Military Review

According to forecasts, the leaders will be F-35

235
World aviation market for fighter aircraft and training aircraft in the next five years


As foreign analysts believe, the leading player in this market will be the American company Lockheed Martin with the fifth-generation fighter F-35. In general, F-35 sales plans remain unchanged and comprise 2443 aircraft for the US Air Force and fewer 600 units for the other eight foreign countries participating in the program: the UK, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Australia.

In the next five years (2014 – 2018) 1508 fighter jets of western production will be delivered to the global aviation market for a total of 162,6 billion dollars. According to the forecast of American analysts who did not take into account aircraft manufactured in China, India and Russia, Lockheed Martin will dominate the global market for fighter aircraft and training aircraft (TCB) during this period, which will produce 467 fighters (31% of the total market). The European consortium “Eurofighter” will take the second place in terms of the number of fighters produced (204 units, 13,5%). Boeing companies (168, 11,1%) and Pilatus (167, 11,1%) will be in the third and fourth places, respectively. In the fifth position will be "Korian Aerospace" (144, 9,6%). All other global manufacturers of fighters and TCB will have 358 aircraft (23,7%).


In monetary terms, the situation in the global market for fighters and TCB, excluding China, India and Russia, will look like this. In the next five years, 162,6 billion dollars in 2014 prices will be received from the sale of fighters on the world market. The leaders will be Lockheed Martin, which will receive a billion dollars (84,7%), Eurofighter (52,1 billion, 40,8%) and Boeing (25,1 billion, 17,1%) for its 10,5 aircraft. This is followed by Dassau Aviation (5,9 billion dollars, 3,7%) and Corian Aerospace (3,5 billion dollars, 2,1%). All other global manufacturers of fighters and TCB will have 10,5 billion dollars or 6,5 percent.

Despite the leading position of Lockheed Martin, other leading players in the global aviation market will make additional efforts to diversify their customers, many of whom will not be able to acquire expensive F-35. They include Boeing with the F / A-18E / F Super Hornet, Dassau Aviation with the Rafale fighter, Eurofighter with the Typhoon fighter and SAAB with the Gripen fighter.

Boeing Plans

The F-35 position in the export market has been consolidated after the Republic of Korea changed in favor of Lockheed Martin its initial decision to buy the X-NUMX F-60 fighter “Silent Eagle” of the Boeing company with conformal armaments and an Electromechanical Control System (EDS) that were recommended by the Defense Procurement Department of the Ministry of Defense in the 15 Trillion Won Budget (8,3 billion). Under the pressure of the military, Seoul followed the decision of Tokyo, adopted at the end of 7,7, in favor of the inconspicuous F-2011.

Seoul’s refusal to purchase F-15 created certain problems for Boeing and, above all, for its aircraft factory in St. Louis (Missouri) where F-15 Silent Eagle, Strike Eagle, F / A-18E are manufactured / F Super Hornet and Electronic Warfare (EW) EA-18G Growler. Uncertainty about the prospects for the continued production of the Boeing line of combat aircraft is related to the fact that the prospects for selling F-15 are still unknown after the export contract with Saudi Arabia, which is due to end in 2018, is completed.

Nevertheless, Boeing officials believe that various options for upgrading the Silent Eagle F-15 fighter, including subtle weapons bays, EMFs and an EW digital system, may be attractive to various F-15 customers who analyze options for upgrading their fighter fleets. aviation.

For Boeing, the situation with its regular customer, the US Navy, which in previous years was actively acquiring F / A-18E / F Super Hornet, is not quite clear. Currently, the Navy, along with the Air Force and the United States Marine Corps, is the customer of F-35 and in 2014 must complete the test program of the deck version of the F-35C on aircraft carriers, after which they will finally decide on the terms of procurement of these deck fighters. Not having so far a firm contract with the Navy to produce the required number of Super Hornet and Growler aircraft, the Boeing company must nevertheless fund the support of the production line of these machines in St. Louis.

Recently, Boeing has strengthened lobbying to force US lawmakers to purchase more F / A-18 or EA-18G. The company also reduces the cost of the fighter production line and invests in automating and slowing down the production of F / A-18 in order to extend the delivery time of existing orders. These measures, according to experts, are caused by competition with F-35. At the moment, the portfolio of orders for F / A-18 fighters and EW EA-18G aircraft includes 73 and 45 units, respectively. X-NUMX F-84 machines for Saudi Arabia are also under construction. Available orders will support fighter production in St. Louis until 15.

F / A-18 Development Director Mike Gibbons said that to save the production line, the monthly production of these fighters dropped from four to three units, while to support the conveyor you need about two planes per month. To save production until 2020, you will need to get an order for 60 additional aircraft for the US Navy. It is expected that then the Middle East and European operators F / A-18, as well as Canada, will update their fleet of fighters.

According to forecasts, the leaders will be F-35

Previously, Boeing assumed that fighter contracts with Brazil and Malaysia would help solve a number of problems. However, the Brazilian competition was lost, and Malaysia recently announced that it was postponing the tender.

According to experts, the Middle East market is quite promising for Boeing, but here F / A-18 can meet a competitor in the person of F-35, which the Pentagon plans to start shipping to the region after 2020.

The situation for the Boeing in the US Navy is somewhat different. F / A-18 earned positive reviews from representatives fleet for their fighting qualities and ease of maintenance. Deliveries of the Super Hornets made it possible to place a sufficient number of fighters on aircraft carriers, which in turn makes it possible to allow delays in the supply of F-35C. It is assumed that the new aircraft will enter service no earlier than 2018-2019. Although representatives of the Navy announced their desire to maintain the F / A-18 production line, no instructions were given to replace the old Hornets, and no funds were allocated for the purchase of new aircraft. Due to the lack of a firm order for F / A-18, Boeing continues to influence lawmakers with the goal of securing funding for the release of new fighters of this type.

In particular, Boeing proposed replacing the X-NUMX of the X-NUMX F-44C aircraft, which the US Navy plans to acquire, with the Super Hornets. The company also advertises the Advanced Super Hornet fighter upgrades program. It will increase the flight range of the aircraft, improve its avionics and a number of other elements. However, even if the modernization kits for the existing Super Hornets fleet will be received for implementation, this program will not be able to save the aircraft production line without other support measures.

The main obstacles for Boeing are the Pentagon’s obligation to purchase F-35 fighter jets for a total of 392 billion dollars and the US Department of Defense’s attempts to guarantee US and foreign orders that will help reduce the cost of the most expensive weapons development programs.

The development of a new fighter is being delayed, its value has increased by 70 percent of the originally determined. Nevertheless, government officials say that Lockheed Martin completes the flight tests of the aircraft, solves the technical problems that have arisen, and on the whole has achieved some success. The Pentagon’s leadership made it clear that the F-35 is among the highest-priority types of equipment to be purchased and that it will be against any attempts by the Navy to acquire more traditional aircraft, such as the F / A-18.

According to Loren Martin, the F-35 Program Manager, the cost of the fighter is falling. In particular, an F-35A aircraft will take an estimated 75 million dollars in the 2019 year, which, according to experts, deprives the Boeing fighter of one of the key advantages - the price. Representatives of the company "Boeing" declare that the cost of a unit F / A-18 with installed radar and engines - about 50 million dollars. Congress experts nevertheless say that the price of F / A-18 with targeting containers and other equipment similar to those set on the F-35 is about 70 million dollars.

In principle, the purchase of combat aircraft is always based on the decision of the top political leadership of the importing country. In the context of reducing defense budgets, it is constantly necessary to consider not only the cost parameters of the transaction, but also the possibility of access to advanced technologies in the event of its implementation, service support for acquired aircraft throughout the entire period of operation that can reach 50 years.

Political surprises

With very limited volumes of the modern market of combat aircraft, a politico-diplomatic solitaire played by the military-political leadership of the exporting country and the importing country can acquire very intricate combinations. In particular, the outcome of the Brazilian FX-2 tender worth 4,5 billion dollars for the purchase of 36 combat aircraft, in which F / A-18E / F Super Hornet was in the lead, was the unpleasant surprise for Boeing, but eventually lost to the fighter. Gripen "of the Swedish company" SAAB ". Boeing presented a rather attractive offer for the Brazilian tender, but the sharp deterioration in political relations between Brazil and the United States, caused by electronic espionage by the US National Security Agency, had a significant impact on the refusal of the Brazilian government to sign the contract. For this reason, in September 2013, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff even canceled her official visit to the United States.

After losing the Brazilian tender, the management of Boeing nonetheless claims that Canada, Denmark, Kuwait, Malaysia and a number of unnamed Middle Eastern countries are showing interest in the Super Hornet. However, the possibility of obtaining contracts in the domestic and foreign markets at present and in the short term is complicated by the reduction of the US budget and financial difficulties abroad. As a result, some contracting decisions on a number of important foreign markets were postponed.

Given the existing, as well as potential orders for the Super Hornet and Growler aircraft, the maximum production volumes of these machines are a thing of the past. According to Mike Gibbons, the current annual production of these aircraft in the number of 48 units is likely to be reduced by 25 percent in 2014-m and then continue to decrease to 24 units per year. Despite the reduction in the rate of production of Super Hornet aircraft, the company intends to keep the cost of one machine at the level of 37 million dollars excluding engines and EW systems. With all the components supplied by the state, the Navy pays for one 50 million Super Hornet. The cost of the "Grouler" is about nine million dollars more - 59 million.

European hopes

A similar problem in preserving the production of Typhoon fighters is also facing the European consortium Eurofighter, since the assembly line of these aircraft is loaded with orders only up to the year 2017. The improved Typhoon of the 3 series performed the first flight at the beginning of December of the 2013 series. This aircraft has a new avionics, radar with active phased antenna array, high-speed data line, fiber optic control system bus weaponsconformal fuel tanks. Deliveries of the 3-series aircraft will begin at the end of the 2015 of the year.

The Swedish company SAAB is developing a new version of the Gripen fighter - JAS 39E, which is a new generation version of the Gripen aircraft demonstrator. It will be equipped with an AFAR radar, a more powerful General Electric F414 engine, and an increased fuel supply. and combat load. Deliveries of these machines are expected in 2018, first for Sweden, which plans to purchase 60 – 80 units, and then for Switzerland, which in 2014 intends to purchase 22 aircraft.

After the victory of the JAS-39E fighter in the Brazilian FX-2 tender, SAAB has strengthened its position in the global market. The signing of a contract worth 4,5 billion dollars for the supply of 36 fighter "Gripen" new generation is planned only in December 2014 year after agreeing on all financial conditions. Delivery of the first aircraft is expected through 48 months after signing the contract. On condition that the agreed production schedule and tests are maintained, the first machine will be adopted by the Brazilian Air Force at the end of the 2018. The contract will provide for the logistics of the aircraft at the initial stage of operation, the training of pilots and technicians, and the delivery of flight simulators.

Currently, Gripen fighters are created in four versions - A, B, C and D. The new version of Gripen-NG (JAS-39E) is an evolutionary development of the last two - C and D.

France connects its prospects in the global fighter market with the expansion of Rafale aircraft exports. For the time being, Dassault hopes to sign the first export contract for the supply of 2014 Rafale for the Indian Air Force to the middle of 126. At the same time, the prospects for the promotion of this aircraft in the Middle East segment of the aviation market and, above all, in the UAE are still unclear. Pending new orders, Rafale batch production has been reduced from 11 machines per year to 26 over the next six-year period.

The Rafale program recently received support from the French government, which allocated about a billion euros for the production of the Rafale F3R. This contract was a clear signal of the intentions of the French military-political leadership to invest in the Rafale program in order to support the combat aviation sector and ensure its compliance with the requirements of the export market.

The contract is a logical decision of the Ministry of Defense aimed at the further development of the Rafale program in order to adapt it to changing requirements and bring it to the necessary requests. The new version of the fighter will be able, in particular, to carry new types of airborne armament such as Meteor air-to-air missiles launched outside the new line-of-sight range of the Next Generation Laser Designation Pod of the new-generation laser container and laser-guided new generation AASM (Air-to-Ground Modular Weapon). This version of the fighter will also have an improved navigation system, a data transmission line, a radar with AFEX RBE2 developed by the Thales company, with which all Rafale fighters are equipped from the middle of the 2013 onwards, the Spectra electronic warfare system. All improvements made to the fighter will expand its multipurpose use.

The aircraft will be able to perform various combat missions, including attacking ground targets and providing air defense. These include the struggle for air superiority, air defense, strikes against ground and surface targets, the provision of direct support to ground troops, reconnaissance, and nuclear strikes. This is the first aircraft designed to operate both from ground bases and from an aircraft carrier, for use by both the Air Force and the French Navy.

The cost of the contract for the development of the Rafale fighter F3R of the NG PDL laser container, which is to be adopted in the middle of 2018, is 119 million euros. The use of a new container developed by Thales Optronics will ensure the search and identification of small targets, as well as the execution of high-precision strikes on ground targets, day and night. This development is funded under the 2014 – 2019 French military programs law and will provide support to the French optoelectronic industry. It is planned to finance the purchase of 20 PDL-NGs containers, 16 of which will be delivered in 2018 – 2019-m.

According to representatives of Dassau Aviation, the new version of the fighter must be certified in 2018 year and will be able to carry more weapons and fuel. The Rafal aviation weapons will include an 30-mm aircraft gun for firing at air and ground targets, Mika missiles with infrared and radar seeker, Meteor missiles (from 2018 of the year), bombs with laser GOS GBU- 12 / 24, AASM and GBU-49 aerial bombs with GPS corrected satellite signals (used in Afghanistan, Libya and Mali), Scalp - Storm Shadow cruise missiles (used in Libya), Exocset anti-ship missiles AM39 Block XNUM for use surface targets and other air-to-surface weapons awst ”, Areos airborne containers for real-time tactical and strategic reconnaissance (used in Afghanistan, Libya and Mali), in-flight refueling systems, ASMP-A nuclear warheads for nuclear strikes.

Rafale fighters were commissioned by the Navy in the 2004 year and the Air Force in the 2006, successively replacing seven types of previously used combat aircraft. To date, 180 serial Rafale machines have been ordered, of which 126 is delivered in three versions: 39 single-seat combat aircraft in the “M” variant for the Navy, 42 twin in the “B” variant, and 45 single-seat combat aircraft in the “C” variant for the Air Force.

The US aviation industry continues to produce other types of fighter jets, which remain in demand in the global market. In particular, since the initial combat readiness of the F-35 is still undetermined, the US Air Force intends to improve the X-NUMX of the F-300 fighters and install on them the SABR (Scaled Agile Beam Radar) AFAR radar, based on the F-16 and F-radar FAR -22, which will extend the operation of these aircraft to 35 year.

Interest in the modernization of F-16 show Taiwan, Greece, Poland, Portugal and Singapore. The company "BAE Systems" equips the radar with AFAR fleet of South Korean F-16.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/
235 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. sds555
    sds555 22 January 2014 15: 19
    +45
    But they forgot this beauty! Or maybe they’re specially afraid
    1. sds555
      sds555 22 January 2014 15: 22
      +16
      Just handsome !!
      1. Wiruz
        Wiruz 22 January 2014 15: 33
        +19
        That's generally handsome (it’s on my desktop as a wallpaper winked )
        1. gunnerminer
          gunnerminer 22 January 2014 15: 59
          -10%
          It’s quite suitable for staging on the desktop. No for combat training.
          1. sds555
            sds555 22 January 2014 16: 09
            +9
            Again this troll brought! By whose order are you obsessing the Russian military-industrial complex in all topics? !!
            1. gunnerminer
              gunnerminer 22 January 2014 16: 17
              -6
              Quote: sds555
              Again this troll brought! By whose order are you obsessing the Russian military-industrial complex in all topics? !!



              Is the T-50 ready to take part in training air battles? Is the engine ready and avionics ready? Is the T-50 ready to transfer to at least the GLITs?
              1. rolik
                rolik 22 January 2014 16: 35
                +30
                Quote: gunnerminer
                Is the T-50 ready to take part in training air battles? Is the engine ready and avionics ready? Is the T-50 ready to transfer to at least the GLITs?

                And F-35 is ready)))) for the battle ... well, at least with the SU-35 ?? )))))))
                1. rolik2
                  rolik2 22 January 2014 16: 39
                  -15%
                  Quote: rolik
                  And F-35 is ready)))) for the battle ... well, at least with the SU-35 ?? )))))))

                  Why not? And who will emerge victorious from this fight is now impossible to determine.
                  1. Shadowcat
                    Shadowcat 22 January 2014 16: 42
                    0
                    In my opinion they have already been identified. And with Drying 35, and even the 27th. About Chinese women, too, do not have to say.
                    1. sledgehammer102
                      sledgehammer102 22 January 2014 17: 25
                      +20
                      In principle, the conclusions are not surprising, because the US vassal countries have no choice but to buy an expensive American brainchild.
                      With the release of T-50 on the world market, the situation may change, although I’m more than sure that many people can’t buy such an expensive toy as a generation 5 aircraft and 4 + and 4 ++ will be in demand. And our aviation industry here has a very wide selection. From both Migi and Su-30, Su-35, so we'll see
                      1. saber1357
                        saber1357 23 January 2014 01: 30
                        0
                        That's right, this is just another campaign to sell a flightless freak, whose only success was shooting in Die Hard 4, and even then as a computer image ...
                    2. Pimply
                      Pimply 22 January 2014 17: 38
                      -11%
                      Quote: ShadowCat
                      In my opinion they have already been identified. And with Drying 35, and even the 27th. About Chinese women, too, do not have to say.

