Military Review

Another comparison in favor of the Su-35

99
Development aviation industry and loud coverage of progress in this area attract the attention of the general public. Because of this, discussions are first tied up, and then estimates appear, including comparative ones. Like most cases, the result of comparing aircraft is praise in the direction of one machine and criticism of another. A few days ago, Business Insider, known for its work in financial and economic analytics, joined the discussion of new fighter aircraft. The attention of the publication was attracted by the latest American and Russian developments, which were compared.


This comparison is not in favor of those aircraft that could be considered as notorious favorites. For this reason, revealing the intrigue, the article is called Russia's Fourth-Gen Fighter Could Be The Best Thing On The Market ("The fourth-generation Russian fighter may be the best on the market").

First of all, Business Insider journalists noted that currently three aircraft are leading in the area of ​​fighters, produced in three countries. These are the American Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, the Chinese Chengdu J-20 and the Russian T-50 (PAK FA). All these projects of the fifth generation fighter are currently at different stages and, as always happens, do not go without problems. Companies involved in projects, to the best of their ability, eliminate problems and fine-tune aircraft.

At the same time, according to the authors of the publication, the most successful at the moment project F-35, which has already reached the stage of mass production, continues to lose customers. At the same time, the authors of Business Insider refer to recent news from the Netherlands. Recall, the military of this country a few days ago published data on the purchase of American fighters, of which it turned out that the operation of the F-35 will cost about 10% more than the use of older General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon planes that are in service with the Netherlands Air Force . Because of this, the number of Lightning II aircraft ordered can be significantly reduced, from 85 to 50 or even 33 units.



Russia does not yet have a fifth-generation serial fighter, and therefore has to offer the 4 ++ generation aircraft, the Su-35. This aircraft, which has characteristics specific to its generation and to the present, is, according to the authors of the article, devoid of the problems inherent in the new fifth generation. In addition, it is based on old and proven technical solutions that have proven their necessity.

The combination of proven fourth-generation solutions and new electronics, bringing the characteristics of the aircraft to the fifth generation, provides the Su-35 the optimal balance of technical and combat qualities. According to this parameter, according to Business Insider, Su-35 is ahead of all other existing aircraft of its class. Thus, while the USA is using one type of fifth generation fighter (Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor) and is producing another (F-35), which turns into corresponding expenses, Russia is upgrading the existing technology of the fifth generation T-50.



For lack of new and up-to-date information, Business Insider cites the memories of the head of Tactical Air Support Inc. J. Gallop, a former military pilot of the USAF. A few years ago, he flew one of the Ukrainian Su-27 fighters and was pleased. Gallop responded well to the flight characteristics of a Soviet-made aircraft. Among other things, he noted a large supply of fuel, which can be compared to the reserve of the Grumman F-14 Tomcat fighter with two outboard tanks. Due to this, according to Gallop, the Soviet / Russian fighter can fly at supersonic speed for a long time, which greatly enhances its combat capabilities.

The deep modernization of the Su-27, which resulted in the emergence of the Su-35, improved the characteristics of the aircraft and brought it to the same level as the most modern foreign developments. This is most clearly manifested in flight qualities. Business Insider journalists confirm this statement with the following figures: Su-35 is able to fly two and a half times faster than the speed of sound and travel up to 1900 miles. For the newest American fighter, the F-35, these figures are 1,6 sound speed and 1380 miles, respectively.



As for the fighting qualities of the Russian and American aircraft, the authors of the article cite statements that could cause a lot of controversy. According to them, both Su-35 and F-35 are able to reach their goals with the same efficiency and destroy them. How exactly and from what considerations such a conclusion was made is not entirely clear. Both aircraft so far worked only in the conditions of test sites and were not used in a real war. Therefore, it is too early to talk about the effectiveness of combat work, and even more so about comparing such things.

Ultimately, the authors of the publication of the Fourth Gen Fighter Could Be The Best Thing On The Market come to the following conclusion. Russia's plans to conquer a third of the world market of low-profile fighters may well be realized with the help of Su-35, belonging to the generation “4 ++”. The fifth-generation fighter T-50 is also capable of this, but, at first glance, the older Su-35 should not be discounted.

Nevertheless, the employees of Business Insider admit that on a number of signs the American F-35 Lightning II surpasses its Russian competitor. However, the current state of the American project hints at the continuation of the protracted refinement of a promising aircraft with corresponding consequences for the project and for customers. Under these conditions, the Russian fighter generation "4 ++" may be much more interesting to potential customers than the machine, which the manufacturer refers to the next fifth generation.

Overall, the publication Business Insider leaves a complex impression. Of course, it is nice when the foreign press praises the Russian military equipment. However, in the article of the publication there were almost no figures, a detailed analysis of the possibilities, etc. things inherent in serious publications on the topic of comparing aircraft. For this reason, the article — although pleasant for the Russian eye — still looks unfounded. At the same time, we should not forget the controversies of recent years, simply pursuing the American F-35 project. For various reasons of a conceptual, bureaucratic and financial nature, this aircraft regularly becomes a target for criticism, primarily of an economic nature.



As an example, suitable to the topic of publication of the American edition, we can cite the specific attitude of the Australian Air Force to the new fifth-generation fighter. Australian military pilots want to build their future air force based on the F-22 fighter, which even now is ahead of the F-35 in a number of parameters. The United States, in turn, has long spoken about this: they are not going to sell F-22 to third countries, and for export deliveries offer its “younger brother” - F-35. Australia insists on its own and as a result, there are numerous critical articles and even some comparative testing-simulations. During one of these procedures, several years ago, the “computer” F-35 lost a lot of air combat with electronic models of the Russian Su-35. Details of the simulations were not published, but their result in the end almost became a pretext for scandal and caused a lot of heated discussions.

Yet it is worth noting that the general “morality” of the article has a reasonable grain. The non-fifth generation Su-35 fighter is much less expensive than the American F-35. As a result, in the event of a full-fledged entry into the international market, it receives an additional advantage, which is fully capable of leveling the existing lag behind competitors of the fifth generation. Another useful feature of the Russian aircraft is its “origin”. Su-35 is another combat vehicle of the successful and popular Su-27 family. Therefore, it will be relatively easy for the operator-country, which already owns aircraft of this family, to master the new Su-35. At the very least, easier than the new American technique.

China has already expressed a desire to acquire two dozen new Russian fighters. If the deal does not break, then the Air Force of the People’s Liberation Army of China will become the first foreign user of the Su-35 fighter jets and will probably set an example to other states. Time proved the correctness of the Business Insider’s prediction of a relatively large export future for the new Russian fighter.


