Military Review

The cessation of production of the F-22 was a catastrophic mistake - the former General of the United States Air Force

165
Former US Air Force Chief of Staff Michael Moseley (pictured), who left his post due to disagreements with Pentagon leadership in 2009, still believes that stopping the serial production of F-22 Raptor fighters was a catastrophic mistake that caused serious damage. US security and its allies, reports janes.com December 5.


“This decision was the most erroneous strategic decision in the last 20-25 years,” the ex-general said during his first public appearance in Washington, DC, after the resignation. In 2008, the Ministry of Defense announced a decision to stop production of the F-22 after the production of the 187 production aircraft, after which in April 2009, General Mosley left his post. Along with him, retired US Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne, who, along with Mosley, argued that it was necessary to have an 381 F-22 to maintain air superiority "over enemy territory."

December 5 Mosley stated that he did not regret that he supported the continuation of the release of fighters of this type and regretted that he had not fought "more actively." The ex-general also said that some US allies, such as Australia, Israel, Japan, and the United Kingdom, could well have acquired F-22 through the US government’s foreign military sales. In his opinion, the new multi-year contract for the production of Raptors could reduce the price of the aircraft to 85 million dollars and even lower, which would correspond to the price of the F-35A Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter.

As expected, the F-35A fighter will enter service with the US Air Force in 2018, by which time its value will drop to 85 million, which is equivalent to 75 million in 2012 prices of the year. F-35A designed as a multipurpose fighter with an emphasis for use as a strike aircraft, F-22 is designed to penetrate enemy airspace to destroy enemy fighters using powerful radar, missiles and a cannon, but the US Air Force has an F-22 capacity-building program as a strike aircraft. Moseley believes that the F-22 and F-35 could operate together in enemy airspace, as the fighters of the previous generation F-15 and F-16 do.

Moseley’s successor, General Norton Schwartz, in April 2009, in collaboration with former US Air Force Secretary Michael Donley, published an article expressing an opinion that would unite supporters and opponents of the cessation of production of F-22 and suggested a compromise number - The 243 vehicles, therefore, the fighters would fill the gap before reaching the initial operational readiness of the F-35A. However, high-level Pentagon officials, while further analyzing the issue, found that the simultaneous production of F-22 and F-35 would be too expensive and decided to close the F-22 production line.

The US Air Force faced severe pressure from then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates (Robert Gates), who questioned the usefulness of the F-22 for use in local conflicts, such as in Afghanistan and Iraq, where there was no need to use them. limited opportunities for striking rebel formations. However, some representatives of the US Air Force noted that although the F-22 is designed to gain air superiority, it is in fact a multi-purpose combat aircraft with a “road map” to increase the air-to-ground potential.

The cessation of production of the F-22 was a catastrophic mistake - the former General of the United States Air Force
Originator:
http://www.militaryparitet.com/
165 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. AVV
    AVV 11 December 2013 15: 14
    +7
    Yes, of course, in recent military conflicts, this machine did not find a place for use, and given the cost and capabilities of this device for use in local conflicts, the Americans themselves made their choice in favor of F-35, and the Americans know how to count money !!! What will happen next, I think we will see soon !!!
    1. sedoii
      sedoii 11 December 2013 17: 37
      +3
      f-22 was abandoned not only because of money, there were also constructive miscalculations that could not be completely eliminated with subsequent upgrades. Some of them appeared on the 35th.
      1. Rav Seren
        Rav Seren 11 December 2013 17: 54
        +1
        No, actually in the machine itself there are no constructive miscalculations. There were some flaws on several plug-in systems - now everything is fixed.
        1. sledgehammer102
          sledgehammer102 11 December 2013 18: 48
          +4
          Quote: Rav-Seren
          Yes, of course, in recent military conflicts, this machine did not find a place for use, and given the cost and capabilities of this device for use in local conflicts, the Americans themselves made their choice in favor of F-35, and the Americans know how to count money !!! What will happen next, I think we will see soon !!!


          This is called the lobby, but in the common people corruption or corruption, when the programs are imposed by corporations on the Pentagon, which in principle does not resist, because it is in the share.

          And Americans are able to count money, but not quite in the sense in which you wrote. The answer will be clear if you read about 2 million homeless children, 30 million poor and homeless people, and also the fact that 55% of all bankruptcies of people are connected with the inability to pay for treatment in a hospital
          1. Rav Seren
            Rav Seren 12 December 2013 10: 58
            -3
            Do not extrapolate Russian realities to the whole normal world.
            And do not read the propaganda of all kinds of fools, because in the USA there are no 2 million homeless children, and the American poor is a person who does not have a separate house, but an apartment of 100 meters and not 2-3, like the average US resident, but only 1 car.
      2. bif
        bif 11 December 2013 23: 11
        +1
        Quote: sedoii
        f-22 refused not only because of money

        Price matters.
        "Today, the F-22 is the most expensive fighter in service in the world. The cost of production of one aircraft is estimated at $ 146,2 million (for 2008), and the full price, taking into account all indirect costs and at the expected volume production - 350 mln.
        Sometimes they say about F-22 that it is “worth its weight in gold”, which literally corresponded to the financial markets for February 2006 of the year - the cost of 19,7 tons of pure gold (weight of empty F-22A) during this period amounted to the same 350 million dollars.
        At the same time, the F-22 is not the most expensive aircraft in the world - the most expensive is the inconspicuous B-2 Spirit bomber, each of which cost the U.S. Air Force without R&D in 1,157 billion dollars, and with R&D in 2,1 billion dollars.
        According to the United States General Audit Office (GAO), at the end of the 2010, the full price of one F-22 aircraft (taking into account the cost of the development program) reached 411,7 million dollars.
        ... for the 2008th fiscal year, the total cost of one flight hour of the F-22, including variable, fixed and other indirect costs, was $ 44, while for the F-259 the same figure was $ 15. USA; "Data from Wiki.
        there were also constructive miscalculations

        There were so many of them that even the latest block 3.1 upgrade did not eliminate them all.
        1. Rav Seren
          Rav Seren 12 December 2013 11: 43
          -2
          No constructive miscalculations were conceptual. There were minor flaws in the oxygen supply system at altitude. and all
    2. Siberian German
      Siberian German 11 December 2013 19: 08
      +2
      you better tell him how much our dermocrats stopped producing - he will immediately stop crying
      1. crazyrom
        crazyrom 8 January 2014 19: 07
        +1
        “This decision was the most erroneous strategic decision in the last 20-25 years.”

        - nifiga like that. The most erroneous decision was to start production of the F-35.
    3. Army1
      Army1 11 December 2013 20: 16
      +3
      In fact, he is right, the same F 15 in terms of combat capabilities and potential is not inferior to F 35, or even surpasses. You will not be full of light fighters, although now the concept of application is changing: drones, false targets, reps, etc.
  2. vlad0
    vlad0 11 December 2013 15: 49
    10
    I hope our top commanders will not make such a mistake with the T-50. There will be 2-3 regiments per district in the series.
    1. avg
      avg 11 December 2013 16: 01
      +6
      I hope our top commanders will not make such a mistake with the T-50.

      The T-50 was initially created as a multi-purpose, including attack aircraft.
      1. Rav Seren
        Rav Seren 11 December 2013 17: 06
        -1
        And this is a mistake - an attempt to combine all the qualities in one machine - always led to trouble
        1. Scoun
          Scoun 11 December 2013 17: 55
          +5
          Quote: Rav-Seren
          And this is a mistake - an attempt to combine all the qualities in one machine

          Or a trend associated with the growth of new technologies and opportunities.
          1. Rav Seren
            Rav Seren 11 December 2013 18: 04
            -26 qualifying.
            Well, what are the new technologies in the Russian Federation? The country cannot create a normal TV. There are no miracles
            1. 1c-inform-city
              1c-inform-city 11 December 2013 18: 18
              10
              And you are aware that the plasma panel was created with us. It just seemed to our leadership unnecessary.
              1. Rav Seren
                Rav Seren 11 December 2013 18: 31
                -5
                It does not matter. It is important that this is not implemented in production. That is, the same thing that this simply was not invented.
                1. tilovaykrisa
                  tilovaykrisa 12 December 2013 10: 38
                  0
                  Yude .......? laughing laughing
                  1. Rav Seren
                    Rav Seren 12 December 2013 11: 44
                    -2
                    Stupid Potsriot? (smart just does not happen)
                2. Scoun
                  Scoun 12 December 2013 11: 41
                  0
                  Quote: Rav-Seren
                  That is, the same thing that this simply was not invented.

