. But – for the purposes of the DPRK, quite effective.

This is an interesting move. The DPRK, having achieved success in some types of weapons, strengthening its aviation with the Su-34, and in the future with other Russian aircraft, will become a very strong player in the region, even without nuclear weapons.

"Limousine diplomacy" is such a delicate matter...
134 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 10+
    9 September 2025 04: 26
    I just can't figure it out. Is the Aurus right-hand drive? Yn is on the left behind the wheel.
    GDP is on the right.
    Or is this photo mirrored?
    1. +8
      9 September 2025 04: 43
      Quote: your vsr 66-67
      Or is this photo mirrored?

      I also noticed... Lately, a lot of photos have been mirrored, but why?
      1. 14+
        9 September 2025 06: 26
        Quote: Uncle Lee
        Lately a lot of photos have been mirrored, why?
        To avoid copyright
        1. +1
          10 September 2025 11: 57
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          To avoid copyright

          Quote: Vadim S
          The front camera of the phone mirrors, have you never taken selfies? :))))) Older generations :))

          Quote: Amateur
          In Aurus "for negotiations" the steering wheel is reversible. So that no one gets offended and both take turns steering

          Everyone's answers are wrong!
          Correct answer:
          VVP has two Auruses! One is left-hand drive, the other is right-hand drive! And both of them drive for him. laughing
          And someone else here wrote about "ears", saying that there are no foreign "ears" in the aurus.
          "Ears" are there, but they are ours! And let the guest babble whatever he wants. VVP will then put it all in a folder. VVP has an excellent Soviet KGB school, and he is a real sly one! laughing
          1. 0
            3 October 2025 06: 56
            The photo is not a mirror image, the car is not an Aurus (as far as I know, there are no two-door Auruses) wink ). Eun's watch is on his left hand, Eun's jacket and VVP's jacket are buttoned on the "masculine" right side. Something like that. request
      2. 11+
        9 September 2025 07: 28
        The front camera of the phone mirrors, have you never taken selfies? :))))) Older generations :))
        1. +5
          9 September 2025 07: 49
          Quote: Vadim S
          older generations :))

          Putin took a selfie!? fellow
          1. +1
            9 September 2025 10: 48
            But the questions are not for Putin, but for the local residents!
        2. +2
          9 September 2025 12: 04
          Quote: Vadim S
          The front camera of the phone mirrors, have you never taken selfies?
          This can be done through Photoshop or through some other graphic editors...
      3. +1
        9 September 2025 12: 49
        To avoid making "free" advertisements... of stores and inscriptions on clothes.
        1. -1
          9 September 2025 13: 04
          Quote: russ71
          To avoid making "free" advertising..

          The most plausible explanation is... good And then selfies, selfies...There is no mirror flip there!
      4. +2
        16 September 2025 09: 19
        Judging by the buttons on the jacket, the photo is not mirrored. The loops are on the left, as expected. Or they were photoshopped
        1. 0
          16 September 2025 11: 11
          Quote: Aldmit_2
          The photo is not mirrored.

          And Un wears a watch on his left hand, unlike Putin...
    2. 28+
      9 September 2025 05: 14
      In Aurus "for negotiations" the steering wheel is reversible. So that no one gets offended and both take turns steering. wassat
      1. +7
        9 September 2025 06: 42
        exactly bro)) the latest models came with two steering wheels by the way, so you don't have to jump from seat to seat))
        1. 14+
          9 September 2025 07: 04
          Quote from Mazunga
          The latest models came with two steering wheels

          Oh, there are even four, so that passengers can steer too. laughing
          1. +2
            9 September 2025 11: 51
            It's not the passengers who use the gearbox and apply the brakes))
      2. +4
        9 September 2025 06: 55
        It's like a training car. The instructor has a stronger hand and will hold the steering wheel if the student misses a maneuver.
      3. +4
        9 September 2025 09: 50
        And maybe with two steering wheels, so that no one would be offended!!! Ha-ha, three times!
        1. +2
          9 September 2025 09: 51
          No! The photo shows one steering wheel, but from different sides. drinks
    3. 2al
      +2
      9 September 2025 09: 57
      This is AI, the picture was created, judging by the filter, in Kandinsky.
    4. +1
      9 September 2025 23: 17
      Note the blurry background behind the windows. This is most likely the AI ​​drew everything completely.
    5. +2
      10 September 2025 17: 45
      Are you a child or something and can't recognize a drawing made by AI? This is not a real photo.
    6. 0
      24 November 2025 09: 14
      I just don't get it. Is the Aurus right-hand drive?


      Not only is it right-hand drive, but it's also located in the rear captain's seats, and the female translator is actually sitting in the trunk, this Aurus from AI. laughing
  2. 31+
    9 September 2025 04: 53
    In addition to various limousine, partnership, oil and other diplomacies, there is one single diplomacy, and it is called effective. But we have not succeeded with it somehow. And the whole article has an interesting line, helping our North Korean partners, as it is written here, this is not payment, this is respect. Somehow it is presented as buying a hamster a new toy, only the reality is a little different. This is a debt, a debt of our government that could not even provide the army with shells, this is a debt to North Korea for participating in the liberation of our territories, by North Korean soldiers. If you told me about this 10 years ago, I would laugh, but today it is the bitter truth. This is limousine diplomacy, when they cannot produce banal shells in their own country, when no matter what you grab, there is nothing, and we are helped by a country that 20 years ago drove trucks, on firewood. And all this is presented as a real diplomatic breakthrough, this is some kind of absurdity... Things need to be called by their proper names, this is a debt, and we always seem to have paid our debts, and it is not a matter of respect, it is simply that debts need to be repaid, and this is also not a diplomatic breakthrough, this is just how everything is arranged...
    1. -9
      9 September 2025 07: 49
      Quote from turembo
      In addition to various limousine, partnership, oil and other diplomacies, there is one single diplomacy, and it is called effective. But somehow we have not succeeded with it... when no matter what you grab, there is nothing, and we are helped by a country that 20 years ago drove trucks, on firewood ...

      Complete and useless sophistry, distortion of terms in attempts to give information negative connotations. It is a simple propaganda technique for working in favor of an ideological enemy. For a barrel of jam and a basket of cookies?
      1. +6
        9 September 2025 08: 28
        Firstly, it is funny that you were not embarrassed by the technique that you attribute to me, by the author of the article. And secondly, I wonder who is your ideological opponent? It seems that we have no ideology in our country, or are you outraged that North Korea helped us in a difficult moment? (yes, yes, it helped), or are you outraged by the ideology of North Korea? If you think that North Korea did not provide us with help, then it turns out that you do not agree with the words of our president? Is that so?
        1. -3
          9 September 2025 10: 17
          Quote from turembo
          It seems like we don't have an ideology in our country,

          There is an ideology, namely of the current Russian government - demilitarization and denazification of that misunderstanding that is called Ukraine
          Quote from turembo
          If you think that North Korea did not provide us with assistance, then you do not agree with the words of our president? Is that so?

          This is pure demagogy on your part, a cheap propaganda ploy.
          1. +5
            9 September 2025 19: 30
            Quote: bober1982
            There is an ideology, namely of the current Russian government - demilitarization and denazification of that misunderstanding that is called Ukraine

            This is a foreign policy task, not an ideology.
            1. -4
              9 September 2025 19: 39
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              This is an outwardly political task, not an ideology.

              Yes everything is correct.
              The point is that any ideology is something quasi-religious, that is, ideology arises in the event of falling away from religion.
              1. +2
                9 September 2025 20: 08
                Quote: bober1982
                The point is that any ideology is something quasi-religious, that is, ideology arises in the event of falling away from religion.

                You know, here I am a supporter of the classical definition, namely:
                Ideology is a system of ideas, views, beliefs and values ​​that explains and justifies the social, political or economic structure of a society.
                The fact that ideology in the past was strongly tied to religion is explained by the fact that religion played a huge role in the life of society. In essence, religion declared morality, ideology supported it in this, hence the connection. Then, as religious positions weakened, ideology gradually moved away from religion.
                1. +1
                  9 September 2025 20: 44
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  In essence, religion declared morality, ideology supported it in this, hence the connection.