On the materials of the sites:
http://businessinsider.com/
http://aviationweek.com/
http://flightglobal.com/
http://ria.ru/
Author:
99 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. wrungel
    wrungel April 26 2013 07: 21 New
    61
    "If you see a gun on any plane or helicopter, do not ask stupid questions whose it is ..."
    Shipunov Arkady Georgievich
    1927/11/7-2013/04/25
    1. radio operator
      radio operator April 26 2013 07: 55 New
      26
      Yes, you are right, blessed memory to Arkady Georgievich, a talented designer of shooting iron.
      1. patline
        patline April 26 2013 08: 49 New
        13
        Shipunov - bright memory.
        1. Russian
          Russian April 26 2013 09: 35 New
          +2
          Hah, sly of course:
          The United States, in turn, has long spoken out on this subject: they are not going to sell the F-22 to third countries, but they are offering its "little brother", the F-35, for export.

          Good plane fuck you, buy unfinished and expensive! Here, we would borrow such experience for trade with China))
          And so, it's nice that even in the foreign press our planes are recognized as the best)
          1. Larus
            Larus April 27 2013 19: 27 New
            +1
            And why did you decide that he is good, maybe on the contrary it turns out to be complete .. And so from the outside, but the numbers seem to be cool.
      2. Sirocco
        Sirocco April 26 2013 12: 22 New
        +3
        The aircraft has an advanced information management system, a radar station with a passive phased antenna array "NO35 Ibis", which in 2010 is the most powerful radar in the world.

        Su-35S is capable of carrying eight tons of various weapons, suspended at 12 points. [b] [b] The standard cannon armament for him is a 30-mm GSh-30-1 aviation gun with 150 rounds of ammunition. [/ b] [/ b] [b] Here she is the glory of the great designer. He erected a monument to himself. [/ B] Missile weapons may include the entire range of relevant domestic products from the baby R-73 to the heavy R-37 with a 300-kilometer firing range. In the future, the latter will be replaced by KS-172, whose range is 400 km.

        The AL-35F41S engines developed by NPO Saturn, with a plasma ignition system and a controlled thrust vector, are used as a power plant on the Su-1S. Such engines allow you to develop supersonic speed without the use of afterburner, which brings the Su-35S closer to fifth-generation fighters. The maximum speed of the Su-35S is 1400 km / h near the ground and 2400 km / h at the optimum flight altitude. But most importantly, the deflected thrust vector greatly increases the maneuverability of the aircraft.
    2. During
      During April 26 2013 10: 33 New
      21
      so how so?!?! fucking Internet ... got the news from Boston and about some kind of useless bulk and for some reason does not report it ... it is impossible not to inform in the first and title lines about the death of this great man ... blessed memory, honor and immense the respect of all generations for hundreds of years to come ... always in mind. Mourn
    3. Alexey K.
      Alexey K. April 26 2013 21: 27 New
      +2
      GSH is the pride of our Fatherland.
    4. Reasonable, 2,3
      Reasonable, 2,3 April 27 2013 03: 13 New
      0
      Is this an export-time to explain ?.
  2. King
    King April 26 2013 07: 35 New
    10
    5th generation fighters can’t be unnoticed by the new generation of rods and can only hide from the development of 70-80 years. and that’s not always. (recall Yugoslavia and the downed stealth). and all the rumors about stealth are just a duck for potential buyers.
    1. patline
      patline April 26 2013 08: 48 New
      +2
      I agree. All this stealth is show off. Yes, and let the amers ponte and make more and more expensive pieces of iron.
      For any disguise method, there is a way to see. Rather, it will be more correct that this disguise will work only for backward countries where there are no modern detection systems.
      1. Thunderbolt
        Thunderbolt April 26 2013 16: 13 New
        +3
        Quote: patline
        this disguise will only work for backward countries where there are no modern detection systems.
        Or modern radars are “knocked out” by first-wave UAVs.
    2. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm April 26 2013 09: 16 New
      +1
      Quote: King
      and all the rumors about stealth are just a duck for potential buyers.

      I would like a more detailed justification.
      1. Canep
        Canep April 26 2013 10: 05 New
        +2
        To shoot down an airplane with the KUB complex (this was the case in Yugoslavia), you need to combine the missile mark on the screen with the target mark manually, using the joystick, as in a video game. This must be done during the entire flight of the rocket. In order for the target to be marked on the screen, the radar (round dish) should receive a response (reflected) signal from the target. If the Yugoslavs shot down F-117, then the guidance radar saw this plane. How they solved the problem of detection, they don’t tell anyone. But SURN complex Cube was developed in the 50s. The elementary base - the radio tubes, about the same stood on the Record 312 TVs. Judge the possibilities of modern radars yourself.
        1. Odysseus
          Odysseus April 26 2013 10: 28 New
          +4
          Quote: Canep
          To shoot down an airplane with the KUB complex (this was the case in Yugoslavia), you need to combine the missile mark on the screen with the target mark manually, using the joystick, as in a video game.

          All this is very witty, but only one trouble the Cube has never shot down the F-117.
          1. Canep
            Canep April 26 2013 10: 37 New
            0
            And what do you think shot down the F-117? Only without allegations.
            1. Odysseus
              Odysseus April 26 2013 11: 03 New
              +5
              Quote: Canep
              And what do you think shot down the F-117? Only without allegations.

              C-125
              1. Tartary
                Tartary April 26 2013 11: 12 New
                0
                Quote: Canep
                And what do you think shot down the F-117? Only without allegations.

                Quote: Odyssey S-125



                At that time, a familiar air defense officer loaded night missiles to the S-125 from a warehouse near Khabarovsk to be sent to Yugoslavia ... There were only officers in the movers - the soldiers were sleeping peacefully in the barracks ...
                I don’t know other subtleties ... Why weren’t there any closer missiles stored in the warehouses? H / s ...
                1. Canep
                  Canep April 26 2013 11: 39 New
                  +2
                  Convinces. Especially that the officers were loading. laughing
                2. ATATA
                  ATATA April 26 2013 13: 01 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Tartary
                  Why weren’t there any closer missiles stored in the warehouses? H / s ...

                  Do you like tucking tales, as I take a look.
                  1. Tartary
                    Tartary April 27 2013 03: 14 New
                    +1
                    Quote: ATATA
                    Do you like tucking tales, as I take a look.