                      How could this really be determined? And do not forget - f-35 three versions. Which one does the fight mean?
                      1. Tersky
                        Tersky 22 January 2014 21: 31
                        +5
                        Quote: Pimply
                        And do not forget - f-35 three versions. Which one is the fight with

                        Above in my comment there is a link, follow it there a full alignment of the correlation of the capabilities of SU-35 vs F-35 for all three versions. Eugene, hi ! Research results in the form of average performance indicators based on the results of 500 air battles

                      2. rolik2
                        rolik2 22 January 2014 21: 53
                        -7
                        Quote: Tersky
                        according to the results of 500 air battles

                        But do not tell me where these fights took place?
                        And their conditions? Group on group or one against one?
                        Without data on the situation, these are just numbers that do not express ANYTHING.
                      3. Tersky
                        Tersky 22 January 2014 22: 10
                        +7
                        Quote: rolik2
                        But do not tell me where these fights took place?

                        Link for whom? Or too lazy to click the mouse? As for the minus, I warned you ... so do not blame me.
                      4. rolik2
                        rolik2 22 January 2014 22: 36
                        -3
                        Quote: Tersky
                        Link for whom? Or too lazy to click the mouse? Well, on the minuses, I warned you ...

                        Well, except for the picture, I don’t display any link, and I can draw the same label.
                        Cons I certainly do not care))) If I go deep into minuses I will write a couple of articles the moderators will reset the counter so that hi
                        You would rather not set the results but the conditions of the fighting, the situation in which they took place is more interesting and informative than the results themselves.
                      5. Apollo
                        Apollo 22 January 2014 22: 40
                        +6
                        Quote: rolik2
                        Cons I certainly do not care))) If I go deep into the minuses I will write a couple of articles moderators will reset the counter so that

                        Here it is not necessary to decide for moderators.
                      6. Tersky
                        Tersky 22 January 2014 22: 46
                        +1
                        Quote: rolik2
                        Well, except for the picture, I don’t display any link, and I can draw the same label.

                        Who is to blame for you that there is not enough time to slam the mouse in the red font and underlined words HERE in my leading comments?
                        Quote: rolik2
                        You would rather not set the results but the conditions of the fighting, the situation in which they took place is more interesting and informative than the results themselves.

                        from there and read.
                        Quote: rolik2
                        ) If I go deep into the minus I will write a couple of articles the moderators will reset the counter so that

                        Read the Apollo commentary below, and look at my profile, just in case, you might understand something.
                      7. rolik2
                        rolik2 22 January 2014 23: 07
                        +1
                        Quote: Tersky
                        Who is to blame for you that there is not enough time to slam the mouse in the red font and the underlined words HERE in my comments below?


                        Well, it doesn’t pop at me laughing Already clapping with a hammer does not come out

                        from there and read.

                        throw a link interestingly

                        Quote: Apollon
                        Here it is not necessary to decide for moderators.

                        Quote: Tersky
                        Read the Apollo commentary below, and look at my profile, just in case, you might understand something.

                        I don’t decide - I say as it was,
                        I saw your profile and that you know in the moderator’s gout hi
                      8. Tersky
                        Tersky 22 January 2014 23: 17
                        +2
                        Quote: rolik2
                        Well, it doesn’t pop at me even though it’s cracked.

                        1) http://www.militaryparitet.com/ttp/data/ic_ttp/5957/, 2) http://www.arms-expo.ru/049051124053055057048.html
                      9. rolik2
                        rolik2 22 January 2014 23: 19
                        0
                        Quote: Tersky
                        http://www.militaryparitet.com/ttp/data/ic_ttp/5957/ , http://www.arms-expo.ru/049051124053055057048.html


                        Thank you
                      10. rolik2
                        rolik2 22 January 2014 23: 26
                        +3
                        The article is interesting, but modeling was done for
                        close air combat between the Su-35 multi-functional fighter and the F-35C strike fighter

                        Here it’s understandable that for the maneuverability brush, the Su-35 tore the enemy as an Acetic warmer, but again the battle was one on one.
                        And at long and medium distances, were the battles modeled? Do you have such data on occasion?
                  2. Pimply
                    Pimply 23 January 2014 02: 25
                    0
                    You are doing the right thing by citing sources. However, analysis is analysis and source to source - discord.
              2. Pimply
                Pimply 23 January 2014 02: 24
                +3
                Quote: Tersky
                Link for whom? Or too lazy to click the mouse? As for the minus, I warned you ... so do not blame me.

                It's just that all such measurements are nonsense, and colossal. How can one calculate something without tactics, studying the situation in the complex, etc.? How can I calculate something when the small F-35 series is still being finished, and it is already more than the Su-35 5 times?
          2. Pimply
            Pimply 23 January 2014 02: 22
            0
            Quote: Tersky
            Above in my comment there is a link, follow it there a full alignment of the correlation of the capabilities of the SU-35 vs F-35 for all three versions. Eugene,! The results of studies in the form of average performance indicators for 500 air battles


            You are joking? Maybe we will also cite the Great Warrior program as the effectiveness of the fighters? Well, after all, they also hypothetically measure wall to wall and conduct 1000 fights on a computer
        2. dmitrich
          dmitrich 23 January 2014 04: 59
          +2
          guano all three versions.
    2. rolik
      rolik 22 January 2014 16: 45
      -2
      Quote: rolik2
      Why not? And who will emerge victorious from this fight is now impossible to determine.

      Naturally not possible, only it will not be the 35th)))))))
      1. rolik2
        rolik2 22 January 2014 16: 59
        -8
        Quote: rolik
        Naturally not possible, only it will not be the 35th)))))))

        This grandmother wondered for two.
        When fighting one on one, pair on pair - the outcome of the battle in favor of Drying can be predetermined BUT again what will be the conditions of the battle? Can a drying radar identify an enemy before launching missiles? (The fact that drying will be detected by Lightning is not in dispute first) will it be able to get closer to the distance from which it will be possible to capture the target? Will it be able to impose a melee?
        And this is all a classic air battle. But look at the conflicts in which the Americans participated, there were no such battles, at first Tomahawks destroyed radar, air defense, aerodromes, then "Wild caresses"
        began hunting for surviving radar and air defense systems. Air raids were covered not only by affection but also by airplanes REB.

        Now tell me, do Russian Air Force pilots have experience in such conditions?
        When fighting "wall to wall" everything depends on the skill of the pilot, but when the SYSTEM is playing against you, it is rather difficult to predict the outcome here.
        1. rolik
          rolik 22 January 2014 17: 13
          +25
          Quote: rolik2
          But look at those conflicts in which the Americans participated,

          The Americans, or rather a bunch of countries, participated in battles with a previously weak enemy. When they fought one on one, they exaggerated, they got a slope. Vietnam remind ????
          The classic air battle, this is the avenue of MIGs, where the mattresses also got lyuley. Incidentally, I recently gave calculations for these fights.
          Especially if you take the means of destruction. Our rockets are superior to mattresses by an order of magnitude. Moreover, these are not new samples. New samples go to the 50th, and coupled with the aircraft itself, it turns out a perfect combat system, to which mattresses can still grow and grow if they grow up.
          In particular, on the Su-35S installed one of the latest developments NIIP them. VV Tikhomirova - Radar with a phased antenna array (PAR) H035 Irbis-E.
          The Su-35 has a radar with a passive phased antenna array H035 Irbis, with a target detection range of more than 400 km. In addition to radar, an optical radar station and an OEIS are used.
          So that the 35th first can detect the SU, only with the help of AWACS))))))
          And having completed the missile evasion maneuver, the SU will release its own, and then we will see the real flight of the penguin .... to the ground. Born to crawl, can’t fly. Moreover, with all its limitations, the penguin is crawling, while SU is flying.
        2. DEMENTIY
          DEMENTIY 22 January 2014 17: 20
          +8
          Quote: rolik
          Moreover, with all its limitations, the penguin is crawling, while SU is flying.



          Why would a penguin insult a pancake. angry Lovely bird. love
        3. rolik
          rolik 22 January 2014 20: 14
          +4
          Quote: DEMENTIY
          Why would a penguin insult a pancake.

          I apologize to the penguin.)))))))
      2. yehat
        yehat 22 January 2014 17: 24
        +6
        about the superiority of weapons - a complete lie
        The Americans in the nomenclature have the latest highly effective melee missiles (where traditionally we felt better)
        and reports appeared to be much more effective than a phoenix long-range missile. About the middle range, to be honest, I'm not completely up to date. Ours, in turn, adopted a number of medium and long-range missiles, which they compensated for from the United States.
        I think that now in service there is a rare complete parity.
        But as for the means of detection and guidance - there are big ambiguities. I believe that in a heavy fighter like T50, you can develop and place everything you need, but will it be in time? Do not save it?
        And besides, due to the technological superiority of the United States, electronic filling with us will come out clearly harder. In general, here is the question!
        Optoelectronic station is not a fact that they will deliver it; it impairs the EPR of the aircraft and its characteristics at high speeds.
      3. dustycat
        dustycat 22 January 2014 19: 28
        +1
        Quote: yehat
        due to US technological superiority,

        It has long been a pitchfork on the water written.
        Thanks to the Chinese and, oddly enough, to Chubais - there is no superiority.
        Unless the Yankees give the Israelis a filling of their own.
        And here is an interesting layout.
        The Americans strongly distrust the Israelis, and the Israelis in response are even more suspicious of the leakage of mattress technology to China and India.
      4. And Us Rat
        And Us Rat 22 January 2014 21: 17
        +2
        Quote: dustycat
        Unless the Yankees give the Israelis a filling of their own ...

        This is an already resolved issue, the "glass cockpit" helmets and related systems on ALL F-35s will be Elbit ones, and on the F-35I batch in general, all avionics, short and medium-range missiles (Python-6 and Derby 2.0 are on the way), as well as a new AFAR with higher characteristics than the "native" AN / APG-81 (Elta is just finishing it to replace the first generation AFAR). The long-range missiles will be Yusav's for the first time, the option of modifying the missiles from "Magic Wand" to enable air-to-air capability (200 + km) is being discussed. The only F-35I will fly only in Israel, and is unlikely to be allowed on the foreign market. It is not clear yet about the "Music-J" missile suppression system, but most likely it will go as an option, since the Yusavites cannot offer anything similar yet.
    3. rolik
      rolik 22 January 2014 20: 41
      +9
      Quote: yehat
      about the superiority of weapons - a complete lie

      Do not lie until you prove the opposite. There is no evidence from you.
      But for some reason you don’t remember about the new missiles for the 50th. If you align the latest mattresses, as you say, with our newest.
      Here is an example for you.
      a missile with the code name RVV-MD, which can guaranteedly hit any aircraft, including the fifth-generation American multi-role fighter F-22 Raptor and most promising UAVs. Another designation of this product is X-38. X-38 has several distinctive features that give reason to call it a weapon of a new generation.
      The missile is universal, it can be equipped with various GOS and combat units.
      She has folding wings, so she can be placed in the internal compartments
      In addition to GLONASS, the X-38 modifications are equipped with a radar, laser and thermal imaging seeker. Goals, terrain, weather conditions - everything happens differently. The choice of the GOS depends on the specific task. One aircraft can carry X-38 of various types. total mass of the rocket - about 100 kg
      length slightly less than 3 m
      warhead weight - 8 kg
      A missile can detect and hit a target flying at an altitude of 20 m to 20 km at a distance of 300 m to 40 km, while guaranteed to destroy an airplane or any other object maneuvering with overloads of up to 20G.
      And now you can give the characteristics of the mattress CUDA
    4. eagle11
      eagle11 23 January 2014 13: 42
      +1
      It is very interesting, especially considering that the Kh-38 is an air-to-surface missile. But the RVV-MD, the evolution of the R-73, is not far gone.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 17: 42
    -5
    Quote: rolik
    The Americans, or rather a bunch of countries, participated in battles with a previously weak enemy. When they fought one on one, they exaggerated, they got a slope. Vietnam remind ????

    I agree with the equal that they didn’t have a conflict, but they didn’t get their hands on rolling the enemy’s air defense. Well, both our and Chinese pilots who fought in Vetnam were 2-3 orders of magnitude higher than the experience of the Air Force pilots now, so at the moment the comparison is not correct, they will roll out any Air Force for the brush of their experience.

    Our rockets are superior to mattresses by an order of magnitude.

    Unique instances may even be superior, though I'm not very sure that they were tested on targets with an EPR comparable to the E-F-22 or F-35. On this site last year was a pretty good article about problems with aircraft missiles, they simply lacks

    H035 Irbis, having a target detection range of more than 400 km.

    400 km is the target with which EPR ??
    At what distance will he determine the target with F-22 - EPR 0,0010 sq.m. F-35 - EPR 0,005 sq. m


    So that the 35th first can detect the SU, only with the help of AWACS))))))


    Detection range of large aerodynamic targets such as fighter radar F-35 (EPR> 1 m²) up to 270-300 km, cruise missile (0,1-0,5 m²) - up to 150 km,

    Detection range of N035 "Irbis" radar for air targets of fighter type (with EPR 3 m²) - up to 400 km. "

    F-35 - EPR 0,005 sq. m
    Su-35 - EPR from 1 to 4 m ^ 2, depending on the suspension.
    So take it yourself hi

    And having completed the missile evasion maneuver, the SU will release its

    Judging by the above characteristics
    F-35 will be the first to detect a target and launch a missile, will the Su-35 dodge it? is not a fact. Will they be able to release their own? Will they lie because he simply does not see him at the distance from which the F-35 will fire, and if the salvo is two missiles? That one hundred percent victory will be for lighting.
    But this is so a theory how everything will turn into reality is not yet clear.
  4. brainkiller
    brainkiller 22 January 2014 17: 54
    +1
    Quote: rolik2
    Su-35 - EPR from 1 to 4 m ^ 2, depending on the suspension.
    is it in frontal view?
    exactly?
  5. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 18: 14
    -8
    Quote: brainkiller
    is it in frontal view?
    exactly?


    I don’t have a form for this product, I take data from the Internet, and they vary on different resources, but I think that this figure is significantly overstated, actually there is more EPR. Judging by the data below
    Su-27 = 10
    F-15A = 7,5-10
    F-15E = 9-11

    The EPR of the Su-35 will be in the range of 7-11, again, depending on what is on the suspensions
  6. brainkiller
    brainkiller 22 January 2014 22: 55
    +1
    I’m just saying that on the front side, there shouldn’t be any special difference between our and other planes - equally streamlined, equally small bodies. and numbers of the order of 10 - probably a top-down view but not a front.
  7. yehat
    yehat 22 January 2014 17: 59
    +9
    the data on the EPR F-35 and F-22 look unrealistic.
    You can reduce the ESR. but 1000 times? This is unrealistic.
    In addition, I want to note that we are talking about EPR at subsonic speed and at a specific frequency of the radar.
    As far as I know, we have found opposition.
  8. anarky
    anarky 22 January 2014 21: 19
    +1
    So they still use composites with might and main. As I understand it, this also contributes. And radar on airplanes is clearly not a meter range. What kind of magical opposition is this?
  9. The comment was deleted.
  10. dustycat
    dustycat 22 January 2014 19: 35
    +7
    Quote: rolik2
    Will they be able to release their own?

    What kind of EPR do you say with the F35 with an open arms hatch?
    5-6 meters? Or like F117 12 meters? Or more?
    And will he search for the Su35 in passive mode and with radio silence?
  11. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 22: 01
    -1
    Quote: dustycat
    And will he search for the Su35 in passive mode and with radio silence?

    Imagine yes, they are practicing the interception of enemy aircraft in full radio continuity with the radars turned off, only one tip from AWACS

    What kind of EPR do you say with the F35 with an open arms hatch?

    After he launches rockets to the drying pilot, it will be all the same he will be more concerned with how to get away from the rocket and not the E-F-35
  12. 31231
    31231 22 January 2014 20: 13
    +4
    F-35 - EPR 0,005 sq. m
    Su-35 - EPR from 1 to 4 m ^ 2,

    Did you measure it yourself? What irradiated and from what angles?
  13. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 22: 02
    -1
    Quote: 31231
    Did you measure it yourself? What irradiated and from what angles?

    Dear your sarcasm is not in the subject, have other data lay out (and do not forget to throw a link)
  14. saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm 23 January 2014 00: 02
    0
    Quote: rolik2
    Dear your sarcasm is not in the subject, have other data lay out (and do not forget to throw a link)

    EPR F-35 0,5 sq. m., and throw a reference after you submit a reference according to your values.
  15. rolik2
    rolik2 23 January 2014 00: 31
    0
    Quote: saturn.mmm
    EPR F-35 0,5 sq. m., and throw a reference after you submit a reference according to your values.

    Please

    F-35
    http://www.militaryparitet.com/perevodnie/data/ic_perevodnie/595/

    Yes, and comrade rolik below gives the same numbers from the same site
  16. rolik
    rolik 22 January 2014 23: 43
    +1
    Quote: 31231
    Did you measure it yourself? What irradiated and from what angles?

    This is the data of Western experts)))) I will announce the entire list of EPR (walking - walking so !!!)
    B-52 = 100 EPR (sq. M.)
    F-4, A-10 = 25 EPR (sq. M.)
    Tornado = 8 EPR (sq. M.)
    MiG-21 = 3 EPR (sq. M.)
    MiG-29 = 5 EPR (sq. M.)
    F-16C, F-18C = 1,2 EPR (sq. M.)
    B1-B 1 EPR = (sq. M.)
    Eurofighter = 0,25-0,75 EPR (sq. M.)
    Gripen = EPR less than 2 (sq. M.) (Estimated by Swedish experts)
    Exocet, Harpoon = 0,1 ESR (sq. M.)
    F-35 JSF = 0,005 EPR (sq. M.)
    F-117, B-2, F-22 = 0,01 - 0,001 EPR (sq. M.)
    That's something so overestimated.
  17. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 23: 52
    0
    Quote: rolik
    That's something so overestimated.