                  The Church cannot declare morality; this is not its task.
                  There has been a global confrontation, for more than 2000 years, between Christianity and the godless, that is, between good and evil, and this is an ideological battle.

                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  Then, as religious positions weakened, ideology gradually moved away from religion.

                  In such cases, the state gives up its positions and weakens.
                  1. +2
                    9 September 2025 20: 52
                    Quote: bober1982
                    The Church cannot declare morality; this is not its task.

                    Well, why not? Let's take Christianity - 10 commandments as a short reminder and a ton of descriptions of how to live right.
                    Morality is a system of norms, rules of conduct, views based on ideas about good and evil, justice, duty, conscience, regulating relationships between people in society. So this is essentially what religion does. It explains what is good and what is bad, how to live, what to strive for, guarantees reward for the righteous and hellfire for the unrighteous.
                    Quote: bober1982
                    In such cases, the state gives up its positions and weakens.

                    Controversial. But - a great topic for discussion, I agree.
                    1. +2
                      9 September 2025 21: 01
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      guarantees a reward for the righteous and hellfire for the unrighteous.

                      This is where you are mistaken, but overall I agree with the comment.
                      No one knows, and cannot know, their posthumous fate beyond the grave; even the great saints and fathers of the Church could not know what awaits them, and what then can we say about us.
                      1. +1
                        9 September 2025 21: 14
                        Quote: bober1982
                        No one knows, and cannot know, their posthumous fate beyond the grave; even the great saints and fathers of the Church could not know what awaits them, and what then can we say about us.

                        Of course. But here everything is in cunning psychologism. The righteous will receive the Kingdom of Heaven, there is no doubt about it - it is guaranteed. But am I righteous? Is heaven waiting for me, or hell? No one can answer this question, which is why a person is motivated to maximum righteousness in order to atone for sins, voluntary and involuntary, with his diligence.
                      2. 0
                        10 September 2025 05: 31
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        why a person is motivated to maximum righteousness in order to atone for voluntary and involuntary sins with his diligence.

                        Every person is a fallen creature; only a few who do not consider themselves as such achieve righteousness.
                        The Church motivates (if we can put it that way) a person not to maximum righteousness, which is out of the question, but to fight passions, to correct himself - fall and get up, fall again and get up.
                        A man cannot atone for his sins by his diligence, he is very weak, the Redeemer is one
                        It’s better not to continue the conversation further, the holy fathers don’t recommend it, but I couldn’t resist and disobeyed.
                      3. The comment was deleted.
        2. +1
          9 September 2025 12: 41
          Quote from turembo
          Firstly, it’s funny that you weren’t embarrassed by the technique that you attribute to me, used by the author of the article.

          Yes, and the author also uses the same technique. It's just that your post hurts more. Because you, without having the slightest idea about the "kitchen" of foreign policy, are trying to evaluate our diplomacy. Yes, the bandit methods of the US + EU almost always give a greater effect. Their racist view of the world allows them to rob their neighbors with brute force, but not with law. Your view is close to theirs, you also suffer from signs of chauvinism. Koreans are a little "unfinished" for you and you are ashamed of the situation when they are able to supply us with what we need at a difficult moment. We consider such methods unacceptable for ourselves and build foreign policy on the basis of equality and mutual respect. These methods do not give an immediate advantage, but work in the medium and long term. This is where BRICS, SCO and common understanding with the South and East are born, which do not always have the strength to openly resist the onslaught of the predatory West. About help. The situation with the shells and the KPA special forces lies in the plane of fulfilling contractual obligations. And here there is a wide field for grannies at the entrance - help or debt... Of course, you have the right to evaluate the goods you received in the store for your money as help. It's your business. We probably forgot when VVP said that there are no friends in international politics. But I am sure that we should thank the Koreans, at least because they fulfilled what was signed. And they can thank us (our foreign leadership, with whom, as you write, we have difficulties) for the same attitude to the agreement (the agreement is clearly mutually beneficial). It's just that in modern conditions many agreements are not fulfilled or are signed with an imbalance of benefits for the parties. We will publicly thank them for their work, but we understand for ourselves that we will pay for everything provided, as agreed. About ideology. We have it and it is written in the Constitution, it's just that the word "ideology" itself is not there, although it is written that there is no "state ideology" (also a sophism introduced to please "some" who at that time considered themselves to be in charge of Russia). However, if you decipher the meaning of this word, you will find that in the Basic Law "... a system of ideas, views, convictions and values ​​that explains and justifies the social, political or economic structure of society..." is reflected quite clearly. And we generally live and build relationships according to this law. Here are our neighbors, whom we used to call "a potential enemy", and who, despite a roughly similar law, do not follow it in building international relations, while demonstrating nationally discriminatory norms and approaches, they are our ideological opponents. And there is no need to try to hide behind "the words of our President". He says the right things, but in a simplified form that is emotionally understandable and close to the main part of the population, which is not experienced in the subtleties of political technologies. Something like that, if very briefly. It happens that the true meaning does not always lie above and is accessible to everyone.
          1. +1
            9 September 2025 14: 19
            Quote: Hagen
            It happens that the true meaning does not always lie above and is accessible to everyone.

            If it were possible, I would give two pluses good
    2. -2
      9 September 2025 08: 54
      Quote from turembo
      This is a debt, a debt of our government... ... this is a debt, and we always seem to have paid our debts, and it is not a matter of respect, it is simply that debts must be repaid...

      It's funny. About "debt" - this is some new topic, and judging by how actively it is being accelerated - this topic will have a continuation. I will watch this continuation with interest
    3. -4
      9 September 2025 11: 29
      There is no debt of Russia to the SK. They have not seen so much oil and grain for 80 years!
    4. +7
      9 September 2025 13: 00
      Quote from turembo
      Things need to be called by their proper names, this is a debt, and we always seem to have paid our debts, and it’s not a matter of respect, it’s just that debts need to be paid, and this is also not a diplomatic breakthrough,

      This is of course a duty, as the DPRK considers it a duty to provide assistance to Russia for their assistance in two wars - with Japan and the USA. And this is certainly a breakthrough. A breakthrough of the blockade that the USA arranged through the UN institutions against this independent and very original country. And now we are allies again. Moreover, allies without any reservations and figs in the pocket. The population of the DPRK will never starve again (it is a mountainous country with a difficult coastal climate, so the harvests there are unstable, and there is little agricultural land), it will not have problems with oil and oil products, and of course there will be no more problems with combat aircraft and air defense systems. And we will always have somewhere and someone to intercept shells from if things get hot again, because in war there are never too many shells.
      And this is precisely a diplomatic breakthrough, and a mutual one - two-way. We now have a reliable military-political ally - a nuclear missile power with one of the largest and strongest land armies on this planet. And this ally is located where we have historically weakened positions due to the uninhabited and undeveloped nature of our Far East.
      I don't know how true the South Korean rumors/gossip about the imminent deliveries of the Su-34 are, but if there is truth in this, then it is a good truth. But first of all, the DPRK needs combat fighters. There were rumors about a contract with the DPRK for the delivery of the MiG-35SE, even from the head of UAC and Rostec, but it seems that our effective management so effectively defeated and destroyed the entire cooperation on the MiG-35S that so far no rumors or facts about the launch of production of these fighters have been heard. But it is the MiG-35S that is the most suitable machine for a small but mountainous country, because the MiG-29 and MiG-35S are especially good at mountain airfields due to their outstanding takeoff and landing characteristics and high thrust-to-weight ratio. And since the DPRK is not only an ally for us, but also a strategic partner and it definitely has something to pay us with, then it is necessary to provide them with air defense and air force at the highest and highest quality level. Because in addition to shells, missiles and long-range self-propelled guns, in the coming decades we will have to build a lot of things in the Far East, in Eastern and Southern Siberia. We have already received rampant crime and corruption from migrant workers/Wahhabis from the Central Asian region, we need completely different builders under contract - conscientious, law-abiding, disciplined and complimentary to our population. And in the above-mentioned regions, such builders can become builders from the DPRK. They build well, quickly, efficiently, and they always have order, discipline, responsibility. This will provide serious wealth for the free hands of the DPRK citizens and solve the shortage of these hands in our Far East and Armed Forces. And with the rubles earned in Russia, after conversion into the DPRK, the Kim government will be able to pay for the purchase of weapons, fuel, food and anything else. No sanctions are scary for the DPRK anymore.
      And the return to this normality is a breakthrough and correction of previously made mistakes.
      1. -1
        9 September 2025 15: 33
        And in the above-mentioned regions, such builders can be builders from the DPRK. They build well, quickly, qualitatively, and they always have order, discipline, and responsibility.