                    Lyaksey, I like you nickname 1 and 2, I say again: - we have different places of residence and apparently upbringing ... Therefore, about stories, etc. - and to all comrades there, on the examples of which mow under "Thomas" and have the audacity to carry all kinds of snowstorms here too ...
                    And less look in the keyhole, but take adult (!) people a word, unless of course there is nothing to object specifically to.
                    And so, as you, along with your doubt, you can every post of any, and yours including, not childish ...
                    Good luck.
              2. Tartary
                Tartary April 26 2013 11: 14 New
                0
                Quote: Odyssey
                Quote: Canep
                And what do you think shot down the F-117? Only without allegations.
                Quote: C-125 [/ quote


                At that time, a familiar air defense officer loaded night missiles to the S-125 from a warehouse near Khabarovsk to be sent to Yugoslavia ... There were only officers in the movers - the soldiers were sleeping peacefully in the barracks ...
                I don’t know other subtleties ... Why weren’t there any closer missiles stored in the warehouses? H / s ...
                Quote: Odyssey
                C-125
              3. Canep
                Canep April 26 2013 11: 51 New
                +2
                Even so, the S-125 is also an ancient complex, and is also not familiar with microprocessors. And the phased array radar is also not equipped.
                1. Odysseus
                  Odysseus April 26 2013 12: 17 New
                  +5
                  Quote: Canep
                  Even so, the S-125 is also an ancient complex, and is also not familiar with microprocessors. And the phased array radar is also not equipped.

                  F-117 has 1 loss in three wars. This is an unprecedentedly low level of losses.
                  And they discovered his P-18 over twenty kilometers. Despite the fact that the amers became insolent and did not interfere.
                  1. Canep
                    Canep April 26 2013 12: 36 New
                    +3
                    Nevertheless, the F-117 was on the ground, shot down by the grandfather of modern air defense systems. I think the latest systems wake them up without difficulty.
                    At the expense of P-18: antennas are not assembled in a phased array, but simply hard phased to improve the radiation pattern. We have one antenna with P-18 used to receive TV in the barracks.
                    1. Odysseus
                      Odysseus April 27 2013 19: 02 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Canep
                      Nevertheless, the F-117 was on the ground, shot down by the grandfather of modern air defense systems. I think the latest systems wake them up without difficulty

                      You overestimate the possibilities of stealth technology.
                      This is not a sword-treasure trove or apples of rejuvenation. Subtle does not mean invulnerable.
                      This is just a very useful technology that allows you to reduce the level of your losses and increase the likelihood of completing a combat mission.
                  2. ifolga
                    ifolga April 26 2013 23: 34 New
                    0
                    Serbs talked of at least 3 downed
                    1. Odysseus
                      Odysseus April 27 2013 19: 03 New
                      +1
                      Quote: ifolga
                      Serbs talked of at least 3 downed

                      One shot down was confirmed, one was most likely damaged.
        2. Roll
          Roll April 26 2013 10: 42 New
          +7
          The southerners shot down f 117 at the moment when he opened the bomb, so at that moment he was clearly visible, and flew along one route, so the southerners ambushed him, and didn’t come up with anything like that, just the amers became insolent, for which they received.
        3. kot11180
          kot11180 April 26 2013 12: 44 New
          +1
          if I’m not mistaken, f-111 shot down a moment of -29 with a missile from a thermal seeker using an optical-location system
    3. Canep
      Canep April 26 2013 09: 30 New
      +2
      Quote: King
      but they can only hide from the development of 70-80 years. and it’s not always

      It is hiding, and even interference from the ground and from the air, you need to put, in general, in every way interfere. At one time, our stealth technology was leaked to an American spy to get evidence on it, so they passed all the documentation, with the exception of the resolution, "Work to stop due to futility." Thus, having killed two birds with one stone, they caught the spy and put the American into disuse, and they pecked.
      1. Windbreak
        Windbreak April 26 2013 10: 05 New
        +7
        Quote: Canep
        At one time, our stealth technology was leaked to an American spy to get evidence on it, so they passed all the documentation, with the exception of the resolution, "Work to stop due to futility."
        Just forgot to remind about this Sukhoi Design Bureau, making the T-50
        1. Canep
          Canep April 26 2013 10: 14 New
          0
          And you know all the details of the design of this aircraft and what technologies are used there. Stealth - this is something harmful to the brand, which allows you to sell aircraft at times more expensive. On the T-50, most likely, low visibility was achieved only by removing external pendants for armament inside the aircraft, as well as using a hull shape that reduces reflection to the signal source.
          1. Zerstorer
            Zerstorer April 26 2013 10: 40 New
            +1
            And there are radar absorbing materials, albeit limitedly. I propose to agree on the terms - what is the "technology" Stealth:
            option number 1
            stealth technologies = technologies (all technologies!) providing low radar visibility. (now they usually mean this term)
            option number 2
            stealth technology includes:
            1) a method of reducing the EPR of the aircraft from the front and front-bottom angles through the use of a faceted washable surface.
            2) a method for reducing the EPR of a flat plate due to the reflection of electromagnetic waves (given wavelength) in antiphase.
            1. Canep
              Canep April 26 2013 11: 05 New
              +1
              I think we need to determine the term technology. "Technology Stealth" - this is my trademark. And there are a lot of means to reduce the visibility of aircraft in the range of electromagnetic radiation. Which of them were and will be used on the T-50, we do not know for sure.
          2. Odysseus
            Odysseus April 26 2013 12: 14 New
            +1
            Quote: Canep
            And you know all the details of the design of this aircraft and what technologies are used there.

            Burelom subtly hints to you that it’s a little strange to say that stealth technologies are "unpromising" when the whole world (including Russia) builds airplanes using this technology.
            You yourself do not notice the contradiction in your words?
            1. Canep
              Canep April 26 2013 15: 11 New
              +4
              The whole world does a lot of things that should not be done, and we often repeat their mistakes. The shuttle is a good example. The Unions flew 10 years earlier, and still fly, and the Shuttles are already in the museum. "Unions" we have not copied from anyone. But with the “Buran” did not work out well, because they imitated. Now about the T-50, have you seen their drawings? I do not and do not presume to judge what is used there from stealth. Note the Americans at one time recognized the superiority of the Su-27, but they did not copy it. They decided to do better. What they did, we learn when they show themselves in battle. Now we can judge their planes only by their advertising booklets and the declared characteristics.
              1. Bad_gr
                Bad_gr 11 May 2013 13: 05 New
                0
                Quote: Canep
                "Unions" we have not copied from anyone. But with the “Buran” did not work out well, because they imitated.

