Military Review

F-35 lost the fight

244



The inconspicuous multipurpose F-35 fighter was defeated without firing a single shot at the enemy. The plane lost the main fight in its life long before its incarnation in the metal - the battle for the justification of its existence.

One can only admire the stubbornness and perseverance of the engineers at Lockheed-Martin, who from year to year correct the identified shortcomings and perfect the complex machine. The efforts of the designers are in vain - despite the brilliant solutions to all the problems that arise, the fighter does not fulfill its main mission: neither the Air Force, nor the Navy, nor the US Marine Corps have any need for such an aircraft.

Fate turned out to be merciless to this cute car, resembling a fat penguin: "Lightning" will never repeat the fates of the legendary Sabers, Phantoms or fourth-generation fighters. Not a single pilot will slam the Lightning over the silver lining and will not say, blurred in a Hollywood smile: “The car is simply gorgeous. This is the best on which I flew! ". The creators of the uber-plane are ashamed to look into the eyes of American taxpayers and European creditors - everyone who sponsored a deliberately uncompetitive project.

What is the reason for such a vile state of affairs?



Now it is completely unimportant: whether the F-35 meets or does not meet the requirements of the “fifth generation”: low profile / increased combat autonomy / cruising supersonic ...
Fate played a cruel joke with the “fifth generation” - most of the stated requirements do not meet the needs of the modern military aviation. And what is really necessary in reality has long been introduced on 4+ generation fighters (a striking example is over-maneuverability).

At the same time, such things as hypersound, increased survivability, absolute invisibility for radar detection means - that could become a real "impetus" for the appearance of fighters of a new generation, still remains in the field of science fiction.

As a result, what Lockheed-Martin designers offer under the guise of a fighter of the “new generation” is just an extremely expensive and complicated machine, standing on the “leading edge” of modern science and technology. At the same time, the achieved gain in the combat capabilities of the F-35 is incommensurable with the amount of funds spent on the creation of an Über-plane.

The abundance of new technologies and overly bold design solutions was not in vain - the F-35 is constantly “frayed” and “lame” during test flights. The wind blows down the most complicated electronics, the pilot doesn’t see a damn thing out of the cabin, and the landing hook, as luck would have it, is too short for a safe landing on the ship’s deck.

Of course, billions of dollars were not wasted in vain - a monstrous amount of money was converted into the powerful fighting machine F-35 "Lightning II".

Lightning is superior to its competitors in the area of ​​stealth (detecting an enemy plane at a distance of 50 or 100 km is two big differences), versatility (sighting systems for working on the ground + a line of outstanding ammunition), as well as detection and integration into The Pentagon’s combat network (it’s no coincidence that the Yankees plan to “link” with the active AN / APG-81 phased array and AN / AAQ-37 electron-optical system naval Aegis air defense / missile defense system - F-35 soaring in the sky-high heights will automatically issue target designation for targets beyond the horizon). These are the side features of the Uber Fighter! In terms of airborne avionics and versatility, the F-35 confidently “plugs in the belt” even its older brother F-22.

F-35 lost the fight

Internal bomb bay F-35. Inside visible planning bomb AGM-154 JSW

It is necessary to note the ingenious concept of "three in one" - the Americans managed to create, on the basis of one glider, a light fighter-bomber for the Air Force, a deck aircraft for the Navy and a "vertical line" for the ILC. The process went with a big creak, the Yankees probably 10 once regretted their careless decision to "save", however, brought the matter to a logical end. Big money can work wonders - an investment of 56 billion in dollars will make even a piano on wheels fly.

And then questions begin. The first of these is why was the F-35 created at all? Formally, to replace the F-16 and F / A-18, as well as the specific AV-8B Harrier II.

In fact, the process is as follows: the Yankees really need to upgrade their fleet of light fighters - the last of the F-16 were transferred to the US Air Force eight years ago. But, excuse me, how is this related to F-35? Modern modifications "Fighting Falkenov" perfectly cope with their functions (cost / result), another thing is that they have not been released for a long time, and the existing F-16 is running out of resources.

The situation with the F / A-18 is even more interesting - the F / A-18E and 18F Super Hornet modifications are in the process of mass production and fully meet the requirements of seafarers.

As for the “vertical” AV-8B, the presence of such equipment in the composition of the aviation of the ILC raises more questions than answers. Wouldn't it be easier to call a link of normal fighters / bomber from the nearest airbase than to try to "shove" these nedosamolety onto the cramped decks of the same non-Avian carriers (versatile amphibious assault ships of the "Wosp" type)? And the use of VTOL F-35B is not a panacea.



To get new type of aircraft is always a pleasure. Another thing is that new fighters should be somewhat different from the "obsolete" aircraft in a positive direction.
This is where the main embarrassment arises. With all the apparent external futuristic, F-35 has no special advantages over the machines of the previous generation.

"Lightning" does not shine flight data: its thrust-to-weight ratio, load on the wing, the value of the established climb rate - everything remained at the level of fourth-generation fighters! There is not even such an interesting feature as a controlled vector of thrust - although it would seem that it is high time to acquire such a system - even in “lapotnaya” Russia, serial production of fighters equipped with engines with military equipment has been established.

The dispute about “flying in a supersonic without afterburner” does not matter: first, the F-35 cannot do this. Secondly, “supersonic without afterburner” is not a priority for modern aviation - the combat capabilities of fighters are determined by dozens of other, much more important parameters.

It is quite obvious: the creators of the F-35 have relied on the perfect on-board electronics and stealth. “Lightning” will be the first to notice the enemy and will be the first to deliver a devastating blow from the ultimate distance, and will remain unnoticed by enemy radars. The calculation is absolutely correct, but there is one important point:
All super-electronics and measures to reduce visibility, implemented in the project F-35, could be successfully introduced into the design of fourth-generation fighter!



As a result, we have the simplest logical chain:

1. The new "platform" did not give any advantages - LTH "Lightning" remained at the level of F-16 and F / A-18.

2. The high-tech “stuffing” of the F-35 does not require the creation of a special carrier for it - all systems
perfectly integrated into the design of existing machines.

The verdict is obvious: there was no need to create from scratch a new lightweight fighter. The existence of Lightning is not justified by anything other than the inordinate greed of the managers of Lockheed-Martin, who have convinced the Pentagon’s leadership that they are right.

As for the real "fifth generation fighter" - it seems that the hour of these machines has not yet struck. Modern science can not offer anything that could radically increase the capabilities of combat aircraft.

Backstab F-35

The pitiful existence of F-35 was suddenly disturbed by the news of the appearance of a formidable competitor. Who is the "put a pig" the latest American fighter? Who plotting against the USAF? Again, these unpredictable Russians with their Sukhoi PAK FA? Or the crafty Asians that copied the F-35 and now sell countless copies in each tray in the Chinese market?

Honestly, you will laugh. The American company "Boeing" tripped the footboard of the American fighter F-35. Fatally offended by the victory of competitors (concept X-32 proposed by Boeing completely lost to Lockheed-Martin concept X-35), Boeing’s top management sat down at the table, and after a short depression phase, decided to turn the offensive loss into their advantage (Americans, pragmatic people). Let competitors disgrace with their F-35, we will not repeat their mistakes and we will be ahead of the curve!


Experimental aircraft Boeing X-32, the main competitor of X-35 (future F-35)
The look of X-32 is so disgusting that there is no way to publish an illustration without the risk of damaging the psyche of the reader.

There was little money - there was no need to rely on funding from the state, Lockheed Martin won all tenders. The development of a new fighter "from scratch" on its own "Boeing" could not pull. The conclusion was obvious: the modernization of existing models.

Then the gaze of Boeing specialists turned to the F / A-18 aircraft of the E / F Super Hornet.

What is this beast "Super Hornet"? Deck fighter-bomber generation 4 +
Easy, reliable, versatile. Twin-engine layout. Full integration into the structure of the US military. Impressive история services - in addition to the States, the Hornets family is in service with seven countries of the world. The main combat aircraft of the CMP aviation and the only fighter-bomber remaining on the decks of American aircraft carriers after the write-off of the F-14 "Tomcat" in 2006 year. There is something to be proud of.


F / A-18E Super Hornet

The Super Hornet (adopted in 1999 year) is not an easy upgrade of the Hornet fighter. This is a completely new plane, a free improvisation based on F / A-18 - a glider, an engine, and avionics - absolutely everything has changed. The wing span increased by 20%, the mass of the empty aircraft - by 3 tons compared to the original design. The capacity of the F / A-18E fuel tanks exceeds that of the Hornet by a third, the combat radius increased by 40%.

The main direction of modernization was chosen to reduce the visibility of the aircraft. Box-shaped nacelles of engines with curved air intakes, high-quality "fit" and alignment of the joints of parts, the elimination of gaps and cavities-resonators, sawtooth joints of surfaces. Widespread introduction of radio transparent and radio absorbing materials has been ensured - according to Boeing’s representatives on F / A-18E and 18F, the most comprehensive set of measures to reduce the visibility among all modern fighters has been implemented, with the exception of F-35 and F-22 stealth aircraft.

This is the place to start!

After discussing all the issues, Boeing decided to create a future competitor F-35 on the basis of its Super Hornet. Why not?

Even the standard “Super Hornet” looks great against the background of the F-35. Flight data and combat load F / A-18E (single version) are absolutely identical to the parameters of the Lightning. The aircraft is tested in combat, reliable and unpretentious.
As for the “stuffing” - here the possibilities of upgrading the “Super Hornet” are practically unlimited - this is what the new EA-18G “Growler” electronic warfare aircraft demonstrated on the basis of the two-seater F / A-18F modification.

“Growler” is known for the fact that a couple of years ago, in one of the training air battles, he “hammered” the F-22 “Raptor” interference, and then conditionally destroyed the “enemy” with rocket weapons. News went beyond the scope of official reports and became the object of caustic jokes at foreign aviation forums in the style: “But have we done everything right? Maybe we should change the "Raptors" to EA-18G "?

Those. The Super Hornet payload reserve allows the installation of virtually any radio-electronic system on the airframe: a radar with AFAR, a system of IR sensors for circular surveillance, an active jamming station or an optical-electronic aiming system for ground-based operation.

After weighing the pros and cons, Boeing announced the launch of the Super Hornet International Roadmap program. As the name implies, Boeing actively contacts foreign developers, contractors and potential buyers. The design of the fighter of the new generation, which was named “Silent Hornet” (silent hornet - a hint of “stealth”), is prepared to the maximum extent for installing any equipment of foreign production - at the request of the customer.

The program was presented at the Farnborough 2010 aerospace show. A year later, a real machine “in metal” grew from a beautiful sketch on paper - a prototype for the study of the main developments under the “Silent Hornet” program, demonstrated at the international exhibition Aero India 2011 (Yelahanka Air Base, Bangalore).

An external inspection gives the following picture: the plane “absorbed” even more elements of the “stealth” technology - the main “highlight” was the ventral overhanging container, made in accordance with the requirements of low visibility. "Boeing" did not "mock" the original design, trying to find a place under the internal compartment of weapons, but simply carried the missiles to the external suspension, covering them with a radio-absorbing "cap", forming a single bottom profile of the aircraft. If the target is designated as “striking ground targets”, conventional bombs, PTBs, sighting and navigation containers or other equipment will take the place of the removable stealth container.









There was something else: the “glass cabin” of the new generation with wide-format indicators of the tactical situation with the possibility of mixing information (simultaneous output and overlaying of “images” from various sensors on a single scale) - as it should be for the fifth generation fighter.

On the hull of the Silent Hornet, specific “influxes” appeared - conformal fuel tanks providing intercontinental flight range. In addition, the Yankees promise new engines and a full range missile detection system, similar to AN / AAQ-37, which is installed on the F-35.

The new generation of Super Hornet will have increased combat survivability, situational awareness and effectiveness.

- Vivek Lall, Vice President, Boeing

In general, the appearance of "Silent Hornet" does not promise anything good for the F-35. The renewed F / A-18 has similar LTH, combat load, avionics and stealth elements. At the same time, the “Silent Hornet” goes at a dumping price, has proven itself well in combat and has a reputation as a powerful, reliable and versatile aircraft. It is no coincidence that thematic editions instantly dubbed the car, as JSF-killer (Joint Strike Fighter - program to create F-35).

The foreign operators of the Hornet family of fighters, among which currently are Canada, Australia, Kuwait, Finland, Spain, Switzerland and Malaysia, already have a prepared infrastructure and accumulated operating experience of such aircraft, so they will consider buying the updated Hornet with great interest whose capabilities match the advertised F-35.

Australia has already taken the first step - January 29 representatives of Canberra announced the cancellation of plans to buy F-2013 fighter jets, in favor of F / A-35F Super Hornet (18 fighter, contract amount $ 24 billion). It is possible that the new Australian F / A-2F will acquire many of the features of the Silent Hornet.

As for the States themselves, it is clear that the existing plans for the purchase of X-NUMX F-327C for deck naval aviation and 35 F-353B vertical pilots for KMP aviation will not be able to meet the needs of the American military - half of the squadrons will continue to fly Super Hornies, and , in perspective, on the “Silent Hornets”.

This is such a funny story - the impromptu Boeing created the Big Trouble program F-35 JSF, and now it is not known how the two aircraft giants will share the tactical aircraft market.

Epilogue. Russian aircraft developers should analyze the experience of their Western colleagues. Perhaps the constant evolution of fourth-generation fighter jets is the key to creating the fifth generation of this magnificent vehicle.



http://www.militaryparitet.com/
http://www.aex.ru/
http://airwar.ru/
http://www.militaryphotos.net/
Author:
244 comments
Ad

Our projects are looking for authors in the news and analytical departments. Requirements for applicants: literacy, responsibility, efficiency, inexhaustible creative energy, experience in copywriting or journalism, the ability to quickly analyze text and check facts, write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. The work is paid. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Denis
    Denis 27 June 2013 08: 30 New
    14
    F-35 constantly "strews" and "limps" during test flights
    It remains only to rejoice and wait for our T-50 in a series

    What, what, and call our probable friends of the master
    1. Romn
      Romn 27 June 2013 08: 47 New
      +6
      And despite all the above, the best aircraft in the world were, are and remain the aircraft of Russian production! smile
      The only thing that upsets, if you look at the number of aircraft purchased by the Americans and compare with ours, but we have almost no aircraft. What can I say if even Su-35 we have in total about fifty ... I hope everything will change, and the T-50 will delight in everything ...
      1. patsantre
        patsantre 27 June 2013 12: 49 New
        21
        Quote: Romn
        if even the Su-35 we have in total about fifty ...