                  On yet for self-education and broadening horizons)))
              2. jjj
                jjj 12 December 2013 01: 02
                +1
                I'm not sure about plasma, but our liquid crystals are. Televisions with handsets were good in Novgorod, but they weren’t going to stores
                1. rolik
                  rolik 12 December 2013 01: 12
                  +3
                  Quote: jjj
                  I'm not sure about plasma, but our liquid crystals are. AND

                  1980, the magazine "Young Technician" there clearly and in detail described how ours developed a plasma panel. Moreover, it was told in great detail. Lick, build production and produce. The Japanese are good fellows, in those days, buying and stealing technologies was in their first place. China was still asleep.
                  1. Rav Seren
                    Rav Seren 12 December 2013 10: 59
                    -2
                    The joke is that plasmas were in use in the United States long before 1980.
                    1. rolik
                      rolik 12 December 2013 11: 19
                      0
                      Quote: Rav-Seren
                      The joke is that plasmas were in use in the United States long before 1980.

                      Yah??? And the guide they were in CeSeA in use, if only in "Star Wars" so there, as far as I remember, in general a three-dimensional 3D image. Look, please, in the chronicles of those years, across the United States. Throw off the photo of plasma in mattress use.
                      1. Rav Seren
                        Rav Seren 12 December 2013 11: 45
                        -1
                        Then I ask for a link to the publication of 2Yunny technician "submit
                      2. rolik
                        rolik 12 December 2013 16: 36
                        0
                        Quote: Rav-Seren
                        Then I ask for a link to the publication of 2Yunny technician "submit

                        No question))))) One of these days I'll go to the garage, I have all the "UT" eximplers there (they wrote out, however) I will copy and throw it off for everyone to see.
                        But in response, I would like to see a proof of your words that plasma mattresses had been in use for a long time in 1980))))) If you don’t imagine, you’ll be a complete hmm .... ohm.
                        And all the cowboys in the midwest will say that Rav Seren is the last h ... mo))))
                      3. Rav Seren
                        Rav Seren 12 December 2013 16: 50
                        0
                        The inventor of plasma panels is well known in the world of those involved in it - this is Tsutae Shinoda.
        2. sergey72
          sergey72 11 December 2013 18: 19
          14
          The United States released its last television as far back as 1989 ...
          Quote: Rav-Seren
          The country cannot create a normal TV.
          1. Rav Seren
            Rav Seren 11 December 2013 18: 29
            -6
            Correctly. The USA moved to the next level, when the plasma panel can already be handed over for assembly to China or Indonesia. For USA panels already
            1. sergey72
              sergey72 11 December 2013 18: 51
              +6
              Quote: Rav-Seren
              USA moved to next level when plasma panel

              What level!? belay By the recognition of the Americans themselves, their production of rubble machinery ruined the rudiments of globalization - Japan and South Korea corrupted the rivals ... negative
              1. Rav Seren
                Rav Seren 12 December 2013 11: 01
                0
                The Americans create high technology - one Silicon Valley produces them for an amount exceeding the entire Russian budget. And there are dozens of such valleys in the USA.
            2. sergey72
              sergey72 11 December 2013 18: 51
              +1
              Quote: Rav-Seren
              USA moved to next level when plasma panel

              What level!? belay According to the Americans themselves, their production of household appliances was ruined by the beginnings of globalization - Japan and South Korea gobbled up competitors ... negative
            3. Bort radist
              Bort radist 11 December 2013 19: 13
              +9
              Quote: Rav-Seren
              US moves to next level

              When they themselves cannot reach the ISS and pay tens of millions for the delivery of Russia.
              1. poquello
                poquello 11 December 2013 22: 18
                +2
                Quote: Bort Radist
                Quote: Rav-Seren
                US moves to next level

                When they themselves cannot reach the ISS and pay tens of millions for the delivery of Russia.

                What are you, what are you, they have placed the delivery, still Here we have placed the production of Russian engines in Russia, they would have placed the production of new Russian engines, but the infection will not allow them to export.
                1. Rav Seren
                  Rav Seren 12 December 2013 11: 48
                  -3
                  Not to production, but to ASSEMBLY. And why not place a screwdriver assembly in such a raw materials appendage as the Russian Federation? They are located in China, India and other underdeveloped countries. RF - exactly the same.
              2. Rav Seren
                Rav Seren 12 December 2013 11: 47
                -1
                Yes, why not rent - since there is a cheap price? And they themselves created the new Dragon shuttle - many times more efficient and roomy soviet antiques.
          2. 77bob1973
            77bob1973 11 December 2013 20: 38
            +4
            And for the past 20 years, it has been purchasing rocket engines in Russia.
            1. Rav Seren
              Rav Seren 12 December 2013 16: 51
              -1
              Sometimes he buys cheaply several engines for one of the stages of the Atlas. And why not buy 0 if they sell cheaply?
        3. sledgehammer102
          sledgehammer102 11 December 2013 18: 52
          14
          Quote: Rav-Seren
          Well, what are the new technologies in the Russian Federation? The country cannot create a normal TV. There are no miracles

          Therefore, now in space the most advanced telescope flies, abruptly the Hubble ??
          Or because the important parts for Boeing and Airbus are we doing?
          Or because our rocket engines are snapping up like hot cakes
          Or because we are building the most advanced icebreakers and nuclear submarines?
          The list is actually very long)))
          1. Muadipus
            Muadipus 11 December 2013 23: 01
            +6
            The list is actually very long
            +1 it is unrealistically long

            And in Russia the most beautiful Women are "produced" :)
            1. Muadipus
              Muadipus 12 December 2013 01: 25
              +2
              By the way, the vaunted Americans still cannot master the production technology of beautiful women. Import the finished product from other countries.
          2. Rav Seren
            Rav Seren 12 December 2013 11: 51
            0
            For Boeing in Russia, folding tables and lids for toilets are made
            And it’s not launching anything particularly cool into space.
            And Americans buy rocket engines in a single number for one of the stages of the Atlas only because the Russian Federation sells them at a price below cost — and the United States has no less reliable and powerful engines - on the Atlas with 3 stages of 16 engines - 1 5 American
        4. Prinse
          Prinse 11 December 2013 19: 03
          +1
          We can create, but do not always use and find application, unlike the United States, where everything goes into business.
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 11 December 2013 18: 24
      0
      In fact, stealth, by definition, is aimed at shock functions.
    3. Andrey Skokovsky
      Andrey Skokovsky 11 December 2013 18: 49
      +3
      Quote: Rav-Seren
      And this is a mistake - an attempt to combine all the qualities in one machine - always led to trouble

      it depends on who is trying to connect ...........
    4. Prishtina
      Prishtina 11 December 2013 23: 36
      +2
      however, like double surnames with nicknames laughing
  • Rav Seren
    Rav Seren 11 December 2013 17: 05
    -11 qualifying.
    First you need to CREATE it yet. For at the moment there are only a few PROTOTYPES. And nothing is clear either with engines, or with weapons, or with avionics. Moreover, it is not clear that with the hull, which some TsAGI experts consider imperfect - because of which, for all the time of flights, only once for a short time did you decide to fly at super sound speed
    1. my opinion
      my opinion 11 December 2013 18: 14
      +7
      The expert is a clown!
      1. Rav Seren
        Rav Seren 11 December 2013 18: 17
        -28 qualifying.
        Yes, those who firmly believe in the creation of the T-50 in the country, who can’t even create their own vacuum cleaner, are like clowns
        1. Midshipman
          Midshipman 11 December 2013 18: 26
          +6
          T-50 has long been created, do not get the hell out of your head
          1. Rav Seren
            Rav Seren 11 December 2013 18: 35
            -15 qualifying.
            No. There are PAK FA Prototypes. Without appropriate engines, avionics and weapons. And during the test only once for a few minutes, and then the speed of sound was overcome at the afterburner. Now, when there are thousands of trials flying at the speed of sound, there will be thousands of trials, when avionics will be completely ready and tested - and it has not yet been created as a system, here when weapons will be created and tested - and there is none yet, when all these 4 components - a glider. avionics, weapons and engines will be assembled and tested together and 2-3 thousand full-fledged test flights will take place - then we can say. that the T-50 is CREATED. Well, i.e. in 10-12 years minimum
            1. Chervonets
              Chervonets 11 December 2013 19: 01
              +4
              Proof come on that "And during the tests, only once for a few minutes and then the speed of sound was overcome with the afterburner."
            2. Scoun
              Scoun 12 December 2013 11: 36
              +1
              Quote: Rav-Seren
              Without appropriate engines