                Even before the flight of Gagarin, we worked out options for reusable systems. And the fact that he flew on a one-time, the decision was purely political, and not from the techies (although it is possible, thanks to this the flight was carried out earlier). And according to Buran there were a lot of projects, and again, what kind of final decision it should be is more political (“make it like the Americans have”), and not based on the opinion of the designers involved in this project. That is, not because of the lack of one’s own, but due to the fact that someone insuring their ass insisted on copying.
    4. Nitup
      Nitup April 26 2013 12: 41 New
      +5
      It's all about the range of detection by enemy radars. In new aircraft, it is decreasing. And the opportunity arises, without entering the affected area, to strike.
    5. ifolga
      ifolga April 26 2013 23: 31 New
      +2
      Stealth is a very important parameter. It determines the target detection range. Priority in battle is the one who first discovered the target.
  3. Romn
    Romn April 26 2013 07: 37 New
    +1
    It’s really nice to read such an article and hear good reviews about our aircraft. Of course, I think one of the first SU-35s to be sold in China, I think it’s not worth rushing at all, but Europe would need to be good at advertising our planes, let them change to good domestic equipment smile
  4. UFO
    UFO April 26 2013 07: 41 New
    0
    Wonderful comparison, article +. Only, I wanted the Yakov line to develop (141 onwards), and aviation electronics need a good boost, in cooperation with the French. Because "going on a level is good, but getting ahead is BETTER!" wink
  5. radio operator
    radio operator April 26 2013 07: 52 New
    +6
    The Americans had previously recognized the superiority of the Russian aircraft.
    This article only adds confidence in this postulate.
    1. Scythian 35
      Scythian 35 April 26 2013 08: 11 New
      -1
      It may be enough to compare the performance characteristics of the Su-35 and F-35. The Americans did not create a fifth-generation aircraft for direct aerial combat. The task of the F-35 is to stealthily approach the enemy’s aircraft, and while Said and Muhamed or Sun and Lin are on the alert watching the girls' tales, they put a rocket in the ass and get rid of it as quickly as possible. While the American aircraft is not finalized and inferior in terms of performance characteristics to anyone, there will be no direct air battles !!!
    2. screw cutter
      screw cutter April 26 2013 17: 49 New
      +2
      A good video, and what’s most remarkable, this program is about three years old. But Shipunova is a pity, such people leave, the earth rest in peace and eternal memory.
    3. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 11 May 2013 13: 27 New
      0
      According to the video.
      The Americans lied to the engines standing on the Raptor: they showed all-angle engines on the stand, and on the F-22 there are engines where the nozzle can turn only in one plane (up and down), and both nozzles synchronously in one direction. In disagreement, and even more so in the side, as on the Su-37, Su-35 and T-50, the F-22 will not work.
      We have turned the nozzle up and down on the Su-30, but the nozzles (unlike the F-22) can be rotated in different directions, so the plane can turn in any direction even at zero speed.
  6. Explore
    Explore April 26 2013 07: 56 New
    +4
    I agree, the Su-35S and MiG-35D are quite promising aircraft. They can be a worthy alternative until the Syrian supply of PAK FA begins in the troops ...
    1. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 11 May 2013 13: 30 New
      0
      Quote: Explorar
      They can be a worthy alternative until the Syrian supply of PAK FA begins in the troops ...

      And will all fighter aircraft be replaced by PAKFA?
  7. Scythian 35
    Scythian 35 April 26 2013 08: 10 New
    -1
    It may be enough to compare the performance characteristics of the Su-35 and F-35. The Americans did not create a fifth-generation aircraft for direct aerial combat. The task of the F-35 is to stealthily approach the enemy’s aircraft, and while Said and Muhamed or Sun and Lin are on the alert watching the girls' tales, they put a rocket in the ass and get rid of it as quickly as possible. While the American aircraft is not finalized and inferior in terms of performance characteristics to anyone, there will be no direct air battles !!!
    1. Vasily79
      Vasily79 April 26 2013 08: 28 New
      +1
      Quote: Scythian 35
      The Americans did not create a fifth-generation aircraft for direct aerial combat.

      Where such infa
      Quote: Scythian 35
      The task of the F-35 is to quietly approach enemy aircraft,

      What on earth. or to U2 or a super duper jet laughing
    2. Die-hard
      Die-hard April 26 2013 09: 38 New
      0
      Quote: Scythian 35
      While the American aircraft is not finalized and inferior in terms of performance characteristics to anyone

      The F-35 has one problem - the VTOL option (F-35B), which very seriously spoiled the entire program. They poured and continue to pour a hell of a bunch of green pieces of paper into this vertical line, but to no avail - the flying iron without cruising supersonic was like a flying iron - it remained. And if the deck and the traditional version (F-35C and F-35A, respectively) can be completely brought to mind, then with this vertical, the Americans are provided with fun for years to come.
    3. USNik
      USNik April 26 2013 10: 38 New
      0
      while Said and Muhamed, or Sun and Lin, on combat duty poison baits about girls, put a rocket in the ass and dump from there as quickly as possible.

      BGG, the good old F-117, which for some reason has long been thrown into the landfill, is perfectly suited for your task yes The Fe-35 is the same f117, only a little lickier, faster, and the city is more expensive, which, in principle, was planned by the star-striped shredders ...
  8. horoh
    horoh April 26 2013 08: 11 New
    +1
    No one doubted that our plane is better good
  9. Canep
    Canep April 26 2013 08: 44 New
    +5
    I probably don’t know the minuses on the stick, but I think it’s necessary to compare not the F-22 and the Su-35 one on one, but the F-22 (400 ml. $) And 5 Su-35 (75 ml. $). I think in this situation the Su-35 is much more profitable.
    1. Alibekulu
      Alibekulu April 26 2013 11: 25 New
      +9
      Quote: Canep
      and F-22 (400 ml. $) and 5 Su-35 (75 ml. $). I think in this situation, the Su-35 is much more profitable.