        I will disappoint you, we have a dozen of them.
        1. patsantre
          patsantre 28 June 2013 21: 48 New
          0
          It’s interesting that they manage to minus the couch cushions? I don’t care, I just want to look at these clowns)
          1. ded10041948
            ded10041948 2 July 2013 08: 55 New
            +3
            Get used to it! The site is full of “disposable” ones, which live by the principle: “Popped up, minuscule and into the bushes, until they spotted (identified)”
      2. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 27 June 2013 12: 56 New
        +8
        Quote: Romn
        What can I say if even the Su-35 in our total number is about fifty ...

        you wrote crap, but you set up the pros, just for what it is not clear what
        1. baltika-18
          baltika-18 27 June 2013 16: 14 New
          +5
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          you wrote crap, but you set up the pros, just for what it is not clear

          Probably for fantasy .......
          At the end of 2012 there were only 8 of them, the Su-35 is meant.
        2. Vadivak
          Vadivak 27 June 2013 17: 10 New
          +3
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          , and you have set up pluses, just for what it is not clear


          Offend ....
          1. alexng
            alexng 2 July 2013 13: 01 New
            0
            Just like that, and they live. What we do, we don’t understand ourselves, but we say they don’t understand us, and we ourselves also can hardly realize what we said and trampled on the keyboard. We always see only the minuses in our country, in our home - such horizontal astigmatism (everything is flattened and stretched horizontally) and the pluses are veiled there beyond the horizon, and with elements of vertical astigmatism (everything is sublime and large). That's how we live in different Russia. Some have it alone, while others have it different. I ask you not to entangle the oligarchs and other mutoty here, we are talking about ordinary Russians, but only in a completely different way perceiving life.
      3. Mairos
        Mairos 27 June 2013 13: 41 New
        +5
        Alas, in matters of radar, navigation and combat electronics, we traditionally lag behind.
        1. dustycat
          dustycat 29 June 2013 09: 37 New
          +2
          In the matter of introducing the latest ideas, we lag behind unambiguously.
          What, interestingly, needs to be done with our generals so that they finally stop repeating the phrase "but our unlikely ally does not have this, but this is it and we want the same."

          The theme of AFAR was worked out in the USSR in the 1950s, the implementation rested purely on the element base. So even "Buran" at the request of the Moscow Region did with a swinging antenna. Although even on vacuum-electron devices made using microlayer spraying technology (using microcircuit technology), it was already worked out by the early 1970s and ... was safely buried. Yes, it had a much higher consumption, but at the same time had characteristics unattainable even on modern semiconductors.
      4. Andrey77
        Andrey77 27 June 2013 13: 58 New
        +5
        And despite all the above, the best aircraft in the world were, are and remain the aircraft of Russian production!
        --
        Patriotism is good, but in this case you are wrong.
      5. Gari
        Gari 27 June 2013 15: 49 New
        +7
        Quote: Romn
        I hope everything changes, and the T-50 will delight in everything ...

        T-50 handsome
    2. experienced
      experienced 27 June 2013 09: 18 New
      41
      Some kind of obscure article about the confrontation between the two largest aircraft companies in the United States based on which the author took the F-35. Reading the article, I caught myself thinking that the author is persistently trying to complete the task and prove that the Americans spent a lot of money, that the original product did not work out, that nobody needs the F-35 ...
      They really spent a lot of money, but this is their money and their problems, even if they are investing trillions.
      There is a plane, it flies, it launches rockets, and if they put it in series, it means they will put and sell it for themselves
      In general, I don’t know, maybe I misunderstood the message of the article, but I am very confused by the numbers of aircraft manufactured in the USA and in Russia. And everything else according to the Russian proverb: "Every sandpiper praises his swamp." hi
      1. Vadivak
        Vadivak 27 June 2013 10: 06 New
        53
        Quote: Author Oleg Kaptsov
        The look of X-32 is so disgusting that there is no way to publish an illustration without the risk of damaging the psyche of the reader.



        Russian men are so severe that their psyche can withstand even the appearance of the X-32
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 June 2013 10: 12 New
          30
          And what kind of photo? Did the F-35 lose its jaw at the sight of the Su-35 aerobatics? laughing
          1. Vadivak
            Vadivak 27 June 2013 10: 25 New
            32
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            And what kind of photo?


            This is a rare refuge - the Boeing X-32, which was preparing to be a star of the American aircraft industry and if Yeltsin had not sold them the Yak-141 it would have been
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 June 2013 10: 39 New
              13
              Yes, I know, thanks, but at the sight of this creation of a gloomy Boeing genius I could not resist a joke of humor laughing drinks
            2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 June 2013 11: 03 New
              12
              Quote: Vadivak
              This is a rare sanctuary.

              By the way, just now I was thinking - maybe it would be more correct not to "lodge", but "slaughter"?
              1. Revolver
                Revolver 28 June 2013 01: 35 New
                +8
                One of the reasons Lockheed won was because the pilots openly said that they would be a bastard to fly at such [profanity]. Seeing the X-32, the pilots immediately gave him the Monica clicker for its wide open mouth and thickness. If anyone remembers, just then the Clinton soap opera and chubby brunette Monica with a wide-open mouth were in full swing.
          2. Bronis
            Bronis 27 June 2013 10: 30 New
            +5
            No, this Boeing is smiling, looking at Lockheed’s success.
          3. self-propelled
            self-propelled 27 June 2013 11: 40 New
            15
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            And what kind of photo?

            But he also flew. really a little bit but flew
            1. Vadivak
              Vadivak 27 June 2013 16: 29 New
              +5
              Quote: self-propelled
              But he also flew. really a little bit but flew


              Like a crocodile ..... low, low
            2. Jurkovs
              Jurkovs 27 June 2013 18: 20 New
              +1
              Beauty is a relative thing. If this “eccentric” flew wonderful, they would say - oh, what a handsome man.
              1. dustycat
                dustycat 29 June 2013 09: 56 New
                0
                One Penguin, the other Monica - well, they basically can’t fly well.
                Appearance will not allow.
            3. Obliterator
              Obliterator 27 June 2013 22: 29 New
              +2
              Come on you. When I saw this prototype, my mood immediately rose. But not from thoughts like "LOL, here it is." Its hefty air intake very much resembles a mouth spread out in a smile. Or something even a shark's mouth, only teeth are missing. Surely, if the artists at Pixar Studios decided to create an animated film similar to "Cars" but only about airplanes, then they would have got a jet fighter exactly like the X-32A.
            4. Dejavu
              Dejavu 28 June 2013 05: 48 New
              +2
              O_o it also flies!
            5. carbofo
              carbofo 30 June 2013 19: 37 New
              0
              Scary, of course, but from a layout point of view, this can be a good solution.
              In general, it is more like working out a conceptual layout.
            6. GreatRussia
              GreatRussia 1 July 2013 19: 41 New
              0
              Quote: self-propelled
              But he also flew. really a little bit but flew

              Not just Monica, but flabby Monica.
              Really pah!
          4. habalog
            habalog 27 June 2013 20: 18 New
            +4
            Laughing in vain smile
            And if the Boeing decided to implement the concept of a ramjet engine in a fighter, the concept of Ajax?
            http://topwar.ru/1538-ayaks-giperzvukovoj-mnogocelevoj-samolet.htm
            If this aircraft performs its tasks, what difference does it look like?
            By the way, it seems that (I read somewhere), our designers want to stick a plasma component (igniter) into the engines of the Sushki.
            I am not an Aviator, but I would listen with interest to the opinion of experienced pilots on this subject.
            1. dustycat
              dustycat 29 June 2013 10: 02 New
              +1
              Well, our space interceptor also looked like a bast shoe.
              It is a pity that for him the direct-drive has not yet been completed.
              And the Yankees will not finish it. Until Russia does it.
              Their jumps in direct-flow tanks became possible only after all developments on this topic flowed from the plundered USSR.
              And before that, they did not advance further the PRD-1 schemes.
          5. dustycat
            dustycat 29 June 2013 09: 53 New
            +1
            Very accurately noticed.

            MiG37 guidance navigator to Su35 flight commander:
            Thirty to the smallest, in a square twelve zero three five penguins (Ф35) and four monica (X32).

            Nah, the American guys don’t like this.
            So the Boeing with FA18 is doing the right thing. It follows the path of Russia - in-depth modernization of the 4 +++ generation. I wish our return to our path.
        2. Denis
          Denis 27 June 2013 11: 27 New
          +5
          Quote: Vadivak
          The look of the X-32 is so disgusting
          Yes and F-117 is far from handsome
          ZRK Square did not like
          Like the Northrop B-2 Spirit
          1. Bronis
            Bronis 27 June 2013 12: 07 New
            +5
            Quote: Denis
            Like the Northrop B-2 Spirit
            Well, about the B-2 - it's a legend ... it didn’t happen. But C-125 for F-117 is a fact. Zlotan Dani will not let lie.
            1. Denis
              Denis 27 June 2013 14: 33 New
              +4
              Quote: Bronis
              Well, about the B-2 - it's a legend ... it wasn’t
              How to know, how to know ...
              They could not refute either
              NATO war against Yugoslavia - used in 1999 by Yugoslavia [15]. According to Russian sources, several NATO aircraft were shot down during use [3]. So for example, the 3M9M3E rocket was Northrop B-2 bomber shot down Spirit [13]. In addition, officially the ministers of defense and foreign affairs of the Russian Federation, as well as representatives of the Russian military air defense, confirmed the fact that the 2K12E “Square” anti-aircraft missile system destroyed an American invisible aircraft Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk [3] [16]. The fact that the F-117 was shot down by the Kub air defense system is also reported by the author of the website "Armament, military equipment and uniforms of the Russian army and navy in the XNUMXth century" A.K. Lysochenko
              I prefer this version
              1. patsantre
                patsantre 27 June 2013 16: 19 New
                0
                And the fact that he is listed in the Air Force does not bother you?
                What do you mean could not refute? You? No? So refute!
                1. Denis
                  Denis 27 June 2013 16: 47 New
                  +2
                  Quote: patsantre
                  What do you mean could not refute? You? No? So refute!
                  I’ll refute the set of words. Yes, yes! At least for now
                  Quote: patsantre
                  And the fact that he is listed in the Air Force does not bother you?
                  Wasn't there a “resurrection” before this?
                  Yet again versionread carefully
                  1. patsantre
                    patsantre 27 June 2013 20: 42 New
                    -3
                    Do not believe in everything now?
              2. Bronis
                Bronis 27 June 2013 16: 31 New
                +8
                how it was exactly there - we won’t know, because we were not there. Yugoslavs talked about 2 allegedly shot down B-2 - "Spirit of Washington" and "Spirit of Missouri". True, they were then repeatedly photographed and took part in the war with Iraq in 2003. So there is no comment. Conspirologists, of course, will say that these are other planes - "the king is not real." But nevertheless, most likely, they did not bring down the B-2.
                Although the general estimates of losses, to put it mildly, are different. NATO confirms only 2 or 4 combat losses (I do not remember). Serbs sometimes write about 100 aircraft. Average - about 60 pcs. Often such planes are then "resurrected" (if the numbers are known).
                The reality is that without the “invisibles” for the Yugoslav air defense there were many simpler goals — all Tornadoes and others. But here it must be understood that by the end of the 90 air defense of Yugoslavia it was greatly weakened - the “sovereignty parade” made decent “holes”. And the general balance of power was depressing ... In general, how the Yugoslavs fought with NATO aircraft - deserves respect.
                And yet, the same Dani shot down the F-117 from close range (6-8 km) from an ambush point-blank. And the calculation was probably used by “Carat” - it was visually suggestive (although there are different opinions). So the "stealth" here would not help much ... because the radar is not at work. But all the same, to bring down the miracle of the American aviation industry with a complex of the beginning of the 60's is a training, but also a certain professional luck.
                So the losses of NATO, most likely, although they are higher than declared, but far from 100 machines. Which does not beg the Serbs. It's just hard to stop the asphalt roller ...
                1. dustycat
                  dustycat 29 June 2013 10: 09 New
                  +1
                  Simply Zoltan studied well at the school and remembered that F117 is not visible to the radar rays that irradiate it and is clearly visible when using radiation from another radar, and that the C125 complex has a function preserved from C75 - the use of radiation from a neighboring radar is passive mode.
                  So I caught F117 for escort and banged him.
                  There is in the internet his own description of the battle.
          2. Santa Fe
            27 June 2013 12: 17 New
            10
            Quote: Denis
            Yes and F-117 is far from handsome

            And here I do not agree
            F-117 - the standard of futurism. Stylish black plane
            1. Bronis
              Bronis 27 June 2013 13: 07 New
              +9
              Yes, futurism. And what else. Officially Knight Hawk. And the pilots called the Lame Goblin. Well, if in fact, then for the time of appearance - this is the peak of the development of technology (within the framework of the goals and objectives that set for the designers).
              The main trouble of the F-117 is not the "legendary" LTX, but excessive over-emphasis. The Americans made him into the media an ideal “super-weapon” capable of solving almost all tasks. Of course, he was not such a super-weapon, but was part of the Air Force system, in which he was assigned a specific role. in general, it was more useful to the Americans in the field of information warfare, and not in military conflicts. That was his fate ... thanks to PR managers. but to be able to competently promote yourself is right. But self-flagellation is silly.
              1. Refund_SSSR
                Refund_SSSR 27 June 2013 14: 22 New
                +5
                The history of Russian self-flagellation is estimated more than a thousand-year history, but the "literate PR" Amerikosov hardly reach the half-century history.
                Draw conclusions what is right and what is not;)
                1. Bronis
                  Bronis 27 June 2013 15: 10 New
                  +5
                  Quote: We refund_SSSR
                  The history of Russian self-flagellation is estimated more than a thousand-year history

                  The fact that our history is more than a millennium is good. And it would be even better if we did not engage in self-revisionism on a state scale. And this action has no direct relation to history ... but only to the momentary politics of various power circles (depending on time).
                  For example, the Yankees are not talking about the genocide of the Indians, but about the development of unpopulated lands, not about their large-scale use of chemical weapons in Vietnam and the ecocide, but about the mythical Iraqi WMD and dubious rumors about its use by Assad. The ability to "translate arrows" and shift emphasis - this must be learned ...
                  1. vBR
                    vBR 30 June 2013 18: 44 New
                    +1
                    Presenting abominations as harmless candy is not our approach. Actually, we simply never had anything like this, except for the only time - when our own country was simply and shamefully ... but this is a different topic. Well, honestly, you need to ask yourself questions, our culture is based, among other things, on the truth
                2. Kostya pedestrian
                  Kostya pedestrian 4 July 2013 06: 06 New
                  +1
                  I note that your knowledge in the history of the Russian peoples is doubtful. If only you are about Fiji - yes, they have such a tradition.

                  my amateur opinion is that air defense systems and turntables are a much more profitable weapon in mine over the battlefield.

                  Although, given the vastness of Russia, supersonic fighters are important: flew in, saw, hit the target.

                  But best of all, it’s the deployment of ground troops, and the significant role of intelligence and counterintelligence in intimidating potential enemies.

                  PieS: by the way, one should not go in cycles in history, it is not necessary to return the USSR, but the spirit of those people who stood breastfeeding for their Motherland, and our traditions defended and increased, despite the minute benefits or deprivations.
              2. Corsair
                Corsair 12 July 2013 12: 57 New
                0
                Quote: Bronis
                Well, if in fact, then for the time of appearance - this is the peak of the development of technology (within the framework of the goals and objectives that set for the designers).

                Which they did not cope with safely ...
            2. Denis
              Denis 27 June 2013 14: 37 New
              +6
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              standard of futurism.
              Tastes could not be discussed ...
              But I would not want my lady to look like on the canvases of Picasso and Pirosmani themselves
              Scary!
            3. mansur
              mansur 27 June 2013 15: 43 New
              +7
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              Stylish black plane

              Type of black square Malevich
              1. Thunderbolt
                Thunderbolt 27 June 2013 16: 27 New
                26
                In the picture, the "black square" hangs upside down.
                1. Gari
                  Gari 27 June 2013 16: 59 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Thunderbolt
                  In the picture, the "black square" hangs upside down.