    The lip is not a fool, but I think our experts will appreciate the opposite, but the average will probably be closer to the truth. laughing
  18. rolik
    rolik 22 January 2014 22: 39
    +4
    Quote: rolik2
    Well, both our and Chinese pilots who fought in Vetnam were 2-3 orders higher

    Tales of the Vienna Forest))))
    The Americans were not alone in the air. Robin Olds doesn't say anything ??? Meanwhile, this is the legendary English ace who fought on the side of the mattresses, and not only he was there.
    The new missile is designed specifically for new aircraft of the 22nd and 35th.
    Where did you get this ESR area ???? These data on the EPR are given according to the claims of WESTERN specialists. Now, let's get back to the realities of life.
    There are practically no independent studies on the stealth of specific aircraft. Only F-117 flights in Iraq and Yugoslavia enabled our military specialists to assess the effect of the "new" technologies of the Americans. And according to the estimates of Russian military experts, modern technologies created under the Stealth program can reduce the effective scattering area (ESR) of aircraft by up to 70 percent compared to conventional aircraft. In this case, the detection range of such an inconspicuous aircraft will be reduced by only a third, since the detection range is proportional to the fourth root of the RCS value. Western experts, however, speak of an almost thousandfold (!) Decrease in the RCS. Very impressive. However, in terms of the detection distance, this means its reduction by about 5,6 times. So, if an ordinary aircraft was detected by the radar at a distance of 300 km, then on the same radar the most "invisible" of the "stealths" will be quite visible at a distance of 54 km. It's not that impressive, but still quite significant.
    I will continue in the next koment.
  19. Alex 241
    Alex 241 22 January 2014 22: 43
    +1
    Quote: rolik
    Quote: rolik2
    Well, both our and Chinese pilots who fought in Vetnam were 2-3 orders higher
    Our pilots did not fight in Vietnam.
  20. rolik
    rolik 22 January 2014 23: 40
    0
    Quote: Alex 241
    Our pilots did not fight in Vietnam.

    Pancake !!! The head is garden, for sure! Our guys did not fight in Vietnam. there the Chinese were atrocious, especially with the names of Li Xi Qing))))))))
  21. Alex 241
    Alex 241 22 January 2014 23: 49
    +4
    As for the participation of our pilots, here is the evidence: there are many memories of the participation of anti-aircraft gunners in this war, but not a single pilot. Apparently, the reason for this is that they did not participate in the hostilities. The then USSR ambassador to the DRV, Ilya Shcherbakov, categorically denies the participation of Soviet aviators in hostilities. One has to admit that an article by a former Soviet officer, and now by American journalist Mark Sternberg, about four divisions of Soviet fighter planes that fought in Vietnam is just a cheap sensation.

    Where did Lisitsyn come from? You have to go from afar. Here are the first five Vietnamese aces of that war: Nguyen Van Kok, Mai Van Kuong, Nguyen Hong Ni, Pham Thanh Ngan, Dang Ngok Ngy. At first glance, it becomes clear that the name of Li Si Tzyn is not similar to Vietnamese. But it looks like a Chinese one. Indeed, in 1938, Soviet pilots assisted the Chinese army in the war with Japan, and this participation in the press was not covered.
    However, in 1939 and 1940 two books were published. The first, “Wings of China. Notes of a military pilot ”under the pseudonym Captain Van Xi was written by Georgy Zhukov (not a marshal and not his relative, but a Soviet international journalist). The second, Notes of Chinese Pilots, under the pseudonym Fyn Yu-ko, was prepared by another journalist, Georgy Korolkov. In these books, the mentioned surnames of Soviet pilots were also cited. In particular, they mention Hu Ben-ho (Gubenko), Wang Yu-shin (Vanyushin) and, finally, Li Si Tsyn (Lisitsyn).
    Subsequently, Soviet pilots, in the form of Chinese volunteers, fought in Korea. In the popular mind, these three wars in remote areas, populated by peoples similar to Europeans, seemed to merge into one. Old jokes simply changed the scene, and a large number of references to the American "Phantom" in the Soviet press gave rise to a famous song.
  22. rolik
    rolik 22 January 2014 23: 58
    +1
    Quote: Alex 241
    in the Soviet press gave rise to a famous song.

    And what a good song (Chizh sings). )))))
  23. Alex 241
    Alex 241 23 January 2014 00: 08
    +2
    I prefer this video, with 1min10 sec. Chizh
  24. rolik
    rolik 23 January 2014 12: 16
    0
    Quote: Alex 241
    this video

    I understand that he is prancing on Elk? Well done!!!
  25. rolik
    rolik 22 January 2014 22: 46
    +3
    Quote: rolik
    I will continue in the next koment.

    I continue.
    So, it makes sense to compare the "dueling" capabilities of the Su-35 and F-22A "Raptor" radar systems. A Russian vehicle equipped with an Irbis can detect a target with an RCS of 0.1-0.5 m2 (that is, a Raptor) at a distance of 165-240 km. The American fighter "sees" its enemy with a much larger (about 1 m2) RCS also at a distance of about 200 km. Thus, the inconspicuous Raptor with its AFAR in terms of the airborne radar complex does not have real superiority over the modernized Sukhoi in missile air combat at "non-visual" range! And this is just one of those most important parameters, in which the American military counted on the unconditional advantage in which the Raptor over any similar machines.
    This estimate is based on the assumption that the F-22 has an RCS of 0,1-0,5 sq., Which is slightly worse than the RCS cited by experts in mattress technology. BUT .... and we do not yet have the opportunity to assess how correct they are - the F-22 has not yet been able to "light up" live. The Americans keep their plane away from our locators, keeping a veil of secrecy over the real properties of stealth of their "super fighter". Our manufacturers' data on the capabilities of new aircraft onboard radars can also vary greatly. The F-22 is equipped with an AN / APG-77 radar:
    The AN / APG-77 radar has an oval-shaped phased active antenna array about 1 m wide, consisting approximately of 1500 solid-state transceiver modules (length of each module is 70 mm, height is several millimeters), which use the technique of monolithic integrated circuits of the microwave range. In order to reduce visibility, passive radar modes of operation are provided, a low probability of intercepting signals during active radar modes of operation is provided. The maximum detection range of large air targets is 270-300 km.
    I will continue further.
  26. rolik
    rolik 22 January 2014 22: 51
    +2
    Quote: rolik
    I will continue further.

    I continue.
    How big is the Su-35 target? It was argued that stealth technologies were used there, and perhaps this would really reduce the range of its detection to 200 km. Regarding our IRBIS radar installed on the Su-35 N035, the Irbis is a Russian aviation small-sized radar with a passive phased antenna array, developed by NIIP. Development of the H035 for fighters of the intermediate 4 ++ generation was started in 2004 and completed in 2006. Radar power for radiation is about 5 kW. Mechanical scanning is carried out by a hydroelectromechanical drive. Detection range of air targets such as fighter (with RCS 3 m²): up to 400 km. The capabilities of the Irbis radar nullify the F-22's stealth capabilities. If the effect of stealth is estimated at 70%, as Russian experts do, then the detection range will decrease by only a third - to 266 km and the F-22 will not be able to get close unnoticed to the launch range of its missiles, which is 180 km. However, if we use the estimates of Western experts, then a thousandfold decrease in visibility should reduce the range of its detection to 70 km and the F-22 will be able to strike first and unnoticed. It is also interesting to cite data on the new Zhuk-AE (FGA29) radar developed by the Fazotron company, which is supposed to be installed on the MiG-29M2 (MiG-35). Our developer's advertising statements look very encouraging: "The Russian corporation Fazotron-NIIR has completed the development of the latest Zhuk-AE airborne radar station for MiG-35 fighters with an active phased array. According to the general director of the company Vyacheslav Tishchenko, this is the first active phased array antenna. Its appearance brings our fighter closer to its main competitor - the American fifth generation fighter F-35. Now our "MiG" is able to compete with the F-35 not only in air battles, but also in the world arms markets. " The test data are presented more objectively:
    "During the phase of testing in the air against the MiG-29 target, 15 flights were performed and a reliable range of 60 km (in the ZPS) and 148 km (in the PPS) was shown. In addition, two flights were performed in the mode of close maneuvering combat and several more work in the mode of radar mapping with a resolution of 5 by 5 m (hereinafter it will be 1 x 1 m). Flight tests continue, the next one was on September 17, they are no longer connected with the development of "hardware" - it is finished, but with software debugging. As a result, the AFAR FGA29 sample ("Zhuk-AE", as part of the RLPK-35) with a diameter of 500 mm showed a sufficient range of action on the demonstrator aircraft - over 130 km against a target with an EPR of 5 sq. m. and reliability to failure - at least 300 hours. The number of tracked targets is provided - 30 (8-10 are displayed on the indicator). "
    I will continue further
  27. rolik
    rolik 22 January 2014 22: 58
    +3
    Quote: rolik
    I will continue further

    I continue.
    So, our AFAR ZHUK-AE provides target detection with an RCS of 5 m (MiG-29) at a distance of 130 km. Let's assume that the F-35 has an ERE 1000 times smaller - 0,005 sq. m. (or "the size of a golf ball" judging by the advertisement). Reducing the RCS by 1000 times will reduce the detection range by 82% - to 23 km. This is significant, since it really makes it possible for the F-35 to strike first while remaining out of sight of the MiG-35, which means to implement its tactical principle. But how objective is this assessment? There are also secrets here.
    The American enthusiasm for stealth technologies gave impetus to the development of new radar methods. To compensate for the decrease in visibility, it is sufficient to increase either the transmitter power, or the sensitivity of the receiver, or both. Of course, everything is not so simple here - it is necessary to take into account the interference and electronic warfare. The task is very difficult, but no more difficult than reducing the EPR of an airplane. Actually, now there is a competition of the sensitivity and power of radars with stealth technologies of aircraft - an analogue of the battle between armor and shell in the history of tank building. That is why such importance is attached to new radar schemes, like AFAR, which not only allow you to increase the emitter power along with the sensitivity of the receiver, but also carry out several goals at once, use digital signal processing, eliminating interference. But the most important - AFAR allows you to scan the space in different frequency ranges. And here we come to another important discovery. The fact is that the effectiveness of stealth technologies used by Americans is very dependent on the frequency range of the radar. They are mainly designed for the X-frequency range, in which most modern (only NATO!) Radars operate. This is a centimeter wavelength. Older air defense radar systems used the L-frequency range (decimeter waves) and for them, American stealth technologies are almost useless!
    And for the meter range, waves are useless at all))))) If for centimeter waves the effective thickness of radio-absorbing materials can be equal to centimeters, then for decimeter waves it is already decimeters and cannot be implemented in practice. The scattering effect according to the Ufimtsev method is also designed for centimeter waves, the scattering of decimeter waves will be much less, the effect of the geometric shape of the object has almost no effect on them. "Here is a very typical example of the destruction of the modern" invisible "F-117 in Yugoslavia by military means forty years ago. The target designation was from the Pechora air defense system station, and the missile was launched from our Kvadrat air defense system." Yuri Bely, general director of NIIP, the developer of the Irbis airborne radar, said not only that. He also said a more interesting thing when asked about the new AFAR radar station, the exhibition of which at MAKS-2009 made a sensation: - Will your AFAR "see" aircraft made using stealth technology?
    - Here is not the AFAR is decisive. The ability to detect such aircraft is more dependent on the range and type of radiated signal. Plus, we have several AFARs operating in different bands on board. And to make a protective coating from the waves, say, centimeter and decimeter range at the same time - is very problematic.
    In fact, this is a verdict to the stealth technology using the Ufimtsev method and using radio absorbing coatings. The radar competition with low visibility has almost won the radar even before the 5 generation airplanes were put into operation. New radar L-band is already advertised NIIP:
    I will continue further.
  28. rolik
    rolik 22 January 2014 23: 03
    +6
    Quote: rolik
    I will continue further.

    I continue.
    The new L-band AFAR is supposed to be installed in the leading edges of the wings and this work has obviously been carried out for a long time. Which is perfectly represented in the T-50. However, before the appearance of working samples, this technique was not officially discussed at all. The modest skeptical statements by our aircraft designers about stealth technology did not attract much media attention and were rarely quoted. Maybe this also made sense? Let a competitor invest in dead-end stealth methods, spend hundreds of billions of them, and we, having spent only a few million, make them completely useless? Only recently, already publicly advertised in the open, the achievements of NIIP in terms of radar in the L-band attracted the attention of Western experts and immediately caused a violent reaction:
    “The JSF program is an example of the complete abstraction of the heady JSF community from the operational reality of the world. This technology [L-band detection] should have been foreseen ten years ago, given the development in the US of AESA L-band radars for systems like Wedgetail AEW & C / AWACS. .. Systems whose survivability depends almost entirely on reduced visibility for X-band radars, such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, F / A-18E / F Super Hornet and F-15SE Silent Eagle, are now visible. for fighters carrying L-band radars, and thus become highly vulnerable to air combat over long distances over the horizon. "
    On November 8, 2009, their independent military analytical agency APA (Air Power Australia) conducted a full comparison of 5th generation aircraft with the latest Russian models and the result of these studies was presented in the form of a letter to the head of the Pentagon, Robert Gates. In the comparison table, out of the many criteria for 5th generation compliance, the F-22 scored 2 points, like our Su-35, while the F-35 gave negative points of -8 points, not satisfying most of the criteria. The leader of the table was our PAK FA T-50, scoring +5 points. At the end of the letter, the experts stated quite philosophically: The fact that this invention does not lie in the best interests of our nations and allies, who, in good faith, agreed to participate in the JSF program, is also self-evident, stemming from the same complete indifference to reality that it gave us the global financial crisis and its most dangerous results, global economic restructuring. The fact that the JSF program requires changes is beyond doubt. How this can be best achieved is well understood by an international group of experts in the Australian Air Force, whose advice, to date, has been ignored by most of those who advise you.
    Here is such a sentence. I agree with local experts, lovers of everything not ours will not like this. This is their own business. Then let me take my leave. Respectfully (this respect does not apply to cacklers)
  29. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 23: 13
    -2
    Quote: rolik
    Then let me take my leave. Respectfully (this respect does not apply to cacklers)

    An interesting review, based on it about the effectiveness of this or that aircraft, we can say "but fig knows it and maybe we will pull our eyes on jo..y, you need to try" laughing
  30. brainkiller
    brainkiller 22 January 2014 23: 00
    0
    Quote: rolik
    And according to the estimates of Russian military experts, modern technologies created under the Stealth program can reduce the effective scattering area (EPR) of aircraft by up to 70 percent compared to aircraft of traditional schemes.

    I don’t know whether or not the bike, but the EPR of an airplane with stealth technology is recorded in the table of our air defense at the same level as the flock of flying ducks =)))
  31. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 23: 17
    0
    Quote: brainkiller
    in the table of our air defense at the same level as the flock of flying ducks =)))

    In the duty room, I saw a table of silhouettes of different aircraft, and below each type a dot indicated the signal size on the radar, so the stealth was placed in the category of a flock of birds, or something like that (I watched it for a long time and didn't pay much attention)
  32. The comment was deleted.
  33. patsantre
    patsantre 22 January 2014 19: 38
    -3
    Compare RVV-SD and Aim-120C, compare their range and only then crow about superiority.
    Look at the characteristics of our long-range missiles for overloads and think about whether they can be used in fighter jets.
    About Irbis, it is claimed that he discovers targets with an EPR of 3 m2 at a distance of 400 km. Do you really believe that a fighter can detect targets at a distance greater than the AWACS plane?
    And where is the confidence that the Su-35 will be able to evade missiles? Is this verified by experience?
  34. rolik
    rolik 22 January 2014 22: 00
    +3
    Quote: patsantre
    only then crow

    For girls I explain. RVV-MD short-range missile. Aim-120C medium-range missile.
    so that before clucking, study the material. And then, as usual, farted into a puddle.
  35. patsantre
    patsantre 23 January 2014 00: 43
    -2
    wassat Did you at least learn to read you at school?) Do you feel the differences between RVV-MD and RVV-SD? For the rest, there is nothing to say? If I were you, I wouldn’t even hang out. Another kind of sneak was a plus, after all)
  36. rolik
    rolik 23 January 2014 12: 42
    +2
    Quote: patsantre
    Have you been taught to read at school?

    Taught to read and write. Unlike middle-level managers, I have a more interesting profession. In my comment I talked about a short-range missile. In the park a little confused.
    No question, back to the topic, you can even compare not with RVV-SD but with RVV-AE: AIM-120C - launch range 105 km, RVV-AE / SD 110 km .: AIM-120C speed 4 m, RVV-AE 4.5 m: guidance system AIM-120C ANN + ARGS, RVV-AE ANN + LRK + ARGS.
    Now show me the advantage of AIM-120C-5
    Or go and learn the material more carefully. Probably the teachings of V.I. Lenin, but rather did not even hear about them. Managers they are such managers))))))
  37. patsantre
    patsantre 23 January 2014 16: 25
    -2
    Sorry, AIM-120D, 180 km range, our missiles did not stand nearby. Is there anything to blather?
  38. My doctor
    My doctor 22 January 2014 21: 49
    +1
    Quote: rolik
    Especially if you take the means of destruction. Our rockets are superior to mattresses by an order of magnitude.
    Gosha belay Do the pilots know about this?
  39. rolik
    rolik 22 January 2014 21: 53
    +1
    Quote: MyVrach
    Quote: rolik
    Especially if you take the means of destruction. Our rockets are superior to mattresses by an order of magnitude.
    Gosha belay Do the pilots know about this?