              Keep the appropriate engines for the Americans))
        2. dimon-media
          dimon-media 11 December 2013 18: 55
          +4
          Quote: Rav-Seren
          Yes, those who firmly believe in the creation of the T-50 in the country, who can’t even create their own vacuum cleaner, are like clowns

          As you put it, in this country of clowns, you yourself live, judging by the flag. Cargo delivery to the ISS - Russia. Delivery of foreign satellites - Russia. Atomic icebreaker fleet- Only in Russia. We are the first everywhere. Including the radio was invented in Russia, Popov. By the way, TV was also invented in Russia:
          As it turned out, there are several "parents" at the TV. In 1907, in Russia, the professor of the St. Petersburg Institute of Technology Boris Rosing created a device with a cathode-ray tube and filed patent applications in Germany, England and Russia. But then this invention was not applied in practice. The fate of the professor was generally tragic: in 1931 Rosing was repressed and exiled to Arkhangelsk, where he died. More fortunate was his assistant Vladimir Kozmich Zvorykin, who sensibly judged that nothing good would come from the Soviet regime, and in 1918 he emigrated to the United States, where he lived a long life (Vladimir Kozmich died in 1982 at the very respectable age of 92) ... It is Zvorykin who is often called "the father of television", because it was he who invented the iconoscope for the television camera and the kinescope for the television receiver. However, Zvorykin himself assessed his merits modestly. "I invented a picture tube and I do not pretend to anything else! Everything else is empty newspaper talk," he said. However, not everything went smoothly in their new homeland, in America - American businessmen were in no hurry to invest in Zvorykin's developments. A whole ten years passed before they became interested in the inventions of Vladimir Kozmich. In 1928, Zvorykin met the head of the Radio Corporation of America (RCA), a former Russian citizen, David Sarnov. Sarnov became interested in Zvorykin's developments and invested about $ 50 million in them. By the way, by that time in the United States and in some European countries, television broadcasting had already begun using mechanical systems that made it possible to transmit elementary images with low definition.
          to say nothing about it, even if to this day Western gunsmiths and the whole world in general cannot create an analogue to the Kaoashnikov assault rifle! Of course, in the aspect of the RELIABILITY and cheapness of this weapon.
          ZY .. and you say clowns .. you do not generalize yourself with others. It's just that some individuals at the helm, standing in some spheres and departments, were engaged in bribes, kickbacks and cuts, not seeing profitability in some things and "working" for their own selfish interests.
        3. Tambov we ...
          Tambov we ... 11 December 2013 18: 59
          +9
          New troll on the site - welcome, the old ones have already banged everyone.
          1. Bort radist
            Bort radist 11 December 2013 19: 16
            +5
            Quote: We are from Tambov ...
            New troll on the site -

            Yes it is the same, in a different wrapper lol
        4. Dim Dimych
          Dim Dimych 11 December 2013 20: 03
          +7
          Rabbi Seren "Yes, those who firmly believe in the creation of the T-50 in the country, who cannot even create their own vacuum cleaner, are like clowns."
          The fool is cardboard, but why do we need to make a vacuum cleaner, or a TV ??? Let the Chinese collect these "vital consumables" for a cup of rice, and we will focus on higher technologies!
          1. Muadipus
            Muadipus 11 December 2013 23: 12
            +5
            I heard that ... In Turkmenistan, in the work of the great Turkmen leader, the first Turkmen resident Saparmurat Niyazov, in the book "Rukhnama" it is written that God, the Japanese created specifically for the Turkmens, so that the Japanese for the Turkmens, did TVs. Here - I understand that)) national identity))
        5. Scoun
          Scoun 12 December 2013 11: 33
          +1
          Quote: Rav-Seren
          Yes, those who firmly believe in the creation of the T-50 in the country, who can’t even create their own vacuum cleaner, are like clowns

          Clown, this is what your beloved Americans say about their Raptor and our "not the most" plane.
    2. 1c-inform-city
      1c-inform-city 11 December 2013 18: 19
      0
      Names of specialists in the studio.
    3. Andrey Skokovsky
      Andrey Skokovsky 11 December 2013 18: 58
      +6
      Quote: Rav-Seren
      First you need to CREATE it yet. For at the moment there are only a few PROTOTYPES. And nothing is clear either with engines, or with weapons, or with avionics. Moreover, it is not clear that with the hull, which some TsAGI experts consider imperfect - because of which, for all the time of flights, only once for a short time did you decide to fly at super sound speed

      an unaddressed lover of the West and a cadet of all Russian,
      I can assure you that the T-50 is already the pride of the country and will undoubtedly be brought to mass production,
      moreover, this is probably not even one of the best, but the best aircraft of planet Earth in the foreseeable future, the history of its predecessors allows us to so categorically affirm.
    4. Dim Dimych
      Dim Dimych 11 December 2013 20: 00
      +4
      Rabbi Seren: "Moreover, it is not clear what happened to the hull, which a number of TsAGI specialists consider imperfect, which is why, during the entire flight period, only once for a short time they decided to fly at super sound speed" (a link to the studio ...) If of course this is not your fantasy ???

      And here's another "healthier" link:
      “Once one of the leaders of TsAGI said that our aerodynamics were the first in the world to solve the problem of opening the hatches and launching missiles at supersonic flight modes. If so, the PAK FA already has superiority over the Yankee F-22 fighter. the American will definitely give way to our T-50 only due to the super-maneuverability of the PAK FA. Moreover, the thrust vector engines will allow the pilot to use a number of anti-missile maneuvers that no fighter can perform today. " (http://pro-samolet.ru/blog-pro-samolet/287-istrebitel-pak-fa-t-50)
    5. Prishtina
      Prishtina 11 December 2013 23: 46
      +4
      several PROTOTYPES
      and how many should there be? 2010-2014 do you think?
      engines, neither with weapons nor with avionics
      I have 3 options ... choose
      - you are lazy and you are too lazy to read information on the object of your "sketch"
      - you are not able to digest what you read. the analytical half suffers GM
      - chronic idiocy (due to the fact that show the design bureau even with us, at least at the test stage they will tell the average person electronically, etc.)
      Moreover - it is not clear what about the case, which is a number of TsAGI specialists
      options again
      1. read the history of KB Sukhoi and specifically T-10
      2. google to help .. for the attentive on Max they said why the lining
      sound speed
      it’s for you personally Bogdan, Poghosyan reported lol or insider in the General Staff of the Russian Federation bully ??
  • clidon
    clidon 11 December 2013 17: 12
    0
    The T-50 is too expensive to be made the main air force machine. As Poghosyan said, he will be glad if the Air Force purchases it in quantities exceeding 100 aircraft, and most likely this number is about 200 fighters. While the role of a cheap add-on will be played by the Su-35, then, apparently, the development of a cheaper 5th generation aircraft will begin.
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 11 December 2013 18: 25
      -3
      With 100 machines, it makes no sense to communicate.
      1. Cherdak
        Cherdak 11 December 2013 18: 47
        +2
        It is planned that the market for T-50 family fighters (including FGFA) will be about 600 aircraft:
        200 units for the Russian Air Force,
        200 - for the Indian Air Force
        200 - export
      2. clidon
        clidon 11 December 2013 19: 03
        0
        120-130 cars are not so few. Plus export, plus the accumulation of technology.
    2. alone
      alone 11 December 2013 22: 55
      +1
      Only borsch on the working dining room is cheap. laughing
    3. Onyx
      Onyx 12 December 2013 00: 16
      0
      Quote: clidon
      While the role of a cheap add-on will be played by the Su-35, then, apparently, the development of a cheaper 5th generation aircraft will begin.

      A new light fighter is being developed in Russia
      1. clidon
        clidon 12 December 2013 05: 44
        +1
        Where and by whom? At least officially, the development of a new 5th generation car was not announced.
  • vadson
    vadson 11 December 2013 15: 58
    +9
    in principle, one with two pondering heads in the pentagon is smaller and easier for us. I hope some stubborn McCain came to the place of this general
    1. Rav Seren
      Rav Seren 11 December 2013 17: 07
      -9
      It can hardly be called a thinking general who does not think with his head.
  • Nevsky_ZU
    Nevsky_ZU 11 December 2013 15: 58
    +5
    Robert Gates (Robert Gates), who questioned the usefulness of F-22 for use in local conflicts, such as in Afghanistan and Iraq, where there was no need to use them, and the plane itself has limited ability to strike at insurgents.