      I will give the following example for this argument:
      Bartini at a meeting in the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) in 1935, stated approximately the following thought: there should be enough airplanes, And in all basic characteristics they should be much better than the aircraft of a possible adversary.
      - We do not understand! - shouted to him from the audience. “Why not just say: do you need a lot of good aircraft?”
      “And so,” the head of the department of science, scientific and technological discoveries and inventions of the Central Committee, K. Ya.Bauman, answered then for Bartini, “that in the Tsushima battle, the Russians had very good ships, with very good guns, but it was only a little worse than the Japanese ... Any other questions?
      From the book of Igor Chutko "Red Aircraft" ..
    2. patsantre
      patsantre April 26 2013 16: 41 New
      -2
      We’ll stick around, because the cost of the F-22 includes R&D, and the Su-35 is not. So there’s such a comparison in the firebox. The clean production of one F-22 cost about 150.
      1. Canep
        Canep April 26 2013 17: 34 New
        +1
        150 - this is only the cost of manufacturing, not the selling price, the owner of the plant does not want to suck his paw, and even so he is two more expensive. And then that the development of the Su-35 KB should not pay back, everything is included here.
        1. patsantre
          patsantre April 26 2013 20: 23 New
          +2
          So drying 75 has a manufacturing price, doesn't it?
  10. Nayhas
    Nayhas April 26 2013 09: 00 New
    +4
    If we discuss the commercial potential of the F-35, it should be borne in mind that they are very interested in the Arab comrades of the United States, who have more money than the Netherlands, if the Netherlands refuse, there will be buyers for their cars. But of course, I already got a chatter about "who has the most rocket" in the Su-35 or F-35. It’s too early to talk about the prospects of exporting the Su-35, we’re doing it at a snail pace for ourselves ...
  11. ed65b
    ed65b April 26 2013 09: 27 New
    +4
    China has already shown a desire to acquire two dozen new Russian fighters. If the deal does not break, then the Air Force of the People’s Liberation Army of China will become the first foreign user of Su-35 fighters and will probably set an example to other states.
    And at the same time they will copy and establish production at home.
    1. Phantom Revolution
      Phantom Revolution April 26 2013 09: 35 New
      +3
      So far X-NUMX have not been copied so far, what can we say about Su-27 .........
      1. Roll
        Roll April 26 2013 10: 47 New
        +4
        And you saw in the photo the Chinese JI 11 in stealth performance, type f 15 stealth. So they normally copied and finished up. And their JI 11 conducts training fights with Su 27, and they know its weaknesses, and for us Ji 11b is a mystery. Then, the Chinas work on the JI 31 and JI 20 in normal mode and they have more prototypes than we have, and our pack fa was postponed for another year.
        1. report4
          report4 April 26 2013 11: 33 New
          +3
          You can make a Cossack similar to a Ferrari from papier mache, but will it be a high-quality copy)?
          1. Patton5
            Patton5 April 26 2013 17: 33 New
            +3
            You can arbitrarily glumit over Chinese industry, but you can soberly evaluate, study and draw conclusions. Which of the principles of behavior is more constructive ???
      2. Patton5
        Patton5 April 26 2013 17: 26 New
        0
        I dare to pre-suppose, they need an engine, a radar well, what’s still there .....
  12. Windbreak
    Windbreak April 26 2013 09: 48 New
    0
    Su-35 is able to fly two and a half times faster than the speed of sound
    2,25 Mach, not 2,5 knaapo.ru/rus/products/su-35/index.wbp
    1. Borat
      Borat April 28 2013 15: 51 New
      -1
      Quote: Burel
      2,25 Mach, not 2,5 knaapo.ru/rus/products/su-35/index.wbp

      Sir, on this site real data contradicting the general mood and it is not recommended to publish fun - they will wipe!
  13. Alex Nick
    Alex Nick April 26 2013 10: 12 New
    +1
    Life makes you make such airplanes. If Russia had poor equipment, what would happen to us?
  14. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi April 26 2013 10: 26 New
    +8
    In principle, the logic is quite traceable. For many countries that have problems with their neighbors, but do not have them with superpowers, there is absolutely no need for the fifth generation, which, like any new system, is sure to get jambs, and a machine brought to perfection like f-15Е or SU-35 is an excellent choice.
  15. baton140105
    baton140105 April 26 2013 10: 47 New
    +3
    You can’t sell Su-35 to China in any way, my personal opinion. Their production potential is many times higher. In a couple of years, their analogues of the 35th will be many times more than ours. The analogue will certainly be inferior to the original, but the T-34 was inferior to the tiger once ...
    1. svp67
      svp67 April 26 2013 10: 50 New
      +1
      Quote: baton140105
      but t-34 was inferior to the tiger once ..

      The comparison is not very skillful and appropriate ...
    2. svp67
      svp67 April 26 2013 11: 09 New
      0
      Quote: baton140105
      The analogue will certainly be inferior to the original, but after all, the t-34 was inferior to the tiger once ..

      T-34 and Tiger were not analogs, much less copies of each other. They were created to solve various combat missions and were structurally completely different ...
    3. Roll
      Roll April 26 2013 11: 30 New
      -11
      crying It is imperative for China to sell both Su 35 and 400 and, moreover, to closely cooperate with it, we are friends. Potm China also has something to offer us besides the bucks, and electronics and composite materials, and much more. China will not go to war with us, after 2020 it will occupy Mongolia and Kazakhstan, and this will calm down in the north. It is advisable for us to divide Kazakhstan with China, although we get a small share. By occupying Kazakhstan, China will solve all its problems with food and oil, and there will be something to populate. And after the occupation of Kazakhstan, we will lose our belligerence towards China and will supply him resources at a discount and buy his goods, that is, full good neighborly relations.
      1. svp67
        svp67 April 26 2013 11: 42 New
        +5
        Quote: Rolm
        China will not go to war with us, after 2020 of the year it will occupy Mongolia and Kazakhstan, and this will calm down in the north.

        Somewhere I already heard it, and in 30 you Chamberlain talked like that about Germany for years. It is NOT possible to allow this, nor any territorial seizure by China should be allowed, this is the key to our security ....
        1. Roll
          Roll April 26 2013 11: 54 New
          -9
          drinks And how do you not allow the occupation of Kazakhstan by China, By 2020, China will grow stronger, and its tank divisions will be ready to occupy Kazakhstan in a month. And that you will send your son to defend Bai Kazakhstan, where our tank brigade will confront a couple of Chinese tank divisions, or we will begin a vigorous war with China. Kazakhstan is already a stranger to us, the Russian-speaking population is being gradually squeezed out from there and the Chinese are not getting into this process. We have no chance to defend Kazakhstan, only to share it with China. Of course your position is what I like, being the strongest, smartest, richest, but everything turns out differently.
          1. Alibekulu
            Alibekulu April 26 2013 11: 59 New
            +1
            Quote: Rolm
            Azakhstan is already a stranger to us, the Russian-speaking population is being squeezed out from there


            Hi, provocateur .. again you start a srach, about Kazakhstan laughing
            Where are the others??!!
            1. Roll
              Roll April 26 2013 12: 10 New
              -2
              fellow Why a provocateur? I am the same patriot as you are. This is one of the likely scenarios of the future. China’s attack on Russia is pointless and dangerous, but Taiwan, Mongolia, and Kazakhstan make sense to take over China. Russia faces the problem of preserving its borders and I do not propose to occupy Kazakhstan. But if, contrary to your opinion, China nevertheless attacks Kazakhstan, it will not hurt to get Russia its share and preferably diplomatically, even to defend Baikonur.
          2. svp67
            svp67 April 26 2013 12: 11 New
            0
            Quote: Rolm
            And as you do not allow the occupation of Kazakhstan by China, by the 2020 year, China will grow stronger, and its tank divisions will be ready to occupy Kazakhstan in a month.