        it's like that...
        but where is the deal?
        but here's the rub: no deal - no builders...
        1. +3
          9 September 2025 19: 39
          Why not, there are builders. They were there before, but not systematically, but now they are systematically inviting builders from there for the region. And when there aren’t enough, they bring them in from Vietnam and from all over Southeast Asia. For example, they brought in builders from all over Southeast Asia for the construction of the Amur Gas Chemical Plant. There are about 30 thousand people working there now. And in Primorye we need to build new shipyards, power plants, a metallurgical plant, new cities. They are starting to implement large development programs there, in the next 20 years they will be building a lot. They have played enough with the Wahhabis, now the bet is on “non-Muslim migrant workers”.
          Quote: Dedok
          where is the deal?

          Now it is becoming dangerous to steal from losses. And in order to steal from profits, you first need to create this profit. Let's see how they will succeed. If they start to be as nimble as before... the fate of "Nikolka's kingdom" will repeat itself.
      2. +1
        9 September 2025 18: 28
        Quote: bayard
        but it seems that our effective management has so effectively destroyed and destroyed the entire cooperation on the MiG-35S that there are still no rumors or facts about the launch of production of these fighters. But the MiG-35S is the most suitable machine

        You are wrong to blame the management for the collapse of the MiG corporation - they started to fall apart back in Soviet times, and on their own, the MiG-29 has nothing else to note except for its outstanding takeoff and landing and piloting qualities, it is like they used to say back in the distant Soviet times: an airplane for gaining air superiority over an airfield, these are not my words, and it is not a secret. As for the MiG-35, it is fantasy.
        1. +2
          9 September 2025 20: 44
          Quote: bober1982
          The MiG-29, apart from its outstanding takeoff and landing and piloting qualities, has nothing else to note. As they used to say back in the distant Soviet times, it is an aircraft for gaining air superiority over an airfield.

          Young man (regardless of age), what modification of the MiG-29 are you referring to? The 1979 model? Well, look at the technical specifications for this aircraft issued to the designers, according to the technical specifications it must be like this - a LIGHT FRONTLINE FIGHTER for basing at frontline airfields, including unpaved (!) and its combat radius of 680 km was included in the technical specifications. It was intended to replace the MiG-21.
          Quote: bober1982
          Apart from the outstanding takeoff, landing and piloting qualities, there is nothing else to note

          Are you sure, YOUNG MAN?
          And what about the magnificent slot Doppler radar, which could see targets perfectly against the background of the earth? And its outstanding for its time OLS, which NATO could not even dream of? And the helmet-mounted laser target designator for the RVV MD with an infrared head? Similar ones appeared in the air forces of NATO countries no earlier than the 00s!? And its outstanding thrust-to-weight ratio, maneuverability, takeoff and landing characteristics? And its altitude? 34 km. - dynamic ceiling!!
          Compare it at least with its classmate, including the time of its appearance in service, with the F-16 of the first modifications. The MiG-29 not only surpassed it in all flight characteristics, it surpassed it in the composition of avionics by a head. The Falcon was then armed ONLY with the MD "Sidewinder" RVV, a weak radar and very meager avionics and onboard electronic warfare. Against its background, the MiG-29, even in its first modifications, was simply a monster. And it could initially use the SD R-27 RVV, not to mention the fact that in close combat, thanks to the OLS, helmet-mounted target designator and more advanced MD R-73 RVV, it tore Falcons apart in all training battles with a dry score like a Tuzik does heating pads.
          But of course it had its shortcomings and the first generation MiG-29 still had them. Due to the extremely tight layout, its sophisticated avionics were not very convenient to service, but this avionics was worth it. For its time, it was a superstar of all air shows and export sales.
          But it is TWIN-ENGINE, which means the time and labor intensity of its maintenance cannot be compared with the light MiG-21. And this labor intensity resulted in both the cost of maintenance and the cost of operation. Due to the density of the layout, the maintenance of the heavy Su-27 looked much more comfortable, and the cost of their life cycle because of this (MiG-29 and Su-27) turned out to be almost equivalent. That is why when the Su-90 entered the market in the 27s, they were preferred to be purchased. And you should not compare a heavy and a light fighter of the same age, they were created for different purposes. And when after the first years of operation the Air Force received a request for a modification with a larger combat radius, the MiG-0M\M29, MiG-2K\KUB were created, the airframe of which became the prototype for the MiG-29. The MiG-35S has a ferry range of 35 km. and a combat radius of 3000 km, which is better than that of other heavy fighters of the 1350th and even 4th generation. Pogosyan's lobby pointed out that the MiG-5S is "too expensive", indicating that its price (in the pre-production batch) is equal to the cost of a serial Su-35SM (at that time, for the purchase of the VKS, about $ 30 million), while ignoring that they are comparing a serial aircraft produced in hundreds of pieces and a fighter from an experimental batch, which has an AFAR radar (versus a slotted PFAR in the Su-30SM), despite the smaller area of ​​​​the antenna canvas, the fighter saw an RCS of 30 square meters at 3 km, better than that of the heavy two-seater Su-280 SM. The MiG-30S engines have a service life of 35 engine hours - the same as the Su-4000S and almost 35 times more than the Su-2SM (30 engine hours), their fuel consumption and operating costs are 2500 times less than those of the Su-1,5S. At the same time, the MiG-35S can be either with a single or a two-seat cabin, there is no need to make a separate aircraft for a twin. The aircraft really turned out and only disgusting financing and Pogosyan's machinations (in pursuit of orders and the desire to eliminate a competitor) led to the fact that this fighter did not become the sales star of our aviation industry.
          The same India operates a very decent fleet of MiG-29 and is quite happy with them, maintains them, repairs them, modernizes them, extends their service life. They are HAPPY with them. Although these are the first modifications of the aircraft. India is a mountainous country and for high-altitude airfields there is nothing better than the MiG-29 - their opinion. Therefore, they periodically buy MiG-29s from the Russian Aerospace Forces, replenishing their fleet. But this is the largest operator of these fighters. And they refused the MiG-35S exclusively thanks to bribes from the French, who were pushing their "Rafale" on them. Now everyone involved in the scam with the "Rafale" is in prison or under investigation. Not for the first year.
          Quote: bober1982
          As for the MiG-35, it's fantasy.

          Six MiG-35S have been purchased by the Aerospace Forces and are in service. They are currently used to provide air defense for Moscow.
          Two+ years ago, the head of UAC, answering a journalist's question on camera about the fate of the MiG-35S, said that they were being prepared for production, that there were foreign customers for this fighter (i.e. at least two), and that a decision on purchases for the VKS had not yet been made. This is what was said officially.
          So leave your fantasies and gossip and "fantasy" of the MiG-35S. The only obstacle to its serial production can only be that UAC, under the protection of the anti-MiG lobby, destroyed the developer and manufacturer of the AFAR radar for this aircraft. And with the gap from the MiG-29M2, this is not quite the same coat. Perhaps serial production of this fighter is slowed down by this.
          For those who are hoping for the imminent appearance of the Su-75, I will cool you down - it HAS NOT TAKEN OFF YET. And it will not be ready for serial production before the first half of the next decade. Not before. And now both our Aerospace Forces and the allied Air Forces need the MiG-35S with AFAR radar like air. This could be a "Squirrel" from the Su-57, reduced in cross-sectional area. Something like this is being prepared for the promising Su-75.
          1. -2
            9 September 2025 20: 55
            Quote: bayard
            YOUNG MAN

            1982 is not the year of my birth, as I have reported many times, and they still stubbornly consider these numbers to be the year of birth.
            1. +2
              9 September 2025 21: 17
              Quote: bober1982
              1982 is not the year I was born.