    Common sense won in America? Potential targets for F-22:
    1. seller trucks
      seller trucks 11 December 2013 16: 05
      +3
      Quote: Nevsky_ZU
      Common sense won in America? Potential targets for F-22:


      (+) base of terrorists?
      1. 0255
        0255 11 December 2013 16: 42
        +2
        Quote: seller trucks
        Quote: Nevsky_ZU
        Common sense won in America? Potential targets for F-22:


        (+) base of terrorists?

        this is a WMD warehouse that the late Saddam Hussein sold to the late Bin Laden wassat The Americans blamed Hussein for this. Of course, nonsense, but no matter what you do for the sake of oil
        1. Rav Seren
          Rav Seren 11 December 2013 17: 58
          -26 qualifying.
          But in Iraq, after all, they found WMDs. And in large quantities.
          1. AlNikolaich
            AlNikolaich 11 December 2013 18: 19
            +7
            Quote: Rav-Seren
            But in Iraq, after all, they found WMDs. And in large quantities.

            Here is the news !!!! Where does infa come from? Share ...
            Links to the studio! (If you didn’t come up with it yourself).
            1. sergey72
              sergey72 11 December 2013 18: 31
              +5
              Quote: AlNikolaich
              Links to the studio! (If you didn’t come up with your own

              Do not pay attention, dear - because Rav-Seren is translated from Hebrew as a major ... comments, as they say, are superfluous ...
              1. AlNikolaich
                AlNikolaich 11 December 2013 18: 40
                +5
                Quote: sergey72
                Do not pay attention dear -

                Then I’ll slam him for a lie. Will know!
              2. Cherdak
                Cherdak 11 December 2013 18: 49
                +4
                Quote: sergey72
                because Rav-Seren is translated from Hebrew


                Seren bothers me lol

                He has a clear spill of ventricular bile
            2. rolik
              rolik 12 December 2013 11: 43
              0
              Quote: AlNikolaich
              Here is the news !!!!

              So Onet (Rav Seren) found)))) I walked along the banks of the Rio Grande River and, suddenly, looks ... both at the WMD !!!! Which Sadam sold to Ben, who transported him to Rio Grande so that no one would find))))) This is what happens when hallucinogens are abused in large quantities. I, like a doctor, advise you my friend, a siphon enema, 5 liters, it helps a lot as a means of indirect exposure to the head through the seat))))
            3. Rav Seren
              Rav Seren 12 December 2013 11: 52
              0
              All information on the website of the UN Chemical Weapons Control Agency, which also refers to WMD
          2. andrei332809
            andrei332809 11 December 2013 18: 44
            +5
            Quote: Rav-Seren
            But in Iraq, after all, they found WMD

            yeah, nuclear weapons-medieval core fool
            1. Rav Seren
              Rav Seren 12 December 2013 11: 51
              -3
              Not nuclear, but chemical
          3. IGS
            IGS 11 December 2013 20: 30
            +5
            WMD in Iraq is abruptly banal green men belay ... For your information: today is 2013, not 2002. You do not save yourself at all, I understand, everything is "in the name" and "exclusively for", but tie it up with psychedelics, and with "smoking" too.
            PS Either the trolyonok is really new, and does not understand where he got. laughing
            1. IGS
              IGS 11 December 2013 21: 45
              0
              Or I don’t understand, he has 3 advantages there ....
          4. Prishtina
            Prishtina 11 December 2013 23: 49
            0
            wassat
            alternative reality .. smoke less grass.
          5. Muadipus
            Muadipus 12 December 2013 00: 26
            0
            What weapons of mass destruction? If you call the Americans weapons of mass destruction, what are they sneaking around there ... so the whole world knows about this "WMD".
          6. Sergey Sitnikov
            Sergey Sitnikov 12 December 2013 03: 47
            +1
            So in the kindergarten, or in elementary school, not the smartest children attract everyone's attention, however, achieving only condescending neglect
  • patsantre
    patsantre 11 December 2013 16: 00
    +2
    F-22 is of little use in local conflicts against any govnostanov (which is fixable by modernization). But only against which Papuans they were going to build 2500 F-35?
    1. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 11 December 2013 16: 19
      +5
      Quote: patsantre
      But just what kind of Papuan are they going to build 2500 F-35?

      The expiration date of the previous generation is coming to an end, all licking want to update the park
    2. 0255
      0255 11 December 2013 16: 58
      0
      But just what kind of Papuan are they going to build 2500 F-35?

      there will always be Papuan, whom the American president wants to bomb.
    3. clidon
      clidon 11 December 2013 17: 13
      -2
      F-35 will become the main machine, what does Papuan have to do with it?
    4. patsantre
      patsantre 12 December 2013 00: 03
      0
      This was a rhetorical question. The fact that the F-22 is not suitable for locales is not an excuse. Because 2500 F-35 is also not for locales. And the F-15, which must be replaced by 22, is much more than 187.
  • makarov
    makarov 11 December 2013 16: 00
    +2
    Oooo. I then thought it was suffering for the power, but it is only for the sake of grannies not received laments.
  • ALEXXX1983
    ALEXXX1983 11 December 2013 16: 00
    +3
    In my opinion, they made a mistake much earlier)))
    Why do we need an ultra-expensive small-batch airplane?
    Ours, with an eye to export, are doing, and cheaper.
    1. Rav Seren
      Rav Seren 11 December 2013 17: 28
      -10 qualifying.
      It’s always good to have a plane that can deal alone with a dozen rivals before they even discover it.
      1. AlNikolaich
        AlNikolaich 11 December 2013 18: 43
        +4
        Quote: Rav-Seren
        It’s always good to have a plane that can deal alone with a dozen rivals before they even discover it.

        What brand of aircraft do you name? It’s interesting!
      2. dimon-media
        dimon-media 11 December 2013 19: 08
        +3
        Where? Who discovered whom? Do not be unfounded; present facts from independent and non-pro-Western sources. I am somewhat annoyed by the association "All Russian is bullshit". At least in the field of weapons do not draw such conclusions. I will not undertake to assert that the American Raptor-bullshit is skiing, it is a normal plane, but not the best!
      3. Bort radist
        Bort radist 11 December 2013 19: 20
        +8
        Quote: Rav-Seren
        who can deal alone with a dozen

        en-2 bully wassat tongue
  • alexng
    alexng 11 December 2013 16: 10
    +3
    Oh yeah! If the FU-22 had not been stopped, then how many flying pans would there be. Americans are afraid to use it, since all its worthlessness will appear in a war with a serious adversary and the moodiness of this raptor-traitor breaks all records.
    1. Rav Seren
      Rav Seren 11 December 2013 17: 56
      -9
      No one Raptor is afraid to use. A magnificent car, an order of magnitude superior to everything that has been created in the world at the moment.
      1. 1c-inform-city
        1c-inform-city 11 December 2013 18: 23
        +5
        And what is he so famous for. Maybe the most expensive flight hour? Or the fact that a third of the aircraft is unsuitable for flights?
      2. Midshipman
        Midshipman 11 December 2013 18: 30
        +1
        If they weren’t afraid, they would use it while they use the good old F-15 and the myth called “F-22”
        1. patsantre
          patsantre 12 December 2013 00: 07
          0
          Because against the Papuans his capabilities are not needed.
          1. Midshipman
            Midshipman 12 December 2013 13: 45
            -2
            Well, then why is it needed at all? America has no natural enemies against which it could use its capabilities. This is the most expensive military aircraft that has not made a single sortie, which is also morally obsolete in a few years.
      3. AlNikolaich
        AlNikolaich 11 December 2013 18: 45
        -1
        Quote: Rav-Seren
        No one Raptor is afraid to use. A magnificent car, an order of magnitude superior to everything that has been created in the world at the moment.

        Where does the information come from? What are the best characteristics? And who uses besides the USA?
      4. dimon-media
        dimon-media 11 December 2013 19: 12
        +1
        Quote: Rav-Seren
        No one Raptor is afraid to use. A magnificent car, an order of magnitude superior to everything that has been created in the world at the moment.

        You would go as a military expert analyst. Although to the point .. computer programs show the opposite. Raptor loses aerial battles to Russian cars.
        1. patsantre
          patsantre 12 December 2013 00: 05
          -1
          What are you talking about? What the fuck are air battles with Russian cars, a dreamer?
      5. samoletil18
        samoletil18 11 December 2013 19: 57
        +2
        Quote: Rav-Seren
        No one Raptor is afraid to use. A magnificent car, an order of magnitude superior to everything that has been created in the world at the moment.