            They can be ready for any situation, but we should not sit back. That is, by all means - political, by creating new, very effective means of armed struggle, by constantly maintaining our army in "tone" to make it clear to China that we are always glad to see them among our allies, but we won’t allow any territorial conquests ...
            1. Roll
              Roll April 26 2013 12: 23 New
              -1
              request Firstly, Kazakhstan is not an independent state, and they will decide who they will lie under, and they may not ask us, they will gradually squeeze out Russian-speaking people, and then it will only get worse, about keeping their army in good shape, I agree, only the Chinese military budget is growing at a rate of 10 percent per year, but with us ???
              1. Patton5
                Patton5 April 26 2013 17: 55 New
                +1
                And we’ve got all polymers blown away ... We don’t have to panic, because here we are like the states, only a sober, balanced assessment of risks ... if a country develops, its armed forces are getting stronger this is no reason to blame militarism and aggressiveness ( otherwise we get the notorious "double standards")
          3. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm April 26 2013 15: 51 New
            +1
            Quote: Rolm
            We have no chance to defend Kazakhstan, only to share with China.

            And is it nothing that Kazakhstan is in the CSTO and the Customs Union?
      2. Alibekulu
        Alibekulu April 26 2013 11: 55 New
        -1
        [quote = Rolm] Kazakhstan is desirable for us to share with China ..
        And we, after the occupation of Kazakhstan [/ quote

        Nerd pants learn to wear yourself ..
        The peepie has not grown yet am, and there ..
        Russia faces a more acute issue of retaining territories within its current borders, and not something to occupy anyone .. no

        P.S. Well, if there is a strong desire to occupy .. you are welcome .., then, then, chur not cry ... laughing
      3. Die-hard
        Die-hard April 26 2013 12: 11 New
        +2
        The whole military history of China consists of how he raked, and he raked nobly and from anyone.
        1. svp67
          svp67 April 26 2013 12: 13 New
          +2
          Quote: Inflexible
          The whole military history of China consists of how he raked, and he raked notably and from whom he pleases

          It’s hard to believe in it, knowing what role it played in world history, how many years it has existed, how an independent state and what area it occupies ...
          1. Die-hard
            Die-hard April 26 2013 12: 38 New
            0
            Yes, it's hard to believe. There are many conflicts with the participation of China against the external enemy, but successful for him .. They were, yes, but it is worth considering that these were the years of the Qing dynasty, which incidentally came from Manchuria. Well, how they were overthrown - the favorite Asian entertainment began - clannishness and sawing each other out. But this is a slightly different topic.
        2. patsantre
          patsantre April 26 2013 16: 43 New
          0
          Who cares what happened to him before? He raked because the army was weak. Now, in your opinion, is it also weak?
          1. Die-hard
            Die-hard April 26 2013 17: 55 New
            +1
            Quote: patsantre
            Do you think she is also weak now?

            She's massive. The mass army in the spirit of the 50s and nothing more. It is at least silly to argue and theorize on the couch, whether she is weak or strong by the result of the temple temine.
            1. Borat
              Borat April 28 2013 16: 01 New
              0
              Quote: Inflexible
              She's massive. The mass army in the spirit of the 50s and nothing more.

              It's just that people are preparing for a global war, and not for operations to destroy mythical terrorists. And in a big war, a platoon of soldiers with "Kalash" is better than one megarembo in an exoskeleton. At least the army in the spirit of the 50s in the USSR was created on the basis of the experience gained in the Great Patriotic War.
      4. Canep
        Canep April 26 2013 17: 17 New
        0
        Quote: Rolm
        China will not go to war with us, after 2020 it will occupy Mongolia and Kazakhstan, and this will calm down in the north. It is advisable for us to divide Kazakhstan with China, although we get a small share.

        Something it smacks of Napoleonic plans. As for the occupation of Kazakhstan: in the 95th I served in the army of Kazakhstan in the division that covered the Dzungarian gates. Our motorized rifle division was, to put it mildly, in a non-operational state, the diesel fuel was only in the tanks (he himself carried out an audit of the fuel and lubricant depots), the equipment was stolen, and there were two batteries per tank company. On the other side of the Chinese stood the Xinjiang Uygur Military District, equipped with 6 combat divisions (and 9 agricultural). Then it was time to seize the territory. They knew about it. Through the frontier. Khorgos shuttles went back and forth day and night; reconnaissance was not difficult to enter Kazakhstan. For two years of service, they even did not even carry out exercises, so everyday fuss of shooting, marches, etc. If they didn’t climb then, and even more so, the Collective Security Treaty Organization then didn’t.
      5. Focker
        Focker April 26 2013 21: 08 New
        +1
        Quote: Rolm
        after 2020 he occupies Mongolia and Kazakhstan