    Pilots yes, and you ????
  40. eagle11
    eagle11 23 January 2014 13: 38
    -2
    Will not find the first Su-35, "Light". And what AWACS finds first is the way it should be. It is foolish to dispute the advantage of the American system of government, it is an order of magnitude better than ours. The level of training, technical condition of aircraft, the reconnaissance and electronic warfare system of the US Air Force and Navy are at their best. We don't have much stupidly.
    There is no need for a hat, only today I took part in a small "war", the results are not encouraging.
  41. Mihail29
    Mihail29 22 January 2014 17: 55
    +3
    What does it mean whether it can get closer, and the fact that our radars on planes determine and capture targets at a distance of almost two times more than that of the United States and air-to-air missiles fly one and a half times further.
  42. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 18: 19
    -4
    Quote: Michael29
    What does it mean whether it can get closer, and the fact that our radars on planes determine and capture targets at a distance of almost two times more than that of the United States and air-to-air missiles fly one and a half times further.

    Dear, I brought you the data that is distributed on the Internet, you can sit down with a calculator and scribble who whom and at what distance will detect based on this EPR.
    Neither I nor you know REAL or approximate data, so let's proceed from what is in the open press. And do not use your desires like "we have the most trainable trains"
  43. dustycat
    dustycat 22 January 2014 19: 42
    +4
    These data with a closed bomb bay.
    Given the installation on the F35 AFAR - this AFAR will at its resonant and spurious frequencies give an echo mom do not worry.
    And how it will glow at frequencies of 600 MHz is not exactly 0,01 sq m for sure.
    In some evolutions, the F35 also has an EPR of at least 4–7 sq m.
    Allies in NATO have blabbed about this several times.
  44. Tektor
    Tektor 22 January 2014 21: 50
    0
    Our designers calculated the EPR of Fu-22 and got a value of 0,1-0,5 m2 depending on the angle. And now CARCASES !, but this is not for the L range, on which the value is an order of magnitude greater. And our Fak On L-radar has ...
  45. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 22: 08
    -1
    Quote: Tektor
    Our designers calculated the EPR of Fu-22 and got a value of 0,1-0,5 m2 depending on the angle. And now CARCASES !, but this is not for the L range, on which the value is an order of magnitude greater. And our Fak On L-radar has ...

    And what did F-22 get into their hands? And why did they shield the EPR for another division? And for how do you say the L range is not counted? And why should he be higher in it?
  46. brainkiller
    brainkiller 22 January 2014 23: 07
    +3
    Quote: rolik2
    And what did F-22 get into their hands? And why did they shield the EPR for another division? And for how do you say the L range is not counted? And why should he be higher in it?
    it’s all about the applied radar absorbing coatings of a narrow range and the glider geometry itself, therefore, when the irradiation frequency changes, the energy of the reflected signal changes
  47. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 22: 05
    +2
    Yeah, and the Su-35, which generally has no elements in the airframe to reduce its visibility, and with its AFAR has an EPR less than the F-35? Do not tell, dear, you contradict yourself.
  48. SV
    SV 22 January 2014 21: 06
    +2
    Before you write nonsense - study the topic ... There is no desire to even comment !!!!!!!! No.
  49. Angry reader
    Angry reader 22 January 2014 17: 59
    +5
    The roller itself rollllists1 Trollik in the world!) If so, mushrooms would grow in your mouth - do you know that?))
  50. dustycat
    dustycat 22 January 2014 19: 18
    +3
    Quote: rolik2
    Can a drying radar identify an enemy before launching missiles?

    It’s no secret to anyone what will happen.
    Its radar operates in the longer wavelength range.
    And this already makes the mattress stealth more visible.
    Everyone already knows that the invisibility of mattress covers is invisible only to the radars of the mattress covers.
    That's when the Yankees finally give the Jews themselves to fill gliders - it will be interesting.
    And so - they still have not really learned how to fly.
    And generally speaking.
    There are more orders for the FA-18 than for the F35.
    And the trend is towards replacing orders for f35 with orders for upgraded FA18.
    Campaign affairs in the aviation industry of mattress are going nowhere better than once they are given such advertising here.
    Bullshit.
  51. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 22: 12
    -3
    Quote: dustycat
    Its radar operates in the longer wavelength range.

    Are you so sure Look, is the friend above sure that they work in the L range? And what is the range of the radar? 5-10 GHz? so it’s not essential, stealth is visible on the subway range radars, and the one that is in the fighter jets doesn’t reach the meter
  52. JIaIIoTb
    JIaIIoTb 22 January 2014 21: 26
    +4
    According to a study by the Australian analytical center Air Power Australia, published in February 2009, the level of Russian air defense systems reached a level at which the possibility of survival of US military aviation is excluded during armed conflict

    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C2%EE%E5%ED%ED%EE-%E2%EE%E7%E4%F3%F8%ED%FB%E5_%F1%
    E8%EB%FB_%D0%EE%F1%F1%E8%E9%F1%EA%EE%E9_%D4%E5%E4%E5%F0%E0%F6%E8%E8

    This I mean that our plane will already have all the necessary information on the enemy’s aircraft.
    And if a miracle happens and the 5th generation of Amer will survive the breakthrough of air defense, he still will not have long to live.
  53. Lyokhin63
    Lyokhin63 22 January 2014 21: 33
    +3
    for two))) not possible)))
    And not the first time, this is not a typo))).
    Something anecdote recalled the old.
    A man was preparing for the abandonment, for 10 years he had studied language, obscene, literary, culture, especially relationships, in short everything.
    They threw it over the forest, buried it, they put on a padded jacket, boots on their bare feet, drank a liter of vodka. Found a path, reached the village, knocking on the first hut:
    - Grandma, give me some water to drink!
    -Milo! You’re no way American spies!
    - !!! Yes, why did you get it, grandma !!!
    - Yes, we have not seen blacks in our village!
  54. Tersky
    Tersky 22 January 2014 22: 06
    +7
    Quote: rolik2
    When fighting one on one, pair on pair - the outcome of the battle in favor of Drying can be predetermined BUT again what will be the conditions of the battle? Can a drying radar identify an enemy before launching missiles? (The fact that drying will be detected by Light is first not in dispute

    By whom, by you? To destroy the Su-35, the F-35 fighter must come closer, thereby putting itself at risk of being detected (a powerful Su-35 radar could well do this, especially since this aircraft has in its arsenal the most long-range air combat missiles with a range of 400 km developed by the company “Pennant”, which is a world record) And in the melee Su-35С with its supernatural ability to fly at minimum speeds and at the same time sharply accelerate to supersonic speeds, turns into a hunter. The maximum speed of the aircraft is 2,5M, the flight range is 3600 km, in the configuration of an air combat fighter it can carry 12 medium-range Vympel missiles (probably referring to the UR P-77 of various modifications. The F-35 fighter can carry only a handful of missiles, the flight range is only 2222 km, and its maximum speed 1,6M, it seems, only speaks of the desire to "die soon." here And lastly, stop infinitely unreasonably neglecting with a silent glanders, + or - connotations are not intended to express sympathy or atypies to the commentator, but this comment is useful for determining or it does not carry any meaning.
  55. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 22: 56
    -2
    Quote: Tersky
    To destroy the Su-35, the F-35 fighter must come closer, thereby exposing itself to the risk of being detected

    What a fright? AIM-120 missiles range from 100 to 180 km
    http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/aim120/aim120.shtml

    the powerful Su-35 radar can well do this, all the more this aircraft has in its arsenal the most long-range air combat missiles with a range of 400 km

    To use them, you still need to see who to shoot at, and the declared range of 400 km is obviously a linden, well, the fighter’s radar cannot see further than AWACS, and don’t tell me how with the number of these missiles? And it’s not so long ago on this site they analyzed the situation in which it turned out that there are new missiles, but in scanty quantities.

    The maximum speed of the aircraft is 2,5M, the flight range is 3600 km, in the configuration of an air combat fighter it can carry 12 Vympel medium-range missiles (probably, the UR R-77 of various modifications are meant. The F-35 fighter can carry only a handful missiles, the flight range is only 2222 km, and its maximum speed of 1,6 M, it seems, speaks only of the desire to "die soon."

    And here, I fundamentally disagree with you, we are climbing into the embrasure, trying to impose close combat on the enemy (where we have no equal), but the Americans were not noticed in this, they have the advantage of stealth, the presence of AWACS, REB aircraft. This is enough to get close to a distance of 100-150 km in the radio silence mode with a tip from AWAXA under the guise of the REB aircraft and fall down without waiting for drying to overtake you.
    Recently I read the memories of pilots with zbitiz Americans Migov so they got a rocket to the side without even knowing where the enemy is.

    And lastly, stop infinitely unreasonably neglecting with a silent glanders, + or - connotations are not intended to express sympathy or atypies to the commentator, but this comment is useful for determining or it does not carry any meaning.

    Dear, I only minus such comrades like "Oh, what a beautiful airplane you need another 100-200 no better than 500 pieces"
    Those who can normally conduct a conversation, and give technically competent refutations, I do not deny, well, if you do not shield those cases with which I fundamentally disagree
  56. Tersky
    Tersky 22 January 2014 23: 39
    +2
    Quote: rolik2
    Those who can normally conduct a conversation, and give technically competent refutations, I do not deny, well, if you do not shield those cases with which I fundamentally disagree

    From the rules of the site-On the site it is forbidden to purposefully methodically lower the opponent’s rating, i.e. multiple minus one user’s comments. For other questions, I have provided you -
    Quote: rolik2
    technically competent rebuttals
  57. rolik2
    rolik2 22 January 2014 23: 59
    +1
    Quote: Tersky
    A purposeful methodical reduction of the opponent’s rating, i.e. multiple minus one user’s comments. P

    I don’t abuse it,

    Quote: Tersky
    I have provided you -
    Quote: rolik2
    technically competent rebuttals


    and here it’s nice to deal with you, I don’t quite agree, but I am satisfied with the discussion with you, there would be more such comrades on the site. hi
  58. Angry reader
    Angry reader 23 January 2014 03: 53
    0
    Tersky, I'm sorry, I will do my bit ... under the nickname rolik2 is hiding as a minimum of the NSA, as a maximum of Snowden, everyone knows, and on both sides.))
    troll. and explicit
  59. skiff-xnumx
    skiff-xnumx 22 January 2014 22: 36
    0
    Again write nonsense about a one-on-one battle. Not strong in aviation, so I will explain using the example of Sq. I think the basic laws differ only in the environment. Let’s say two objects come together on opposite courses and are located to each other the most favorable sphere in front of it. Roughly speaking, there is active (feed-reflection-reception) and passive (listening) sonar. So in the water you can hear the noise of the screws, but in the air I didn’t hear anything about this technology and to find the target and direct the rocket at it you need to turn on the active radar and here, about a miracle, the praised penguin glows like a Christmas tree and how it is made there . Point the rockets and shoot. And it’s not the fact that they will detect or detect you have time to shoot. And you imagine what will happen if the territory of the Russian Federation is pulled with an ax. I think no one is good.
  60. Angry reader
    Angry reader 24 January 2014 04: 52
    0
    liberty-mind ... does not reproduce such options. Everything is democratic, tolerant rolllist)
  • yehat
    yehat 22 January 2014 17: 37
    +1
    simulations of the battle on the computer were carried out, there was a huge advantage at drying due to the fact that in the melee one wicket. At a long distance, the F-35 has a slight advantage - after modernization of the EPR, drying was seriously reduced and the superiority in the detection range became insignificant.
    1. rolik2
      rolik2 22 January 2014 17: 55
      -9
      Quote: yehat
      simulations of the battle on the computer were carried out, there was a huge advantage at drying due to the fact that in the melee one wicket. At a long distance, the F-35 has a slight advantage - after modernization of the EPR, drying was seriously reduced and the superiority in the detection range became insignificant.


      I also rolled armada of fighters and bombers on simulators, reality is not a simulator.

      after EPR modernization, drying was seriously reduced and the superiority in detection range became negligible.

      Read above
      Detection range of large aerodynamic targets such as fighter radar F-35 (EPR> 1 m²) up to 270-300 km, cruise missile (0,1-0,5 m²) - up to 150 km,

      The detection range of the N035 "Irbis" radar for air targets of the fighter type (with an RCS of 3 m²) is up to 400 km. "

      F-35 - EPR 0,005 sq. m
      Su-35 - EPR from 1 to 4 m ^ 2, depending on the suspension.
      1. yehat
        yehat 22 January 2014 18: 04
        +3
        we are talking about American simulations f-35 vs su-35.
        I did not spend them)))
        as for real combat, at a large and medium range it can be modeled quite well. Algorithms for battle simulators of this type have long been developed.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • dustycat
    dustycat 22 January 2014 19: 06
    +9
    Have you seen the movie of the training battle with rafal ?!
    He couldn’t get into rafalu (!).
    What Su35UVT will do with it is not even funny.
    1. rolik2
      rolik2 22 January 2014 19: 14
      -1
      Quote: dustycat
      Have you seen the movie of the training battle with rafal ?!
      He couldn’t get into rafalu (!).
      What Su35UVT will do with it is not even funny.

      I saw videos when the pilot normally could not land the plane. Put you on a Formula 1 car and let them drive along the streets of a small town for distillation with a penny whose driver hit it hundreds of thousands of kilometers, who do you think will blow up whom ???
  • Tersky
    Tersky 22 January 2014 21: 24
    +3
    Quote: rolik2
    And who will emerge victorious from this fight is now impossible to determine.

    In July 2008 of the year, an air battle simulation was carried out with the participation of a Su-35 fighter against a mixed fleet of American fighters - F-22, F / A-18 Super Hornet and F-35, where the latter was "beaten with a baton as a child." The simulation was carried out on the basis of the US Air Force Hikam in Hawaii, which was witnessed by at least four representatives of the Australian Air Force and military intelligence. Australian MP Dennis Jensen expertly stated that during the "highly classified simulation" of the F-35 was "mercilessly beaten by a Su-35 fighter." here everything is defined there, quite detailed and justified.
    1. Tersky
      Tersky 22 January 2014 21: 48
      +1
      And this is a visual aid to the capabilities of SU-35С, give me something similar about F-35, maybe I doubt it.
    2. rolik2
      rolik2 22 January 2014 22: 15
      -1
      As you do not understand that the simulation does not give a real result, I ride in the nymphospide better than the Schumacher, and in fifa 2012 I play better than the Ronaldo, and in real life I go mediocre, but I don’t play foodball in general. So it is here.
  • saber1357
    saber1357 23 January 2014 01: 28
    0
    Of course, it is impossible - what will come out of the battle between the non-existent and the imaginary, but how can this be imagined ....
  • Mihail29
    Mihail29 22 January 2014 17: 49
    +4
    And you read your F-35 cord’s characteristics — some show-offs, and the American pilots lost to our pilots many times in training and in the air and simulators, although they have much more hours / hours than ours because they fight and serve for fila, yes and used to fight with which countries.
    1. SV
      SV 22 January 2014 21: 16
      +2
      even Hindus on our MIGs (or Sushki) didn’t roll on mattresses during a training battle / about three years ago (there is data in the press, look - laziness)
  • dustycat
    dustycat 22 January 2014 19: 04
    +2
    Quote: rolik
    And F-35 is ready)))) for the battle ... well, at least with the SU-35 ?? )))))))

    As a training target.
    And so ready that the Israelis are ready to buy only a glider.
    The offal from the mattresses is not at all interesting to them, especially at the price of the service for it.
    Moreover, the super toy cannot even really finish the test program.
    And apparently in time for the adoption of PAKFA
    1. rolik2
      rolik2 22 January 2014 19: 11
      -6
      Quote: dustycat
      And so ready that the Israelis are ready to buy only a glider.
      The offal from the mattresses is not at all interesting to them, especially at the price of the service for it.


      Why overpay for what you can do yourself? Do not shield them with fools, they know how to shield money, theirs avionics are not inferior to American, so why pay more ??
      But this does not mean that avionics is shit on Light.

      Quote: dustycat
      Moreover, the super toy cannot even really finish the test program.

      Are you so sure about this?
      In particular, it is reported that since December 2006, the F-35 performed more than 7100 flights with a total flight time of more than 11000 hours (the first AA-1 prototype completed the 91 flight).

      How many T-50s did departures? How many hours were in the sky?
      The T-50 already has enough problems, and this does not mean that in the future, with an increase in raid, they will not appear anymore. All the same, the car is a huge number of innovations and not everything will go smoothly.
  • eagle11
    eagle11 23 January 2014 13: 24
    0
    Do we have full-fledged serial Su-35s? Oh well...
  • evgenii67
    evgenii67 23 January 2014 14: 09
    0
    Quote: rolik
    And F-35 is ready)))) for the battle ... well, at least with the SU-35 ??