        Regarding the loss of one in Jordan, it has already been hinted at the presence of the S-300 in Syria. And there were also sources that Syrian MiGs were spinning there, not that -29, not that -23. Some of these three are to blame. Otherwise, the F-22 could not die, it is "an order of magnitude superior to everything ..."
        1. clidon
          clidon 11 December 2013 20: 00
          +2
          F-22 in Jordan lost only Iranian television. )
          1. poquello
            poquello 11 December 2013 23: 03
            +2
            Quote: clidon
            F-22 in Jordan lost only Iranian television. )

            "According to the Los Angeles Times, the loss of a modern F-22 aircraft in northern Jordan, where five F-22s are located, was the main reason the US delayed its aggression against Syria."
            then explain where it scattered, but for now we’re watching ads

            1. clidon
              clidon 12 December 2013 05: 46
              0
              And the Los Angeles Times took the information from the Syrian channel, and those from the Iranian. Already disassembled and, in my opinion, on this site. It also mentioned the shooting down of the Tomahawks. )
              1. poquello
                poquello 12 December 2013 19: 50
                +1
                Quote: clidon
                And the Los Angeles Times took the information from the Syrian channel, and those from the Iranian. Already disassembled and, in my opinion, on this site. It also mentioned the shooting down of the Tomahawks. )

                Give the link, I'm tired of looking for this refutation.
              2. The comment was deleted.
        2. alone
          alone 11 December 2013 22: 57
          +2
          Well, yes, you surprised at all. The old instant-23 could bring down the F-22)) You are like an adult, but still believe in oriental tales.
          1. samoletil18
            samoletil18 12 December 2013 07: 16
            0
            I just listed those mentioned in the media. And hinted at the failure of technology. The story is painfully dark.
      6. Dim Dimych
        Dim Dimych 11 December 2013 20: 08
        +1
        Rav-Seren: "No one is afraid to use the Raptor. A magnificent machine, which is an order of magnitude superior to anything that has been created in the world at the moment."

        Straight all went bile from envy that F22 is a "boy" in comparison with the "serious uncle" T50!
        Go on, maybe sooner, or pozno and gov ... about all you will come and disappear ...))!
      7. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 11 December 2013 22: 26
        +1
        Quote: Rav-Seren
        No one Raptor is afraid to use. A magnificent car, an order of magnitude superior to everything that has been created in the world at the moment.

        Not so long ago, Rafal drove him.
  • VADEL
    VADEL 11 December 2013 16: 12
    +4
    It was not worth it to worry so much about tearing hair on his head. laughing
  • Stiletto
    Stiletto 11 December 2013 16: 26
    +3
    Even for America, the production of the F-22 proved to be an overwhelming burden. And the attempt to shift the costs onto the "partners" was also unsuccessful. So stopping production was not a political but rather an economic decision. But don't be upset, dear Comrade Moseley. As they say, everything that is done is for the best. In the case of the F-22, this phrase is generally accurate.
    But Russia, by the way, is starting to create a new light fighter - and this is good news. I hope that soon this info will appear on the VO website.
    1. Rav Seren
      Rav Seren 11 December 2013 17: 26
      -12 qualifying.
      The Americans did not try to shift the costs of the Raptor to the Allies - he was even banned from exporting.
      And for a light fighter in the Russian Federation - all this garbage, excuse me - let them first create the T-50
      1. Stiletto
        Stiletto 11 December 2013 17: 44
        +1
        Quote: Rav-Seren
        The Americans did not try to shift the costs of the Raptor to the Allies - he was even banned from exporting.


        I have not written anywhere that "the Americans tried to shift Raptor Costs on allies "- I was talking about trying to shift costs to" partners "- these are somewhat different things.

        Quote: Rav-Seren
        And for a light fighter in the Russian Federation - all this garbage


        - Do not be lazy, look at my post below - not garbage. Or look in open sources - this is indeed stated by Rogozin.

        Quote: Rav-Seren
        let the T-50 first create


        - It has already been created, five pieces are flying. Yes, these are prototypes, but they will go into production in any way.
        1. Rav Seren
          Rav Seren 11 December 2013 17: 52
          -11 qualifying.
          You are wrong:
          1. The Americans initially created the Reptor on their own, without partners
          2. That's it - and once Rogozin said - all this is a priori garbage
          3. Do not confuse the prototype PAK FA with the T-50 aircraft. And the prototype, for all time only once exceeding the speed of sound, and even then on the afterburner, which does not have avionics, weapons, or engines that correspond specifically to the 5th generation, cannot go into series. What series can we talk about if the engine is going to him in 2015 only START TO DO?
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 11 December 2013 18: 27
            +2
            A suitable engine is already there. They are going to make the engine better when you are already worried about something ...
          2. 1c-inform-city
            1c-inform-city 11 December 2013 18: 33
            +1
            And whose engines are f22?
          3. vadson
            vadson 11 December 2013 20: 22
            +4
            a priori you are a balabol, not a single evidence, not a single link. only unfounded groaning and licking of the Yankee experience. do not erase the tongue.
            Conclusion Troll Detected
            1. poquello
              poquello 11 December 2013 23: 24
              +1
              Quote: vadson
              a priori you are a balabol, not a single evidence, not a single link. only unfounded groaning and licking of the Yankee experience. do not erase the tongue.
              Conclusion Troll Detected

              He is not a balabol, he is a malicious Troll. Such a narrow horizons and degree of obstinacy DO NOT HAPPEN. Having fun, you guessed right.
  • FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 11 December 2013 16: 42
    +2
    Amerov’s corruption in their defense industry is our natural allies. More of them, more. And our embezzlers are their allies.
  • yurii p
    yurii p 11 December 2013 16: 48
    0
    "The termination of the production of the F-22 was a catastrophic mistake - ex-general of the US Air Force" .... more such mistakes, you look in the world less blood would be shed, otherwise, like vampires, they want more and more blood.
  • Nitarius
    Nitarius 11 December 2013 16: 49
    -1
    Do NOT relax! if you abandoned this MACHINE-- it means they are preparing another with the best features!
  • 0255
    0255 11 December 2013 16: 50
    +6
    maybe their general was frightened by the tests of the PAK FA and the new modifications of the Su-35 and Su-30? So you decided to resume production of Raptors?
    1. Rav Seren
      Rav Seren 11 December 2013 17: 29
      -18 qualifying.
      And before the creation of the T-50, there were still many many years. And the Su-35s and 30s are not opponents of the Raptor: they do not pull
      1. 0255
        0255 11 December 2013 17: 57
        +7
        if the Americans say that the Su-30 and Su-35 are not rivals of the F-22, this does not mean that it is.
        1. Rav Seren
          Rav Seren 11 December 2013 18: 01
          -13 qualifying.
          This is not the Americans say, this is our say. They say at least the fact that 30 and 35 lost all the tenders in which they participated - no one wants to take them
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 11 December 2013 18: 28
            +5
            You did not work 500 p. you write too obvious nonsense.
          2. 1c-inform-city
            1c-inform-city 11 December 2013 18: 37
            +3
            I wonder how many tenders lost su 30? name it. Su 35 has not yet been noticed in tenders, it hasn’t been offered much.
            1. 0255
              0255 11 December 2013 21: 38
              +2
              Quote: 1c-inform-city
              I wonder how many tenders lost su 30? name it. Su 35 has not yet been noticed in tenders, it hasn’t been offered much.

              The Su-35 was offered to South Korea at the beginning of the 15s, the Koreans took the F-15K, created on the basis of the F-XNUMXE. But it is unlikely that the Russian fighter had a chance to get into the air force of the pro-American state
          3. AlNikolaich
            AlNikolaich 11 December 2013 18: 52
            +1
            Quote: Rav-Seren
            This is not the Americans say, this is our say

            And who is YOUR ??????
            I will add from Sergey72:
            Rav-Seren translated from Hebrew major ... comments, as they say, are unnecessary ...So YOURS then who?
          4. Bort radist
            Bort radist 11 December 2013 19: 24
            0
            Quote: Rav-Seren
            this is our say.

            Yours say so Rav in Seren.
          5. samoletil18
            samoletil18 11 December 2013 20: 05
            +2
            Quote: Rav-Seren
            This is not the Americans say, this is our say. They say at least the fact that 30 and 35 lost all the tenders in which they participated - no one wants to take them

            Especially china fool
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. Prishtina
        Prishtina 11 December 2013 23: 52
        +1
        why do not pull it ???
        only up the road ... laughing
    2. alone
      alone 11 December 2013 22: 58
      0
      Quote: 0255
      maybe their general was frightened by the tests of the PAK FA and the new modifications of the Su-35 and Su-30? So you decided to resume production of Raptors?