        about occupation - of course, this is still nonsense, but why exactly after the 20th year ??
      6. ifolga
        ifolga April 27 2013 00: 01 New
        0
        I do not agree. China has one enemy. But China, almost never, unlike democratizers, did not wage unreasonable wars. Even if you look at China biased, the only unreasonable decision was the war with Vietnam, which ended by and large with nothing, and the reason was the pressure of Vietnam on the then Kampuche, which China supported. Mongolia and Kazakhstan are important for China only in economic terms, and in terms of war - more important than Taiwan, there is no goal.
      7. Ro-man
        Ro-man April 28 2013 15: 34 New
        0
        I once also liked to play strategy :).
    4. Patton5
      Patton5 April 26 2013 17: 42 New
      0
      How can we say that Russia has few allies if you don’t trust anyone? Plagiarism on the part of China is a matter of politicians, and this is not a reason not to sell (or do you offer to sell to everyone except China?)
  16. rudolff
    rudolff April 26 2013 12: 17 New
    +2
    The Chinese will never climb to Kazakhstan. Anyway in the foreseeable future. This is tantamount to declaring war on Russia. If anyone should be afraid of China at the present time, it is Kyrgyzstan and Mongolia. To a lesser extent, Kyrgyzstan has too many states interested in it. But Mongolia ... It really is a big question. The almost complete absence of armed forces, not participation in any military-political blocs, alliances. At the same time, a vast territory rich in minerals. In China, there is the province of Inner Mongolia and there is talk that Mongolia should be alone, long ago. Naturally in China. By the way, the attitude of our authorities towards Mongolia is not entirely clear. She seemed to be point blank. But they could offer membership in the customs union or the CSTO. In the 80s in Ulan Bator, I calmly talked with the Mongols in Russian, almost everyone understood and knew Russian.
    1. Roll
      Roll April 26 2013 12: 48 New
      -5
      love As for Mongolia, I agree, but Kazakhstan is more useful to seize for China. There are a billion pounds of grain, oil, uranium, useful resources, and the strategic position of access to the Caspian Sea, and the cutoff of Russia from Asia. If China deploys medium-range nuclear missiles in northern Kazakhstan in the Astrakhan region, substituting the entire European part of Russia and the Urals for sight. I doubt whether we will declare a vigorous war to China over Kazakhstan. In any case, China will certainly take a chance. Then there are various scenarios, for example, riots and commissioning at the invitation of the government of the Chinese peacekeeping forces. Here we are completely out of work.
      1. smsk
        smsk April 26 2013 16: 47 New
        +4
        Michael
        Do you really think that Russia will allow the deployment of Chinese nuclear missiles in northern Kazakhstan? Russia will not surrender Kazakhstan unambiguously; here is the largest land border. Then there will be nowhere to retreat.
  17. andron352
    andron352 April 26 2013 12: 23 New
    0
    China can sell the SU-35 after it will be completed and will go in series PAK FA
  18. rudolff
    rudolff April 26 2013 12: 28 New
    +4
    As for the Su-35s, most likely it was he who was destined to become the main multipurpose aviation complex of the Russian Air Force. The T-50 will never become a mass combatant. Too expensive, too complicated to operate. Yes, and combat capabilities in most cases will be redundant. Unless we decide to fight with NATO or China. They will make a hundred and a half from their strength for their air force and will continue to actively push it to the foreign market. But the Su-35s is a very worthy machine, capable of replacing the entire fleet of 27s and their derivatives.
    1. patsantre
      patsantre April 26 2013 16: 45 New
      +1
      Quote: rudolff
      Too expensive, too complicated to operate.


      Do you already have data on this? And what is so super complicated in it compared to the Su-35? Of the serious differences, only inconspicuous.
  19. Odysseus
    Odysseus April 26 2013 12: 32 New
    +1
    Quote: rudolff
    But the Su-35s is a very worthy machine, capable of replacing the entire fleet of 27s and their derivatives.

    Su-35 is the derivative of the Su-27.
    Quote: rudolff
    As for the Su-35s, most likely it is he who is destined to become the main multipurpose aviation complex of the Russian Air Force

    God forbid, I need a T-50.
  20. rudolff
    rudolff April 26 2013 12: 51 New
    +3
    Yes, Odysseus, the Su-35s is a derivative of the 27th. The most perfect and probably the last. A kind of "swan song." But precisely because it is a descendant of the 27th, it is easier to master in production and it is easier to prepare the flight crew. And we won’t pull the T-50 even from the point of view of the economy. Yes and no, this is not necessary. I repeat, its combat capabilities in most cases will be unnecessary, and the loss of at least one T-50 will be expensive. One can talk about mass character only if a lighter and cheaper version of this machine is created. I would also like to see our airbases packed with hundreds of T-50s, but this is simply unrealistic. And with our talkers in power, even more so.
    1. patsantre
      patsantre April 26 2013 16: 47 New
      0
      Quote: rudolff
      I repeat, its combat capabilities in most cases will be redundant


      Give an example of such a situation.
      I understand that if they say that spending a controlled bomb on an armored car is unnecessary.
    2. Odysseus
      Odysseus April 26 2013 19: 31 New
      0
      Quote: rudolff
      Yes and no, this is not necessary. I repeat, its combat capabilities in most cases will be redundant

      Explain pliz, what is the military meaning of the main aircraft with a large EPR and PFAR?
      I do not see this point.
      And why will the capabilities of the T-50 be redundant? Look at the pace of rearmament of other countries.
      Quote: rudolff
      You can talk about mass only if a lighter and cheaper version of this machine is created.

      And why massively build an obsolete car when it is possible to build an additional T-50 with this money? And if you want to take in quantity then you really need to concentrate on the Mig-35, and not on the Su-35.
      As for the lack of money, dozens of T-50s can be built with only one money stolen at an unnecessary Olympics in Sochi.
      Su-35 makes sense only as an intermediate type, and only because our pilots now have nothing to fly on.
      1. ifolga
        ifolga April 27 2013 00: 18 New
        0
        I agree. And at the expense of money, a simple example is the construction of the northern bypass of Mozhaika from Molodezhnaya to Rublevka, 10 km long. estimated at 60 billion rubles. With this money, you can build 25 SU-35, i.e. 10 km. roads priced more than 25 SU-35.
        The question is not about money, but about effective managers.
      2. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 11 May 2013 13: 45 New
        0
        Quote: Odyssey
        Look at the pace of rearmament of other countries.

        We look at the United States, in which the military budget of four (?) Overlaps ours.

        Even they cannot afford to keep only fifth-generation aircraft in the Air Force.
        At the moment, the contract for the production of F-22 is closed.
  21. Geokingxnumx
    Geokingxnumx April 26 2013 14: 07 New
    0
    the most important thing is the pilot himself and his skill!
    1. Artmark
      Artmark April 26 2013 16: 35 New
      +1
      I welcome you. The pilot is the most important in the control of the aircraft, but if the car is bad then the pilot will not be able to do anything! Dryers are the best in the world !!!!! hi
      1. Geokingxnumx
        Geokingxnumx April 26 2013 17: 02 New
        +1
        Quote: ArtMark
        I welcome you.

        Hello hi
        Quote: ArtMark
        The pilot is the most important in the control of the aircraft, but if the car is bad then the pilot will not be able to do anything!

        yes of course you're right
        but if you encounter Su-35 and F-22 in the sky, the result will be for the pilots, no matter which plane is better
        Quote: ArtMark
        ! DRY- the best in the world !!!!!