              Quote: bayard
              Young man (regardless of age)

              I am calling you this way for your "youthful judgments". Don't be offended, I didn't mean to offend.
      3. +3
        9 September 2025 19: 32
        Quote: bayard
        And in the above-mentioned regions, such builders may be builders from the DPRK

        Quote: bayard
        And with the rubles earned in Russia, after conversion into the DPRK, the Kim government will be able to pay for the purchase of weapons, fuel, food and anything else it wants.

        The idea is very interesting and, without a doubt, correct. I must say that it did not occur to me.
        1. +4
          9 September 2025 21: 38
          This has been discussed for the last few years. And after the conclusion of the union treaty, this can be implemented in the working order, to conclude long-term contracts with the leadership of the DPRK for the organized training of large groups of builders for work, possibly on a rotational basis. That is, so that not only/so much our companies would be engaged in recruitment, but at their orders the Korean side would form a contingent with the leaders and commissars of labor collectives, as was the case back in the USSR. That is, systematically, organized, according to plan. This will be more convenient for both us and them. For the DPRK, this will be very profitable, and for us - even more so. We have a huge front of work, the Koreans of the North have a lot of educated, disciplined and responsible workers. We can even suggest that they create construction departments to work in the Russian Federation, so that not just ordinary workers would go, but organized teams with their own foremen, team leaders, political workers, even doctors, cooks, etc. I think that in this way it will be possible to attract up to several million in total, which will be quite enough for the construction of everything that is to come. We pay in rubles, and as a result the DPRK will have a constant influx of our currency to purchase everything necessary from us. And this already creates a natural and colossal trade turnover. From this, both the DPRK and our Far East and all of Eastern and Southern Siberia will flourish.
  3. 12+
    9 September 2025 05: 32
    How many countries can only Russia protect? The DPRK is one of them. None of the CIS countries sent their troops to the North-Eastern Military District. But the DPRK did. Here is a real comrade and friend. Here is someone who needs to be armed with modern weapons and helped with food. We still have to fight NATO and an extra reserve and ambush regiment will not hurt us. soldier
  4. +8
    9 September 2025 05: 39
    North Korea needs Su-35s like air!
    1. +5
      9 September 2025 06: 28
      Quote: Clever man
      North Korea needs Su-35s like air!
      Better intercontinental missiles. So that on the other side of the Pacific puddle they calm down wink
      1. +2
        9 September 2025 12: 09
        We have such missiles, who did they reassure?
        1. +3
          9 September 2025 14: 50
          Quote: Clever man
          We have such missiles, who did they reassure?
          And if they didn’t exist, they would bomb us, like they did Yugoslavia in their time, while talking about “human rights” and “universal human values.”
    2. +7
      9 September 2025 08: 52
      Even a very good car alone will not be able to meet their needs.
      At a minimum, they need another mass-produced inexpensive light fighter for air defense purposes and at least launches of 1-2 units of long-range air-to-ground weapons, for example, based on a deep modernization of the MiG-21. And another 1-2 aircraft for naval aviation and patrols.
      1. 0
        9 September 2025 10: 51
        Where will the MiG 21 without a radar launch long-range weapons?
        1. +3
          9 September 2025 10: 53
          To drop a pre-programmed glide bomb, you don't need a radar.
          1. -2
            9 September 2025 12: 08
            Where will he throw this bomb? On South Korea? And the US with their raptors? Mig 21 )))) joke humor
            1. +1
              9 September 2025 12: 15
              I don't see anything funny about a fighter that confidently accelerates to 2.5 Machs and in its latest upgrade is capable of fighting the newest F-16s, and recently fought F-16s and Rafales in India. And the acceleration characteristics of the aircraft will allow it to launch a gliding bomb at 100-150 km. And I'm sure the South Koreans won't be laughing either.
              And the price of such an aircraft is quite low. India and China are now jointly producing the JF-17, which is essentially a deep modernization of the MiG-21. And it looks like the Su-75.
              It's only you who is so funny, but the plane is being seriously prepared for battle.
              1. +1
                9 September 2025 14: 05
                You understand that you are going to fight the US Air Force with a MiG-21, do you realize at what distance the F35 will see the MiG-21? And how many minutes will the MiG live in the air? One MiG?)
                1. +1
                  9 September 2025 14: 22
                  First of all, there are no US Air Forces there. At best, an aircraft carrier will bring something.
                  secondly, in mountainous terrain, the F-35 will be perfectly visible to stationary stations and transmit target designation,
                  thirdly, the Koreans don’t have the money for a mass-produced aircraft with advanced electronics,
                  fourthly, the main enemy is the Korean aircraft, which are visible quite well
                  fifthly, Korea is not looking for an aircraft that will replace the entire air defense system, but only a small element of the country's defense. And it must simply be made significantly newer
                  Sixthly, we are not talking about a MiG-21 produced in the 60s, but about a deeply redesigned machine, equipped after 2020, which will be able to see something and use the latest range of weapons.
                  Finally, seventhly, the logic of the question is not about building an Air Force that is guaranteed to gain air superiority against any enemy (that would be too much), but at least to worthily meet what is already there.
                  And there are F-15s with American-issue missiles.
                2. +2
                  9 September 2025 14: 27
                  Quote: Clever man
                  You understand that you are going to fight the US Air Force with a MiG-21, do you realize at what distance an F35 will see a MiG-21?

                  I would let Comrade Yn decide what and how much to order from Russia. I don't think he really needs our advice. wink
              2. -1
                9 September 2025 18: 26
                Quote: multicaat
                India and China are now jointly producing the JF-17

                What!? India and China are jointly producing a fighter jet?! This is something new! When? Where? Which one? laughing
                1. +1
                  10 September 2025 08: 34
                  I probably expressed myself poorly, in parallel, not together. For China (and Pakistan) it's the JF-17, for India it's the Russian and Eastern European modernizations of the MiG-21.
                  But everyone is developing the same platform. And somehow its age doesn't bother them.
              3. +1
                9 September 2025 22: 31
                India and China are now jointly producing the JF-17

                The JF-17 is produced by Pakistan, not India.
      2. +1
        9 September 2025 11: 31
        It will be. After the war. Russia's military-industrial complex has just gotten going...
    3. +3
      9 September 2025 10: 19
      Rather the MiG-35, then it will become cheaper for our Air Force.
  5. 23+
    9 September 2025 05: 42
    As for me, Kim should be given everything he asks for. Food, fuel, fertilizers, weapons, technology. They are resourceful guys, they will put everything to good use. Because the Jucheites have shown themselves to be our only true friends, and this despite all the nastiness that our leadership did to them after the collapse of the Union. And the current one, by the way. This attitude is expensive, very expensive in today's vile world. We owe a debt. And not a small one. And one that even slightly self-respecting people pay...
  6. -11
    9 September 2025 05: 49
    . Everyone knows that the DPRK is subject to weapons sanctions. The Koreans can only dream of new weapons. And Russia adheres to international rules.
    But no one can forbid them from developing their own. So I will say again that the article is the author's pipe dream!
    1. +7
      9 September 2025 06: 38
      Quote: maratk
      And Russia adheres to international rules.
      That's what's bad!
    2. 10+
      9 September 2025 06: 57
      And Russia adheres to international rules.

      When it comes to Russia, its "partners" "nag" at international rules, treaties and even common sense. But the Russian authorities pretend to be "unkissed girls" for some reason.
      Live with wolves - howl like a wolf
      (Folk wisdom)
      1. +7
        9 September 2025 07: 33
        This behavior has been annoying the people for a long time! All our best is stupidly copied, and our "copyrights must be respected", no Filkin agreements are violated, otherwise the "partners" will be offended. What is this, stupidity or cowardice?!
      2. 0
        9 September 2025 14: 02
        Quote: Amateur
        But for some reason the Russian authorities are pretending to be "unkissed girls".
        This is capitalism, in which there is a monopoly and a periphery, we are clearly not at the top of the capitalist pyramid. Our "masters of life" have long been in fact not patriots of Russia, having foreign citizenship, and trading in raw materials, with the withdrawal of assets abroad, to foreign banks and in foreign currency.
        Who will allow them to "howl like wolves", or rather, like masters. Here it is more correct - "What is allowed to Jupiter is not allowed to a bull".
    3. 12+
      9 September 2025 08: 52
      Bolshevism is the essence of Russian civilization.