                  Wow
                  1. baboon
                    baboon 1 July 2013 07: 39 New
                    -1
                    he hangs sideways
              2. Ded_smerch
                Ded_smerch 2 July 2013 10: 30 New
                0
                at a point (i.e. squared) noticed the comrade lol
            4. saturn.mmm
              saturn.mmm 27 June 2013 17: 13 New
              +2
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              F-117 - the standard of futurism. Stylish black plane

              Yes, even Steven Seagal flew on it.
              But foreign pilots, in an interview, about the f-35 respond well, maybe PR, I don’t know. Until the mass F-35 series, another 3 years, then years of production, this is the time the Super Hornets fly by. Your article, as always, is read interestingly, but you did not drip deep into it (personal opinion). That would be about the submarines of WWII time to read in your performance.
              1. Santa Fe
                27 June 2013 18: 36 New
                +3
                Quote: saturn.mmm
                then years of production, this is the time the Super Hornets fly by

                Super Hornet production is calculated at least until 2020.
                Then Silent Hornet will go into the series - f-35 will serve side by side with the Hornet until the middle of the century, and there you’ll come up with the sixth generation
                Quote: saturn.mmm
                That would be about the submarines of WWII time to read in your performance.

                yes I will try
                1. saturn.mmm
                  saturn.mmm 27 June 2013 22: 17 New
                  +5
                  Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                  Then Silent Hornet will go into the series - the f-35 will serve side by side with the Hornet until the middle of the century,

                  Well, of course, as without the relatively cheap workhorse, I would imagine f-35 as a mobile platform for an information and combat module, I think this is still a step forward in the development of military equipment, I am alarmed by the single information field created by the Americans, the release of f-35 to 2034, then a decade and a presentation of the 6th generation, such are the plans of the USA, if there is enough money, but the 6th generation is something like this
                  1. dustycat
                    dustycat 29 June 2013 10: 13 New
                    0
                    They simply realize one idea worked out in the USSR in the late 1960s.
                    Maybe now our generals will want "the same."
            5. laurbalaur
              laurbalaur 27 June 2013 17: 38 New
              +2
              I agree with you! About SR-71 and U-2, they also said: What monsters! But the cars did their job in high quality!
            6. cth; fyn
              cth; fyn 27 June 2013 17: 50 New
              0
              Stylish black plane

              Correction: Stylish black Subsonic aircraft.
            7. Jurkovs
              Jurkovs 27 June 2013 18: 24 New
              +2
              The tail is really like feathers ... in the ostrich's ass.
            8. Ded_smerch
              Ded_smerch 2 July 2013 10: 26 New
              0
              just tail iron tifal is the standard of futurism laughing
        3. mansur
          mansur 27 June 2013 15: 39 New
          0
          Quote: Vadivak
          Russian men are so severe that their psyche can withstand even the appearance of the X-32

          Admire this ,, Handsome ,,
          1. Denis
            Denis 27 June 2013 16: 49 New
            +1
            Quote: mansur
            Admire this
            Is he that?
            pregnant
            1. Ded_smerch
              Ded_smerch 2 July 2013 10: 37 New
              +1
              I didn’t guess, he’s a male, you see two eggs hanging on his belly)))
          2. soldier's grandson
            soldier's grandson 27 June 2013 23: 13 New
            +5
            I still want to throw a garbage bag into this waste bin
            1. ded10041948
              ded10041948 2 July 2013 09: 17 New
              0
              Finally found a use!
          3. antibanukurayza
            antibanukurayza 28 June 2013 10: 42 New
            +1
            It resembles a pelican ... or a fish on the shore ... greedily swallows the air.
          4. Andrey Yuryevich
            Andrey Yuryevich 28 June 2013 17: 59 New
            +1
            yes, friends ... X-32 looks mildly obscene ... as much as distorted ...
        4. Dimanrus86
          Dimanrus86 27 June 2013 18: 47 New
          +2
          Pleased, I’ve been laughing for 5 minutes already !!! So it’s only to stub fish while fishing, and to frighten for one))) I think an eternally drunken welder from any wreck will make such an instance in 2 nights and one bottle of vodka ...
        5. Dejavu
          Dejavu 28 June 2013 05: 47 New
          0
          How terrible he is ...
          1. Andrey Yuryevich
            Andrey Yuryevich 28 June 2013 18: 00 New
            +1
            he is terrible .... he is clumsy ... laughing
      2. djon77
        djon77 27 June 2013 10: 12 New
        +2
        they weren’t embarrassed. Initially, the Super Hornets were to be operated in parallel with the F-35 lightings. So the author here just gave out wishful thinking. It’s hard to blame Americans for the lack of pragmatism
        1. Refund_SSSR
          Refund_SSSR 27 June 2013 14: 24 New
          +2
          Examine the question.
          F-35 was created as a single replacement, and not as an addition.
          1. djon77
            djon77 27 June 2013 16: 51 New
            +1
            it’s not quite like a replacement. I therefore wrote about the deck version. only the newest US aircraft carriers are designed to receive lightning. and the linkage on earlier versions of the Nimits will remain in the form of Hornets. as a complete replacement this applies to the f-16 also to the harrier
      3. Papakiko
        Papakiko 27 June 2013 11: 59 New
        -1
        Quote: seasoned
        And everything else according to the Russian proverb: "Every sandpiper praises his swamp"

        To the brutal TRUE words, as well as all the others in the post.
        But for the work done to the author THANKS. good
        This is not a homosexual and the Zionists discuss. wassat
        1. Papakiko
          Papakiko 27 June 2013 12: 05 New
          +6
          By the way there is an almost fresh video, like for the Indians did.
          Rafal's training battle against the Fu-22.
          Watch with 2: 20.
          You can clearly hear how the pilot suffers overload.
          1. Jurkovs
            Jurkovs 27 June 2013 18: 34 New
            +1
            I thought a woman was giving birth.
          2. mirag2
            mirag2 28 June 2013 06: 53 New
            -3
            And you didn’t think that this plane can carry EVEN SUCH overloads and what is its safety margin?
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 28 June 2013 08: 07 New
              +2
              the plane makes EVEN SUCH overloads and what is its safety margin

              Which ones? Our Su-27 (what can I say about the 35th?) Carries more loads than the pilot can withstand!
            2. dustycat
              dustycat 29 June 2013 12: 11 New
              +1
              Well, what is it, what is it? ..
              Well, only 9 times the load.
              And what?
          3. dustycat
            dustycat 29 June 2013 12: 10 New
            0
            ёёёё .....
            Already sweating ...
            The pilot is cool.
      4. smprofi
        smprofi 27 June 2013 13: 38 New
        +6
        Quote: seasoned
        to prove that the Americans spent a lot of money, that the original product did not work out, that nobody needs the F-35.

        oh how not needed!
        oh how everyone refuse it!
        US Navy 4 a day ago received the first F-35C Lightning II, deck version



        and Italiano-Macarono confirmed that it will purchase 90 pieces of various modifications of the F-35. the Minister of Defense wants, however, 131 pcs, but the parliament told him "padaji! here we’ll buy 90, and then we’ll scrape it over the guts and consider the issue of additional purchases"

        here: http://www.corriere.it/politica/13_giugno_26/pd-presenta-mozione-per-acquisto-f3

        5_615038ca-de33-11e2-9903-199918134868.shtml
        1. Santa Fe
          27 June 2013 14: 03 New
          0
          Quote: smprofi
          US Navy 4 a day ago received the first F-35C Lightning II, deck version

          This is even funnier)))
        2. igor67
          igor67 27 June 2013 20: 18 New
          +5
          Lockheed Martin: Israel will be the first US ally to receive the F-35

          publication time: 16: 53
          last update: 17: 02



          Lockheed Martin's vice president Steve O'Brien, who is responsible for the financial part of the fifth-generation F-35 fighter program, said Israel will be the first country to receive new aircraft after the United States.

          According to Aviation Week magazine, a statement was made by O'Brien the day before in Paris, where the Le Bourget international air show is taking place these days.

          The first IDF pilots should arrive for retraining at the US Air Force base "Eglin" at the beginning of the 2016 year. The first F-35I squadron will be handed over to Israel in the 2018 year.

          O'Brien added that each of the eight countries participating in the project will receive its own version of the aircraft, developed in accordance with the wishes of the customer. Other customers will only be able to obtain this version with the permission of the first customer.

          Therefore, all electronic and avionic systems installed on the F-35I by order of the Israeli Ministry of Defense will be exclusive. As an example, the vice president of Lockheed-Martin cited the Spice-1000 missile control units developed by Rafael.

          According to O'Brien, Israel is likely to receive the latest version of AIM-9X short-range air-to-air missiles and Raytheon's mid-range AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles, along with aircraft. At the same time, Rafael is developing a new version of Python rockets specifically for F-35.

          It is also reported that in order to increase the radius of the aircraft, Lockheed Martin is exploring the possibility of using the fired fuel tanks developed by Elbit concern in 425 gallons.

          Note that Israel has become the last country to receive partner status. In addition, the Israeli Ministry of Defense agreed to sign an agreement on the purchase of aircraft only in July 2012, after Lockheed Martin made concessions and agreed to grant Israel permission to install equipment developed by Israeli defense concerns on the F-35.

          The installation of Israeli equipment on the F-35 delivered to Israel was one of the main requirements of the IDF. However, until the last moment, the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin did not agree to this requirement, although a similar permission was obtained for aircraft of other models (F-15, F-16) purchased in the USA.
          1. dustycat
            dustycat 29 June 2013 10: 19 New
            0
            All systems will be exclusive because the US Congress allowed only the flawed version to be supplied.
            An exclusive is worth other money.
      5. Andrey77
        Andrey77 27 June 2013 14: 01 New
        +1
        America i.e. USA did not open. The US Air Force command can bet on different companies, and we can only on Sukhoi Design Bureau. Alas.
        1. Denis
          Denis 27 June 2013 14: 24 New
          +9
          Quote: Andrey77
          and we are only at Sukhoi Design Bureau. Alas
          KB Mikoyan is somehow undeservedly forgotten
          Or maybe Yakovlev’s design bureau will surprise you
          1. Andrey77
            Andrey77 27 June 2013 14: 37 New
            +1
            Maybe they’re doing something, but they can’t imagine a glider. It does not apply to Mikoyan Design Bureau - I repent, did not mention it in a post.
          2. dustycat
            dustycat 29 June 2013 10: 25 New
            0
            Mikoyan Design Bureau is 40% owned by Boeing.
            So, in principle, they will not be able to surprise anything special.
            This is a window for Boeing in our secrets.
            So first, we’ll be surprised at the new features of the FA18 with another plus.
            Yakovlev Design Bureau in a strong corral.
            Design Bureau Ilyushin only partially exported from Ukraine and Uzbekistan. The Ukrainian part of the Design Bureau is trying something, but they squeezed money. For the Russian part of the design bureau, the maximum that is allowed is the modernization of IL72 and IL76.
            KB Antonova almost entirely dies in Ukraine.
      6. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 27 June 2013 16: 44 New
        +1
        The article that although the amers pushed indescribable money into a minted kettle of "inconspicuous" shape, they unfortunately have a decent airplane. That is, that in the military field, despite the rapid erosion of potential under the influence of the philosophy of effective managers, they still have a large margin of safety. And this is sad and sad.
      7. Per se.
        Per se. 27 June 2013 20: 13 New
        +2
        Quote: seasoned
        Reading the article, I caught myself thinking that the author is persistently trying to complete the task and prove that the Americans spent a lot of money, that the original product did not work out, that nobody needs F-35 ...
        The author, perhaps, is trying to prove that we do not need such a plane, goodbye forever, YAK-141, eternal memory. But, God forbid, war, a big war, Borjomi will drink late.
        1. dustycat
          dustycat 29 June 2013 10: 33 New
          0
          Yak141 is a completely different concept.
          Only common - all weapons in the fuselage.
          But it was decided on the great-grandson of IL2 - IL-102.
          However, IL102 is also buried.
      8. pavelfi
        pavelfi 28 June 2013 01: 34 New
        0
        it would be surprising that after such a devastation the numbers would be the same.
      9. DEfindER
        DEfindER 29 June 2013 01: 58 New
        +1
        Quote: seasoned
        Some kind of obscure article about the confrontation of the two largest aircraft concerns

        I agree, such a feeling has developed that it’s as if it’s written specifically for us by amers, like you don’t have to worry about American technology full of g .. so you can relax and not create your new generation aviation ..
        At the same time, it is correctly said that the piano will fly for that kind of money, so they will bring it to mind, they have nowhere to retreat, it will fly and shoot, so we should not relax.
      10. dustycat
        dustycat 29 June 2013 09: 46 New
        0
        Flying for such grandmas is not enough.
        You must also be able to defeat the previous generation of aircraft not only for the price.
        But he cannot do this.
        And he blew the lafal, and the super hornet, and the EW airplane.
        It remains to be seen what Su35 can do with it.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Nitup
      Nitup 27 June 2013 15: 23 New
      +6

      _____________________
      1. Avenger711
        Avenger711 27 June 2013 21: 22 New
        +1
        Shurygin LOL. The declared speed of intercepted targets in the S-300, even with the weakest missiles, is 4 Mach. And where does the information harness and the plane itself, I did not notice the connection.
        1. Nitup
          Nitup 28 June 2013 00: 32 New
          +1
          at the expense of our air defense, I agree that he obviously mixed up something with the speeds of intercepted targets.
        2. vBR
          vBR 30 June 2013 19: 09 New
          0
          I read it so occasionally. But then a strong suspicion crept in, whether he possessed anything at all for real, or whether he was half-fantasizing. He did not make a reservation - 2500 km / h, but simply does not know
    5. Gari
      Gari 27 June 2013 15: 58 New
      +1
      Quote: Denis
      What, what, and call our probable friends of the master

      But friends of friends:
      According to the Norwegian government and industry, the American company Lockheed Martin has not yet set a real price for the F-35. They fear that the signed contract at a cost will be very different from the prices of 2014, when the fighters begin to enter the arsenal of the country's air force.
      For example, the previously announced price of $ 2,57 billion for a batch of 48 aircraft was calculated at the wrong exchange rate of the Norwegian krone to the US dollar. This price is based on the January 2008 rate.
      Other potential F-35 recipients are also not fully informed about the value of the contracts.
      The price for one "Norwegian" F-35 in the amount of $ 68,12 million is also very different from the cost of the aircraft intended for the Pentagon
      Generally complete mess
    6. Apologet.Ru
      Apologet.Ru 27 June 2013 20: 13 New
      +1
      Colleagues, it’s a sin, of course, to laugh at the wretched, but, as I recall, the basis of P. Inosovsky’s F-35 was the Soviet Yak-141. Not?
    7. vlad767
      vlad767 27 June 2013 21: 26 New
      0
      And the moral of this story is this: sometimes the simplest solution is the best! drinks
    8. SSR
      SSR 27 June 2013 21: 56 New
      +5
      Quote: Denis
      What, what, and call our probable friends of the master

      and then it will be like with other fkmi ... they will go ... block-1 ... block2 and so on ..
      Super Hornet (adopted in 1999) is not a simple modernization of the Hornet fighter. This is a completely new aircraft, free improvisation based on F / A-18 - glider, engine, avionics - everything changed drastically. Wingspan increased by 20%, empty weight - by 3 tons