        Yes of course! For me, the best airplane is the Su-25 air tank
        1. APOCALIPTIC
          APOCALIPTIC April 26 2013 19: 44 New
          -2
          but if you encounter Su-35 and F-22 in the sky, the result will be for the pilots, no matter which plane is better


          The result will be who will be the first to see someone and launch a missile at the enemy, and this is under the big question that the SU-35 will see the F-22 first. So the T-50 is needed and there are already equal chances. The battle is a thing of the past, now the technology is gaining strength, and the human factor as well as maneuverability go to the fluorine plane. So 5th generation needs to be riveted at a rapid pace
      2. Patton5
        Patton5 April 26 2013 18: 03 New
        +1
        and still need LFI ...
  22. Roll
    Roll April 26 2013 14: 49 New
    0
    bully Cool reasoning for many Chatlan about selling su 35. But that's the catch, we are ready to sell him at least 100 dryers 35 with engines and licenses, but China is wandering, I’ll buy 5 pieces for testing, defective and non-standard, I’ll only buy until 2016, no need later. That's the problem we are ready to sell, and he thinks whether he needs such a treasure, although he has the dough, that the fool has a mooch.
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt April 26 2013 16: 41 New
      0
      Venezuelans are showing interest in the Su-35 and the Brazilians.
  23. Alibekulu
    Alibekulu April 26 2013 17: 49 New
    0
    Quote: Rolm
    There are a billion pounds of grain, oil, uranium, useful resources, and the strategic position of access to the Caspian, and the cutoff of Russia from Asia


    Here, many people like to write that in Kazakhstan everything was sold to American, European and other companies.
    Really they will give China, just so EVERYTHING to get it ...
    And then in the world there is a strong whaling that China is simply not (at least for now) profitable to China ..
    Therefore, the vector of their expansion is now directed towards Africa, oddly enough it sounds ..
    And then the CCP has not yet completed the “gathering of lands” - Taiwan is in the 1 line ..
    And yet, China, Xinjiang has not yet digested ..
    1. Canep
      Canep April 26 2013 21: 58 New
      +2
      Quote: Alibekulu
      Here, many people like to write that in Kazakhstan everything was sold to American, European and other companies.

      Everything has already been bought back, though with an overpayment. There is not a single large enterprise with foreign participation in Ekibas; the exclusion of Ekibastuz State District Power Station-2 JSC is 50/50 Kazakh-Russian. And before, everything belonged to the Americans, except for the same state district power station-2, they were able to redeem most likely due to pension savings.
  24. bord731
    bord731 April 26 2013 21: 45 New
    +1
    During one of these procedures, a few years ago the “computer” F-35s lost a lot of air battles with electronic models of the Russian Su-35s. Details of the simulations were not published, but their result as a result almost became an occasion for scandal and caused a lot of heated discussion.
    Therefore, the details of the simulations were not published - the perspective is bleak ... lol
  25. barbiturate
    barbiturate April 27 2013 05: 08 New
    +1
    the characteristics of both aircraft are incomprehensible, some military men say one thing and the other ... hmm Su-35 is a descendant of the Su-27, which means excellent maneuverability and speed, climb, climb, climb in dive, specific wing area is low, technologically excellent aircraft, classmates seem to be worse. Now we need electronics, here we are worse and seriously worse. Capriciousness about the f-35, does not withstand the slightest criticism, fools, they themselves could not even put a shovel on the conveyor, but every philological miracle loots the equipment. Here you need to look ... Su-35 is needed in series, simulate the battle
  26. NickitaDembelnulsa
    NickitaDembelnulsa April 27 2013 05: 33 New
    +2
    The article is controversial. It is generally accepted that the Su-35 meets all the requirements of a fifth-generation aircraft, except for stealth. the article says that the Su-5 does not belong to the fifth generation, raising our spirits with the numbers "35 ++". We can say that the Su-4 is a fighter of the “35-” generation
    1. Odysseus
      Odysseus April 27 2013 18: 58 New
      0
      Quote: NickitaDembelnulsa
      It is generally accepted that the Su-35, meets all the requirements of the 5th generation aircraft, except stealth

      Who accepted? How can a plane without AFAR be the 5th generation?
      The Su-35 is the usual modernization of the Su-27. It would not even have received a new index from Amers and the USSR.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 11 May 2013 14: 09 New
        0
        Quote: Odyssey
        Who accepted? How can a plane without AFAR be the 5th generation?

        http://www.spacephys.ru/svodnaya-tablitsa-istrebitelei-5-pokoleniya
  27. barbiturate
    barbiturate April 27 2013 05: 46 New
    0
    Quote: NickitaDembelnulsa
    The article is controversial. It is generally accepted that the Su-35 meets all the requirements of a fifth-generation aircraft, except for stealth. the article says that the Su-5 does not belong to the fifth generation, raising our spirits with the numbers "35 ++". We can say that the Su-4 is a fighter of the “35-” generation


    Well, Su 35 no one declared as the 5th generation, this is a good move, first announce, then debunk) Although, if you carefully approach, it can pull on 5-, but still not on 5 solid, wait for the T-50, which will be offered
  28. papik09
    papik09 April 28 2013 12: 59 New
    +1
    A provocateur in Africa - a provocateur am
    Quote: Rolm
    fellow Why a provocateur? I am the same patriot as you are. This is one of the likely scenarios of the future. China’s attack on Russia is pointless and dangerous, but Taiwan, Mongolia, and Kazakhstan make sense to take over China. Russia faces the problem of preserving its borders and I do not propose to occupy Kazakhstan. But if, contrary to your opinion, China nevertheless attacks Kazakhstan, it will not hurt to get Russia its share and preferably diplomatically, even to defend Baikonur.
  29. gameover65
    gameover65 April 28 2013 17: 48 New
    +5
    Why is the F-35 always regarded as a 5th generation aircraft?
    One of the main requirements for a 5th generation fighter is to fly at supersonic speeds without using afterburner.
    the F-35 undersuppressor does not have this, which means a generation no higher than four.

    although, all these divisions on generations are nonsense, except marketing of any value.
    IS-3 tanks or, for example, T-10 1st or 2nd generation. T-10 only in the 90s withdrew from the armament.
    and to modernize them, yes, dynamic protection, and multiply by mass use, and where will their generations be?
    also with aviation, in the west, only from the realization that the MiG-29 or SU-27 is against them, something warm is already flowing along the frogs, regardless of generation. smile
  30. iksanoff
    iksanoff 15 July 2013 10: 14 New
    0
    By the way, but really? Is there somewhere, a clear gradation, what is a 5,4,3 generation aircraft? Well, the first thing I understand is the Wright brothers apparatus