      Quote: maratk
      Everyone knows that the DPRK is subject to weapons sanctions. The Koreans can only dream of new weapons. And Russia adheres to international rules.
      Quote: Dutchman Michel
      That's what's bad!
      Quote: Vadim S
      This behavior has been irritating people for a long time!

      All sanctions against the DPRK, which Russia had joined earlier, ended a year ago. Today, the Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between Russia and the DPRK, which was signed on June 19, 2024 in Pyongyang by Russian President Vladimir Putin and DPRK leader Kim Jong-un, is in effect.
      1. 0
        15 January 2026 09: 32
        How are the planes???? Please tell me.😁
    4. 2al
      +2
      9 September 2025 10: 10
      Let me clarify that the Russian Federation has blocked the work of the UN sanctions committee, so it is officially impossible to record violations of the sanctions regime.
      Response of the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry M.V. Zakharova to the media's question about the West's reaction to Russia's veto of the UN Security Council resolution on the group of experts of the UN Security Council Committee 1718 on sanctions against the DPRK
      "The goal of the group of experts, which cannot be called independent and impartial, was not to resolve issues of maintaining international and regional security, but to compromise Pyongyang and discredit the friends of the DPRK.
      The UN has never been able to properly study the scale of the blow that UN Security Council sanctions directly or indirectly inflict on ordinary people. The topic of illegal unilateral coercive measures has traditionally remained taboo."
    5. +1
      9 September 2025 10: 23
      Everyone knows that the DPRK is subject to weapons sanctions. The Koreans can only dream of new weapons. And Russia adheres to international rules. - Who told you such nonsense? Minus times minus equals plus.
    6. +2
      9 September 2025 11: 33
      And if Russia violates these "weapons sanctions", will it be subject to sanctions? laughing
  7. +7
    9 September 2025 08: 00
    Not a fact about the Su-34. Some kind of horror story.
    For the DPRK, a good scenario would be the MiG-35, after the MiG-29 it is easier to integrate. And considering the theater of operations, it will be quite sufficient in terms of functionality and range. Another option is the Su-30/35. And the Su-34 is only a bomber, in an air battle with the F-15/16 it will lose without cover. Let's see what happens in reality. The Su-34 is very unlikely...
    1. 0
      9 September 2025 09: 48
      Quote: Glagol1
      For the DPRK, a good scenario would be the MiG-35, after the MiG-29 it is easier to integrate. And considering the theater of operations, it is quite sufficient in terms of functionality

      The MiG-35 has a relatively weak radar. Therefore, it makes no sense to arm the MiG-35 with the same R-37M missiles. To conduct possible air battles with modern versions of the F-15 aircraft of the South Korean Air Force, the DPRK Air Force needs air superiority fighters capable of using long-range air-to-air missiles at maximum range. The best option would be the Su-35S with R-37M missiles + inexpensive Chinese J-10CE with PL-15 missiles. If the fighters of the South Korean Air Force are not neutralized, then the attack aircraft of the DPRK Air Force will simply be quickly destroyed in air battles in the event of a war.
      1. +1
        16 September 2025 00: 12
        I agree with AlexanderA. The MiG-35 cannot be armed with long-range missiles, that's a fact, but if it had RVV-SD with a range of 100 km + Kh-38 ground missiles and FAB-500 bombs with a module - yeah, that's why we bought a whole ruble's worth of nickels. The Su-35 is of course even more interesting, but the price... In any case, at least 24 units should be supplied to the DPRK. Better - 30.
        Otherwise it will be hard. I still support the 35th MiG, the price, the price, the price. And the plane is good. And it will be easier for the Korean comrades after the MiG-29.
        1. 0
          16 September 2025 17: 35
          Quote: Glagol1
          I still support the 35th MiG, price, price, price. And the plane is good.

          At one time, the competition for a promising frontline fighter (PFI) was divided into the development of the future Su-27 and the future MiG-29, justifying this NOT tactically, but economically:

          https://www.universalinternetlibrary.ru/book/58774/chitat_knigu.shtml

          "According to O.S. Samoylovich, the initiative for this proposal belonged to the Mikoyan Design Bureau: "The MiG Design Bureau came up with a radical proposal - to divide the topic into two subtopics: heavy PFI - anti-F-15 and light PFI - anti-F-16." Otherwise, Oleg Sergeevich's account of events coincides with what is given in the memoirs of Academician E.A. Fedosov: "Mathematical modeling was organized at GosNIIAS and the 30th Central Research Institute of Aircraft and Aviation Technology to determine the feasibility of creating a mixed fleet of aircraft. Calculations, carried out on the condition of a cost ratio of the Su-27 and MiG-29 of at least 2:1, showed that a mixed fleet is the most optimal, provided that it should consist of one third of the Su-27 and two thirds of the MiG-29."

          In fact, the cost ratio of the Su-27 and MiG-29 was not "at least 2:1", but "1,33:1". With such a cost ratio, a mixed fleet of frontline fighters "one third Su-27 and two thirds MiG-29" was not economically justified.

          Tactically... the MiG-29 has not had a single recognized aerial victory over a 4th generation enemy fighter in the entire history of its combat use.

          In the Ethiopian-Eritrean war at the turn of the century, a direct air clash between the Su-27 and the MiG-29 demonstrated that the Su-27 actually had complete tactical superiority over the MiG-29. In battles with the Su-27, several MiG-29s were shot down, but in response, not a single Su-27 fighter was shot down by the MiGs.

          It is clear that tactically as a frontline fighter, the MiG-35 is even less justified today than the MiG-29 was tactically justified in its time. Well, the MiG-35 cannot come even close in effectiveness in air combat to the Su-35 fighter with R-37M missiles.

          What about the economy? What is the ratio of the purchase prices of the MiG-35 and Su-35 today? Is it really better than the ratio of the purchase prices of the MiG-29 and Su-27 in the USSR? Considering the inevitable low-volume production of the MiG-35, I doubt it very much.

          Today, the MiG-29/35 family of aircraft can find a niche in the domestic Armed Forces only as deck fighters for the only domestic heavy aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov. But since the Navy leadership is silent about the future of the heavy aircraft carrier, it is very difficult to find justifications for further maintaining the possibility of producing a new production MiG-29/35. For example, to rearm the MiG-35 of the DPRK Air Force. It remains only to understand why the DPRK Air Force needs the "anti-F-16" MiG-35, which has no chance in air battles with South Korean F-15K fighters and the soon-to-be-delivered (2028 aircraft are planned to be delivered by 40) KF-21 fighters.
    2. 2al
      +3
      9 September 2025 10: 16
      The leak on the Su-34 could only have come from the Russian Federation and most likely this is unreliable information. In fact, the DPRK needs a type of Su-75 Checkmate with a 177S engine, with which the Su-75 can take off with a complement of explosive missiles from a runway shorter than 500 m. Organizing licensed production of the Su-75 in the DPRK like the Su-30MKI in India is a completely solvable task, while not violating UN sanctions.
  8. +2
    9 September 2025 08: 16
    Everything is so enthusiastic, only reality often makes "face to table". It is unlikely that our leaders will take the risk, they still hope to return back, to "before 2022"...
  9. +2
    9 September 2025 08: 18
    Il-28. An airplane that for some reason was not given as many lines and paragraphs as it deserved

    Why?
    At least three Il-28s have found their “eternal parking” place in Vologda, Chelyabinsk and Verkhnyaya Pyshma.
  10. +4
    9 September 2025 08: 42
    Why the Republic of Korea stubbornly calls the Su-34 a heavy fighter is a great mystery. Either there is no corresponding hieroglyph yet, or there is no understanding of the concept of its use.
    Yes, everything is defined correctly in Korea! There are no fools in their Central Committee! In general, the Su-34 should have been called fighter-bombers! But, in connection with the liquidation of fighter-bombers as a "class" in the Russian Federation, they were forced to call the Su-34 bombers! But unofficially ("semi-officially") the Su-34 has always been called (and is called) a fighter-bomber! And it should be taken into account that in a number of foreign countries such aircraft are called heavy fighters! So there is no point in blaming Korea!
    1. +2
      9 September 2025 11: 59
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      The Su-34 has always been called (and is called) a fighter-bomber!
      Now a mysterious definition has appeared for this kind of machines - multirole fighter...
      1. +2
        9 September 2025 13: 28
        Quote: Luminman
        Now a mysterious term has appeared for this kind of machine - a multi-role fighter...