      Their general is retired. And to resume production is not the competence of the general, especially retired))
  • saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm 11 December 2013 16: 52
    0
    Quote: Stiletto
    Even for America, the production of the F-22 was an overwhelming burden.

    Probably the United States simply does not need this aircraft at this time. Who will gain dominance in the sky?
    1. Stiletto
      Stiletto 11 December 2013 17: 15
      +1
      Quote: saturn.mmm
      Probably the United States simply does not need this aircraft at this time. Who will gain dominance in the sky?


      Mikhail, in the long term, Russia, China are preparing very, very worthy rivals for the Raptor, I would not discount India either. If we talk about the current state of affairs, if we do not take into account the principle of invisibility (a very controversial principle, by the way), Russia already has, albeit in small numbers, cars that can at least compete on equal terms with the F-22 in the fight for the sky.
      And this is only one side of the issue concerning aviation. We shouldn't forget about the air defense and aerospace defense, too, the flight over our territory today is deadly for the Raptor, Molniya and Orlov in any of their modifications. But our new complexes are on the way, and for the Yankees it should be a wake-up call that their quality is finally turning into quantity, we are no longer talking about single copies.
      So the United States has a need, in my opinion. But the possibilities are a big question.
      1. andrei332809
        andrei332809 11 December 2013 17: 44
        +7
        Quote: Stiletto
        Russia already has, albeit in small numbers, cars capable of at least equal competition with the F-22 in the fight for heaven.

        1. Stiletto
          Stiletto 11 December 2013 17: 53
          +3
          Andrey, thanks for the video. "The Russian test pilot offered to conduct a mock battle. No one was willing to accept the challenge." In a real battle, the F-22, by the way, has never yet participated.
          1. andrei332809
            andrei332809 11 December 2013 18: 01
            +1
            Quote: Stiletto
            Andrey, thanks for the video

            hi there is still
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=uialmgaUlcE
            all the same, our beauties
          2. Rav Seren
            Rav Seren 11 December 2013 18: 08
            -6
            More precisely, they SAY. And what is there in reality - no one knows
          3. ZU-23
            ZU-23 11 December 2013 19: 17
            +2
            so this Raptor also can’t really maneuver, which is what the trolls of the United States are catching up with negative
          4. The comment was deleted.
      2. Rav Seren
        Rav Seren 11 December 2013 18: 03
        -12 qualifying.
        Not a single Russian radar can even detect the Reptor.
        1. AlNikolaich
          AlNikolaich 11 December 2013 18: 28
          +2
          Quote: Rav-Seren
          Not a single Russian radar can even detect the Reptor.

          Full of those! what nonsense !!!! Where does infa come from? OBS?
          The stealth system is not a panacea! The same Americans abandoned her! It is only about a possible decrease in visibility over a long distance!
          1. patsantre
            patsantre 12 December 2013 00: 12
            -2
            Are you normal, no? They have all the planes made using this technology.
        2. 1c-inform-city
          1c-inform-city 11 December 2013 18: 39
          +1
          Actually, the Su 35 radar is more powerful, and most importantly more long-range missiles.
        3. Cherdak
          Cherdak 11 December 2013 19: 04
          +2
          But thanks to American colleagues, the account is already open!
          1. poquello
            poquello 11 December 2013 23: 31
            +2
            Quote: Cherdak
            But thanks to American colleagues, the account is already open!

            There is not enough flying saucer, he also shot down it. How many addicts are there?
        4. samoletil18
          samoletil18 11 December 2013 20: 08
          +2
          Do not put "-" on him. And don't answer. He's suffering x-she.
        5. shinobi
          shinobi 12 December 2013 04: 49
          0
          Du.rack or something? All serial radars of the decimeter range can see it perfectly.
      3. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 11 December 2013 22: 56
        0
        Alexei in the near future the likelihood of a military conflict between Russia and the United States is negligible, China is an American factory. In India, tea is good, they would deal with Pakistan. In the Middle East, you can get by with the F-15.
        I did not consider the confrontation of the F-22 with Russian aircraft.
  • andrei332809
    andrei332809 11 December 2013 16: 53
    0
    not mastered the entire budget? come visit, our bureaucrats will give a couple of master classes wassat
  • kapitan281271
    kapitan281271 11 December 2013 16: 59
    +1
    New light fighter? It would be nice, but something is hard to believe. If you can a few words in more detail !!!
    1. Stiletto
      Stiletto 11 December 2013 17: 19
      +1
      Quote: kapitan281271
      New light fighter? It would be nice, but something is hard to believe. If you can a few words in more detail !!!


      "Russia will create a new light fighter, the development of which is envisaged by the state armaments program. According to RIA Novosti, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, who oversees the military-industrial complex, said. He noted that light fighters are in great demand on the foreign market.
      “A light fighter is always the most in demand from the point of view of export potential - people buy it more willingly. For example, the MiG-29, for example, it certainly surpasses heavy fighters, but today we already have a fully promoted production at the Irkut enterprise ─ this is the Su-30SM, we produce the Su-35S in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, PAK FA ─ at we already have 5 samples, "said Rogozin, noting that Russia has always tried to combine the production of light and heavy fighters."

      True, what type of light fighter is in question, Rogozin did not specify. But, I want to believe, she knows what she’s talking about ...
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 11 December 2013 23: 32
        0
        Quote: Stiletto
        True, what type of light fighter is in question, Rogozin did not specify. But, I want to believe, she knows what she’s talking about ...

        Migovtsev have a mockup
      2. patsantre
        patsantre 12 December 2013 00: 16
        0
        Quote: Stiletto
        But, I want to believe, knows what she’s talking about ...

        Quote: Stiletto
        MiG-29, for example, it certainly surpasses heavy fighters


        Yeah, he knows ....
  • Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 11 December 2013 17: 09
    +3
    The decision to stop the release of the F-22 was a forced one and mainly for financial reasons. The trillion US government debt, economic and financial crisis forced to take such drastic measures as the conservation of aircraft production. Everyone understands that this is a machine for gaining dominance in the air. And where was it planned to be applied? Well, not in Africa. Who is the likely adversary of these aircraft? Of course, the air force of our country. So this is good news.
  • cdrt
    cdrt 11 December 2013 17: 20
    +1
    1. Our T-50 is exactly the same in fact, so the whole experience around the F-22 is useful to us (I’m ready to put the money, that within our leadership the Air Force and the aircraft as a whole, with the continuation of the crisis, will also discuss how to reduce the production program serial T-50)
    2. As I understand it, the discussions are not only about whether or not the F-22 can be used on the ground, but about the fact that the same pilot is unlikely to be equally good at conducting an air battle and working on the ground - how they wrote there: "they have created universal aircraft, but have not yet learned how to create universal pilots."
  • cdrt
    cdrt 11 December 2013 17: 20
    +1
    1. Our T-50 is exactly the same in fact, so the whole experience around the F-22 is useful to us (I’m ready to put the money, that within our leadership the Air Force and the aircraft as a whole, with the continuation of the crisis, will also discuss how to reduce the production program serial T-50)
    2. As I understand it, the discussions are not only about whether or not the F-22 can be used on the ground, but about the fact that the same pilot is unlikely to be equally good at conducting an air battle and working on the ground - how they wrote there: "they have created universal aircraft, but have not yet learned how to create universal pilots."
  • Indifferent
    Indifferent 11 December 2013 17: 52
    +6
    I tried to insert a picture with the comparative characteristics of the aircraft. To open and see it is better to open in a new tab, then it will be large and you can consider all the numbers.
    So our Su-35 is slightly inferior to the advertising characteristics of the Raptor, but it is 10 times cheaper. But ten Su-35s are quite capable of gouging the Raptors link. So at the price of the Raptor in FIG, even Amers do not need it. Then in the war, the dust didn’t get there, the scratch was not there, the plane itself didn’t want to take off. And what kind of money is needed to repair and restore the fleet. It turns out a disposable contraption. Broke down and scrapped. In war, money must be considered. It is not in vain that half of the IL-2 was made of plywood. But there was a cheap and very effective contraption.
    By the way, the table shows that their F-35 is inferior in all respects to ours both to MIG and SU.
    1. Rav Seren
      Rav Seren 11 December 2013 18: 11
      -11 qualifying.
      The main quality of the 5th generation fighters is invisibility on the radar. and in this, the Raptor and Lightning are far superior not only to the existing drying, flashing and others, but also the PROMISED, declared characteristics of the PAK FA. Everything else is secondary. You can have a firing rocket twice as far, but not even see the enemy almost point-blank. And the principle of Raptor and Lightning - "first saw - and killed"
      1. AlNikolaich
        AlNikolaich 11 December 2013 19: 01
        +3
        Quote: Rav-Seren
        The main quality of 5 generation fighters is invisibility on the radar
        Where does invisibility come from? What kind of nonsense? Reduced EMF, yes, but invisibility from where! And how are raptors and penguins protected from detection by electron-optical means?
        Quote: Rav-Seren
        And the principle of Raptor and Lighting - "first saw - and killed"

        And why should he be the first to see? What, the enemy does not use radars? Does he have optical complexes? The infrared portrait of the aircraft is missing ???
        Do not bullshit, dear! You have already been caught in a lie!
        1. Bort radist
          Bort radist 11 December 2013 19: 28
          +2
          Quote: AlNikolaich
          Do not bullshit, dear! You have already been caught in a lie!