    You put it this way, "AT LEAST with the Su-35" The Su-35 is the best that we have in fighter aviation, I would like to believe that in general it has no competitors.
  • vovanbesmert
    vovanbesmert 17 May 2014 00: 43
    0
    than su 35 exceeds f 35. Maneuverability of f 35 is not needed, this indicator neutralizes the side-driver 9X - this wunderwaffle can be a nightmare for our fighters 1. the matrix head of this rocket with high resolution is not sensitive to infrared traps (the missile hit 21 out of 22 targets during testing ( there were jamming operations against the missiles) 2. The variable thrust vector gives this missile superior maneuverability - higher than that of the p73 (alas, even the su35 may not go away.) 3 AIM9X version 3 is planned with an increased range (50-55 km) and this is already an indicator medium-range missiles and the type P27er, etc., with the maneuverability of short-range missiles.
  • sds555
    sds555 22 January 2014 16: 43
    +7
    Quote: gunnerminer
    Is the T-50 ready to take part in training air battles?

    This is not the case, just the guys are not too lazy, go to his profile, look at his comments, there is a solid negative you will immediately realize that he is a troll!
  • GSH-18
    GSH-18 22 January 2014 16: 50
    +6
    Quote: sds555
    Again this troll brought! By whose order are you obsessing the Russian military-industrial complex in all topics? !!

    You see what s.tsuko! Minusanula and dumped!
  • mirag2
    mirag2 22 January 2014 17: 27
    +1
    Let me speak about the Russian defense industry:
    here, somewhere recently, a question was asked, why do we create associations (holdings)?
    -for cutting dough?
    Quote from an article by Primakov:
    “The participation of our defense enterprises in the consolidation of assets into large holdings is becoming increasingly important, which allows defense companies to advance in the creation of new types of weapons and at the same time expand the production of civilian products. Such a“ maneuver ”was successfully carried out by the United States, where in the 90s the assets of Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, and Raytheon were merged. "
  • sds555
    sds555 22 January 2014 19: 57
    +1
    In the course of the user under the nickname gunnerminer jumped and caught a ban, all his comments from all branches were deleted Here is a repost of one comment from a neighboring branch
    Greyfox (3) RU January 13, 2014 14:33 p.m. ↑
    For those not in the know. The gunnerminer character became very famous thanks to his comments on bmpd. Caught on Russophobia and incompetence. Likes to speculate on naval topics, thickly sprinkling posts with terms and abbreviations. At the same time, they are fired either on ignorance of the forms of admission to information constituting a state secret, then they begin to treat the pilot YES about the Tu-95 types. I talked about the unsettledness of the pilots at the NITK in Yeisk, yellow stains on the mattresses of the sailors on the "Kuza", now about the toilets in Dzemgi. I saw everything personally, knows everyone by name. The last annealing-measurement of insulation resistance in volts. Admirals-generals to him in line for a report (judging by the information he is operating).
    Now, from far away, in France, she is sad about the routine of the flight personnel (its trademark expression). Only until yesterday it was vaguely imagining where this airdrome is located
    And here she’s also going through combat training ... Do not take care of yourself, Gunya.
  • Wiruz
    Wiruz 22 January 2014 16: 20
    +1
    It’s quite suitable for staging on the desktop. No for combat training.

    As the saying goes, What is your evidence?
    1. gunnerminer
      gunnerminer 22 January 2014 16: 28
      -1
      Quote: Wiruz
      It’s quite suitable for staging on the desktop. No for combat training.

      As the saying goes, What is your evidence?


      The machine, which has not been adopted for service, does not represent combat value for the Air Force. This is a fact. This is proof. You can by your decree accept this flying layout for placing on your desktop.
      1. sds555
        sds555 22 January 2014 16: 33
        +11
        Quote: gunnerminer
        The machine, which has not been adopted for service, does not represent combat value for the Air Force. This is a fact. This is proof. You can by your decree accept this flying layout for placing on your desktop.

        This is the fabrication of a real troll !!!
  • GSH-18
    GSH-18 22 January 2014 16: 29
    +1
    Quote: gunnerminer
    It’s quite suitable for staging on the desktop. No for combat training.

    But for the real, how else! hi
    1. gunnerminer
      gunnerminer 22 January 2014 16: 32
      -4
      Quote: GSH-18
      Quote: gunnerminer
      It’s quite suitable for staging on the desktop. No for combat training.

      But for the real, how else! hi


      At which theater of operations was the T-50 used? In real aerial combat? With which enemy?
      1. GSH-18
        GSH-18 22 January 2014 16: 40
        +1
        Quote: gunnerminer
        At which theater of operations was the T-50 used? In real aerial combat? With which enemy?

        Readiness for hostilities is practically determined by the fact that the technical specifications of the Ministry of Defense correspond to existing aircraft and weapons. What in fact has already happened. hi
        1. Fofan
          Fofan 22 January 2014 16: 45
          -10%
          Quote: GSH-18

          Readiness for hostilities is practically determined by the fact that the technical specifications of the Ministry of Defense correspond to existing aircraft and weapons. What in fact has already happened. hi

          yeah the acting samples are powerful. 1-2 pieces per country, without the possibility of mass production. straight poet's dream.
    2. Fofan
      Fofan 22 January 2014 16: 37
      -17%
      Quote: GSH-18
      Quote: gunnerminer
      It’s quite suitable for staging on the desktop. No for combat training.

      But for the real, how else! hi

      you still gsh18 remove from the profile picture
      they released a couple of thousand and covered the shop. also with the T-50 will be. build 50, shout "we have the best aircraft" and disperse. first time chtoli ...
      1. gunnerminer
        gunnerminer 22 January 2014 16: 41
        0
        Only audible. By 2015, by 2020. A promising, unparalleled, under construction, planned, will be adopted, laid, designed. The capabilities of the aviation industry of the Russian Federation are such that 50 T-50s will be built 30 years before communism.
      2. GSH-18
        GSH-18 22 January 2014 16: 44
        +1
        Quote: Fofan
        you still gsh18 remove from the profile picture
        they were released a couple of thousand and covered the bench

        It was clearly not limited to a couple of thousand there, since this model went "for cardon" (not counting its own Armed Forces) in good batches to arm the special forces of various states. You are greatly mistaken about the "cover of the shop".
        1. Fofan
          Fofan 22 January 2014 16: 51
          -7
          Quote: GSH-18

          It was clearly not limited to a couple of thousand there, since this model went "for cardon" (not counting its own Armed Forces) in good batches to arm the special forces of various states. You are greatly mistaken about the "cover of the shop".

          just wrong, bring at least one tsiferka with the source. and no one leads, but do you know why? because it will not be sold raw and without refinement.
  • velikoros-xnumx
    velikoros-xnumx 22 January 2014 21: 38
    +1
    And I have these two beauties
    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2014/111/vsym534.jpg
    and at work tu-160
  • sds555
    sds555 22 January 2014 15: 33
    +19
    Wonderful video by Konstantin Khmelik Landing without a parachute! That's cool!
    1. askort154
      askort154 22 January 2014 16: 18
      +10
      sds555

      Thank you and Konstantin Khmelik for the pleasure! I look with delight and think: if I showed this video about 50 years ago in the aerodynamics class, then not only pilots, but also aerodynamics teachers, would go crazy, not believing their eyes.
      You won’t be envious of those guys who happen to fly such a wonderful beauty. Although it should be so: a new generation - a new technique.
      1. sds555
        sds555 22 January 2014 16: 28
        +4
        askort154
        Not at all, I myself root for the aviation and the army! Yours faithfully hi
    2. dr.star75
      dr.star75 22 January 2014 17: 00
      +4
      Beauty! As you know, beauty will save the world. This beauty needs a thousand. For starters, and then for the current need.
    3. dr.star75
      dr.star75 22 January 2014 17: 54
      0
      FLY. FLYING. And let's fly!
    4. BOB48
      BOB48 22 January 2014 18: 40
      +1
      Thank you for the video!!!!!
    5. dzvero
      dzvero 22 January 2014 22: 00
      0
      Thank you and the author of the video for a wonderful video! The car is a masterpiece! On the earth it looks somehow awkward, but after take-off ... as if aerodynamics had nothing to do with it!
  • gunnerminer
    gunnerminer 22 January 2014 15: 58
    -2
    Outwardly handsome. But not ready for sale for export and for transfer to the Russian Air Force.
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 22 January 2014 16: 27
      +1
      F-35 is not ready either.
      1. gunnerminer
        gunnerminer 22 January 2014 16: 33
        -1
        Not ready. Who is arguing?
      2. Pimply
        Pimply 22 January 2014 17: 39
        -1
        Quote: EvilLion

        EvilLion Today, 16:27 ↑ New
        F-35 is not ready either.


        He has a small series going. Moreover, in a small series of aircraft - more than planned purchases of PAK FA
        1. dr.star75
          dr.star75 22 January 2014 18: 45
          +5
          We, too, first the T-34 in small portions of the release!
  • GSH-18
    GSH-18 22 January 2014 16: 26
    +6
    Yes, it’s not cold and hot for us from their conclusions hi
    By the fact that after being put on the PAK FA series, their Fu-35 will not be interesting to us in principle. Next, we will equip a couple of AUGs with marine versions, and we will drive all this flying wunderwaffle across the Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean, in order to train young pilots! yes
    1. gunnerminer
      gunnerminer 22 January 2014 16: 37
      0
      Quote: GSH-18
      Yes, it’s not cold and hot for us from their conclusions hi
      By the fact that after being put on the PAK FA series, their Fu-35 will not be interesting to us in principle. Next, we will equip a couple of AUGs with marine versions, and we will drive all this flying wunderwaffle across the Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean, in order to train young pilots! yes



      Who are you going to staff? Anatoly Eduardovich Serdyukov liquidated naval schools and military aviation schools. With the help of his assistant Mrs. Priezheva, he reformed the military education system so that the Academy of the General Staff of the Russian Federation for another 15 years will not be able to train senior officers capable of managing the aforementioned AUG.
  • yehat
    yehat 22 January 2014 15: 26
    +5
    I think everyone forgot about China.
    They can significantly affect the sales structure by exporting their latest developments.
    Yes, our T50 promises to be better, but for the price after some disagreement with India, I think there will be a lot of problems.
    1. Jurkovs
      Jurkovs 22 January 2014 16: 06
      +1
      The arms race has driven second-tier countries into a dead end. The results of recent tenders in India and Brazil say that these countries are ready to buy, if only to buy regardless of any performance characteristics and hoping that countries of the first echelon will not attack them.
      1. yehat
        yehat 22 January 2014 16: 50
        +1
        this is not entirely true. Rather, they defiantly refused to fight for air supremacy and focused on the practice of exploitation - price, maintenance, resource, and the possibility of using a modern range of weapons and avionics. This is exactly the choice made by the Brazilians (although, as I understand it, they were in a hurry and had a large shortage of funds)
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. GSH-18
      GSH-18 22 January 2014 16: 37
      +6
      Quote: yehat
      Yes, our T50 promises to be better, but for the price after some disagreement with India, I think there will be a lot of problems.

      All this is bullshit. The plane is almost ready. Roughness testing is underway, before being accepted into the Air Force and putting into series. Moreover, new weapons are ready for him.
      Russia is able to develop and rearm its air forces for the 5th generation itself. And, as always was before that, our planes are the best in the world! Like the MiG-15, Su-27, MiG-29, etc. in due time. yes
      1. yehat
        yehat 22 January 2014 16: 46
        -1
        Quote: GSH-18

        All this is bullshit. The plane is almost ready.

        ready ???
        I know for sure that not everything has been decided with Avionics - because of the failure of India.
        I know for sure that the engines of the 2nd stage still did not even put on an experimental aircraft
        I know for sure that the weapons control system and radar equipment were not tested on long-range firing (for which the whole plane was conceived)
        and is it called ready?
        and they say there are a number of some minor annoying problems, for example, with a catapult.
        1. GSH-18
          GSH-18 22 January 2014 17: 00
          +1
          Quote: yehat
          I know for sure that not everything has been decided with Avionics - because of the failure of India.

          Since when has Indian avionics become the best in the world? belay
          Quote: yehat
          and they say there are a number of some minor annoying problems, for example, with a catapult.

          There is definitely no problem with the catapult there, the other day they showed it on TV.
          Quote: yehat
          I know for sure that the weapons control system and radar equipment were not tested on long-range firing (for which the whole plane was conceived)

          Well, let’s just check in practice, according to Fu-35! laughing
          Do not fence the garden - you do not know how things really are. The project is classified. However, according to indirect data, we can confidently conclude that everything is going well, and the Russian Federation will soon become the owner of a new, powerful strike aircraft, in many ways ahead of the much-praised new Western models yes
          1. yehat
            yehat 22 January 2014 17: 04
            -1
            Indian investments were originally planned for electronics and avionics. The Indians refused, because of this, the beginning of the development and its course were disrupted. And in a hurry and lack of funds (which were knocked out in a firefight), you can nakosyachit or do something unfinished.

            and on what "many" characteristics of the t50 is better, do you even know?
            balabol)))
            1. GSH-18
              GSH-18 22 January 2014 17: 08
              +2
              Quote: yehat
              And in a hurry and lack of funds (which were knocked out in a firefight), you can nakosyachit or do something unfinished.

              You can screw up. And OKB "Sukhoi" makes the best strike aircraft in the WORLD.
              1. yehat
                yehat 22 January 2014 17: 12
                -2
                Yes? then read how Sukhoi lost the pilot during the creation of the su-27 generation.
                also in a hurry ...
              2. The comment was deleted.
          2. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • dr.star75
    dr.star75 22 January 2014 16: 46
    0
    Yes, no, that's right, if HE is in the air, fuhh the leader in losses!
  • Yankuz
    Yankuz 22 January 2014 18: 04
    0
    Rather, they do not take it seriously ...
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Sharingan
    Sharingan 22 January 2014 18: 56
    +2
    Quote: sds555
    But they forgot this beauty! Or maybe they’re specially afraid

    And we will release them 500 pieces in 4 years, like Lockheed Martin?
    And "beauty" has nothing to do with it, as well as "coolness". Who buys from whom is decided not by the military, but by the politician, focusing on the geopolitical situation.
  • Army1
    Army1 22 January 2014 20: 25
    0
    On Su 30 do not plan to put Afar? or is he so good? In general, if you remove the castrated aug fighters from the states, about 2000 air force fighter, navy air force, national guard air force, most light vehicles. To protect the homeland, with the East Kazakhstan region and the Air Force, we will not allow anyone to gain superiority in our skies. But if you have to defend your interests abroad, but we have to, we need more light front-line vehicles.
  • saber1357
    saber1357 23 January 2014 01: 27
    +1
    Everything is much simpler, they just copy the English article on the bourgeois website, translate it into Russian and put their own label "Author Nikolai Novichkov", as if the real original author was not a CIA public relations officer at all. Behind the Russian text, there are even clichés from English, for example, "unit cost" - "per unit" and so on. And here is an example of a very similar English text http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_12_16_2013_p0-64717
    3.xml
  • RUSS
    RUSS 22 January 2014 15: 21
    +12
    According to foreign analysts, the leading player in this market will be the American company Lockheed Martin with a fifth-generation fighter F-35.

    Well, whoever doubts, we fully believe foreign analysts laughing
    1. 0255
      0255 22 January 2014 16: 22
      0
      Quote: RUSS
      According to foreign analysts, the leading player in this market will be the American company Lockheed Martin with a fifth-generation fighter F-35.

      among pro-American countries, yes.
      And whoever is not friends with the States will buy Russian or Chinese fighters, where should they go. Or buy Rafal or Gripen
  • Stiletto
    Stiletto 22 January 2014 15: 23
    +15
    No, it’s just that the analysis was not taking into account China, India, Russia, which are precisely the main competitors for Lockheed and others like him in aircraft production.
    1. rolik2
      rolik2 22 January 2014 16: 31
      +3
      Quote: Stiletto
      China, India, Russia, which are precisely the main competitors for Lockheed


      I don’t think that the countries of the NATO bloc will go to buy airplanes from China, India, and Russia. That and they can not now offer it, not only for export but also for their Air Force (China has 3 prototypes, and Russia 5)
      In the next 10 years, Lockheed is the only company that is ready to export aircraft of this class.
      1. GSH-18
        GSH-18 22 January 2014 17: 05
        +1
        Quote: rolik2
        (China has 3 prototypes, and Russia 5)

        Amendment, at the end of the 13th year of the Russian Federation had 8 flying prototypes T-50.
        1. rolik2
          rolik2 22 January 2014 17: 14
          -2
          Quote: GSH-18
          At the end of the 13th year, the Russian Federation had 8 flying prototypes of the T-50.

          eight to ten is not so important but at the moment and another 10 years of the Russian Federation will not compete with Lockheed.
          1. bask
            bask 23 January 2014 00: 33
            +2
            F-35, in the West, Asia and in Israel.
            Prasrali your Yak 141, he could be in the No. 1 sales leaders.

            1. Apollo
              Apollo 23 January 2014 00: 40
              +1
              Quote: bask
              Prasrali your Yak 141, he could be in the No. 1 sales leaders.


              I welcome you bask hi
            2. Pimply
              Pimply 23 January 2014 02: 33
              0
              Quote: bask
              F-35, in the West, Asia and in Israel.
              Prasrali your Yak 141, he could be in the No. 1 sales leaders.