        Well, actually the phrase "multirole fighter" came to us from the last century from NATO... as did the definition of "tactical fighter"! In fact, the definitions: "Multirole fighter", "Tactical fighter", "Fighter-bomber" are synonyms! But some experts make nuances! In their opinion, "multirole fighter" is "4 in 1" ... that is, "air superiority fighter", "frontline bomber", "attack aircraft", "reconnaissance aircraft"! And "fighter-bomber" is "2 in 1", that is, an air superiority fighter and a light (frontline) bomber! Each expert has his own "cockroaches"!
  11. 0
    9 September 2025 08: 42
    On the world map, the Korean peninsula is not impressive in size, and its northern part even less so.
    If we compare the two halves, the southern half has a more developed economy and is more than twice as populous as the northern half.
    It is important to understand that behind the southern half of the Korean peninsula stands practically the entire world capitalism with all its military might, and what about the northern half? The agreement on comprehensive partnership of the Russian Federation has a symbolic meaning - the Russian capitalists would not allow to fight for Un without completely losing the slave labor against the background of losses in the war with Ukraine (even the government talks about the critical situation with the slave labor). The PRC is pursuing a non-aligned policy so as not to put restrictions on economic expansion. This poses for Un, as once before N.S. Khrushchev, the problem of the optimal choice - missiles or aircraft. It seems that the choice is unambiguous - Missiles!
    If N.S. Khrushchev had cut funding for the missile program and given earrings to every girl in his time, and had not reduced the size of the army and funding for other types and branches of the military, the USSR would have collapsed much earlier.
    1. +3
      9 September 2025 10: 16
      At one time, N.S. Khrushchev cut funding for the missile program and gave earrings to all the girls - if he had not reduced the size of the army and funding for other types and branches of the military, the USSR would have collapsed much earlier.

      This is not the main reason, Khrushchev, willingly and unwillingly, was already destroying the Union, in various ways, but he was already strong, he could not be brought down immediately, after his removal, this process somewhat stopped, and after 1975, especially after the signing of the Helsinki Accords, as the deceased, GMS, said, the process began.
      1. +1
        9 September 2025 14: 17
        Quote: parusnik
        as the deceased said, GMS, the process has begun
        The process began, but there was an All-Union referendum, which showed that the overwhelming majority of the population was for the preservation of the Soviet Union. Its collapse is a crime, both in violation of the will of the people in the referendum, and the Constitution itself.
        Yes, everyone wanted changes, but the population was meanly and criminally lured into "democracy", where, under its guise, capitalism was quietly imposed. No one under Yeltsin said that we had adopted capitalism, moreover, a fake parody of the CIS was passed off as a renewal of the USSR.
        Khrushchev's sin, having besmirched Stalin, essentially besmirched the reputation of socialism itself. Brezhnev's sin, the Moon deal, for the sake of bourgeois payoffs and foreseeable benefits with detente, gave birth to stagnation and the fetish of the West. So we have what we have, with a corrupt "elite" and puffing out their cheeks in a ostentatious butt-butting with the masters of world capitalism, who wanted to see a strong Russia in a coffin, since they did not destroy the USSR for that. It is sad that with the help of the DPRK they liberated the Kursk region, and the Donbass has not been cleared for the fourth year, what can we say about "denazification" and "demilitarization"... Probably, everything said will again be explained in a different light, as it was with the pension reform.
        1. 0
          9 September 2025 14: 52
          But the Ostankino TV tower didn't give a damn about the opinion of the population. And the process started by the first Sergeyevich was completed by the second, although no, they didn't complete it, they carried out deindustrialization, they didn't complete decommunization. But judging by the articles on VO and the comments, it is going well.
      2. +1
        9 September 2025 15: 55
        Quote: parusnik
        This is not the main reason, Khrushchev already voluntarily and involuntarily destroyed the Union in various ways

        If the NSH had set the goal of destroying the USSR, then it simply had to agree with all the demands of the army and navy.
        The Soviet Army and the Navy, with 5,5 million people, would have devoured the USSR in about ten years. And without being able to cause any damage to the enemy. Because the army could not cross the Atlantic, and Europe was expendable material for the USA. And the Navy would have continued to build artillery steamships for a repeat of World War II, which, if anything happened, would have been defenseless against enemy aviation.
        1. 0
          9 September 2025 16: 14
          And when Gorbachev M.S. came to power, he said so, and right away, that all my activities in the positions I held would be aimed at the collapse of the USSR. "The women shouted Hurray! and threw their bras in the air" (c) This is to say that
          If the NSH had set a goal to destroy the USSR
          All his actions led to this, where they would lead, he himself did not know. He thought what was best, but it turned out as always. Paul I also thought that by canceling the "mama's" laws and introducing his own, it would be better, but he got a snuffbox to the temple.
          1. -1
            10 September 2025 10: 38
            Quote: parusnik
            All his actions led to this, and he himself didn’t know what they would lead to. He thought about what was best, but it turned out as always.

            Yes, that's true. However, this is the fundamental principle of any government in Russia. smile
            As for the NSH, the most effective way for it to collapse the USSR would have been to strengthen its defense capability in the understanding of the military of that time, who traditionally continued to prepare for the past war.
    2. +2
      9 September 2025 10: 17
      Quote: Jacques Sekavar

      If we compare the two halves, the southern half has a more developed economy and is more than twice as populous as the northern half.

      In military terms, there is another difference - an incomparably more developed road network. This gives a great advantage in terms of movement of troops and mobile launchers, which cannot be said about airfields, which cannot be moved.
      1. +2
        9 September 2025 12: 59
        But the DPRK has a whole network of underground cities where you can hide anything. And South Korea doesn't have nuclear weapons yet, but the DPRK does.
        As for the population... if necessary, all North Korean youth will take up arms without any discussion. In South Korea... the youth there is somewhat different, with different priorities. K-pop is more expensive than a military strap.
        1. 0
          9 September 2025 14: 13
          Quote: Illanatol
          But the DPRK has a whole network of underground cities where you can hide anything you want.

          That's true, but shooting from underground will be difficult. As for the quality of people - everything will depend on the nature of the conflict. Fortitude is good, but professionalism is also very important.
        2. 0
          9 September 2025 14: 27
          Quote: Illanatol
          As for the population... if necessary, all North Korean youth will take up arms without any discussion

          Long gone are the days when the number of soldiers was decisive
          Now the effective organization of the army, supplies, advanced weapons and firepower are decisive. Recently, the accuracy and guidance of heavy weapons have become increasingly important.
    3. +1
      9 September 2025 18: 58
      North Korea seems to be willing to help Russia with labor. The company where I work has increased its workforce by fifty Korean women, which has allowed it to lay off a couple of hundred Tajiks and Uzbeks. An additional contingent of workers from the DPRK is expected, as well as a further reduction in irreplaceable specialists from Central Asia.
      1. 0
        13 September 2025 13: 25
        Quote: Amazoniy
        An additional contingent of workers from the DPRK is expected, as well as a further reduction in irreplaceable specialists from Central Asia.

        The whole problem is that the population of the DPRK is significantly smaller than the population of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. And the birth rate in the DPRK has already fallen below the population replacement level. Plus the circumstances around the DPRK are much worse than those of the Central Asian republics. So this trend is, in my opinion, rather fleeting. If it exists at all.
        1. +1
          13 September 2025 18: 48
          I can't speak for all of Russia, all of Russia is very big... But I saw myself that women from the DPRK work at the Agrokultura Group greenhouse complex. There are a lot of rumors about them, but no one knows the truth. I heard that they have a contract for five years. There are about fifty women in total, of different ages. And yes, they fired a couple of hundred irreplaceable specialists from Central Asia. Korean women work incomparably better. They do a greater volume of work, and much better quality.
    4. +2
      9 September 2025 22: 55
      Quote: Jacques Sekavar
      It is important to understand that behind the southern half of the Korean peninsula stands practically the entire world capitalism with all its military might, and the northern? The agreement on comprehensive partnership of the Russian Federation...