      Personally, I am glad that they have so many problems with 5 .. but do not consider them completely booby ...
      + a candy wrapper machine they have a plus .. let's compare the speed of Boeing and Lockheed with Sukhoi .. no ... compare with the United Aircraft ...
      IMHA to spoil the image .. and overtake .. may the great gurus of patriotism forgive me .. the battle cannot be defeated by one thrust vector ...
      PS. for the ram on the fan ..
      The United States rivets for the last hundred for the year .. we are a dozen ... you can mock at the failures of the United States but you cannot underestimate their potential ...
      (statistics of air fights are not in our favor (modern fighters) on the battlefield they always participated in more advanced models) but then .. MiG-29 fired f-15 ... current arf block three (roughly speaking) and MiG from the first. ..in general, you need to learn apathy quickly and not like us .. Su-27 ... 20 years Su-30 ... another 15 years Su-35 ...
      The truth is always unpleasant .... and the shades are a sauce to soften bitterness.
    9. askarlad
      askarlad 28 June 2013 00: 15 New
      +6
      Hello everyone! I have been reading articles and comments on this site for a long time. With your permission I will express my point of view.
      Do not you think that all the defeats of F 35 are just dust in the eyes? You can certainly say that in the United States everything is built on a commercial basis and lobbying (well, like cutting dough). But it seems to me that the government of America is not so stupid. PS "Do not underestimate the enemy!".
  2. Professor
    Professor 27 June 2013 08: 34 New
    +9
    Chickens in the fall count






    1. Canep
      Canep 27 June 2013 09: 10 New
      +8
      Good to you Professor. I also think that it is better to judge a combat aircraft not by advertising leaflets, but by the facts of its combat use. But the cost of the aircraft can be judged now, and this parameter is not in favor of the F-35, and even more so the F-22. B-2 so generally more damage to the Americans than their opponents.
      1. Professor
        Professor 27 June 2013 09: 18 New
        10
        It would be interesting to compare the cost of airplanes in man hours of, say, Chinese, Russian and American "invisibility". This would clarify a lot and one could assume the cost of these aircraft for years so through 10 when they all go into series. hi
        1. Canep
          Canep 27 June 2013 09: 55 New
          +3
          Now you can compare the FA-18 and Su-35 for the price of approximate parity. The market equalizes prices. With invisibles in 5-10 years of mass production, I will be sure as well. And all the development costs will be covered by the American taxpayer, because development costs will be included in the cost of the first shipments of aircraft, which naturally go into service in the United States. As a result, US debt will grow by several hundred wagons of money (billions of dollars), and the world will come closer to the financial apocalypse. I'm afraid these planes will only lead to the end of the world by their presence.
          1. Hug
            Hug 1 July 2013 15: 45 New
            0
            What an internationalist you really are! - Worry about American taxpayers ....
      2. Pimply
        Pimply 27 June 2013 09: 24 New
        +2
        You judge the cost, as if one aircraft was being developed. But in fact, there was a development of three different machines. The fact that they are unified in a number of details is a saving in the future, and not at the development stages.
        1. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 27 June 2013 11: 02 New
          +2
          What is the difference, at what stage does an unforeseen excess of project costs arise?
        2. SSR
          SSR 27 June 2013 23: 03 New
          0
          Quote: Pimply
          You judge the cost, as if one aircraft was being developed.
          here I’m talking about .. in two years they’ll give out a bit like block 2 and block-3, but in fact like Su-27 and Su-30 .....
      3. postman
        postman 27 June 2013 18: 40 New
        +4
        Quote: Canep
        B-2 so generally more damage to the Americans than their opponents.

        I do not agree.
        At least for a brief analysis, read PM, where the correspondent personally flew and flew the B-2.
        And nothing about the strikes from the United States to the transcontinental range.

        That B-2, that 22 or 35, is still a new stage of aviation.
        It doesn’t matter whether it turned out or not.
        first damn so to speak
    2. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 27 June 2013 09: 37 New
      +2
      Colonel, why all these photos?
      Do you think we forgot what the 35th looks like? It’s bad, it doesn’t look beautiful. Well honestly.
      1. Professor
        Professor 27 June 2013 09: 45 New
        +8
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        Do you think we forgot how 35 looks like?

        the photos show: vertical take-off and landing, the number of finished aircraft, a carbon helmet, the size of the aircraft relative to the pilot, the ability to refuel in the air. I can offer night flights including vertical take-off and landing, rocket launch.
        1. ed65b
          ed65b 27 June 2013 10: 04 New
          +1
          Hi professor hi globally nothing new and such that we do not have. Vertical take-off only in lightning is an exception.
          1. Vadivak
            Vadivak 27 June 2013 10: 11 New
            11
            Quote: ed65b
            Vertical take-off only in lightning is an exception.


            And even then the big question is whether it is advisable to carry around two tons of sophisticated equipment that after take-off is no longer needed is a very expensive pleasure
            1. postman
              postman 27 June 2013 18: 37 New
              +2
              Quote: Vadivak
              And even then, the big question is its feasibility, to carry about two tons

              for KPM it is important, otherwise you need to carry bulldozers or airfields with you.
              O. Kaptsov convincingly proved (well, let's call it that) that there is nothing to be done by decks and not to win
              1. Santa Fe
                27 June 2013 19: 29 New
                +2
                Quote: Postman
                for KPM it is important, otherwise you need to carry bulldozers or airfields with you.

                Practice shows that the aviation of the ILC and the Navy is too small and weak
                All serious matters are decided only by the Air Force (they have both numbers and special equipment - RC-135, E-8, U-2, Raptors and F-15, strategists, etc. destructive things)

                Regarding bulldozers - a panorama of the construction of the ersatz airbase in the Falklands (Harrier FOB)
                1. postman
                  postman 28 June 2013 00: 51 New
                  0
                  Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                  Regarding bulldozers - a panorama of the construction of the ersatz airbase in the Falklands (Harrier FOB)


                  This is a classic example. Conclusion?
                  svvp or ukvp-need!
                  for cpm anyway
                  1. Santa Fe
                    28 June 2013 01: 05 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Postman
                    svvp or ukvp-need!
                    for cpm anyway

                    why are these stumps?
                    there is always an air force nearby with hundreds of full-fledged vehicles
          2. White
            White 27 June 2013 10: 14 New
            +3
            well, for example helmet f-35 if everything goes together, it will just be a leap into the future.
        2. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 27 June 2013 10: 55 New
          +1
          But there is no photo where the deck version has a normal, laid out length, hook?
        3. Corsair
          Corsair 27 June 2013 11: 07 New
          +8
          Quote: Professor
          I can offer night flights including vertical take-off and landing, rocket launch.

          Professor, do you have an F35 rental office? lol
          1. Professor
            Professor 27 June 2013 11: 14 New
            +3
            Quote: Corsair
            Professor, do you have an F35 rental office?

            I would not refuse to own such an office. bully
    3. Wedmak
      Wedmak 27 June 2013 10: 14 New
      +1
      Penguins ... Of course, the Americans have nowhere to go, they gave birth to a penguin, now we need to buy, otherwise they will be left without aviation.
    4. Uncle Serozha
      Uncle Serozha 27 June 2013 11: 52 New
      +6
      Quote: Professor
      Циdance in the fall

      Professor, do not mistake for grammar nazi, but at your scientific degree it’s a shame to write the word “chickens” through “and”. ;)

      In addition, I did not understand exactly how the F-35 photographs you uploaded confirm or refute any messages. That is, the pictures are beautiful, of course, but they wanted to say something?
      1. Professor
        Professor 27 June 2013 12: 04 New
        +8
        Quote: Uncle Serezha
        Professor, do not mistake for grammar nazi, but at your scientific degree it’s a shame to write the word “chickens” through “and”. ;)

        Technician I, what will you take from me? Yes, and non-Russians one around ... repeat

        Quote: Uncle Serezha
        That is, the pictures are beautiful, of course, but they wanted to say something?

        This plane is not a toy and did not cut money. People are serious about taking it into service, comprehensively "run in" and the bird is already far from a single copy.
        1. Uncle Serozha
          Uncle Serozha 27 June 2013 12: 14 New
          +5
          Quote: Professor
          Technician I, what will you take from me? Yes, and non-Russians one around ...

          I am also a techie, but I prefer to write competently. Well, at least to set an example for non-Russians. ;)
          Quote: Professor

          This plane is not a toy and did not cut money. People are serious about taking it into service, comprehensively "run in" and the bird is already far from a single copy.

          Mmmm ... I apologize for my visual cretinism (although I changed my profession from an engineer to a designer), but I could not draw such far-reaching conclusions from the pictures. repeat That F-35 does not exist in a single copy is not necessary to prove, because in the article, in fact, the opposite was not stated. But that the car is problematic is for sure.
          I have another claim to the article - the lack of parametric criteria. Well, they spent on Hornet measures to reduce the EPR. So what is the bottom line? Did the EPR itself equalize with that of the F-35, or not? Vague doubts torment me ...
          1. dustycat
            dustycat 29 June 2013 10: 47 New
            0
            Judging by the shape of the air intakes, there is still work to work on the superhornet.
            Plus, the wing adjoining the fuselage must be filed with a file.
            Although the idea of ​​licking is quite promising and certainly less expensive (at least in cost) than F35.
            Maybe if Israel throws out the entire problem stuffing from the F35 glider and fills it with stuff from the superhoner or rafal, something more decent will work out.
            Here, the ban on the supply of Congress the most sophisticated version can play into the hands of F35.
            So the positive of the Professor can be very justified.
      2. SSR
        SSR 27 June 2013 23: 07 New
        0
        Quote: Uncle Serezha
        Quote: Professor
        Chickens in the fall count
        Professor, do not mistake for grammar nazi, but at your scientific degree it’s a shame to write the word “chickens” through “and”. ;)

        His nickname is loud and provocative ... but in fact Pupyrchaty and atalef give much more information to the mountain for discussion ... and a prohhphessor makes a pug at one of his nicknames ... I'm "nedur" ....
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 27 June 2013 23: 57 New
          0
          Quote: SSR
          but in fact Pupyrchaty and atalef give out to the mountain much more information for discussion ...

          It’s better to double-check their information, just in case, from the Israelis I would single out Aron Zavi and the Tourist Breakfast, and the professor has a lot to do with the mood
    5. askarlad
      askarlad 28 June 2013 01: 12 New
      0
      I wonder how many designers worked on the helmet? Not to mention the elements of an airplane. Dust in the eyes that everything and everyone on this last hope.
    6. Borat
      Borat 28 June 2013 08: 20 New
      +1
      Quote: Professor
      Chickens in the fall count


      Professor, respect the Russian language!
      Gypsy stood on his chicks and said Chicken Chick
  3. keeper
    keeper 27 June 2013 09: 04 New
    +1
    Let's hope that the new T-50 glider will really bring new opportunities compared to the good 4 ++ Su-35. I would not want to think, as can be seen from the article, that all the same could be achieved on the Su-35 glider (in the sense of the already spent funds on the development of a new glider).
    1. Vadivak
      Vadivak 27 June 2013 10: 02 New
      12
      Quote: keeper
      new glider T-50


      All new well-forgotten old, Yak-201 for example
      1. WS
        WS 27 June 2013 20: 45 New
        -1
        This aircraft Yak-141
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 27 June 2013 23: 59 New
          +3
          Quote: WS
          This aircraft Yak-141

          And this is a plane
        2. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 28 June 2013 00: 09 New
          0
          And what then is the plane
    2. askarlad
      askarlad 28 June 2013 01: 55 New
      0
      Understand the Show (with a capital letter) in the USA and only there they know how to create. And in Russia, the successor to the USSR, words serve the cause.
  4. 77bob1973
    77bob1973 27 June 2013 09: 19 New
    +9
    As Valery Pavlovich Chkalov said, a fighter should be simple, reliable and cheap.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 27 June 2013 10: 30 New
      +4
      At that time, yes, but now the 21st century is in the yard ...
    2. Uncle Serozha
      Uncle Serozha 27 June 2013 12: 28 New
      +5
      Quote: 77bob1973
      As Valery Pavlovich Chkalov said, a fighter should be simple, reliable and cheap.

      Valery Pavlovich was an outstanding pilot, for which he has a bright memory. But he was neither a designer nor an analyst, so I would rely on calculation rather than quotes when shaping the appearance of future cars. Even quotes from the great.
  5. dmit-xnumx
    dmit-xnumx 27 June 2013 09: 25 New
    +7
    This article says, "you cannot lay eggs in one basket": at least Two design bureaus must design aircraft and prove the advantages of their aircraft with demonstration flights, and not with "battles" in the offices of high authorities.
  6. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 27 June 2013 09: 27 New
    +2
    Good article. And the impression remains that neither the F-22 nor the F-35 are useless. Although a lot of questions remain regarding the further development of aviation. We are not pulling for hypersound yet, but development is required somewhere. I wonder where we'll go. hi
  7. DAGESTAN333
    DAGESTAN333 27 June 2013 09: 34 New
    15
    Our favorite national game is to throw the enemy’s caps at first, and then hardly recover from a sudden knockout.
    And why no one undertakes to analyze, for example, the capabilities of the on-board computer in the F-35? For some reason, nobody is interested in the level of software for this machine ... It feels like we want to convince ourselves that the F-35 is just a safe toy. Yes, soon she’s “with us” will even stop flying.
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 27 June 2013 09: 44 New
      +7
      That is not, just if there were so many bugs and other problems and absurdities on which thread from our new planes, then it would be cherished at every turn, different Expertoid. Well, when our "friends" have this happen, they try to pass it off almost for dignity. This is ridiculous.
    2. 77bob1973
      77bob1973 27 June 2013 09: 45 New
      +2
      Just in order for it to be a true 5th generation airplane, you really need a miracle, and this is an awesomely sophisticated and fucking expensive airplane that Super-Hornet can successfully fulfill.
    3. Uncle Serozha
      Uncle Serozha 27 June 2013 11: 58 New
      +4
      Quote: DAGESTANETS333
      Our favorite national game is to throw the enemy’s caps at first, and then hardly recover from a sudden knockout.

      +1 Moreover. The article did not like the fact that the author continuously says that the same can be achieved on modernized machines of the 4+ generation, but at the same time does not give any figures and calculations.
      Silent Hornet conducted a series of activities to reduce ESR. Perfectly. So tell us what is the EPR of this machine relative to the F-35? Parity achieved?
      1. Santa Fe
        27 June 2013 12: 30 New
        +6
        Quote: Uncle Serezha
        So tell us what is the EPR of this machine relative to the F-35? Parity achieved?

        The standard Super Hornet has a minimum front-end EPR of 1,2 sq. meter

        According to reports from November of the 2005 year, the U.S. Air Force claims that the F-22 has the smallest EPR of all manned aircraft in service with the U.S. Air Force, with a frontal EPR of 0.0001 ~ 0.0002 m² (which is comparable to a marble ball in the frontal aspect). According to these reports, the F-35 has an EPR comparable to a metal golf ball, about 0.0015 m². What is 5 - 10 times larger than the minimum frontal EPR of an F / A-22 fighter. However, the F-35 has an EPR less than that of the F-117, and is comparable to that of the B-2 bomber (whose EPR is two less than the F-117).
        For comparison, the EPR MiG-29 is about 5 m².


        This whole pun has one result:

        inscription on a T-shirt - sorry, did not know that he is invisible
        1. Uncle Serozha
          Uncle Serozha 27 June 2013 12: 50 New
          +1
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          According to reports from November 2005, the US Air Force claims that the F-22 has the smallest EPR of all manned aircraft in service with the U.S. Air Force, with a frontal EPR of 0.0001 ~ 0.0002 m² (which is comparable to a marble ball in the frontal aspect)

          In our aviation industry, among the experts, other figures are in use. It is believed that the frontal EPR F-22 is 0,0024 m², from the side angles - 0,004. In the rear hemisphere, it rises sharply to 0,032 m²

          But I didn’t talk about that. I asked if it was possible to equalize the EPR Silent Hornet with the F-35? By superhornet, the data is just well known. That is, is the message of the article true that on a 4+ generation machine it is possible to achieve the same EPR values ​​as on the F-35? There are doubts about this.
          1. Santa Fe
            27 June 2013 13: 49 New
            0
            Quote: Uncle Serezha
            That is, is the message of the article true that on the machine of the 4 + generation it is possible to achieve the same EPR values ​​as on the F-35?