          Guys, yes, you spit on him, let him scream in silence - To teach a fool, only to blunt the device.
    2. Rav Seren
      Rav Seren 11 December 2013 18: 15
      -9
      "But ten Su-35s are quite capable of gouging a Raptor unit."

      It will not work out precisely because the Raptors will simply not be fixed by the radar of the dryers.
      1. dimon-media
        dimon-media 11 December 2013 19: 28
        +1
        Well you say that he is invisible? According to your words, one hundred (100) SUSHEKs and MIGs should not gouge the raptor link, they will not see it! Point blank!
        In general, you are nonsense, dear. We will not argue, a specific battle (duel) will dot all I.
    3. patsantre
      patsantre 12 December 2013 00: 19
      0
      From what murzilka this crap was taken? 1 raptor without R&D costs 140 lyam, drying without R&D costs 90 lyam. There is no 10 fold difference in the mind. And the MiG-35 doesn’t cost 25 lyam either.
  • ZU-23
    ZU-23 11 December 2013 17: 57
    +6
    I remember so many minuses from these fucking trolls when I said that the Raptor was discontinued.
  • psiho117
    psiho117 11 December 2013 18: 05
    0
    Quote: ALEXXX1983
    In my opinion, they made a mistake much earlier)))
    Why do we need an ultra-expensive small-batch airplane?
    Ours, with an eye to export, are doing, and cheaper.

    And why did you need a flight to the moon? The question of prestige - we are the coolest, we are the only ones who have the fifth generation flying game. And with the collapse of the union, America simply did not need it, tactical schemes reoriented the Papuans to bombing, the super-expensive and duper-sophisticated fighter-interceptor remained out of work - there was nobody to intercept, the Ben Laden from the fleet had a maximum of stolen Boeings.
  • Unisonic
    Unisonic 11 December 2013 18: 07
    +3
    F-22 is a cold war machine. The Soviet Union is no more. Russia with its potentials is one tenth of the potential of the USSR. China is not an adversary either.
    Why thousands of F-22s? Not at all. And you can understand the general, he just lobbies the interests of the American oligarchy.
  • de bouillon
    de bouillon 11 December 2013 18: 13
    +1
    Quote: patsantre
    F-22 Raptor


    to replace the fleet of old F-15/16 A-10s which already have 25-30 years of active use

    and the F-35 is optimistically proposed for a period of up to 2050, i.e. until the middle of the century
  • de bouillon
    de bouillon 11 December 2013 18: 22
    +1
    Quote: indifferent
    I tried to insert a picture with the comparative characteristics of the aircraft. To open and see it is better to open in a new tab, then it will be large and you can consider all the numbers.
    So our Su-35 is slightly inferior to the advertising characteristics of the Raptor, but it is 10 times cheaper. But ten Su-35s are quite capable of gouging the Raptors link. So at the price of the Raptor in FIG, even Amers do not need it. Then in the war, the dust didn’t get there, the scratch was not there, the plane itself didn’t want to take off. And what kind of money is needed to repair and restore the fleet. It turns out a disposable contraption. Broke down and scrapped. In war, money must be considered. It is not in vain that half of the IL-2 was made of plywood. But there was a cheap and very effective contraption.
    By the way, the table shows that their F-35 is inferior in all respects to ours both to MIG and SU.



    This picture means absolutely nothing!

    because anyone can draw it and change the numbers. Yes, and the numbers are actually small here, which means.

    it's like in the 40s

    when by 44-46 years old there were high-speed piston Mustangs of the N series, Typhoons, Spitfire 23 series, German Ta-152, etc. in fact, they were the most advanced piston fighter aircraft at that time, and on the other hand, not quite reliable, awkward Me-262, Shuting Stary. And just not everyone understood that the era of the propeller had already passed.
  • Altona
    Altona 11 December 2013 18: 39
    +2
    Why does he regret it? And where and how were the available 187 aircraft used? For bombing, Bantustanov is expensive and stupid, and there are no worthy goals ... But to drop cluster munitions and work on areas is quite enough for 3 and 4 generations ... They use drones for quiet killings ... For modern air defense whatever there was a plane, it’s still a point on the radar, no matter what they think about themselves there ...
    1. clidon
      clidon 11 December 2013 19: 33
      -1
      And they must be applied? Strategic Missile Forces were also not used anywhere ...
  • saag
    saag 11 December 2013 18: 50
    +3
    Quote: Rav-Seren
    It will not work out precisely because the Raptors will simply not be fixed by the radar of the dryers.

    physics of the process, however, these very "invisible" Raptors of drying from the ground are guided by a surveillance radar of a meter range, in which the Raptors with all their invisibility are perfectly visible, then a dog dump begins, and in close combat the Raptor against the Su-35 is not a fighter
    1. clidon
      clidon 11 December 2013 19: 38
      +2
      Raptors are undoubtedly very powerful machines and will be difficult for previous generations to handle. However, I would not boil everything down to the fact that they cannot be detected. For example, they have maximum stealth only from the front side, from the side-back the signature will be higher. Again, the radar system will be able to help, optical guidance stations. The latest Su-35s are equipped with rather powerful radars with phased array.
      But on the other hand, not everything is so simple with meter radars. Sushka will still need to find a target and aim the missiles on her own, which will not be easy. In general, it is worth hoping that the T-50 will become a worthy rival to the Raptor.
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 11 December 2013 19: 18
    0
    Of course I'm sorry. After all, he probably got dibs for lobbying his further production. And how it failed to break through, the grandmas stopped paying! So sorry!
  • voliador
    voliador 11 December 2013 19: 26
    +1
    Let them continue to stop the production of various types of weapons. Let the Batmen plush sew laughing .
  • saag
    saag 11 December 2013 19: 46
    0
    Quote: clidon
    But on the other hand, not everything is so simple with meter radars

    Well, he will not be able to classify the target, but altitude, azimuth, speed, reaction to the request of the interrogator is quite capable, to direct Su with these data, and then use something like R-73 in close combat
    1. clidon
      clidon 11 December 2013 20: 01
      0
      While Drying is brought in with her R-73s, they simply knock her down. Not so simple with meter radars ...
  • SK12
    SK12 11 December 2013 20: 17
    +4
    Quote: Rav-Seren
    But in Iraq, after all, they found WMDs. And in large quantities.

    And in August 2008, treacherous Russia attacked a peaceful sleeping Georgia. With the advent of the United States, Afghanistan has finally established a regime of prosperity and security. Libya, after the bombing of NATO and the overthrow of Gaddafi, finally found happiness. Assad, of course, is a tyrant who does not allow bringing holy democracy from the most exclusive nation to the tormented Syrian land. Yes, I forgot completely, 2MV, of course, Stalin started, and of course the USA won the war! And yet, the bloody regime of the USSR, equivalent to the regime of Nazi Germany, dropped bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. How is it still being taught at the State Department?
  • Leshka
    Leshka 11 December 2013 20: 20
    0
    survive with us it was more often
  • Irokez
    Irokez 11 December 2013 20: 38
    +2
    Here it is, the F-22 is so cool. Even Rafal of generation 4 ++ keeps him on the fly and could shoot from cannons, not to mention rockets. Rafal, by the way, turned out beautiful. The French are sophisticated and aesthetic.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGuWadoTgkE
    The maneuverability on modern airplanes rests on the endurance of the pilot, and then the time is approaching when, according to this indicator, at high speed, the cars are equated, but in a slower duel, the advantage over all-maneuverability is where we look better.
    The reptoloid has the advantage of engines and thus high speed for breakthrough and withdrawal, but we have a better MIG-31 with long-range missiles and good airborne locators. Catch up and take up. Our arms are longer.
  • saag
    saag 11 December 2013 20: 52
    0
    Quote: clidon
    While Drying is going with her R-73s, they’ll just knock her down