      Olga Alexandrovna, do you seriously think that China is just lying next to North Korea and not taking any part in the existence and policies of this state, or have you simply lost sight of it? winked
  12. +4
    9 September 2025 08: 47
    It is not quite correct to call the Su-34 a fighter. Rather, it is a light frontline bomber with some fighter capabilities. Well, it will not work to make an armored machine for ground strikes from a fighter and ultimately leave a full-fledged relevant fighter. Miracles do not happen.
  13. +4
    9 September 2025 08: 48
    Good allies must be protected. The DPRK demonstrates its attitude towards Russia by its actions, unlike some of the CIS countries.
  14. +1
    9 September 2025 09: 31
    I think we should help our North Korean comrades. This is mutually beneficial cooperation.
  15. -4
    9 September 2025 09: 36
    The people in the photo look kind of scary. Couldn't you find any better photos?

    And that makes sense.
    The Tsar of a neo-medieval country and the president for life help each other to kill the national population (remember, "there are no Ukrainians, only Russians" - not literally, VVP)
  16. 0
    9 September 2025 09: 39
    Comrade Ynu could easily be given not only an SU-34, but also a couple of SU-35s.
  17. +1
    9 September 2025 09: 51
    Why does a country like North Korea need the Su34?
    In case of war, it will cover South Korea with artillery and missiles and it will need to defend itself from superior air forces and a cruise missile attack on its territory.
    Su34 will not help the DPRK in any way.
    From the Sukhoi line (taking into account the option of destroying ships) - Su30SM2 is the best choice, MiG35S is also not bad. Both can throw UMPK Su30SM2 can use the long-range missile R-37M.
    Both and the DPRK itself need an analogue of the Kinzhal and a small cruise missile for tactical aircraft.
    1. osp
      +1
      9 September 2025 14: 22
      The most optimal choice for them is the MiG-29SMT and MiG-29M2.
      It will be easiest to switch to them and the infrastructure for light fighters, there is operating experience.
      Belarus and Kazakhstan were supplied with Su-30SMs at domestic prices as CSTO members.
      But even for these countries it is excessive.
      1. 0
        9 September 2025 16: 00
        But the Russian Federation does not produce MiG...
  18. -2
    9 September 2025 10: 15
    Probably Toyota Mark 2))
  19. +2
    9 September 2025 10: 48
    The Su-34 can be armed not only with aeroballistic missiles but also with hypersonic cruise missiles (like the Zircon). Such a missile was tested during the testing of the new destroyer's weapons this year.
  20. +2
    9 September 2025 10: 48
    our KM-SAM, which, we note, our specialists from Almaz-Antey and Fakel helped make

    Russians know how to make good weapons.
    But this skill is reset too often
    political brainlessness.
  21. 0
    9 September 2025 13: 07
    C-34 is a formidable drake. It will be an excellent choice for the DPRK Air Force.
  22. osp
    -1
    9 September 2025 14: 19
    The author is not competent.
    For such a country, the most suitable fighters are the MiG-29SMT and MiG-29M2, since it will be easiest for pilots to retrain from the existing MiG-29.
    No other heavy aircraft can be operated there, there are no tasks for the Su-34 there at all and no infrastructure for this aircraft.
    It is absolutely not needed by such small states.
    Even Belarus abandoned it in favor of the Su-30SM and the modernization of the existing MiG-29.
  23. osp
    0
    9 September 2025 14: 26
    Quote: multicaat
    It is not quite correct to call the Su-34 a fighter. Rather, it is a light frontline bomber with some fighter capabilities. Well, it will not work to make an armored machine for ground strikes from a fighter and ultimately leave a full-fledged relevant fighter. Miracles do not happen.

    That's true. It has essentially completely lost the fighter capabilities of the Su-27 on which it was based.
    Its weight has increased significantly, reducing its maneuverability.
    All avionics are designed to work against ground targets; they are not designed for close air combat at all - there is no helmet-mounted target designation system.
    At low altitudes, it performs worse in terms of stability compared to the Su-24 - the latter has a variable-sweep wing for low-altitude flight.
  24. osp
    -1
    9 September 2025 14: 32
    Quote: 2al
    The leak on the Su-34 could only have come from the Russian Federation and most likely this is unreliable information. In fact, the DPRK needs a type of Su-75 Checkmate with a 177S engine, with which the Su-75 can take off with a complement of explosive missiles from a runway shorter than 500 m. Organizing licensed production of the Su-75 in the DPRK like the Su-30MKI in India is a completely solvable task, while not violating UN sanctions.

    What licensed production of the 5th generation in the DPRK?!
    Have you even seen the scale of the aircraft factory in Komsomolsk-on-Amur?
    How much equipment, workshops, machines and specialists are there?
    How many suppliers of materials and components?
    Where can you find all this in the DPRK?

    P.S.
    India had some infrastructure for such production; they had long ago established the production of some Soviet aircraft, their maintenance, and modernization.
    At first, the Su-30MKI was only assembled there from kits supplied by IAPO.
  25. 0
    9 September 2025 23: 14
    Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Kim Jong-un – we already have the photo of the year in the Grand Press Photo competition. laughing
  26. 0
    10 September 2025 09: 34
    It is doubtful, the Su-34 got to Algeria because of a kickback, the DPRK does not have money for such a thing, and they need a normal aircraft. A frontline bomber in the 21st century is a waste of money.
  27. +2
    10 September 2025 11: 24
    Quote: RondelR
    North Korea doesn't have money for that,

    How many millions of large-caliber shells, missiles, MLRS, guns, electronic components came from the DPRK to Russia and all this is not worth a dozen Su-34 aircraft or even Stealth? I think it is enough for more. Another thing is that they could exchange for something more valuable to them and not for aircraft.
    1. 0
      5 November 2025 19: 15
      The Su-34 is too specialized, so they'll also need the Su-35 and Su-30. Why would they need that when they could just get the Su-30, like India?
  28. +2
    10 September 2025 11: 38
    Quote from osp
    What licensed production of the 5th generation in the DPRK?!
    Have you even seen the scale of the aircraft factory in Komsomolsk-on-Amur?
    How much equipment, workshops, machines and specialists are there?
    How many suppliers of materials and components?
    Where can you find all this in the DPRK?

    Do you have any idea about the military-industrial complex of the DPRK? In electronics, chips, machine tools with CPUs they are at the highest world level, if not even higher than the world level.
    Produces the largest ICBM movements, glide vehicles for ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, etc. lighter than the most modern aircraft?
    Why do you think they still have Soviet and Chinese planes flying there that were delivered 40-50 or more years ago?
  29. +1
    11 September 2025 19: 00
    Why do they need the Su-34? The MiG-35 would be a good fit for them. Minimum retraining, can use almost the entire range of strike weapons. Maybe we could get a couple of regiments of them too.
  30. 0
    13 September 2025 16: 23
    for the price of one 34 it is better to buy the corresponding number of geraniums and other drones in North Korea
  31. 0
    15 September 2025 19: 20
    Su-34: wings for Kim Jong-un.