              Why? Very little is taken from the Yak-141, but the B version does not differ in a large number of machines and few will order it.
  • brainkiller
    brainkiller 22 January 2014 15: 23
    +10
    Quote: RUSS
    According to foreign analysts, the leading player in this market will be the American company Lockheed Martin with a fifth-generation fighter F-35.

    the author forgot to add that in the American market
    1. rolik2
      rolik2 22 January 2014 16: 32
      +3
      Quote: brainkiller
      the author forgot to add that in the American market


      Number of combat aircraft ordered or planned by customers
      USAF - 1763 F-35A
      US Navy - 260 F-35C
      KMP USA - 340 F-35B + 80 F-35C
      Navy and Royal Air Force - 138 F-35B
      Italy - 60 F-35A + 30 F-35B
      Netherlands - 85 F-35A
      Turkey - 100 F-35A
      Australia - 100 F-35A
      Norway - 52 F-35A
      Denmark - 30 F-35A
      Canada - 30 F-35A
      Israel - 19 F-35A
      Japan - 42 F-35A
      1. dr.star75
        dr.star75 22 January 2014 17: 08
        +1
        As the saying goes, a drum on the neck! And an electric train towards! But isn’t that the TTX F35 is worse than that of a probable opponent?
        1. rolik2
          rolik2 22 January 2014 17: 15
          -1
          Quote: dr.star75
          But nothing that TTX F35 is worse than that of a likely opponent?

          Which one

          TTX aircraft of different versions (compared with the F-35A)

          Length - 15,7 m (F-35B - 15,6 m)
          Height - 4,38 m (F-35B - 4,36 m, F-35C - 4,48 m)
          Wingspan - 10,7 m (F-35C - 13,1 m)
          Swipe horizon. stabilizer - 6,86 m (F-35B - 6,65 m, F-35C - 8,02 m).

          Empty aircraft weight - 29300 kg, or 13270 kg (F-35B - 14655 kg, F-35С - 15800 kg)
          Internal fuel stock - kg 8278 (F-35B - 6125 kg, F-35C - 8960 kg)
          Maximum take-off weight - kg 31785 (F-35B - kg 27240, F-35C - kg 31785)

          Weight of combat load - 8160 kg (F-35B - 6800 kg, F-35C - 8160 kg)

          Armament - 25 mm gun GAU-22 / A (on the F-35B and F-35C versions - no)
          The standard combat load is two AIM-120C SDs and two GBU-31 JDAM 2000 pounds caliber bombs (954 kg) in the internal compartment

          The power plant - TRDDF F-135-PW-100 with a forsazh 40000 pounds (19500 kg), without afterburner - 25000 pounds (11325 kg)

          Max. speed (at full load of the internal compartment of the weapon) - 1,6M
          Fighting radius - 1093 km (F-35B - 833 km, F-35C - 1100 km)
          Flight range on the internal fuel reserve - 2200 km (F-35B - 1667 km, F-35C - 2200 km)

          Max. operational overload - 9,0 g (F-35B - 7,0, F-35C - 7,5)
          1. dr.star75
            dr.star75 22 January 2014 21: 27
            0
            I don’t ask you to google about the T-50, but at least compare with Sushki, by the way, they have a sphere without a chainsaw.
      2. FREGATENKAPITAN
        FREGATENKAPITAN 22 January 2014 19: 28
        0
        That many, many ............ We also started the war with I-15,16,153 bis ......... ended with what? So, do not panic here and even more provoke it! Thank God the 90s are over, there is money and desire, so that everything will be ....
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. SV
        SV 22 January 2014 21: 50
        0
        And although - would half of the countries listed in the money pull so much?
  • Wiruz
    Wiruz 22 January 2014 15: 28
    +9
    Well, it’s time to increase the mass production of Su-35 in Russia (mass, in my opinion, this is far from 20-30 fighters per year), and not only for itself, but also for export. And soon Lockheed Martin with his penguins will monopolize the entire world market of fighter aircraft.

    By the way, me one uh ... shocked phrase
    2443 aircraft for the U.S. Air Force
    ? Of course, I understand that the F-35 is not a competitor for our Dryers, but in fact they can take a number. what
    1. Bronis
      Bronis 22 January 2014 15: 42
      +4
      Quote: Wiruz
      2443 aircraft for the US Air Force? Of course, I understand that F-35 is not a competitor for our Dryers, but they can take a number

      The Americans supply such a quantity based on the quantitative composition of their Air Force, Naval Aviation and ILC. We are based on our composition. They have many more planes now. Only the Hornets alone in the fleet are more numerous than our fighters in the Air Force, alas. And the F-35 is designed to replace several types of aircraft. Hence the number. In the domestic air force, there are about 400 fighters (plus or minus)
      1. vadson
        vadson 22 January 2014 16: 26
        +2
        Well, let's say this, it's not really bad.
        if you look at the problem from a different angle, for example: f35 crashed, one, a week later another, third (eh, split :-)) flights stop until problems are identified. as a result, a bunch of planes nailed to the runway with nails :-) this has already happened with f22. will be with the new plane. this iron has not fallen yet just because it is operated with great restrictions. and in battle no one will play with him
        1. rolik
          rolik 22 January 2014 16: 52
          +1
          Quote: vadson
          and in battle no one will play with him

          And if they ask for more careful knocking down their 35th)))))))))) Shoba was not so offensive))))))
          1. vadson
            vadson 22 January 2014 19: 23
            +1
            that is, more tolerant, like so reluctantly :-) I really didn’t want it to happen :-)
      2. SV
        SV 22 January 2014 21: 57
        0
        At the beginning of World War II, the composition of the English fleet numerically and qualitatively surpassed the German fleet, but was dispersed throughout the planet, as a result of which it could not adequately resist the German ...
    2. Tektor
      Tektor 22 January 2014 18: 26
      0
      Quote: Wiruz
      Of course, I understand that the F-35 is not a competitor for our Dryers, but in fact they can take a number.
      According to the 2020 GPV, the number of combat aircraft in our country should be 2600 aircraft by 2020, at least 70% of which are new. How many Fu-35 can they make by 2020?
      1. rolik2
        rolik2 22 January 2014 18: 34
        -1
        Quote: Tektor
        According to the 2020 GPV, the number of combat aircraft in our country should be 2600 aircraft by 2020, at least 70% of which are new. How many Fu-35 can they make by 2020?

        Let's look at things really, and not dream about what will happen
        They already have 192 F-22 and 100 F-35 now, even if we subtract 30% of the total number as prototypes, the amount is quite impressive.
        How much and what can Russia oppose them now?
        You can write yourself below (to avoid bias on my part)
        1. Russ69
          Russ69 22 January 2014 19: 08
          0
          Quote: rolik2
          Let's look at things really, and not dream about what will happen
          They already have 192 F-22 and 100 F-35 now, even if we subtract 30% of the total number as prototypes, the amount is quite impressive.
          How much and what can Russia oppose them now?

          In such a confrontation, air defense also plays a large role.
          1. rolik2
            rolik2 22 January 2014 19: 16
            -2
            Quote: Russ69
            In such a confrontation, air defense also plays a large role.

            Judging by the latest conflicts, it is being destroyed first.
            1. Russ69
              Russ69 22 January 2014 19: 24
              +3
              Quote: rolik2
              Judging by the latest conflicts, it is being destroyed first.

              This is what air defense and what conflicts ..? Compare air defense, the Arab countries and Russia, is stupid.
              1. SV
                SV 22 January 2014 22: 04
                0
                According to NATO estimates, our air defense is capable of destroying up to 80% of the air attack weapons of the alliance countries, which, according to their conclusion, is unacceptable / our analysts stopped at 75, which is also not acceptable for our "partners" (the numbers could be a little wrong, but the order is correct).
              2. rolik2
                rolik2 22 January 2014 22: 22
                0
                Quote: Russ69
                Compare air defense, the Arab countries and Russia, is stupid.

                Do you think in a year of service the soldiers will have time to master the most simple complex? And what are you based on saying that there is nothing to compare Russian air defense with Arabs air defense?
                Exercises on old targets, studied lengthwise and crosswise. Yes, they are regularly hit at the training grounds, but that’s not enough, they won’t just fly and wait when you put a rocket in it, first they will iron the Tomahawks, then weasels with harms will go, and then a wave of planes under the guise of Laskok and planes REB SUCH situations our airmen worked out ? No, many will learn and grind and will not live to see victory.
      2. patsantre
        patsantre 22 January 2014 19: 48
        -1
        You should at least think about what you read.
        Fighter plan to release and upgrade (upgraded also included!) 600 pieces.
        2600 aircraft - this is a total.
        As already tired of reading vysery tipapriotov.
      3. Bronis
        Bronis 22 January 2014 20: 06
        +2
        Quote: Tektor
        According to the 2020 GPV, the number of combat aircraft in our country should be 2600 aircraft by 2020, at least 70% of which are new. How many Fu-35 can they make by 2020?

        Alas, not airplanes, but aircraft (including helicopters, BTAs, etc.)
        The total strength of the Air Force will be 2000-2300 aircraft. And the actual fighter aircraft - within 400 aircraft
  • Dazdranagon
    Dazdranagon 22 January 2014 15: 28
    +18
    It's a strange article to consider the military aviation market without a few major players. This is the same as "AVTOVAZ is the sales leader in the automotive market excluding Japan, Germany and the USA" ... hi
    1. Gregazov
      Gregazov 22 January 2014 15: 46
      +3
      They share their chicken coop and cut the dough from their egg capsule. In this situation, no one is going to let Russia or China into their chicken coop, and even more so to the egg.
  • TS3sta3
    TS3sta3 22 January 2014 15: 29
    +2
    rotten forecast if it does not initially consider such participants as Russia and China. it's like sharing the skin of a dead bear.
    1. SV
      SV 22 January 2014 22: 08
      0
      rotten forecast if it does not initially consider such participants as Russia and China.


      And it is impossible to predict them. lol
  • Saburo
    Saburo 22 January 2014 15: 31
    +2
    Lightning's biggest advantage is that more than 100 units have already built them. At the same time, it is planned to build more 3000 Lightnings of all modifications before the 2020 year. More than three thousand, if someone thought that I attributed the extra zero. And what are our Defense Ministry plans for the T-50?
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 22 January 2014 15: 48
      +2
      Quote: Saburo
      At the same time, it is planned to build more than 3000 Lightnings of all modifications until 2020

      Well, you can plan anything - the Zamvolts also planned to build 30-odd ones at first, but as they started construction, they immediately cut it down to 3 and transferred it to the category of experimental ones. And also, as stated in the article, more than 2000 will be for the United States, and only about 600 units for other allied countries. And still a little confused by its sky-high price for such a "mass" aircraft ...
      1. rolik
        rolik 22 January 2014 16: 53
        0
        Quote: Albert1988
        its sky-high price for such a "mass" aircraft ...

        And it is growing)))))
        1. rolik2
          rolik2 22 January 2014 17: 04
          0
          Quote: rolik
          And it is growing)))))

          Who told you that? Read the above statement of the company Lockheed glider fell in price by 50%
          1. yehat
            yehat 22 January 2014 17: 11
            0
            let's say it’s not the most expensive in an airplane ...
            besides - what does it mean cheaper?
            due to the fact that it has a unified corps, and the Marine Corps needed a fucking supersonic helicopter, there are redundant elements in it,
            which increase the cost of construction, even if the case goes at cost!
            1. rolik2
              rolik2 22 January 2014 17: 46
              +1
              Quote: yehat
              besides - what does it mean cheaper?

              Read the above statement from the management of Lockheed Martin, in the person of the general manager of the F-35 department, Lorraine Martin, who said that .. the cost of the airframe of the small batch LRIP-5 fell by 55% for the shield for increasing the number of aircraft produced.
              That is, with an increase in the number of aircraft produced, the cost will continue to fall.
          2. yehat
            yehat 22 January 2014 17: 11
            0
            let's say it’s not the most expensive in an airplane ...
            besides - what does it mean cheaper?
            due to the fact that it has a unified corps, and the Marine Corps needed a fucking supersonic helicopter, there are redundant elements in it,
            which increase the cost of construction, even if the case goes at cost!
          3. Albert1988
            Albert1988 22 January 2014 18: 37
            0
            Quote: rolik2
            Who told you that? Read the above statement of the company Lockheed glider fell in price by 50%

            So what can’t you say for advertising purposes, so you’ll have to look at the price at which his US Army will sell, sooner or later it will leak onto the Internet)))
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. yehat
        yehat 22 January 2014 17: 01
        +2
        the plane claims some versatility. Therefore, the replacement is not 1: 1, but in a smaller quantity and therefore the price increase is normal. The only question is whether Lockheed Martin can quickly solve current problems and maintain sales so that the price can be reduced to a reasonable price.
        However, another problem awaits the Americans. In decommissioning F-15, F-16, etc. they will inevitably find themselves in a situation that everywhere there will be no cars that are better than mediocre melee combat. Neither the F-22 nor the F-35 will ever be leaders in close combat.
        1. rolik2
          rolik2 22 January 2014 17: 19
          0
          Quote: yehat
          Neither the F-22 nor the F-35 will ever be leaders in close combat.

          So their concept of warfare does not offer melee combat? The melee battle is the last chance for the F-35, and its result directly depends on the skill of the pilot (I can give you the example of the Great Patriotic War when we drove the Nazis into obsolete and slow-moving planes, for personal skill and overcoming the enemy)
          1. yehat
            yehat 22 January 2014 17: 34
            +1
            but agree that on a light Yak-1 it is much easier to go into the tail of the FW190 than on an LAgg-3, for example. And on the i-16 it’s almost impossible.
            The outcome of the battle operates with probabilities and influence on them.
            And the likelihoods are such that in the confusing battle at close range, the amers will not have an advantage. Moreover, the strength of the F-35 body raises big questions - it was also facilitated for vertical take-off and was initiated for all 3 options.
            1. rolik2
              rolik2 22 January 2014 18: 02
              +1
              And why do you always start comparing the Su-35 with the F-35 in a classic battle? When was the last time such fights took place? Compare them in conditions when the ground infrastructure is destroyed, target designation for dryers is not visible to anyone they are looking for the enemy blindly, and the enemy having less noticeability quietly creeps up the distance of a guaranteed defeat, being not noticed at the same time? Why don't you count REB aircraft? due to which the operation of the REU is complicated radar screens are covered with ripples? Does the hanging AWAX bring lightings to dry?
              Who then rolls whom?
              1. yehat
                yehat 22 January 2014 18: 12
                0
                Well, firstly, you need to build on something.
                secondly, I did not talk about the su-35. It was understood that the last su-27, su-35 and t50 - all have a significant advantage in maneuver and passive direction-finding because of the optical station. Previously, there was an advantage due to missiles, but now the Americans have jumped us even a micron - they have new missiles.
                thirdly, electronic warfare is not a panacea and in close combat drying will see no worse than the F-35. Although you hang a cloud of AWACS and EW aircraft hang.
                In general, all stealth technology in close combat turns into solid minuses.
                True, there is an exception - F117 at low altitudes is still a dangerous opponent.
                1. rolik2
                  rolik2 22 January 2014 18: 28
                  +1
                  Quote: yehat
                  secondly, I did not speak about su-35

                  That makes no difference

                  have a significant advantage in passive direction finding due to the optical station. R

                  At ranges of 100 km or more, they are simply useless.

                  thirdly, electronic warfare is not a panacea and in close combat drying will see no worse than the F-35. Although you hang a cloud of AWACS and EW aircraft hang.

                  So you need to live up to close combat. And the tactics of the Americans are aimed precisely at avoiding it. No, of course, there will be melee fights, but not to the extent that drying can win air superiority, well, Americans wouldn’t open the doors with their forehead and go into close combat when they have great chances of knocking dryers out of the blue.

                  In general, all stealth technology in close combat turns into solid minuses.

                  Well, I wouldn’t say)) Secretly approaching the target at a distance sufficient for its guaranteed defeat and making it difficult to point missiles is worth a lot.
                  The tactics that countries choose play a role here.
                  Apparently (if you look at the last conflict with Georgia), we have the principle "Women will give birth to new ones"
              2. The comment was deleted.
          2. yehat
            yehat 22 January 2014 17: 34
            0
            but agree that on a light Yak-1 it is much easier to go into the tail of the FW190 than on an LAgg-3, for example. And on the i-16 it’s almost impossible.
            The outcome of the battle operates with probabilities and influence on them.
            And the likelihoods are such that in the confusing battle at close range, the amers will not have an advantage. Moreover, the strength of the F-35 body raises big questions - it was also facilitated for vertical take-off and was initiated for all 3 options.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Do not care
              Do not care 22 January 2014 22: 29
              0
              Here is the main mistake of all critics of the F35.
              The super-maneuverability necessary to enter the rear hemisphere towards the enemy is simply not needed. In close combat, he attacks the enemy equally well in any hemisphere. Figuratively speaking, it is in the tail of any aircraft initially.
              This is achieved thanks to the "global information space" + a super-powerful computer for information processing + all-aspect rockets with "lock-after-lunch".
              The fine-tuning of this system is the main reason for the delays in development and, accordingly, the growing cost. But "the game is worth it."
          3. Albert1988
            Albert1988 22 January 2014 18: 39
            0
            Quote: rolik2
            So their concept of warfare does not offer melee combat?

            In Vietnam, too, initially was not supposed to melee - and on those! Even the cannons after that were returned to the planes, so anything can be ...
            1. rolik2
              rolik2 22 January 2014 18: 54
              0
              Quote: Albert1988
              In Vietnam, too, initially was not supposed to melee - and on those! Even the cannons after that were returned to the planes, so anything can be ...