            And why not?

            If you do not bring the idea to an absurdity and take, as the most likely, frontal direction:

            - dismantle underwing pylons and protruding parts
            - without lantern
            - coating the outer surface of the fuselage with a radar absorbing material, similar to F-35

            There are already curved air intake channels, it remains to lay them out from the inside with radar absorbing material
            Wing span F / A-18E and F-35C identical
            1. Uncle Serozha
              Uncle Serozha 27 June 2013 14: 04 New
              +2
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              And why not?

              This is exactly what the article says. And I asked for specific numbers. Did you manage to bring the EPR of at least one generation 4 car to the F-35 level?
              1. Santa Fe
                27 June 2013 14: 20 New
                +4
                Quote: Uncle Serezha
                And I asked for specific numbers. Did you manage to bring the EPR of at least one 4 generation machine to the F-35 level?

                Does anyone have accurate EPR data for thirty-five? I’m silent about the Silent Hornets ... (c)

                I’ll add from myself: in the stealth techniques implemented on F-35 there is not one that could not be implemented on the Silent Hornet. In the same volume and with the same result
            2. postman
              postman 27 June 2013 18: 36 New
              0
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              There are already curved air intake channels, it remains to lay them out from the inside with radar absorbing material

              Toyota will not work out of Lada Kalina, even Opel, how not to tune.
              It's the same here.
              Read (as you recommended, Ufimtsev to everyone), everything is written there
              1. Santa Fe
                27 June 2013 19: 31 New
                +1
                Quote: Postman
                Toyota will not work out of Lada Kalina, even Opel, how not to tune.

                F / A-18E - not fret viburnum, that’s the thing
      2. viktorR
        viktorR 27 June 2013 13: 12 New
        0
        Does anyone have accurate EPR data for thirty-five? I’m silent about the Silent Hornet ...
        1. dustycat
          dustycat 29 June 2013 10: 55 New
          0
          According to different sources, different.
          Some say 0,5 square meters, others say 0,35 square meters.
          But in the millimeter range.
          In decimetric, a completely different picture.
          Data varies from 3 to 8 sq.m
          But even if you take the largest ones, it will still be very difficult to find it at long range, and in the conditions of electronic warfare.
    4. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 27 June 2013 19: 03 New
      0
      And on what subject? What can this computer do, what a mediocre tablet cannot? The strength of this lame duck is not in the computer but in armament. Well this is not a plane but just a foundling! He jumped up, targeted about where the enemy was, fired rockets and sat down with relief. Well, he still hobbled around if he hadn’t found anyone. He must also have a reliable connection ... that's all. If you peel off the words that are beautiful and “selling,” which marketers love, such an application of this thing comes out of their advertising.
      By the way, they implemented "poke control into the screen" there, as I understand it. Well done ...
      1. dustycat
        dustycat 29 June 2013 10: 57 New
        0
        "By the way, they implemented there" control by a push in the screen "as I understood. Well done ..."

        Well, keep up with the Chinese ...
    5. SSR
      SSR 27 June 2013 23: 13 New
      0
      hi
      Heh .. what are we talking about .. in a year two will release Block two .. (wrote above)
      here is what I’m talking about .. in two years they’ll give out a bit like block 2 and blo3, but in fact like Su-27 and Su-30 .....

      Quote: DAGESTANETS333
      And why no one undertakes to analyze, for example, the capabilities of the on-board computer in the F-35?

      but cho to analyze .. so I'm the coolest .. like chuck noriss ... if you analyze .. then along the steep not chuck)))
  8. Grey_k
    Grey_k 27 June 2013 09: 47 New
    +4
    Most importantly, we (and the Americans, too, regrettably) will accumulate vast experience in the technological field, young engineers will gain knowledge for subsequent developments ... another question is whether it was worth spending such a huge amount of money? Although it was probably worth it ... in 90 we lost a whole generation of promising engineers, still a little time and the old people simply would not have time to pass on their still Soviet experience to the young. The answer is obvious - the costs are 100% justified for just that. Yes, and it’s too early to write off 4 ++, they will last even a dozen years, they need to be built more, they will remain a real workhorse for aviation in the near future, the 5th generation, even the domestic one is still expensive, both in production and in operation .
    1. djon77
      djon77 27 June 2013 10: 17 New
      -1
      and now let’s imagine the developments that are used in 35 on the raptor. after all, the principle of architecture can be upgraded until ... you fall. again, the raptor will be ahead of the rest of the planet
    2. Uncle Serozha
      Uncle Serozha 27 June 2013 12: 35 New
      +4
      Quote: Gray_K
      The most important thing is that we (and the Americans, too, sadly) will accumulate vast experience in the technological field, young engineers will gain knowledge for subsequent developments

      But this is a VERY true idea. If we do not want to become a nation, then we need to work our brains. Continuously. Did not work out? Not scary, experience gained is also a result.
      But if the whole country will be engaged in screwdriver assembly of sliding wardrobes ... If institutes and technical schools will train sales managers, and vocational schools - security guards and prostitutes ... then write is lost.
      I would like to be smart and rugged people. And for this, mind and hands must be applied.
  9. Nayhas
    Nayhas 27 June 2013 09: 48 New
    +9
    How did Oleg categorically go about Lightning-2. You indicate that it is "strewing" and limping on test trials. However, according to LM reports, all test tests pass safely confirming the inherent characteristics. And about the fact that electronics are disconnected from the wind ... why not from the gases emitted by the pilot? The problem with the hook on option C was solved, and the problem was that it was not short, and with the chosen location of the hook, it bounced up when landing, and therefore there was no catch for the aerofinisher. This has already been fixed ...
    25.10.2012/1000/2012 the 3th flight was completed in 2012 under the design test program (prototype CF-31.12.2012, test pilot of the US Navy Chris Tabert, Patuxent River), all in 1167 (as of December 9300, XNUMX) XNUMX were performed under this program flights, as a result of which XNUMX points of the program were “closed”;
    14.11.2012/50000/4 for the first time, a maximum design height of XNUMX feet was achieved (prototype AF-XNUMX, Lockheed Martin test pilot David Nelson, Edwards);
    30.11.2012/10/1 a new hovering record was set for a fighter with a shortened takeoff and a vertical landing - XNUMX minutes (prototype BF-XNUMX, test pilot BAE Systems Peter Wilson, Patuxent River);
    07.12.2012/4/2 the first flight was performed at maximum angles of attack with external suspensions (prototype AF-3, test pilot Lockheed Martin David Nelson, Edwards), pylons were installed on the plane at points 9, 10, 9, 1, AIM-11X rockets at points 31 , 2, in addition, in the internal compartments there were a guided aerial bomb GBU-120 and XNUMX AIM-XNUMX missiles;
    07.12.2012/1000/1 The XNUMXth test flight for fighter aircraft with a shortened take-off and vertical landing was performed (prototype BF-XNUMX, test pilot of the Marine Corps CR Clift, Patuxent River);
    18.12.2012/360/1,2 1 degree coup was performed for the first time. at supersonic speed (XNUMXM) with open shutters of the internal weapons compartment (prototype AF-XNUMX, test pilot of the US Government Vince Catarina, Edwards);
    23.03.2013/1/6 the first delayed landing with external suspensions was performed (prototype BF-2, test pilot BAE Systems Peter Wilson, Patuxent River), the machine was equipped with a fuselage container gun and 9 pylons, XNUMX of which were suspended AIM-XNUMXX missiles.
    And the fate of Silent Hornet will be similar to the fate of Saylet Eagle, oblivion and a place in a museum or test bench, because the best enemy of the good ...
    1. viktorR
      viktorR 27 June 2013 13: 15 New
      +1
      And the fate of Silent Hornet will be similar to the fate of Saylet Eagle, oblivion and a place in a museum or test bench, because the best enemy of the good ...
      mixed up places wink ?
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 27 June 2013 21: 26 New
        0
        No, do you have any perspectives on F-15SE sales prospects?
        1. Santa Fe
          27 June 2013 23: 45 New
          0
          Quote: Nayhas
          No, do you have any perspectives on F-15SE sales prospects?

          Imagine, even the F-15SE turned out to be overly complex for the US Air Force

          South Korea (purchased by 61 strike needles), Singapore (24), Saud. Arabia (70) - they all chose the standard F-15E fighter-bomber. The capabilities of this machine are amazing
          1. Nayhas
            Nayhas 28 June 2013 05: 58 New
            0
            I didn’t mean the F-15E Strike Eagle, but the F-15SE Silent Eagle
            1. Santa Fe
              28 June 2013 12: 54 New
              0
              Quote: Nayhas
              F-15E Strike Eagle and F-15SE Silent Eagle

              Well, what am I talking about?
              Everyone prefers the usual F-15E and does not want to overpay for the "Silent Eagle." The capabilities of this machine (ordinary Strike Needle) allow you to solve any urgent tasks.
    2. dustycat
      dustycat 29 June 2013 11: 01 New
      0
      "However, according to LM reports, all test tests pass safely confirming the inherent characteristics."

      Now, if only Boeing confirmed this ...
      And so ...
  10. ed65b
    ed65b 27 June 2013 10: 07 New
    0
    Of course, after so many bucks entered, no one will abandon him. And judging by the author, the 5th generation should look more like a UFO.
  11. White
    White 27 June 2013 10: 09 New
    +2
    F-35 is mercilessly criticized though, as for me the plane is not so bad.
    But I'm not talking about that - you look at this assembly line, at the production culture just a fairy tale. But the technology is becoming very complicated and in order to do everything qualitatively, to set everything up and calibrate, you need to go to such a production because it is difficult to pull modern equipment to the standards of the USSR.
    1. Vadivak
      Vadivak 27 June 2013 10: 19 New
      11
      Quote: White
      you look at this assembly line, the production culture is just a fairy tale


      The Yankees have always had culture, and there has been no war on their territory since the civil
      1. White
        White 27 June 2013 10: 46 New
        -2
        70 years of peace time is that a short time?
        This is just an excuse no more.
        1. Vadivak
          Vadivak 27 June 2013 11: 24 New
          +4
          Quote: White
          70 years of peace time is that a short time?


          After the war, the country lay in ruins for about 20 years, and then that we did not have perestroika? and then Yeltsin, this is the second troubled time
          1. dustycat
            dustycat 29 June 2013 11: 04 New
            0
            Stalingrad was still being restored in the mid-70s, but there are cities that have not yet been restored to pre-war sizes.
        2. Zopuhhh
          Zopuhhh 27 June 2013 14: 47 New
          +1
          In fact, there were photographs from our factories, the only difference is in the assembled aircraft.
          1. Atrix
            Atrix 27 June 2013 18: 31 New
            +3
            Quote: Zopuhhh
            In fact, there were photographs from our factories, the only difference is in the assembled aircraft.


            Yes, the only difference is in airplanes laughing
    2. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 27 June 2013 10: 56 New
      +4
      But what, do we still collect planes on our knees or what?
  12. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 27 June 2013 10: 10 New
    +5
    f-35 victim is more likely a new developer policy. Everything related to aircraft testing, all problems are widely covered.
    This does not change anything. They’ll bring the car. An excellent range of weapons is already there. Better write than we will fight back.
    1. dustycat
      dustycat 29 June 2013 11: 05 New
      0
      Ugly planes do not fly well.
      Let's hope this is just a stepping stone to generation 6.
  13. Wedmak
    Wedmak 27 June 2013 10: 12 New
    +1
    Russian aviation weapons developers should analyze the experience of their Western colleagues. Perhaps the constant evolution of fourth-generation fighters is the key to creating the fifth generation of this magnificent technique.

    The family of aircraft based on the Su-27, as it were, gives an answer to this "attack." And MiG, with due attention from the state, could have been born a whole family of light fighters, electronic warfare aircraft, decks.
    It is also interesting what modifications the T-50 will have, probably the schemes are already being worked out.
    1. Vadivak
      Vadivak 27 June 2013 10: 53 New
      +3
      Quote: Wedmak
      It is also interesting what modifications the T-50 will have.


      So far, only one is known - double
  14. KG_patriot_last
    KG_patriot_last 27 June 2013 10: 20 New
    +1
    All the problems of this aircraft are economic ... Do not underestimate the opponent ...
    Aircraft industry is developed in the USA and competitors themselves produce such critical materials ... Well, let it be no better than f16 / 18, the main thing is to be worse than PAK and its other ...
  15. abu
    abu 27 June 2013 10: 33 New
    +2
    An interesting decision about a hanging container with missiles, do not bother with a place in the fuselage, and who wondered if anyone had thought of this before?
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 27 June 2013 10: 45 New
      +3
      Even on IL-2 there was, so to speak, a prototype of such a container. True to PTAB. Il took 4 such containers and poured them onto a column of armored vehicles, the effect is amazing.
  16. TRAFFIC
    TRAFFIC 27 June 2013 10: 44 New
    0
    Gee-gee, all mixed up in a heap, we’ll leave it to the conscience of the author about reliability, but the fact that so far none of the F-35s have crashed and the F-16s are falling with frightening regularity. As for the F-18, it’s as if according to LTX, it’s worse than the F-14 which he replaced and nothing wink
    The existence of Lightning is justified by nothing but the exorbitant greed of the managers of Lockheed Martin, who convinced the Pentagon leadership of their correctness.
    So this is not the Pentagon conceived the JSF program? After all, an F-35 was created for it, and not vice versa. About the new F-18, so when there was a competition, and when the Boeing showed the concept, the difference is 10 years! And as for the F-35B and Harrier, there’s a shine in general, just why you need it. smile
    1. Santa Fe
      27 June 2013 23: 38 New
      0
      Quote: TRAFIC
      ! And as for the F-35B and Harrier, the shine is generally good, just why is it needed.

      Why are they needed? Your version?
      1. TRAFFIC
        TRAFFIC 28 June 2013 14: 19 New
        0
        Yes, what does my version have to do with it? They wanted the ILC to replace the Harriers, they have to ask why they need their own aircraft, but it is obvious that the F-35B is better than the Harrier.
  17. Grigorich 1962
    Grigorich 1962 27 June 2013 10: 57 New
    +1
    If you go even higher above the analysis of the situation, then you can clearly see ... the USA is losing ground on all fronts. Somewhere I heard ... or read that the United States will fall apart under the "black" president ..... hmm .... it seems that the forecast is starting to come true .... given the internal political situation and the United States ... well, how it says ... God grant!
  18. Vital 33
    Vital 33 27 June 2013 10: 58 New
    +3
    I think everything will be fine with the F-35, they will be brought to condition. Yes, the mine is not bad. As for any failures, there’s nothing to be surprised at, because the car is new, and the introduction of innovations always goes "bumpy". Our su-27, and instant-29, at one time also experienced various difficulties. It’s just that it wasn’t written then. If anyone thinks that ours quickly riveted, and he immediately began to fly super, he is mistaken. I remember reading about the creation of the Su-27, there at the beginning they also miscalculated a little, but brought to mind, and got one of the best cars ...
    F-35 may not be the best, but it will fulfill its tasks ... They will bring it ..
  19. Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 27 June 2013 11: 00 New
    0
    Quote: White
    well, for example helmet f-35 if everything goes together, it will just be a leap into the future.

    And how can you shield the electronics in a helmet from exposure to EMP?
    It’s just not clear how to a limited extent, this problem can be solved. After all, a helmet, if, as you say, “they bring it to mind,” an indication of almost all incoming information will be laid. It is necessary to protect something like that.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 27 June 2013 11: 11 New
      +2
      And how can you shield the electronics in a helmet from exposure to EMP?