    Then, in addition to the Su-34, the Korean comrades will also find the Su-35 useful, and new air defense systems and mobile anti-ship missile systems will not be superfluous.
  32. 0
    17 September 2025 10: 55
    I've been reading the comments, from the fence to lunch. In the heat of the debate, it seems like they threw out the baby along with the bathwater. From religious sermons about how sinful man is to where the steering wheel is on an Aurus. What are you guys talking about?! The 34th is a good machine, the "Duckling" has proven its worth in combat. But it's not for everyone; the principle of reasonable sufficiency hasn't been repealed. I believe the DPRK's 34th is excessive. The author of this publication constantly discusses the war between North and South. He laid out everything on a map, showing how he sees events unfolding in the future. I sincerely hope that common sense will prevail and the country will unite under the slogan "one country, two systems." Regarding the permanent state of "neither peace nor war" between North and South, the North needs help developing its industry. After all, not everything is perfect there with food, and what good prospects there are for tourism and medicine.
    1. 0
      5 November 2025 19: 13
      Korea needs a versatile aircraft, and that's the Su-30.
  33. +1
    19 September 2025 03: 46
    Quote: bayard
    Quote: bober1982
    The MiG-29, apart from its outstanding takeoff and landing and piloting qualities, has nothing else to note. As they used to say back in the distant Soviet times, it is an aircraft for gaining air superiority over an airfield.

    Young man (regardless of age), what modification of the MiG-29 are you referring to? The 1979 model? Well, look at the technical specifications for this aircraft issued to the designers, according to the technical specifications it must be like this - a LIGHT FRONTLINE FIGHTER for basing at frontline airfields, including unpaved (!) and its combat radius of 680 km was included in the technical specifications. It was intended to replace the MiG-21.
    Quote: bober1982
    Apart from the outstanding takeoff, landing and piloting qualities, there is nothing else to note

    Are you sure, YOUNG MAN?
    And what about the magnificent slot Doppler radar, which could see targets perfectly against the background of the earth? And its outstanding for its time OLS, which NATO could not even dream of? And the helmet-mounted laser target designator for the RVV MD with an infrared head? Similar ones appeared in the air forces of NATO countries no earlier than the 00s!? And its outstanding thrust-to-weight ratio, maneuverability, takeoff and landing characteristics? And its altitude? 34 km. - dynamic ceiling!!
    Compare it at least with its classmate, including the time of its appearance in service, with the F-16 of the first modifications. The MiG-29 not only surpassed it in all flight characteristics, it surpassed it in the composition of avionics by a head. The Falcon was then armed ONLY with the MD "Sidewinder" RVV, a weak radar and very meager avionics and onboard electronic warfare. Against its background, the MiG-29, even in its first modifications, was simply a monster. And it could initially use the SD R-27 RVV, not to mention the fact that in close combat, thanks to the OLS, helmet-mounted target designator and more advanced MD R-73 RVV, it tore Falcons apart in all training battles with a dry score like a Tuzik does heating pads.
    But of course it had its shortcomings and the first generation MiG-29 still had them. Due to the extremely tight layout, its sophisticated avionics were not very convenient to service, but this avionics was worth it. For its time, it was a superstar of all air shows and export sales.
    But it is TWIN-ENGINE, which means the time and labor intensity of its maintenance cannot be compared with the light MiG-21. And this labor intensity resulted in both the cost of maintenance and the cost of operation. Due to the density of the layout, the maintenance of the heavy Su-27 looked much more comfortable, and the cost of their life cycle because of this (MiG-29 and Su-27) turned out to be almost equivalent. That is why when the Su-90 entered the market in the 27s, they were preferred to be purchased. And you should not compare a heavy and a light fighter of the same age, they were created for different purposes. And when after the first years of operation the Air Force received a request for a modification with a larger combat radius, the MiG-0M\M29, MiG-2K\KUB were created, the airframe of which became the prototype for the MiG-29. The MiG-35S has a ferry range of 35 km. and a combat radius of 3000 km, which is better than that of other heavy fighters of the 1350th and even 4th generation. Pogosyan's lobby pointed out that the MiG-5S is "too expensive", indicating that its price (in the pre-production batch) is equal to the cost of a serial Su-35SM (at that time, for the purchase of the VKS, about $ 30 million), while ignoring that they are comparing a serial aircraft produced in hundreds of pieces and a fighter from an experimental batch, which has an AFAR radar (versus a slotted PFAR in the Su-30SM), despite the smaller area of ​​​​the antenna canvas, the fighter saw an RCS of 30 square meters at 3 km, better than that of the heavy two-seater Su-280 SM. The MiG-30S engines have a service life of 35 engine hours - the same as the Su-4000S and almost 35 times more than the Su-2SM (30 engine hours), their fuel consumption and operating costs are 2500 times less than those of the Su-1,5S. At the same time, the MiG-35S can be either with a single or a two-seat cabin, there is no need to make a separate aircraft for a twin. The aircraft really turned out and only disgusting financing and Pogosyan's machinations (in pursuit of orders and the desire to eliminate a competitor) led to the fact that this fighter did not become the sales star of our aviation industry.
    The same India operates a very decent fleet of MiG-29 and is quite happy with them, maintains them, repairs them, modernizes them, extends their service life. They are HAPPY with them. Although these are the first modifications of the aircraft. India is a mountainous country and for high-altitude airfields there is nothing better than the MiG-29 - their opinion. Therefore, they periodically buy MiG-29s from the Russian Aerospace Forces, replenishing their fleet. But this is the largest operator of these fighters. And they refused the MiG-35S exclusively thanks to bribes from the French, who were pushing their "Rafale" on them. Now everyone involved in the scam with the "Rafale" is in prison or under investigation. Not for the first year.
    Quote: bober1982
    As for the MiG-35, it's fantasy.

    Six MiG-35S have been purchased by the Aerospace Forces and are in service. They are currently used to provide air defense for Moscow.
    Two+ years ago, the head of UAC, answering a journalist's question on camera about the fate of the MiG-35S, said that they were being prepared for production, that there were foreign customers for this fighter (i.e. at least two), and that a decision on purchases for the VKS had not yet been made. This is what was said officially.
    So leave your fantasies and gossip and "fantasy" of the MiG-35S. The only obstacle to its serial production can only be that UAC, under the protection of the anti-MiG lobby, destroyed the developer and manufacturer of the AFAR radar for this aircraft. And with the gap from the MiG-29M2, this is not quite the same coat. Perhaps serial production of this fighter is slowed down by this.
    For those who are hoping for the imminent appearance of the Su-75, I will cool you down - it HAS NOT TAKEN OFF YET. And it will not be ready for serial production before the first half of the next decade. Not before. And now both our Aerospace Forces and the allied Air Forces need the MiG-35S with AFAR radar like air. This could be a "Squirrel" from the Su-57, reduced in cross-sectional area. Something like this is being prepared for the promising Su-75.

    Compare the takeoff weight, payload, and range of the MiG-29 and F16, the number of hardpoints, and the types of weapons used. Two engines versus one. It was the F2's versatility that gave it a much longer life.
  34. 0
    19 September 2025 04: 01
    Neither 6, nor 12, nor even 36 Su-34s will be a game-changer in North Korea's confrontation with the South. Yes, of course, the aging MiG-17s and Il-28s need to be replaced. But North Korea doesn't have the cash to pay for these aircraft, and it never will. Perhaps bartering for ammunition? But that would be a lot for just one aircraft.
  35. 0
    5 November 2025 19: 06
    Assembly of upgraded MiG-35s could be organized in Korea. However, it's unclear whether the two-seat MiG-35 can be upgraded to Kab1500 and fuel capacity.
    Probably not, and that is why the Mig glider is becoming history.
  36. 0
    17 November 2025 16: 19
    The main thing is not to get knocked out while turning. Especially if it's a man. Men don't give birth.
  37. 0
    6 December 2025 15: 53
    Quote: bober1982
    Quote from turembo
    It seems like we don't have an ideology in our country,

    There is an ideology, specifically that of the current Russian government - demilitarization and denazification of that misunderstanding that is called Ukraine.

    These are too shady, short-term plans to be called ideology. Hitting a thug with a brick so he'll be dead for good and the gang that raised him will disperse in the alleys isn't ideology. It's tactics. Don't throw around terms whose meaning you can't handle.
  38. 0
    6 December 2025 16: 12
    Any new fighter jets for the DPRK are a plus for the security of our border regions. It's clear that it makes economic sense to have one model, it's clear that we ourselves are currently short of Su-35s, and it's clear that transferring pilots from MiG-21s to Su-57s is like jumping from a cart into a flying saucer.
    It's also worth understanding that all news on VO can be divided by two. This doesn't mean Kim will get an SU-17 instead of a 34, but still.