              Do not compare the ability to detect the aircraft of the time with the current ones, and our current pilots do not have even a tenth of that skill and raid than the pilots who participated in the battles in the Vetnam, take into account that most of them beat the Germans in the Second World War. Now this simply will not have experience.
              1. Albert1988
                Albert1988 22 January 2014 19: 39
                +1
                Well, if it goes, then the amers also have no experience of air battles with the enemy, at least slightly approaching them in terms of capabilities, and not being an "intellectual target". And I will also repeat - no one could ever predict what the next war would be like, and what a modern war between well-developed powers will look like - God forbid we will never know ...
                1. rolik2
                  rolik2 22 January 2014 22: 25
                  -1
                  Quote: Albert1988
                  Well, if that’s all right, then the Amers also have no experience of air battles with the enemy

                  I agree the experience is not great, they simply do not allow the enemy to unfold in the sky. Destroying aircraft on earth, and you know this is a big plus.
              2. Bronis
                Bronis 22 January 2014 22: 42
                +1
                Quote: rolik2
                our pilots do not have even a tenth of that skill and raid than the pilots who participated in the battles in the Vetnam, take into account that most of them beat Germans in the Second World War.

                In Korea, our front-line pilots were. And in Vietnam, it seems, only anti-aircraft gunners.
    2. Russ69
      Russ69 22 January 2014 18: 52
      +2
      Quote: Saburo
      At the same time, it is planned to build more than 3000 Lightnings of all modifications until 2020

      Not by 2020, but by 2040. By 2018, they plan to reach a pace of 100 aircraft per year, with adequate funding ...
  • AVV
    AVV 22 January 2014 15: 33
    +1
    The struggle between manufacturers of aviation equipment in Western countries is only increasing !!! If Boeing loses its orders, it will try to increase them in new sales markets !!! Our manufacturers need not to give, traditionally our markets, to the same Boeing or anyone else, but It’s better to expand your presence in foreign markets !!!
  • Mails
    Mails 22 January 2014 15: 33
    +6
    analysis was carried out without taking into account China, India, Russia soldier

    After that, interest in the article immediately diminished, ran into the slide for review, because what else can you learn new.

    If the main competitors are removed, there remains a riffraff.
    And such an analysis result, you can calculate it yourself without an American analyst))
    1. shinobi
      shinobi 22 January 2014 15: 46
      +2
      Totally agree with you. hi
    2. Nayhas
      Nayhas 22 January 2014 21: 43
      +1
      Quote: Miles
      If the main competitors are removed, there remains a riffraff.

      Please list the countries in which we are real competitors? The main buyers of American aircraft are the NATO countries, Australia, Canada, the Middle East, Japan, Israel ... Those. almost all countries capable of buying paying off credit and which our aircraft will never buy. We get rogues who buy from us for our money, which we borrow from them, and here our competitor is China.
  • Stiletto
    Stiletto 22 January 2014 15: 40
    0
    Quote: Saburo
    Lightning's biggest advantage is that more than 100 units have already built them. At the same time, it is planned to build more 3000 Lightnings of all modifications before the 2020 year. More than three thousand, if someone thought that I attributed the extra zero. And what are our Defense Ministry plans for the T-50?


    T-50 is too expensive a car to exchange for some F-35. For 3 thousands of state toys, 4-5 thousand warheads for C-400 will be quite enough. In perspective.
    1. RBLip
      RBLip 22 January 2014 15: 48
      +4
      Quote: Stiletto
      For 3 thousand state toys, 4-5 thousand warheads for the S-400 will be quite enough. In perspective.

      absolutely agree. in relation to the ratio of aircraft, the ratio of air defense systems should be considered.
    2. Saburo
      Saburo 22 January 2014 15: 49
      +1
      Well, the approximate cost of the T-50 is about $ 100 million. Moreover, this is a fully finished production model with 5-th generation engines, which does not yet exist. Lightnings, depending on the modification, cost from 90 to 100 million. So the difference is minimal.
      1. yehat
        yehat 22 January 2014 16: 00
        +1
        Quote: Saburo
        Well, the approximate cost of the T-50 is about $ 100 million. Moreover, this is a fully finished production model with engines of the 5th generation, which does not yet exist.

        engine exists. there are no guarantees for it yet
        1. gunnerminer
          gunnerminer 22 January 2014 16: 02
          -1
          wiggler exists. there are no guarantees for it yet



          An engine without warranties cannot be installed on an ordinary car. Especially on a combat vehicle.
        2. gunnerminer
          gunnerminer 22 January 2014 16: 03
          0
          The engine exists. there are no guarantees for it yet



          An engine without warranties cannot be installed on an ordinary car. Especially on a combat vehicle.
          1. BOB48
            BOB48 22 January 2014 18: 42
            +1
            Yes, calm down, one is already in the GLICE!
        3. Saburo
          Saburo 22 January 2014 16: 44
          +1
          The engine exists, I know. I'm talking about the plane on which this engine would be installed. Ready for mass production. Here it does not exist yet.
          1. Albert1988
            Albert1988 22 January 2014 17: 43
            +1
            The engine, according to the statements of the "dry" itself, is undergoing bench tests, so they will put it on the plane only after being fully convinced of its performance and reliability. As far as I know, the main problem was in the turbine blades - we had problems with the manufacture of all-ceramic blades, which actually slowed down the development, if I am right wrong since 2009. Now it seems that a solution has been found, so all that remains is to wait ...
            And then - let's recall the plans for the production of the T-50: only the 7th and 8th aircraft should become full-fledged pre-production models, but for now only the 5th has flown)))
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Stiletto
        Stiletto 22 January 2014 16: 11
        0
        Quote: Saburo
        Well, the approximate cost of the T-50 is about $ 100 million. Moreover, this is a fully finished production model with 5-th generation engines, which does not yet exist. Lightnings, depending on the modification, cost from 90 to 100 million. So the difference is minimal.


        You need to compare not the cost of fighters, but the capabilities of printing presses. And they are fundamentally different with the States. And the fact that money is not worth it for them is very, very much for us.
      4. rolik2
        rolik2 22 January 2014 16: 35
        +2
        Quote: Saburo
        So the difference is minimal.

        The management of Lockheed Martin, represented by the general manager of the F-35 division, Lorraine Martin (Lorraine Martin) said that the cost of the F-35A version with the usual take-off and landing will be less than $ 100 million per unit. Noting that the cost of the glider of the small batch LRIP-5 fell 55%.
        With a further increase in the number of aircraft produced, the price will decline even more.
        1. Vasek
          Vasek 22 January 2014 19: 59
          +1
          Quote: rolik2
          The management of Lockheed Martin, represented by the general manager of the F-35 division, Lorraine Martin (Lorraine Martin) said that the cost of the F-35A version with the usual take-off and landing will be less than $ 100 million per unit. Noting that the cost of the airframe of the small batch LRIP-5 party fell by 55%.


          You, Roller, like a pancake parrot - for the 5th time you talk about the fall in the cost of a glider.
          They just recouped the costs of R&D at the expense of quantity, but the glider didn’t get any better from this!
          I think that more than one expensive car will be dropped on the ground and not one pilot will be destroyed ...
          1. rolik2
            rolik2 22 January 2014 22: 28
            -1
            Vasek, what do you think 100 million for the T-50 is taking into account R&D? And what money will eliminate existing problems? The T-50 raid does not make up a third of the Lightning raid, and it is not yet clear which sides will emerge in the distant future.
      5. Albert1988
        Albert1988 22 January 2014 16: 36
        0
        I hope you understand that the Lightning and T-50 cars of a completely different class and the cost of Lightning should be 2-3 times lower than the T-50? And they are in almost the same category - it's like buying a light tank at the price of a heavy ...
        1. rolik2
          rolik2 22 January 2014 16: 45
          -6
          Quote: Albert1988
          I hope you understand that the Lightning and T-50 cars of a completely different class and the cost of Lightning should be 2-3 times lower than the T-50? And they are in almost the same category - it's like buying a light tank at the price of a heavy ...

          I don’t understand a little, only the Lightning minced meat precedes the T-50 and the cost of the T-50 is quite approximate, and does not include the cost of a new engine (they fly on engines from the Su-35) and I don’t hear anything about the radar it to mind or not is it installed? so if you scrape everything that has not yet been developed and is not installed on the T-50, then its cost WILL GROW and increase interest by 50-60%. And the cost of lightings Already falling and falls on a rather large bag.
          1. Albert1988
            Albert1988 22 January 2014 16: 59
            +2
            Firstly - 100 bucks lemons - this is just the estimated cost with the second stage engine and with the radar, etc. Secondly, the reduction in the cost of Lightning will come at the expense of dumping - do you think all Americans allies have money to buy this car at a real price? And thirdly - there was already a scandal with the installation of Chinese electronics on Lightnings, .. such a cheapening ...
            1. rolik2
              rolik2 22 January 2014 17: 08
              -4
              Quote: Albert1988
              100 lemons bucks

              This is an approximate price, no one will tell you the real one, but from experience I will tell you that the further the cham the more it will grow because there are already problems
              -Avionics - due to the failure of India.
              -engines of the 2nd stage still did not even put on an experimental aircraft
              -arms control system and equipment with radars were not tested on long-range firing (for which the whole plane was conceived)
              - There are a number of some minor annoying problems with the catapult.
              And the elimination of all the problems and shortcomings that already exist and will be driven by a new machine that has not been mastered requires a LOT OF AMOUNT of money.

              will come at the expense of dumping - do you think all Americans allies have money to buy this car at a real price?

              Lockheed Company is a private company, and it will not sell planes at a loss, it is not Russia that can afford to forgive billions of debts with the condition that they buy weapons for an amount less than the forgiven debt
              1. Albert1988
                Albert1988 22 January 2014 17: 17
                +2
                Quote: rolik2
                This is an approximate price, no one will tell you the real one, but from experience I will tell you that the further the cham the more it will grow because there are already problems

                To be honest, I know very well about these problems - since a good friend graduated from Moscow Aviation Institute and works closely with people who are involved in the development of the project, and a distant relative works in the ground support service of the same project, so all that you have told me it’s known, and I’ll repeat to you again - 100 million green is a rather overpriced price, just taking into account all the problems ...
                Quote: rolik2
                Lockheed Company is a private company, and it will not sell planes at a loss, it is not Russia that can afford to forgive billions of debts with the condition that they buy weapons for an amount less than the forgiven debt

                Here I do not agree - in the field of arms trade in any country there is a large share of politics. Moreover, those countries that buy Lightning will then be forced to regularly buy spare parts, etc., and they will buy it from Lockheed, so it is quite possible that the losses from lowering the cost of the car itself can pay off, moreover, the car most likely will need additional maintenance - there the Raptor needs to regularly update its radar coverage ...
                1. The comment was deleted.
                2. The comment was deleted.
                3. rolik2
                  rolik2 22 January 2014 17: 52
                  -2
                  Quote: Albert1988
                  and I’ll repeat to you again - 100 million green is a rather high price, just taking into account all the problems ...

                  How do you justify this? If the T-50 had serial (cheap) components in its composition, then a sum of 100 million could be considered real, but since EVERYTHING in this aircraft is being developed from scratch, then this bag is significantly underestimated or, to put it mildly, does not correspond to reality

                  Quote: Albert1988
                  I do not agree here

                  They could dump if they had a competitor, and they are the only suppliers of aircraft of this type, so the term dumping is not appropriate here, the discount is yes.
                  1. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 22 January 2014 18: 21
                    +1
                    Quote: rolik2
                    How do you justify this?

                    I heard this figure with the corresponding comments from a person who has a specialized education and some contacts with specialists working on the T-50, so there is a question for them, but I think that you should at least listen to them.
                    Quote: rolik2
                    They could dump if they had a competitor, and they are the only suppliers of aircraft of this type, so the term dumping is not appropriate here, the discount is yes.

                    I apologize - I used the term incorrectly, although if you take into account that a Boeing can be a kind of competitor, Lockheed is quite able to agree to a slight reduction in price, as many Western experts paid attention to the obviously overpriced Lightning, coupled with the presence of several shortcomings for machines sharpened by vertical take-off, only this samphy vertical take-off just fully realized and did not work ...
                    1. rolik2
                      rolik2 22 January 2014 18: 41
                      -3
                      Quote: Albert1988
                      I heard this figure with the corresponding comments from a person who has a specialized education and some contacts with specialists working on the T-50, so there is a question for them, but I think that you should at least listen to them.

                      You can listen, but you can’t blindly believe if the Americans, when developing a 5th generation aircraft, faced problems that required significant financial investments, and even though they already had experience with inconspicuous aircraft, faith in our managers who say that the amount is not growing and this despite the fact that we didn’t have any achievements on stealth planes at all, it simply doesn’t matter that from the very beginning we got the cost of an airplane of 100 million and that it will not increase any more, even though at this stage we have encountered significant problems, for the solution of which millions and millions are needed.
                      1. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 22 January 2014 18: 57
                        0
                        Quote: rolik2
                        then faith in our managers who say that the amount is not growing and this despite the fact that we had no developments on stealth planes at all,

                        I will clarify if you do not understand - it was not the "managers" who spoke, but the specialists who are directly involved in the development, and in general, if you do not believe them, then just wait for the serial machine to go to the troops - then we will find out the final price)))
                      2. rolik2
                        rolik2 22 January 2014 18: 58
                        +1
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        I will clarify if you do not understand - it was not the "managers" who spoke, but the specialists who are directly involved in the development, and in general, if you do not believe them, then just wait for the serial machine to go to the troops - then we will find out the final price)))


                        OK, this will be more accurate than guessing at the coffee grounds.
      6. Saburo
        Saburo 22 January 2014 17: 23
        +1
        Okay, then let's compare with the F-22 from the same Lockheed Martin. The unit cost is about $ 150 million. 195 units were produced, including prototypes and pre-production copies.
        1. Albert1988
          Albert1988 22 January 2014 17: 35
          +3
          Quote: Saburo
          Okay, then let's compare with the F-22 from the same Lockheed Martin. The unit cost is about $ 150 million. 195 units were produced, including prototypes and pre-production copies.

          Well, it is precisely with the Raptor that we must compare - for machines of the same class and approximately the same purpose with similar characteristics (in the sense of the requirements for them).
          Here one cannot but agree that we were far behind the Yankees - they were already producing their F-22s in full, when the T-50 was only in the early stages of development. But it is worth noting that the Raptor, firstly, is out of production, which is not going to be renewed, and secondly, it still suffers from a number of "childhood diseases", which, of course, are eliminated gradually, its exploitation is very expensive for a number of reasons. Moreover, our car, already at the prototype stage, in a number of characteristics can very safely argue with the Raptor ... It should also be added that most of the Raptors are actually in conservation.
          Therefore, in my opinion, in terms of heavy fighters, we will be able to "catch up with America", the only concern is the lack of development of a promising light fighter in our country, which would be just like Lightning in relative numbers and main characteristics (
          1. yehat
            yehat 22 January 2014 17: 41
            0
            new twinks now in fact can close this in tandem with the T50, if the T50 is accepted for service on time.
            In a moment, another problem is exploitation! Engine life, supply of braces, warranty repairs, etc. There problems are immeasurable.
            1. Albert1988
              Albert1988 22 January 2014 17: 47
              +1
              About the moment you are certainly right, but still I would very much like to have a promising development in this area repeat
          2. The comment was deleted.
        2. rolik2
          rolik2 22 January 2014 18: 07
          -1
          Quote: Saburo
          Okay, then let's compare with the F-22 from the same Lockheed Martin. The unit cost is about $ 150 million. 195 units were produced, including prototypes and pre-production copies.

          Do you want to compare that?
          Albert1988 and I compared the cost of the T-50 and F-35 and how it changes depending on the number of boarded aircraft.
          Want to compare with a raptor?
          No problem, how much did the first copies cost?
          and how many are the last?
          How much has the cost of the aircraft of the first and last batch changed?
          1. Albert1988
            Albert1988 22 January 2014 18: 14
            0
            Quote: rolik2
            No problem, how much did the first copies cost?
            and how many are the last?
            How much has the cost of the aircraft of the first and last batch changed?

            So enlighten us about this: as they say, "tsifiri in the studio" winked
            1. rolik2
              rolik2 22 January 2014 18: 46
              -1
              Quote: Albert1988
              So enlighten us about this: as they say, "tsifiri in the studio"

              Well, did Saburo want to compare? By the way, where is he? Why was the guy removed? I wanted to know the answers to my questions, but here the evil moderators deleted you laughing

              The first F-22s cost about 180 million, and the last 150 million
              1. Albert1988
                Albert1988 22 January 2014 18: 59
                0
                Quote: rolik2
                Well, did Saburo want to compare?

                But, nevertheless, it was you who asked the question about "the first and the last", and then, in spite of the cost, production was stopped, having produced only 170-180 cars, most of which, as I said, are kept in a mothballed state.
                1. rolik2
                  rolik2 22 January 2014 19: 03
                  0
                  Well, then I answered)))
                  The first F-22s cost about 180 million, and the last 150 million
                  1. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 22 January 2014 19: 15
                    +1
                    Quote: rolik2
                    The first F-22s cost about 180 million, and the last 150 million

                    So, what prevents our T-50s from costing 100 lemons first, and then say 80?
                    1. rolik2
                      rolik2 22 January 2014 19: 21
                      -1
                      Quote: Albert1988
                      So, what prevents our T-50s from costing 100 lemons first, and then say 80?

                      Well, after all, the forecasted price for the Raptor was at first less than 180 million. It began to grow due to the fact that during development it encountered a number of problems, and it began to fall due to serial production.