      Aluminum foil will save the beacon of democracy!
      1. dustycat
        dustycat 29 June 2013 11: 13 New
        0
        Somewhere in the internet there is a video as a balloon surrounded by foil reacts to irradiation with a maser.
        I don’t think the pilot will be pleased.
        In addition, it remains a visor with a bunch of dusting of various metals.

        Ammunition EMR F35 just can not bear painlessly.
  20. savoj
    savoj 27 June 2013 11: 04 New
    -23
    ... the Russians want - but they cannot ...... therefore the poison from the teeth drips. I imagine, as it were, those who were throwing their hats over the enemy in combat conditions would again be draped to Moscow .... leaving 5 million prisoners.
    1. Denis
      Denis 27 June 2013 11: 37 New
      +2
      Quote: savoj
      poison from the teeth and drips.
      Noticeably
      And someone feces, a lot of feces and not a word about the car
      It remains to blurt out about Stalin
    2. Vadivak
      Vadivak 27 June 2013 12: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: savoj
      Again, they would have been draped to Moscow .... leaving 5 million prisoners.


      It is a pity that only the Romanians felt sorry for you, but it was necessary as near Stalingrad, the grandfather told the tank in a column


      One word Romanian.
      -He is Bulgarian!
      -Who cares?
      1. djon77
        djon77 27 June 2013 16: 59 New
        0
        he is not Romanian and not Moldovan. he is a merchant. there are such individuals in every nation. Russia all contains dependents, but she is grateful. 4 lard with a fostik for gas should already be sent to you. Then they yell at all forums that their gas is cheaper than in the rest of Moldova
      2. postman
        postman 27 June 2013 18: 33 New
        +2
        Quote: Vadivak
        -Who cares?

        Vadim, you're wrong.
        In any case, from the point of view of the Romanians.
        They with respect worthy of tenacity, consider:
        Romanians are the only heirs and direct descendants of the proud Rome
        -Rom = RomanmiaYou root one IMHO we (Romanians essno), heirs of proud Rome
        -Latinica identity (do not care that the languages ​​are far, the heirs have forgotten)
        - once upon a time (that they consider) the Romans (the most conscious and advanced) reached the territory of present-day Romania and formed a conclave.
        Here.
        Something like this.
        And you equate them with "some kind of Bulgarians."
        Not comme il faut.
        Nostalgia (memoirs of a military man): 1991-92, I remember Romanians in Transnistria, nice, good ... THROUGH A CUT SIGHT love
        1. djon77
          djon77 27 June 2013 21: 18 New
          -1
          well, even if you started to say something, then at least study the question. The Dacian population after the conquest by Rome was romanized. That is, the Legionnaires were allowed to stay and marry the Dacians. And there are very few Dacian men left and women were married to Roman legionaries, and the language is common was Latin. although legionnaires and not all were Romans. by the way, for reference, Romanian and Italian are most similar from the Romance language group
          1. postman
            postman 28 June 2013 00: 49 New
            0
            Quote: djon77
            Well, even if I took to say something

            What am I talking about?
            my version is one of the versions promoted by romanians.
            yours is another. and it is not adequate. with the same success, the legionnaires remained, married (or simply) on the Celts, Franks, and other wavars.
            Something I did not meet with allegations about the Romans ala naturel in Fr, Germany and so on.
            Quote: djon77
            .By the way, for reference, Romanian and Italian

            By the way, for reference: proven (scientifically and irrefutably) English and Russian languages ​​were divided 6-6.5 million years ago.
            and one people has a common language.
            but about the "similarity" of Romanian and Latin, I will not say anything.
            Oh well, why am I all on my own, and then again
            Quote: djon77
            Well, if I took

            Give the tel / name of the Turk, engineer Philip Maurice, now he is in Algeria, the Romanians arrived there, after the Russians.
            He will tell everything, for me.
            Is it necessary?
            1. djon77
              djon77 28 June 2013 12: 43 New
              -1
              explain to me then, how did I communicate with an Italian without an interpreter and I understood him and he didn’t understand me 100%, but 80 percent for sure. I assume that you are a super person. But I would do my self-education before I talk about something to reason
    3. postman
      postman 27 June 2013 18: 28 New
      +1
      Quote: savoj
      ... the Russians want - but they cannot ...

      some kind of not good (quite) comment. fu
    4. dustycat
      dustycat 29 June 2013 11: 24 New
      0
      You should read the uncensored memoirs of the generals of the winners about the initial and not only the period of the war.
      They retreated to Moscow precisely by the elementary gouging of bureaucrat generals.

      I’m now reading the memoirs of the colonel in command of the 159 fortified area.
      The fortified areas were built according to the focal principle with a spacing of positions of up to 3 km, forgetting the experience of the First World War and about the trenches.
      In the gaps between the positions of the German columns and broke through.
      In 1943, near Stalingrad, in order to recapture the fortified heights from the Germans, the artillery battles were disarmed (they seized the machine guns and mortars instead of arming the calculations with small arms) and threw them into the attack. The battalions laid the heights did not take.

      At the same time, defense systems of fortifications were built on the "advanced" West European principle of those times ..
  21. Akim
    Akim 27 June 2013 11: 08 New
    0
    The F-35 will soon have competitors in the form of: Dassau, SaaB, Mitsubishi. This will spur him on to further development.
  22. experienced
    experienced 27 June 2013 11: 28 New
    +2
    Here is the Italians look at Italy’s participation in the development of the F-35 from a fresh Foreign Press, there is a lot of talk about the airplane, the article “The whole truth about F35” (“L'Espresso”, Italy) by Gianluca Di Feo
    Thesis is written very accessible hi

    http://www.inosmi.ru/world/20130627/210418690.html
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 27 June 2013 12: 43 New
      +4
      Interesting article. The respondent is somewhat cunning. A typhoon theoretically can certainly replace Tornadoes and the AMX, but Harier will never have to give up her aircraft carriers in Italy ... Italy has no choice, Typhoon was the last fighter developed by European cooperation, there were so many difficult deliveries that many doubted the positive outcome. the second Typhoon Europe will not stretch and Italy will have to buy Laetningi.
  23. Forest
    Forest 27 June 2013 12: 06 New
    -1
    An expensive toy that they were afraid to use in Libya because of maintaining the image and its price.
    1. patsantre
      patsantre 27 June 2013 13: 08 New
      -1
      What ??? He hasn’t even been adopted yet, and it will not be adopted very soon, as far as I know, he hasn’t used weapons yet (I could be wrong). What kind of Libya ???
      1. Forest
        Forest 27 June 2013 15: 46 New
        0
        Suppose (although they could test in real conditions), but the F-22 was also not used for these reasons ??? )))
        1. patsantre
          patsantre 27 June 2013 16: 14 New
          +1
          Quote: Forest
          Let's say (although they could test in real conditions)


          He is not ready for this yet.

          Quote: Forest
          F-22 is also not used for these reasons ??? )))


          But what the hell is it for? It's a plane to gain air supremacy, and it is designed to fight against a serious opponent. And its strike capabilities are very modest. Its use there is meaningless and not justified.
          1. Forest
            Forest 27 June 2013 16: 25 New
            0
            Quote: patsantre
            Quote: Forest
            Let's say (although they could test in real conditions)


            He is not ready for this yet.

            Quote: Forest
            F-22 is also not used for these reasons ??? )))


            But what the hell is it for? It's a plane to gain air supremacy, and it is designed to fight against a serious opponent. And its strike capabilities are very modest. Its use there is meaningless and not justified.

            So you yourself have proved - “meaningless and not justified.” In short, they created an airplane, but no tasks are expected for it).
            1. patsantre
              patsantre 27 June 2013 20: 47 New
              0
              If it was not useful in one war, this does not mean that it will not be needed in another. And yes, the raptor then began to be created during the Cold War and its task was to fight our fighters. But even now it would be foolish to say that the tasks for he is not there.
              1. Forest
                Forest 28 June 2013 11: 39 New
                0
                “But now it would be foolish to say that there are no tasks for him” - if they haven’t been using it for 12 years now, it’s foolish to say that it is necessary, it’s still five years old and it’s morally obsolete, but for now 4+ generations are in demand.
            2. Odysseus
              Odysseus 28 June 2013 00: 51 New
              +3
              Quote: Forest
              So you yourself have proved - “meaningless and not justified.” In short, they created an airplane, but no tasks are expected for it).

              Your logic is strange. But you are aware that the MiG-31 and Su-27 have never been used in combat for 30 (!!!) years (the Su-27 allegedly had one semi-mythical battle in Ethiopia, but with the Soviet Mig-29)
              So, by your logic, it turns out that these aircraft are "meaningless expensive toys"
              1. igor36
                igor36 28 June 2013 10: 00 New
                0
                Quote: Odyssey
                Your logic is strange. But you are aware that the MiG-31 and Su-27 have never been used in combat for 30 (!!!) years (the Su-27 allegedly had one semi-mythical battle in Ethiopia, but with the Soviet Mig-29)
                So, by your logic, it turns out that these aircraft are "meaningless expensive toys"

                The best weapon should be such that for a probable opponent the very fact of its presence would beat off any desire to measure strength. And the price depends on the technological level of production.
              2. Forest
                Forest 28 June 2013 11: 21 New
                0
                The mentioned equipment of generation 4 and 4+ is therefore much lower in price and cheaper to maintain, and I didn’t say anything about generation 4+ whose construction is justified and which "work" in hot spots.
  24. Massik
    Massik 27 June 2013 12: 38 New
    0
    Just be glad it remains let them take their F35 into service, although they will spend more money)
    1. Vadivak
      Vadivak 27 June 2013 16: 56 New
      +2
      Quote: Marssik
      Just be glad it remains let them take their F35 into service, although they will spend more money


      What’s the matter with what and with the dollars, but we have for one paper 1 they give 32,8766 raw
  25. washi
    washi 27 June 2013 12: 40 New
    +4
    Epilogue. Russian aircraft developers should analyze the experience of their Western colleagues. Perhaps the constant evolution of fourth-generation fighter jets is the key to creating the fifth generation of this magnificent vehicle.
    Or maybe you should think about the fact that Boeing is rummaging around in our airlines, and many of our aircraft designers work for them? But the fact that Boeing has taken Our Way (modernization of Su, MiG to the level of many +++++) does not make you think? And the replacement of our civilian aircraft by Boeing?
  26. Uncle Serozha
    Uncle Serozha 27 June 2013 12: 40 New
    +2
    Quote: Uncle Serezha
    Quote: Gray_K
    The most important thing is that we (and the Americans, too, sadly) will accumulate vast experience in the technological field, young engineers will gain knowledge for subsequent developments

    But this is a VERY true idea. If we do not want to become a nation, then we need to work our brains. Continuously. Did not work out? Not scary, experience gained is also a result.
    But if the whole country will be engaged in screwdriver assembly of sliding wardrobes ... If institutes and technical schools will train sales managers, and vocational schools - security guards and prostitutes ... then write is lost.
    I would like to be smart and rugged people. And for this, mind and hands must be applied.
  27. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 27 June 2013 13: 02 New
    +4
    Even though the Americans have a flying saucer in zone 51, why haven’t they gutted it yet? But seriously, apparently the Americans tried to shove all the novelties that they have in one plane, it’s clear that the plane will initially have a lot of “childhood illnesses”, but over time they will probably fix them. You don’t need to throw them with caps, in the end only a real air battle will show who is better.
  28. Chicot 1
    Chicot 1 27 June 2013 13: 28 New
    0
    "Fifth generation" is nothing more than a promoted move in order to pull taxpayers from holding power. They have no real and real, tested and practical advantages over the machines of the previous fourth generation (and even more so 4 ++). So stop naively believing the manufacturers brochures. They, for the sake of a red word, will also not write such tales ...
  29. postman
    postman 27 June 2013 13: 42 New
    +4
    Quote: Author
    to everyone who sponsored a knowingly uncompetitive project.

    obviously uncompetitive - where are the "woods" from? Well, that is, thoughts?
    Docks, reports, assumptions of futurologists (well, the globe finally)
    HOW CAN YOU KNOW what will be known?
    Quote: Author
    - Most of the stated requirements do not meet the needs of modern military aviation.

    и
    Quote: Author
    At the same time, things like hypersound ... still remain in the realm of science fiction.

    Something I didn’t hear, so that the KPM (well, or the Australian Air Force) ordered a hypersonic plane, or did TK for this
    Quote: Author
    And then questions begin. The first of these is why was the F-35 created at all? Formally, to replace the F-16 and F / A-18, as well as the specific AV-8B Harrier II.


    Well, the answer is obvious. Inertia of thinking ... When it was the USSR, with its capabilities
    Quote: Author

    As a result, we have the simplest logical chain:

    1. The new "platform" did not give any advantages - LTH "Lightning" remained at the level of F-16 and F / A-18.

    2. The high-tech “stuffing” of the F-35 does not require the creation of a special carrier for it - all systems
    perfectly integrated into the design of existing machines.

    1. stealth and something else (I will not list)
    2. see. 1 + 3 in 1
    Quote: Author
    There is not even such an interesting feature as a controlled thrust vector — although it would seem that it was time to get a similar system for a long time — even in the “boggy” Russia mass production of fighters equipped with engines with OVTs was launched.

    -And he (UVT / OVT) is really needed (provided that the glider satisfies aerodynamics)?
    -cost price?
    survivability? Life cycle?
    -cost and qualifications for maintenance?
    -qualification of the pilot?
    Who has the thread analyzed this?

    Quote: Author
    the plane “absorbed” even more elements of the stealth technology

    I assure you: he has not “absorbed” anything and cannot “absorb”:
    the same glider
    95% glider materials are the same
    - the bottom badge (container) will glow no worse than outboard arms on the pylons of the external wing suspension (and then “shove” it into it)
    1. postman
      postman 27 June 2013 13: 43 New
      +6
      Quote: Author
      Specific “influxes” appeared on the Silent Hornet hull — conformal fuel tanks providing intercontinental flight range.

      everyone runs with these ctbs, like with a written bag, but there was a smart article by a NASA engineer:
      ON FUI do you need them?
      -99,99% La flies over its territory
      -up to 80% of flight time over its / friendly territory or under the cover of air defense
      - when a situation arises / performing a combat mission, they are dropped by the PTB and La is deprived of flaws, but what about the KPTB? THEY are removed / installed only on the ground
      -intercontinental range and with PTB was easily achievable
      -KPTB worsen LTH LA.

      -expensive, no need (PTB performs the same tasks), BUT BEAUTIFUL AND GLAMOROUS
      Quote: Author
      Here’s such a funny story - the Boeing impromptu created Big Trouble for the F-35 JSF

      competition, you know ... Well, there is no Poghosyan in America, what to do and UVZ does not receive preferences (however UVZ does not get the same)

      Well, then, in principle, the same situation as with the T-50 and variations on the theme of the Su-35 / Mig-29 (35)
      Only it is easier for us, t to go "next", given the errors ...
      Yes, it is correctly spelled "chickens in the fall"
      So far, all the reasoning: the figment of the fantasies of journalists (T-50 will tear to shreds F-22), the analogue "another iPhone killer is released"
      =========
      Overboard were:
      -development of new production lines
      -Breo, radar, other sensors, materials science, etc., that appeared during the development of Ф-35
      -the concept of 3 in 1 (so what is the first pancake with lumps)
      - the system itself of automatic design and diagnosis
      And there weren’t any fights, even "virtual" ones
      Tc statement
      Quote: Author
      F-35 lost the fight
      , no more than a figment of the author’s imagination.
      Threat. I’ve figured out why he is promoting Boeing (and Lockheed’s rhythm)?
      Huh? recourse
      "Shpak has a tape recorder, the ambassador has a medallion", i.e. Yesterday, he (the Author) is harassing aircraft carriers, promoting nuclear submarines, today he has taken on the F-35 ..
      All this is not casual, certainly not "for that"
      1. Santa Fe
        27 June 2013 17: 32 New
        0
        Quote: Postman
        everybody runs with these ctbs, like with a written bag, but there was a clever article by a NASA engineer: DO YOU NEED FUI?