    In war as in war, or interceptor raise or send a rocket, which will be at hand
    1. clidon
      clidon 11 December 2013 22: 31
      0
      Here we are talking about an advantage that is difficult to get around old cars.
  • Wiruz
    Wiruz 11 December 2013 21: 21
    +2
    Oh, how much noise they made here, as if the AK and the M16 were being compared. The enemy must be respected, so let's turn on the rational half of the brain and admit that the Raptor is a good plane, not the BEST IN THE WORLD, but just GOOD. The cessation of its production is a big mistake for the United States, which now may not be noticeable, but after about twenty years it will make itself felt. Although to us, the people sitting at the other barricade, this is only at hand bully .
  • ed65b
    ed65b 11 December 2013 21: 57
    +1
    argued that it was necessary to have 381 F-22 to maintain air superiority "over enemy territory."
    There is a backfill question, why exactly 381 and not 382-3-4 or 299? I doubt the calculations. moreover, and
    Designed as a multi-role fighter with an emphasis for use as an attack aircraft, the F-35 is designed to penetrate enemy airspace to destroy enemy fighters using powerful radar, missiles and side gun,
    What kind of long-range gun is this ???? From star wars or something ????
    1. clidon
      clidon 11 December 2013 22: 44
      -1
      There is a backfill question, why exactly 381 and not 382-3-4 or 299? I doubt the calculations. moreover, and

      Do you think they take numbers from the ceiling? )

      What kind of long-range gun is this ???? From star wars or something ????

      Normal melee gun. What is surprising here?
  • Irokez
    Irokez 11 December 2013 22: 18
    +1
    A gun is usually a gun of some kind. They say that with a gun like that. As I understand it, every pilot has a gun on board to rush in his pocket or ammunition.
    1. Wiruz
      Wiruz 12 December 2013 10: 47
      +1
      A gun is usually a gun of some kind. They say that with a gun like that. As I understand it, every pilot has a gun on board to rush in his pocket or ammunition.

      Yeah, Makarych lies under the seat laughing laughing laughing Here you fly up to the enemy’s airplane, open the cockpit and shoot !!! laughing laughing laughing
      But seriously, then go here - https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE% D0% BD% D
      0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%B0
  • Sax
    Sax 11 December 2013 22: 19
    -1
    Open message to admins: I replied dimon-media (1) SU Today, 18:55 ↑ 30 minutes ago. All this time the post was being "loaded". So where is my post?
  • Prishtina
    Prishtina 11 December 2013 23: 59
    +3
    krasava T-50 bully
  • kair_kz
    kair_kz 12 December 2013 00: 31
    +5
    Quote: Rav-Seren
    Yes, those who firmly believe in the creation of the T-50 in the country, who can’t even create their own vacuum cleaner, are like clowns

    in some countries it’s great to make knives and watches, some have household appliances, but Russians who are fighting almost their entire history are specialists in creating weapons. That's all)))
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 12 December 2013 00: 51
    0
    Great news. The more catastrophic mistakes they have, the less problems we have.
  • Sergey Sitnikov
    Sergey Sitnikov 12 December 2013 04: 38
    +2
    I apologize in advance for the simplicity of the style of narration - I am not an expert and am currently writing from memory, but I can bring out particularly meticulous people to that conversation where there are all kinds of footnotes, references, etc.
    I read a comparison of these Raptor, f-35 aircraft and our Drying 4 +++ (I will not advertise a narrowly-themed group), one guy (judging by the texts and style of the narration, a real specialist, for example, advised how to find certain lectures of military experts on maneuvering that are freely laid out, and are clear to understanding) there are so many jambs outlined by the Raptor))), I didn’t even understand much, that's exactly what happened:
    having internal armament, he can’t use the weapon at supersonic sound at all (fall into pieces - physics);
    in order to reduce its visibility, it was completely deprived of the capabilities of electronic warfare, unlike ALL of our aircraft (as I understand it - that pointy thing between the nozzles of the engines is the back of our electronic warfare)))), in general, there is much more ...
    They will detect it not by the illumination of the case, but by the Raptor radiation, when he compares the relief with his flash drive))), the thing I wrote about above is tuned to that radiation (on su -35), and different sou -35, i.e. one leads the target (unmasking), and shoots the second, without active radiation, but with missiles)))
    Summary Raptor is not a supersonic aircraft)))
    lacking the ability to defend against air-to-air
    his invisibility under a BIG question
    1. shinobi
      shinobi 12 December 2013 05: 06
      0
      The trick is that the Raptor is supposed to be used in the case when all the means of strategic detection and half of the air defense (ideally completely) are knocked out from the enemy, see the doctrine of the US lightning fast strike. Essentially F22 is the same F117, with the same application problems. As you rightly noted on TTX, it is not an opponent of our serial Su ++++. I hope it doesn’t reach real clashes. It will all depend on the pilots . hi
      1. clidon
        clidon 12 December 2013 07: 06
        0
        The F-22 is essentially a conceptually versatile machine with the primary goal of gaining superiority in the air. That is why it does not look at all like a clean F-117 drummer.
    2. clidon
      clidon 12 December 2013 08: 09
      0
      - The Americans unequivocally claim that he can use weapons on super-sound.
      - there is a built-in electronic warfare system INEWS
      The raptor is a supersonic aircraft (moreover, the only one in the world with cruising supersonic), and it will be quite traditional to detect it - look for radar and optics.
      And its stealth does not cause any questions in my opinion at anyone. The question is how difficult it will be to detect it by modern means.
      1. Chertkov Oleg
        Chertkov Oleg 12 December 2013 19: 29
        +1
        Raptor supersonic aircraft (moreover, the only one in the world with cruising supersonic)

        Our PAK FA has a cruising supersonic, and even without afterburner. About it with 30 minutes of the video.
      2. poquello
        poquello 12 December 2013 20: 05
        +1
        Quote: clidon
        - The Americans unequivocally claim that he can use weapons on super-sound. ...

        Oh, against the background of the fact that the Americans unequivocally argued, their statements by me personally are not clearly perceived.
  • Sergey Sitnikov
    Sergey Sitnikov 12 December 2013 07: 52
    +1
    Quote: clidon
    The F-22 is essentially a conceptually versatile machine with the primary goal of gaining superiority in the air. That is why it does not look at all like a clean F-117 drummer.

    I don’t understand, nevertheless, in order to gain dominance, he needs to fly to a place at supersonic speed and then slow down to 700-750 km / h there in order to shoot the air-air located inside ??? And this is over the territory of the enemy - once domination, but even with it, they will be able to gasp at the same place)))))))))))
    1. clidon
      clidon 12 December 2013 08: 10
      0
      Of course not. He shoots at supersonic.
  • Sergey Sitnikov
    Sergey Sitnikov 12 December 2013 07: 55
    +1
    expensive Raptor plane with a flight range that is not sea-based for conquering the sky of the Russian Federation, I don’t think that secretly it will be possible to transfer 180 raptors to Japan and Europe for the sake of domination in the sky of Russia
    1. clidon
      clidon 12 December 2013 08: 12
      -1
      Which fifth generation airplane is cheap? This is a tactical machine, not a strategic bomber, so the range is enough. In the end, the tanks will hang or refuel. Secretly transfer F-22 and do not have to.
      In addition, half of this amount will tear the Russian Air Force in its current state as a tusik heating pad. It remains to rely on the support of air defense systems and nuclear weapons.
      1. Sergey Sitnikov
        Sergey Sitnikov 12 December 2013 14: 16
        +1
        I’m not going to argue and put cons, but I’m still confident in the info that I described from the people whose knowledge is very different from those (I don’t necessarily mean you) who live on network resources with servers in the States
        1. clidon
          clidon 12 December 2013 15: 25
          -1
          I even know where that person is so smart from. At least I know, the source of his confidence that the F-22 cannot shoot at supersonic sound is an article by one of the researchers (if memory serves as a retirement), about the behavior of high-speed objects in supersonic sound. That is, it’s just a person’s opinion that it’s impossible to open an arms compartment at such a speed like this - it will collapse. At the same time, a person admits that he does not know exactly how the American F-22 compartment is arranged, but he is deeply convinced that nothing will work out.
          And the Americans say that they succeed.
  • samoletil18
    samoletil18 13 December 2013 23: 01
    0
    I watched a movie with my son. "Transformers-2" is called. This is not a fighter. This is a Decepticon in disguise. belay