        Bombing remote areas in the absence of serious resistance - when the only obstacle is range

        Ordinary PTBs have less capacity and create more resistance, and dumping them without cause is ruinous (so what if they are empty?).

        Silent-Hornet’s (like the MiG-29СМТ - although the situation is different there, but it seems) are generally built into the top of the fuselage. Like ordinary tanks. Reserve of space.
        Quote: Postman
        So far, all the reasoning: the figment of the fantasies of journalists (T-50 will tear to shreds F-22), the analogue "another iPhone killer is released"

        Samsung Galaxy

        I agree about competition. The advantage of F-35 is not obvious - he will not be allowed to live in peace.
        Quote: Postman
        -development of new production lines
        -Breo, radar, other sensors, materials science, etc., that appeared during the development of Ф-35

        F-35 goes on the thumb.
        All this is a consequence of the work on the "Reptor"
        Quote: Postman
        Yesterday, he (the Author) is harassing aircraft carriers, promoting nuclear submarines, today he has taken on the F-35 ..
        All this is not casual, certainly not "for that"

        It was a Stasi special mission.
        And today I received an order from Mossad - to quit Merkava))))
        Previously often collaborated with the CIA and NSA (operational alias - Edward Snowden)

        The witch hunt is open!
        1. postman
          postman 27 June 2013 18: 25 New
          0
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          The witch hunt is open!

          You twisted as always
          and about KTPB you are not right. There is no less volume there. not at all.
          Where will it fit more into the cylinder with the same length or into something incomprehensible?
          and aerodynamics, yes.

          but the cost is incommensurable
    2. Santa Fe
      27 June 2013 17: 16 New
      0
      Quote: Postman
      HOW CAN YOU KNOW what will be known?

      A single-engine aircraft with low thrust, without ATS, with a high specific wing load (475 kg / m2 versus 520 ... 600 kg / m2 with F-35), whose appearance is "ennobled" by stealth technology - which from it a fighter of the "new generation"?
      Quote: Postman
      Something I didn’t hear, so that the KPM (well, or the Australian Air Force) ordered a hypersonic plane, or did TK for this

      Naturally. The Australian Air Force is fully satisfied with the Hornet family aircraft (cost / result) and the Australian Air Force does not need a “fifth generation” (more precisely, what the F-35 stands for).
      Quote: Postman
      1. stealth and something else (I will not list)

      Silent Hornet, Silent Eagle
      Quote: Postman
      and he (UVT / OVT) is really needed

      Yes, judging by what Su-35 is doing, OBT is a good bonus for close combat
      Quote: Postman
      survivability? Life cycle?
      -cost and qualifications for maintenance?
      -qualification of the pilot?

      no more complicated than AN / AAQ-37 - an all-angle infrared detection system whose sensors are “stuck” with F-35
      Quote: Postman
      the same glider
      95% glider materials are the same

      But what about upgrading the F / A-18C ⇒ F / A-18E
      Quote: Postman
      (and then "shove" it into it)

      4 AIM-120 or AIM-9
      1. postman
        postman 27 June 2013 18: 26 New
        0
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        no more complicated than AN / AAQ-37 - an all-angle infrared detection system whose sensors are “stuck” with F-35

        compared electronics and mechanics of the highest degree of complexity, working around the clock, and even in the "hot shop"
  30. Andrey77
    Andrey77 27 June 2013 14: 08 New
    +1
    “Here’s such a funny story - the Boeing impromptu created the Big Trouble for the F-35 JSF, and now it’s not known how the two aircraft giants will share the tactical aviation market.”
    The author of the article, and from which finger conclusions? Two different firms were created on the model, as we have Kalashnikov and Simonov. They will accept the best.
    1. Santa Fe
      27 June 2013 14: 25 New
      0
      Quote: Andrey77
      They will accept the best.

      Will both
      F-35 - there is no turning back
      Silent Hornet is a real opportunity to save (a full analogue of F-35 at a dumping price). But talking about it out loud cannot be out loud, otherwise a question from taxpayers will follow: WHY F-35 ??
  31. Vlad_Mir
    Vlad_Mir 27 June 2013 14: 18 New
    +3
    Airplane do not underestimate! Finalize, bring to mind and will be a great car! It is clearly being developed for new tactical schemes and weapons. I would take a closer look at it, especially the version soaring vertically.
  32. Andrey Skokovsky
    Andrey Skokovsky 27 June 2013 14: 23 New
    -2
    Quote: Vadivak
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    And what kind of photo?


    This is a rare refuge - the Boeing X-32, which was preparing to be a star of the American aircraft industry and if Yeltsin had not sold them the Yak-141 it would have been


    that’s how it was, they handed over the documents to them, and the specialists at 90 worked for them for a pittance, and damn it anyway they gave birth to some kind of G.!

    this is definitely some kind of rare talent to create eerie ...
    1. patsantre
      patsantre 27 June 2013 14: 41 New
      +4
      And you have a rare talent to freeze thoughtless crap :)
      1. Andrey Skokovsky
        Andrey Skokovsky 28 June 2013 16: 47 New
        +1
        I don’t understand what you do not agree with.

        So that the Americans used our developments when designing their aircraft in 90? Thank you for at least some bucks given but could give nothing at all.

        Or with the fact that when designing this fat penguin, the F-35 used the documentation for the Yak-141?

        Or with the fact that our specialists lured west and left so that they would not bend here? Like, too, is no secret. If they wanted to and money, they could bring any kb to the bud in the United States, and there would be some kind of dry from Michigan, another question is that they didn’t set the task so specifically, or they thought that only stars like the same Jews with their mercava are cooler than Boeing with Locking , again, Putin apparently did not wait ....

        Or do you disagree with the statement “a good plane is a beautiful plane!”?
        I agree somewhat emotionally and vaguely, but there are almost no damn exceptions.

        I advise you to see the F-22 aerobatics, I personally have the impression that a cabinet with wings flies, like a cabinet with wings.
  33. spirit
    spirit 27 June 2013 14: 30 New
    +1
    And I liked the new F18) and I think it is not a direct competitor. 35. Amer just made secure by introducing a transitional link (and rightly so). Over time, they will change the old F18, while the ratio of aircraft in the troops of the F18 / 35 series will gradually go down to 2m. They did everything right. And not how some people like to do. write off the old and the new is still raw !!!!
    1. patsantre
      patsantre 27 June 2013 14: 41 New
      0
      The "old" is still far from old and can be modernized, and when you buy the "transitional link", the dokhrenchika will leave the money, all the more so since the "new" will be ready for production soon, you just have to wait a bit and they have nowhere to rush.
  34. Russ69
    Russ69 27 June 2013 15: 53 New
    0
    The Americans will bring their F-35 to mind sooner or later. but how much will it cost? although having a printing press on hand is permissible for them.
    I imagine what a howl would be if Russia would spend the same dough on the creation of the T-50.
    But in fact, we spent several times less money, and we argue who is cooler.
    So it is necessary to rejoice that it was possible to create an identical aircraft at a minimum price and for a shorter time, compared with mattresses.
    1. Capt.stryker
      Capt.stryker 27 June 2013 16: 34 New
      0
      Quote: Russ69
      The Americans will bring their F-35 to mind sooner or later.

      They will certainly bring it, and God forbid not to know its real possibilities. And then a-ba-sru-t-xa all sorts of Arabs there, not Arabs with the vaunted Su-35s against the F-35s, and severe depressions will happen at the patriots! laughing
      Quote: Russ69
      I imagine what a howl would be now if Russia would spend the same dough on the creation of the T-50

      And who will tell you how much money you really spent on this plane? Moreover, using stolen technology, you can greatly save on research of something fundamentally new.
      Quote: Russ69
      So it’s necessary to rejoice that we managed to create an identical aircraft at the lowest price and for a shorter period

      In less time? With a lag of 20 years, is this a shorter period? fool
      1. Santa Fe
        27 June 2013 20: 04 New
        0
        Quote: Capt.Stryker
        And then a-ba-sru-t-xa all sorts of Arabs there, not Arabs with the vaunted Su-35 against F-35, and a severe depression will happen in the patriots!

        And it will happen to you. After all, you do not have a US citizen passport

        Then why are you rejoicing, wonderful man? The fact that the Yankees can joke to smash your house?
        Quote: Capt.Stryker
        So it’s necessary to rejoice that we managed to create an identical aircraft at the lowest price and for a shorter period
        In less time? With a lag of 20 years, is this a shorter period?

        It began to be created 7-8 years ago. Prior to this, there were no works on the PAK FA theme (MiG 1.44 and Su-37 with “reverse sweep” - dummies for air shows)

        PAK FA will be adopted at least 10 years later, but there is no fault in Russian science here. This has affected the economic and political situation in the country. And your slogans "later on 20 years" - populism and cheap talk

        By the way, can you tell me how many years the Yankees saved thanks to the documentation received on the Yak-141?
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 27 June 2013 21: 35 New
          0
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          By the way, can you tell me how many years the Yankees saved thanks to the documentation received on the Yak-141?

          I think a couple of days were saved, no more ...
        2. Capt.stryker
          Capt.stryker 27 June 2013 21: 57 New
          -2
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          Then why are you rejoicing, wonderful man? The fact that the Yankees can joke to smash your house?

          It’s only in your crazy fantasies that the Yankees are going to bomb my or your house fool

          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          It began to be created 7-8 years ago. Prior to this, there were no works on the PAK FA theme (MiG 1.44 and Su-37 with “reverse sweep” - dummies for air shows)

          Exactly, eccentric! Since the Mikoyanovsk product "1.44" and Sukhov S-37, also Su-47, but not Su-37, turned out to be dead ends, they were forced to follow the path of the Americans at Sukhoi, and they took all the best from F-22 and YF -23, combining them together, adding something already known at that time from the JSF program, the notorious T-50 was piled.
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          And your slogans “20 years later” are populism and cheap chatter

          These are your works - populism and empty, cheap talk am
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          By the way, can you tell me how many years the Yankees saved thanks to the documentation received on the Yak-141?

          Do not be ashamed to lie !? am The Americans did not receive any documentation, actually on the Yak-141 airplane! They officially bought only the swivel assembly for the deflected nozzle! The patent, by the way, belongs to the British. And that picture, such as the Yak-43, which you compare with the X-35, appeared after the appearance in the open press of sketches of JSF projects.
          1. Santa Fe
            27 June 2013 23: 34 New
            +4
            Quote: Capt.Stryker
            It’s only in your crazy fantasies that the Yankees are going to bomb my or your house

            No, they will treat you to ice cream
            Quote: Capt.Stryker
            These are your works - populism and empty, cheap talk

            Then why do you read and comment on them?

            To spend time with greater benefit - learn English and express your enthusiasm in American forums (indigenous amers respect patriotism, but you will treat people like you with sincere misunderstanding and disgust)

            but to constantly blow on the Russian forum about the victories of American weapons - not from a great mind
            Quote: Capt.Stryker
            they were forced to follow the path of the Americans at the dry company, and they took all the best from F-22 and YF-23, combining them together, adding something already known at that time from the JSF program, pile the notorious T-50.

            So, what is next?

            Lockheed Martin has banal more money and opportunities than Sukhoi Design Bureau - the political and economic situation in the Russian Federation and the USA is even different
            Quote: Capt.Stryker
            They officially bought only the swivel assembly for the deflected nozzle! The patent, by the way, belongs to the British.

            And the theoretical basis for "stealth technology" belongs to the Russian scientist Peter Ufimtsev

            What's next? Repeat for the hundredth time: US science and technology are the best !!! Russian and Soviet technology is a backward pile of metal (with which, in principle, I agree - not everything is smooth and often done through the fifth point, there are many miscalculations and problems). But why so self-flagellate? Why repeat the hackneyed truths for the hundredth time and tease everyone with the successes of the American military-industrial complex?
          2. Know-nothing
            Know-nothing 28 June 2013 07: 44 New
            0
            Quote: Capt.Stryker
            They officially bought only the swivel assembly for the deflected nozzle!

            And they looked, looked at him ... and gave to develop Rolls-Royce, which made it based on their past achievements.
  35. Argon
    Argon 27 June 2013 16: 04 New
    +2
    The article is complete nonsense, the author, well, at least, went to an aviation club at school? Obviously, no. Then why write "reviews" of the world media and give them out as your opinion. How can you compare F-18 and F-35, cars in different weight categories. with different number of engines. One can be argued, they will not be competitors in the US armed forces.
  36. Capt.stryker
    Capt.stryker 27 June 2013 16: 22 New
    +4
    Mr. Kaptsov has long proved his fierce hatred of aircraft carriers in general and American in particular, to everyone. Now it is the turn of combat aircraft, and especially the American ones. Let Mr. Kaptsov, “burn” on!
  37. Konsmo
    Konsmo 27 June 2013 16: 39 New
    +2
    All this canoe for boys sitting in flight simulators, around the clock. You need to take radical steps. Such a step is being prepared, cancellation of medium-range missiles, really what is the point of doing thousands of expensive aircraft. We have space and technology, and programmers we have are at least no worse. All airfields should be included in destruction programs. Only defending against air strikes like Serbia or Iraq cannot be defeated. The output must be beaten at the airfields and storage facilities of aircraft and ammunition, as well as crews. When it's all on the earth, not in the air. The enemy must be forced to walk on the ground and then in small dashes. That would not even have thought to bring the plane to taxiing.
    hi But in general, I am for peace, I’m all for good.
  38. vikruss
    vikruss 27 June 2013 17: 29 New
    0
    The article says F 35 is the most sophisticated in terms of electronic systems. The article says how Super Hornet_GROULER, crushed the electronics of the F35th followed by theoretical destruction. This is his weak spot ... It is necessary to create universal systems of radio interference and suppression, like this is already in the plans. Also, the F35 will be fully integrated with satellite target designation ... it will most likely be completely silent and use only passive sensors. If the radar is used, it will be detected. It all comes down to the fact that in the event of a successful rapprochement with this machine, and such options are even very possible as it seems to me, this machine will lose its superiority and will prove to be vulnerable. I am sure that without the support of the AWACS system, F35 will not be used at all. All this super duper electronics is becoming a weak point in these systems. It is necessary to damp into the radio suppression systems ...
  39. Algor73
    Algor73 27 June 2013 17: 30 New
    0
    5th generation airplanes are very science-and technology-intensive. The Americans were the first to encounter a number of problems that are gradually resolving and not always successfully. Russia cannot avoid them either, it is not known how long the T-50 will be required before the series and what kind of concessions and simplifications Russian designers will make. But the Americans have an indisputable advantage - its F-22 and F-35 aircraft are already in the series. There are also doubts about the effectiveness of the 5th generation in the costs of their development. I'm not saying that this is a dead end, but traditional aircraft construction seems to have reached the top of perfection.
  40. KononAV
    KononAV 27 June 2013 17: 35 New
    0
    Wonderful article. Although I don’t really like the USA, the reading about F 18 was pleasant. But the question is different, about its relationship with our Su 30/35
  41. Jurkovs
    Jurkovs 27 June 2013 17: 58 New
    0
    "The debate about" flying in super sound without afterburner "does not matter: firstly, the F-35 is not able to do this. Secondly," supersonic without afterburner "is not a priority for modern aviation."

    Because supersonic without afterburner is not a priority of modern aviation, because the F-35 does not know how to do this. Everything is purely American. I propose to remove cannon weapons from the F-35, in close combat it will not be useful to him and the weight characteristics are spoiled.
    1. Santa Fe
      27 June 2013 18: 29 New
      0
      Quote: Jurkovs
      I propose to remove cannon weapons from the F-35, in close combat it will not be useful to him and the weight characteristics are spoiled.

      There is no built-in gun on the “deck version” of the F-35C and the F-35B VTOL aircraft

      Suspended cannon container visible under F-35 belly
  42. gregor6549
    gregor6549 27 June 2013 18: 23 New
    +3
    I'm not a big flyer specialist and maybe f35 has already lost to someone and in something, but how do you command me to interpret this message?

    “Lockheed Martin’s vice president, Steve O'Brien, who is responsible for the financial part of the fifth-generation F-35 fighter program, said Israel will be the first country to receive new aircraft after the United States.

    According to Aviation Week magazine, a statement was made by O'Brien the day before in Paris, where the Le Bourget international air show is taking place these days.

    The first IDF pilots should arrive for retraining at the US Air Force base "Eglin" at the beginning of the 2016 year. The first F-35I squadron will be handed over to Israel in the 2018 year.

    O'Brien added that each of the eight countries participating in the project will receive its own version of the aircraft, developed in accordance with the wishes of the customer. Other customers will only be able to obtain this version with the permission of the first customer.

    Therefore, all electronic and avionic systems installed on the F-35I by order of the Israeli Ministry of Defense will be exclusive. As an example, the vice president of Lockheed-Martin cited the Spice-1000 missile control units developed by Rafael.

    According to O'Brien, Israel is likely to receive the latest version of AIM-9X short-range air-to-air missiles and Raytheon's mid-range AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles, along with aircraft. At the same time, Rafael is developing a new version of Python rockets specifically for F-35.

    It is also reported that in order to increase the radius of the aircraft, Lockheed Martin is exploring the possibility of using the fired fuel tanks developed by Elbit concern in 425 gallons.

    Note that Israel has become the last country to receive partner status. In addition, the Israeli Ministry of Defense agreed to sign an agreement on the purchase of aircraft only in July 2012, after Lockheed Martin made concessions and agreed to grant Israel permission to install equipment developed by Israeli defense concerns on the F-35.

    The installation of Israeli equipment on F-35 supplied to Israel was one of the main requirements of the IDF. However, until the last moment, the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin did not agree to this requirement, although similar permission was obtained for aircraft of other models (F-15, F-16) purchased in the USA. "

    Those. It turns out that Israel, which is really fighting and is going to fight further, is betting in future wars on a knowingly losing plane? I do not believe, as Stanislavsky would say

    And the fact that they are trying to temporarily compensate for delays in its delivery with other planes, for example, modernized F18, this does not mean that the plane itself is bad. Only time and real fighting can show what he is capable or not capable of. Prior to this, everything that a typical "la la poplar" writes about him
  43. Simon
    Simon 27 June 2013 18: 27 New
    0
    Quote: Denis
    Quote: mansur
    Admire this
    Is he that?
    pregnant

    No, he wants to eat! laughing
  44. Marmon
    Marmon 27 June 2013 19: 27 New
    +3

    And why did they decide that the F-35 should replace the F-18. It was previously written that he will replace the F-16. And they plan to replace the F-18 with this http://dream-air.ru/forum/38-234-9, at least as it was written earlier.
    1. Santa Fe
      27 June 2013 20: 13 New
      0
      And why did they decide that the F-35 should replace the F-18. It was previously written that he will replace the F-16.

      because the F-35 was created in three versions - for the Air Force, for the Navy and the "vertical" for the ILC

      They plan to replace F-18 with this http://dream-air.ru/forum/38-234-9, at least as it was written earlier.

      Dreaming is not harmful
      1. Marmon
        Marmon 27 June 2013 20: 42 New
        +2
        The US Navy issued a request for information on the delivery of a new F / A-XX carrier-based attack aircraft, which will replace the F / A-18E / F Super Hornet and the EA-18G Growler EW aircraft.

        As Rear Admiral Donald Gaddis said at the Navy Association’s annual conference on April 16, the fleet expects the new generation aircraft to reach its initial state of readiness for combat use in 2030. By this time, the Super Hornet fleet will be around 9000 hours.

        According to Janesie International, the request for information provides for the US Navy Aviation Systems Command (NAVAIR) to pre-select applicants for the analysis of alternatives for replacing the F / A-18E / F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler.

        According to the requirements, the new aircraft must perform tasks as part of an aircraft carrier-based aircraft wing (CVW) from aircraft carriers of classes CVN-68 and CVN-78. At the same time, changes in the configuration of the ship and the operating modes of the air units during the operation of new equipment should be minimal.

        F / A-XX is considered as an addition to the F-35C Lightning-2 and unmanned reconnaissance and strike UAVs (probably UCLASS).

        The main tasks of the US Navy F / A-XX are to gain air superiority, strike at ground targets and surface ships, air support, and ensure the isolation of the combat area. Developers should also evaluate the capabilities of the aircraft for reconnaissance and electronic warfare.

        The US Navy intends to consider a wide range of proposals, including unmanned, optionally manned and manned aircraft. These systems are supposed to be considered in the context of their cost and feasibility.

        According to Donald Gaddis, an analysis of alternative technologies, which usually precedes major procurement programs, is likely to be "lengthy" with the aim of conducting various studies on the structure of the wing by 2030. The United States Department of Defense may require an assessment in conjunction with the United States Air Force, which also intends to purchase an FX aircraft to replace the F-22A Raptor.

        Rear Admiral also announced his intention to replace the carrier-based transport aircraft C-2 Greyhound. An analysis of alternatives is underway to develop a replacement plan. The program is planned to be implemented over the next decade following a tender.

        According to some Navy experts, one of the most acceptable options would be to use the Osprey V-22 convertiplanes.
        In addition, the US Navy is due to issue a request for proposals in June as part of the procurement program for the next generation interference transmitter for the EA-18G Growler aircraft. Its delivery is scheduled for 2020.
        1. Santa Fe
          27 June 2013 23: 11 New
          0
          This is the old duck news of 2010 of the year.
          Recalls the story of the A-12 Avenger stealth attack aircraft
          Quote: Marmon
          the fleet expects that the new generation aircraft will reach the state of initial readiness for combat use in the 2030 year.

          and then where to put F-35C, what will reach the state of initial readiness towards the end of this decade?))
    2. Windbreak
      Windbreak 28 June 2013 10: 09 New
      +1
      F-35C should replace F / A-18 Hornet, not Super Hornet
  45. Odysseus
    Odysseus 27 June 2013 19: 30 New
    +4
    An interesting and, as usual, with a twinkle written article by a respected author. But in general, it is difficult to agree with his arguments
    1) In order to create an inconspicuous aircraft, it is not enough to make some changes to a 4-generation aircraft. It must first be designed as inconspicuous.
    For example, the EPR of Super Hornet from the nose was brought up to only 1 sq.m. And even for this it was necessary to create a new airplane in many ways.
    2) The integration of new equipment into 4-generation airplanes is not at all such a simple thing. For example, integration of one AFAR into Typhoon and Rafal will take at least 5 years and not a little money.
    3) In total, at best, from 4-generation aircraft we can get a half-steel in which we constantly need to “implement” something, and for big money. The cost of Rafal, Typhoon, and most likely Silent Hornet is not much different from the cost of F- 35. By the way, precisely because of the high cost (and also because of the length of the runway), the ILC at one time refused Super Hornet.
    4) The juxtaposition of Silent Hornet and Lighting2 .F-35 is not primarily understood as a single strike fighter to replace the F-16, A-10 and then the F-15E in the Air Force and Harrier in the ILC. The program began in the mid-90s, and the versatility of the aircraft was supposed to ultimately contribute to cost savings, since it was not necessary to develop several separate programs. Plus, the mass production should have had a beneficial effect.
    Silent Hornet is a purely exporting feature of the Boeing of the late 2000s. The aircraft, of course, is good, but so far there are no orders for it and it is not known whether it will be not cheap at all. For example, Australia acquired 24 Super Hornets for 2,9 billion. Doll.
    So there is no reason to say that Silent Hornet is an effective and cheap alternative to the F-35.
    1. Santa Fe
      27 June 2013 20: 44 New
      0
      Quote: Odyssey
      In order to create an inconspicuous aircraft, it is not enough to make some changes to the 4 generation aircraft. It must first be designed as inconspicuous.

      If you do not bring the idea to the point of absurdity (F-117, B-2), then all the "stealth" rests on the "three pillars":
      - geometry (parallelism of faces, "sawtooth" joints)
      - radar absorbing coatings
      - careful assembly and special receptions (bezrypletny lamp, etc.)

      Each of these tricks can be implemented on F / A-18E
      Quote: Odyssey
      EPR Super Hornet from the nose brought only up to 1 sq.m.

      Is the standard Super Hornet coated with a multi-layer stealth coating like the F-35?
      Does the hornet have a non-binding flashlight? Hanging stealth container for weapons?

      That's when these things will be introduced into the design - then we’ll see how much less EPR F-35. Most likely, it will be comparable (dimensions are identical, stealth elements are identical)
      Quote: Odyssey
      Integration of new equipment into 4-generation aircraft is not at all such a simple thing. For example, to integrate one AFAR into Typhoon and Rafal, it will take at least 5 years and not a few funds.

      Radars with AFAR are located on many US fighters - F-16 Block 60, new F-15E modifications ...
      The AN / APG-82 combines the processor of the APG-79 used on the F / A-18E / F Super Hornet with the antenna of the APG-63 (V) 3 AESA being fitted on the F-15C

      And the most sophisticated aiming and navigation containers (LANTIRN, LITENING) are dragged by each "dog" of the US Air Force. So the problem with equipment integration is exaggerated
      Quote: Odyssey
      F-35 was primarily created as a single strike fighter to replace the F-16, A-10 and then the F-15E in the Air Force and Harrier in the KMP.

      Replaced?
      1. Odysseus
        Odysseus 28 June 2013 00: 36 New
        0
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        Is the standard Super Hornet coated with a multi-layer stealth coating like the F-35?
        Does the hornet have a non-binding flashlight? Hanging stealth container for weapons?

        That's when these things will be introduced into the design - then we’ll see how much less EPR F-35. Most likely, it will be comparable (dimensions are identical, stealth elements are identical)

        Super Hornet doesn’t have all this, but that’s not the point.
        The fact is that if you create a stealth plane from a 4-generation aircraft, this means to a large extent create a new plane that will not be inferior in price to a stealth plane. The question arises: why do this?
        If you follow this logic, then in the 90s (when the concept was chosen) amers needed to create several alternative projects for stealth 4-generation aircraft. Silent Falcon, Silent Hornet, Silent Eagle, some Silent Harrier. And run all of them in production. As a result, all this would result in some unrealistic amounts. And not the fact that, based on old aircraft, it would be possible to radically reduce the ESR.
        The Americans took a different path: they decided to create a new single unobtrusive aircraft, integrating all the achievements in the field of avionics.
        In my opinion, the solution is logical.
        Another thing is that the creation of a “single” aircraft faced various technical difficulties and its cost exceeded the estimated one.
        But, IMHO, finally we can understand whether the Americans were right only by assessing the real effectiveness and cost of the F-35.
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        So the problem with equipment integration is exaggerated

        Why exaggerated? This can be done, but it’s difficult and expensive. Only a few F-15Cs pulled the AFAR. F-16 block 60, in general, an expensive export aircraft for the rich UAE, the F-15E AFAR equipment program will take a lot of time and will cost a pretty penny. on the F-35 is not only AFAR.
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        Replaced?

        No smile But will replace.
        "-Give only a period, There will be a squirrel for you, there will be a whistle!"
      2. postman
        postman 28 June 2013 03: 57 New
        +2
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        then the whole "stealth" rests on the "three pillars":

        there is one more "kitty": to radiate a wave in antiphase to a source of radio waves.
        The result of adding two sinusoids = the signal received at the receiving antenna will be zero (well, or close to it) and?
        and the radar will not see anything
        Well, if you forget about dualism
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        Radars with AFAR

        well, not the 81st

        (he has a very interesting noise and tsu selection software)
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        So the problem with equipment integration is exaggerated

        ?
        F-18 bus MIL-STD-1553B or MIL-STD-1770. bandwidth, voltage frequency differ from IEEE-1394B (35)
        even more so if in the specification S3200 + ADA
        22 is compatible (or rather will be by 2014) with 35m, but the F-18 is unlikely
  46. dizelniy
    dizelniy 27 June 2013 19: 42 New
    +1
    To such articles you need to add drumming, for greater vigor. Aircraft Sazdan as part of a global reconnaissance and strike system. A specialized aircraft, for strikes against ground targets, an air battle on an equal footing with a specialized fighter is not his element. The aerodynamic design will work for about 40 years, the systems will be brought up and tightened. The mood of the article resembles Voroshilov’s speeches, before the Second World War, we will fight only on the territory of the enemy.
  47. Diviz
    Diviz 27 June 2013 19: 52 New
    0
    who knows what they stuffed in f35. guessing does not make sense. The US Navy plowed the expanses of the Atlantic Pacific Oceans while controlling the actions of the armies of other countries. therefore f35 and unmanned vehicles meet these requirements and the solution to these problems. therefore, I think T50 with this armada is not worth comparing. if they create a pack that can resist this, then we'll see.
  48. Ducksar
    Ducksar 27 June 2013 20: 27 New
    +1
    The look of X-32 is so disgusting that there is no way to publish an illustration without the risk of damaging the psyche of the reader.

    Inadvertently splattered the monitor with tea laughing thanks neighing
  49. Do not care
    Do not care 27 June 2013 20: 30 New
    +1
    All talk goes around the concept of the 5th generation aircraft, which was formulated at the beginning of the 80s.
    F22 is quite consistent with it. PAK FA follows her as well. Dry adheres to the Japanese principle of "do the same, but better and cheaper." Apparently the T-50 will be so.
    But there is one big "BUT":
    In the late 90s, the concept of the 5th generation aircraft has seriously changed. The main element was the distributed system of global information and combat downtime which creates completely new opportunities. F-35 in it is a key link. Creating such a system is an ambitious and very difficult task. The Americans have not yet been able to provide "Real time" functionality. The delay with the conclusion of information to the helmet-mounted display reaches 1 second, which is unacceptably a lot in a real combat situation.
    The 35th program code exceeded 10 million lines (10 cuts more than the 22nd) and requires serious debugging.
    Such problems are the main causes of development delays and consequently rising costs.
    In no other project (F22, PAK FA, Silent Hornet, Silent Eagle) such tasks were set, F-35 is the first here.
  50. sergey158-29
    sergey158-29 27 June 2013 21: 01 New
    0
    I do not see the logic in the article! Consider the T-50 and Su-35: they are similar in terms of thrust-weight ratio, speed, and super-maneuverability. So, someone will say that the T-50 is just an expensive toy, of course not. Since the T-50 is new materials, technologies, equipment (including integrated), engines, etc. Su-35 is the modernization of the Su-27 to the parameters of the 5th generation. Is it possible to oppose them, I think not. I do not pretend to be true ... hi