                      So we have declared the first 100 million first installment will cost 30-40 percent more than the matched amount, and then IDEA the price should fall, but where did you see that our prices fall? Yes, but they did so to fall, it’s a rarity, take the T-90 as an example, how much does it sell for a hill and to your native Moscow region? So there will be 100 million here so as not to discourage the customer, that’s when they go into the series and then put up the real price + their markups laughing
                    2. Albert1988
                      Albert1988 22 January 2014 19: 34
                      +1
                      As for defense pricing, now the state will decide this issue, and not the MoD butting with the military-industrial complex as before. And the rest - I propose to wait until the series begins, then we'll see, otherwise building assumptions based on speculation is counterproductive hi
  • ytqnhfk
    ytqnhfk 22 January 2014 18: 14
    0
    Stilletto do not write nonsense with 400 intended for other purposes! If that’s what you need for this, it’s more likely that some kind of needle M1 is only cooler!
    1. anarky
      anarky 22 January 2014 21: 32
      +1
      And why then do you need the S-400?
      1. alexng
        alexng 23 January 2014 04: 00
        0
        A flock of AWAXes to turn into a bunch of junk, and the fact that at least four hundred will protect themselves C-400. Who will allow AWACs to quietly barrage in the air? Well, then in the classics ...
        1. mirag2
          mirag2 23 January 2014 04: 09
          0
          Good morning,
          Do you mean only AWACS?
          And everything else does not bring down?
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. alexng
            alexng 23 January 2014 12: 42
            +1
            And on the other do not waste the charges. It is necessary to take care to repel a massive missile attack. And for flying irons, there are other systems, for example, for fighting axes and other bastards. And the new Vityaz air defense systems will deal with this problem easily.
  • avt
    avt 22 January 2014 15: 43
    +5
    “According to foreign analysts, the American company Lockheed Martin with the fifth generation F-35 fighter will be the leading player in this market. "-------- Well, straight ,, The Diamond Hand" - "Distribute among the residents of our house" ,,, And if someone refuses? " ,, Turn off the gas " laughing Of course they are bringing in satellites, here are the Angles for aircraft carriers - there’s no alternative, they won’t take Rafal from the Franks, probably not all Europeans, but Australians will. In general, all those countries that an airplane will use as part of a common system with amers. Well, the other, as the bakshisha is drifted .Indians will get our nerves tired - they will breed with the PAKFA version for money and technology, which the guardians of the oral tradition of secret knowledge about flying vimanas have already begun to do.
  • shinobi
    shinobi 22 January 2014 15: 45
    +4
    Quote:

    According to the forecast of American analysts who did not take into account aircraft manufactured in China, India and Russia, the Lockheed Martin company will dominate the world market of fighters and training aircraft (TCBs) during this period.

    That's all. I didn’t even read further. The Yankees in their repertoire. Then, with sincere surprise, they will find that they are not able to compete with manufacturers that they did not consider.
  • Andrey_K
    Andrey_K 22 January 2014 15: 53
    +3
    Super Hornet was in a leading position, but in the end lost to the Gripen fighter of the Swedish company SAAB. “Boeing” presented a rather attractive proposal to the Brazilian tender, however, the sharp deterioration in political relations between Brazil and the United States caused by electronic espionage by the US National Security Agency

    And here is the material loss from Snowden.
    If not US intelligence agencies, then Boeing for sure ... will not forgive him.
  • Jurkovs
    Jurkovs 22 January 2014 15: 59
    +4
    All the world's analytics have been paid for by Lockheed Martin, otherwise everyone will see that the king is naked.
    1. yehat
      yehat 22 January 2014 16: 03
      +1
      It’s not just about paid politics.
      let's take boxing. One, for example, has 100 fights and all have 100 knockouts.
      is impressive? yes, very much so! But it’s not necessary to say that a couple of friends with bats helped him))) The statistics of the F-15 look exactly the same.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 22 January 2014 21: 13
        0
        Quote: yehat
        But it’s not necessary to say that a couple of friends with bats helped him))) The statistics of the F-15 look exactly the same.

        Justify?
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • Narrator.tales
    Narrator.tales 22 January 2014 16: 18
    +3
    PR) pure water. the project failed and it is necessary to pay off
  • Moga
    Moga 22 January 2014 16: 23
    +5
    In case of war, how much scrap metal will fly to us, where will we put it? :)
    1. Thirsty for wind
      Thirsty for wind 23 January 2014 00: 36
      0
      Well then ...
      Excites another, who will collect this scrap?
      Go ahead and the pioneers are gone.
      One hope for the homeless. But they prefer stranded copper cables.
      Solid problems with these flying irons.
  • guran
    guran 22 January 2014 16: 23
    +3
    Americans pay their workers well. Yes, the cost is higher. But even the expensive 35th is the turn.
    Nobody wants to work for us for a penny, workers are sorely lacking, and Pagasyan will go to work as an installer himself if he does not change the situation with wages. It is impossible for high-tech products to be made by workers with the salary of a loader.
    There is a good salary - there will be planes, there is no good salary - there are no planes. (c) installer Mechnikov
    1. gunnerminer
      gunnerminer 22 January 2014 16: 30
      0
      Quote: guran
      Americans pay their workers well. Yes, the cost is higher. But even the expensive 35th is the turn.
      Nobody wants to work for us for a penny, workers are sorely lacking, and Pagasyan will go to work as an installer himself if he does not change the situation with wages. It is impossible for high-tech products to be made by workers with the salary of a loader.
      There is a good salary - there will be planes, there is no good salary - there are no planes. (c) installer Mechnikov



      There is a way out. To recruit legal and illegal immigrants to the airline shops, but you will have to put up with a sharp increase in the accident rate in the Air Force.
    2. Vasek
      Vasek 22 January 2014 20: 08
      +1
      Quote: guran
      There is a good salary - there will be planes, there is no good salary - there are no planes. (c) installer Mechnikov


      Intelligent Locksmith Mechnikov laughing
      1. Vasek
        Vasek 23 January 2014 16: 16
        0
        Quote: Vasek
        Intelligent Locksmith Mechnikov


        Excuse me, an intellectual fitter Polesov: in the presence of the absence of saturated sleepers ... wassat
  • Leshka
    Leshka 22 January 2014 16: 23
    +2
    the future will show
  • bubla5
    bubla5 22 January 2014 16: 28
    +1
    So far, everything is really true, on our single copies, and the Americans put on stream
  • Cherdak
    Cherdak 22 January 2014 16: 36
    +10
    And here the other day and the new MiGs lit up ... The Swedes and the French will definitely choke
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. yehat
      yehat 22 January 2014 16: 56
      -1
      as I understand it, the moment is now mainly focused on the domestic market
      they essentially have no service network, but there are a lot of problems.
      It would be nice if they could pull the demanded light fighter to the level of T50 technologies ... So far they have endless upgrades of what they have.
      1. typhoon7
        typhoon7 22 January 2014 17: 07
        +2
        And it depends on the policy of the leadership, I assure you, wait a minute for GDP near the MiG-35 and say well, the situation will change in a week. hi
    3. eagle11
      eagle11 24 January 2014 00: 14
      0
      Where are they new? In the photo is the old 9-12.
  • aleksandrs95
    aleksandrs95 22 January 2014 16: 42
    +1
    The T-50 is a great car, but it’s still work and work with it. And the Hindus really want the expensive Rafali, so they omit the new FGFA development, which means we have a much more formidable, heavy machine in the form of the T-35 at 50 for the same price. Question in the T series -50, with the wisdom of the Indians, they will have a wonderful airplane, no, they will buy airplanes from everyone. This is especially convenient for China, it is self-sufficient. India, alas, is dependent.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 22 January 2014 21: 13
      0
      Quote: aleksandrs95
      The T-50 is a great car, but it’s still work and work with it. And the Hindus really want the expensive Rafali, so they omit the new development of the FGFA, which up to 35 at the same price has a much more formidable, heavy car in the form of the T-50.

      Hindus want technology
  • djachaev
    djachaev 22 January 2014 16: 46
    +1
    If the Americans really build about 3000 F-35s, then we must increase PAK FA production.
    But unfortunately, for us they have already begun its mass production, and since the end of last year they have already begun to deliver in small batches to their allies.

    Our T-50 will go into production only in 2015, and from 2017 should be put into service. By this time, the F-35 should be adopted by the United States, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Israel. And over the next years, the number of Penguin operators will increase.

    I advise the Sukhoi Design Bureau to hurry up with fine-tuning the PAK FA to mind.
    1. Tektor
      Tektor 22 January 2014 18: 46
      0
      If the Americans really build about 3000 F-35s, then we must increase PAK FA production. No, it’s not necessary: ​​the Yak-130 is enough, because without radar, it is invisible due to size ... tongue
      1. patsantre
        patsantre 22 January 2014 20: 05
        -1
        belay Is he the size of a raven?
        Yak-130 for a serious battle is generally useless.
        1. Tektor
          Tektor 22 January 2014 22: 19
          0
          The Yak-130 is so advanced that it doesn't even need a radar. Full situational awareness in the complete radio silence mode is achieved by interaction with target designation systems, for example, the A-50 or the automated control system of the Polyana-D4 anti-aircraft missile brigade ... Moreover, 4 RVV SD can be taken on board: 6 Fu-12, with competent work because of the shelters of the area. This will justify all funds for the production of ALL Yak-35. good
          1. patsantre
            patsantre 23 January 2014 16: 30
            0
            Clown, what are you talking about, where is he wandering around? Is it a TRAINING aircraft, it has weak performance characteristics, very limited avionics capabilities. By your logic, can you put any MiG-15s back in operation and hang RVV-SD on them?
            For people like you, you don’t have the power to understand that Yaku has nothing to give target designation for RVV-SD, given that DRLO planes for missiles do not give target designation?
  • HAM
    HAM 22 January 2014 16: 50
    +3
    There was a lot of screaming about F117, but why is it silent now?
    1. yehat
      yehat 22 January 2014 16: 52
      +1
      because this aircraft occupied its narrow niche, without claiming to be universal and everyone was satisfied.
      1. SkiF_RnD
        SkiF_RnD 22 January 2014 18: 47
        +1
        He took a place in the museum. F-117 withdrawn from service.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • Orc-xnumx
    Orc-xnumx 22 January 2014 16: 53
    +3
    Have you already cut the market?
  • 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 22 January 2014 17: 05
    +3
    Quote: Saburo
    Well, the approximate cost of the T-50 is about $ 100 million. Moreover, this is a fully finished production model with 5-th generation engines, which does not yet exist. Lightnings, depending on the modification, cost from 90 to 100 million. So the difference is minimal.

    No need to compare these aircraft, they are not similar in many basic respects. For example, the f35 does not have cruising supersonic. The range is less. Arms compartment less than two times. The range is two times. The maximum speed is one and a half times. The range of the radar is doubled. Well, how to compare these aircraft.
    1. djachaev
      djachaev 22 January 2014 17: 36
      +2
      No one argues, it is obvious that the PAK FA is superior to the F-35. But it is unlikely that these aircraft will ever converge in battle.
      And the Americans are not going to let the "penguins" into one-on-one battle, especially in Dogfight. They expect that the "Lightings" will patrol the space in units, or even squadrons.
      Everything develops to ensure that the style is the same as in Iraq and Yugoslavia, when several F-15s were put up against one instant.
      1. clidon
        clidon 22 January 2014 19: 34
        0
        No one argues, it is obvious that the PAK FA is superior to the F-35. But it is unlikely that these aircraft will ever converge in battle.

        This is just not yet obvious. PAK FA prototype without a full-time engine and full-time radar, F-35 pre-production sample with a full-time engine and radar. The T-50 has the first experience in creating a stealth machine, the F-35 is already the 4th. The T-50 has the first working AFAR, the F-35 has the 4th. The authors of the T-50 have no combat experience over the past 40 years, the authors of the F-35 have at least two conflicts with large-scale involvement of fighter aircraft.
        So let’s take a look at what actually happens there.
  • Sergf
    Sergf 22 January 2014 17: 09
    +3
    I don’t understand, are you going to fight with someone? F 35, T 50 ... Well, you kill each other, then what?
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. rolik2
      rolik2 22 January 2014 18: 12
      -2
      Quote: brainkiller
      is it in frontal view? right?

      I don’t have a form for this product, I take data from the Internet, and they vary on different resources, but I think that this figure is significantly overstated, actually there is more EPR. Judging by the data below
      Su-27 = 10
      F-15A = 7,5-10
      F-15E = 9-11

      The EPR of the Su-35 will be in the range of 7-11, again, depending on what is on the suspensions
  • Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 22 January 2014 18: 03
    +3
    And for me, get so sick if all NATO members buy 35's penguins. The plane is shit and is unmeasured.
    So let these planes undermine their defenses and budgets, while we are building the world's best heavy and very good light fighters.

    And on the account of the fact that the Americans will roll out air defense .. Whose air defense? Iraqi, Libyan?
    As the famous character said, from the film "Gentlemen of Fortune" - "Come to your senses, come to your senses immediately, before it's too late!" I say this as an old air defense-shnik. wink
  • mivmim
    mivmim 22 January 2014 18: 27
    +1
    As foreign analysts believe

    I will not read further. We got these ratings, and those that copy and paste them everywhere. I know what they can believe, and I don't care what their "analysts" think. The article is rubbish.
  • djachaev
    djachaev 22 January 2014 18: 41
    +3
    Quote: Al_lexx
    And for me, get so sick if all NATO members buy 35's penguins. The plane is shit and is unmeasured.
    So let these planes undermine their defenses and budgets, while we are building the world's best heavy and very good light fighters.


    It's good to be a patriot, but it's better to be a realist! According to the characteristics of the PAK FA, it is much superior to the "Penguin", but the Americans (and allies) will take them into service earlier, and the number will be greater.

    Therefore, it is necessary to pour mud, and take an example. We must also finish the T-50 faster, because we will completely lag behind.

    I wish good luck to Sukhoi Design Bureau in the development of the fifth generation fighter.
    1. Al_lexx
      Al_lexx 22 January 2014 19: 28
      +5
      Realism is certainly good. A healthy sense of humor is even better. wink

      And then, you did not understand the main message of the old air defense officer.
      There is much talk about a hypothetical clash of twinks / dryers with penguins. I somehow hardly believe that the Americans are so stupid that they will contact us.
      But those countries that do not have fusion and which buy 35, let them buy, will be poorer, but they still will not reach us. And if you fly, then in addition to the expected T-50 there is also something to meet them with.
      1. anarky
        anarky 22 January 2014 20: 43
        -1
        And can you tell the young, almost PWoshnik how to meet them now? We have not yet recreated the unified air defense system of the country. RTVshnikov is far from completely updated. How will we meet the adversary?

        Do not think that this is sarcasm, I really do not understand.
      2. djachaev
        djachaev 22 January 2014 20: 51
        +2
        Defense is not the right place for humor! stop

        Yes, and the F-35 aerial combat will not be a weak enemy for flashes and dryers. At least it is very dangerous at medium and long range. That is, in a situation where aircraft flight characteristics do not play a significant role. Here you can rely only on the power of the radar. and the effectiveness of missiles. EPR "Penguin" 0,3-0,4 m, and in most cases it is he who will be the first to detect our 4th generation aircraft. Talk about the EF-2000, F-18 Super Hornet and Su-35 can be stronger than the F-35 taken from the sky. At least because these aircraft have a high RCS. Meanwhile, as any aircraft of the 4th generation will be tens of kilometers from the "Light", he will be the first to notice them will take a comfortable position and will launch an AIM-120 missile. The enemy can only rely on the power of their radar.But if the our drying or a moment will be able to sneak up to the "Light" and go into the tail, then he is already dead. We have only one aircraft, much superior to the F-35 - this is PAK FA. But when we will have it is not exactly known, therefore "in it is not necessary to defeat the enemy in advance. wink

        There will be PAK FA in the series, then it will be possible to compare them!
  • Shadowcat
    Shadowcat 22 January 2014 18: 51
    0
    Modestly give stsylochku to Australia. March 2013
    Comparisons of Modern and Prospective Air Complexes

    http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-081109-1.html
    1. clidon
      clidon 22 January 2014 19: 27
      +4
      So this is a club of lovers named after Dr. Cope. They learned to make tablets there a long time ago. They still remember that the flightless (then) Su-35 landedly cracked down on electronic exercises with the flying (then) F-35. )
  • chudoudodelt
    chudoudodelt 22 January 2014 18: 56
    -2
    probably the Chinese themselves for this period rivet, more planes than all these companies combined.
  • Kyrgyz
    Kyrgyz 22 January 2014 19: 10
    +5
    The dispute in the comments is perhaps more interesting than the article, but the dispute is by no means, there are at least open data on the characteristics of the aircraft, there is also confidence in what is said, and the declared characteristics are not very far from each other, I’m sure that all 5th generation aircraft will be very close in terms of characteristics (like cars of the same class, praise what you love or bought), the pilot training, the coordination of services and systems, the unexpectedness of the episode for the enemy, the number of units involved will play a decisive role in the battle.
    And if, according to the forecasts of foreign analysts, then the Russians all died out of vodka, Russia fell into pieces, Adam and Eve were both men.
    1. SV
      SV 22 January 2014 22: 52
      0
      And if, according to the forecasts of foreign analysts, then the Russians all died out of vodka, Russia fell into pieces, Adam and Eve were both men.


      good good
  • ars_pro
    ars_pro 22 January 2014 20: 13
    +2
    The Yankees are accustomed to counting the skins of unkilled bears, looking even on credit to kindness will give, with not even a large percentage of mmm about 20) In the place of the Allies, I would have thought how to abandon such an interesting undertaking to look and the crisis will not hit so hard, people are carbon fiber and you can’t feed with nanocoating. I won’t be surprised if they behave, thus putting another yoke on themselves, and how much they will cost, apart from current expenses, it’s easier to surrender to Russia, cheaper and more profitable, only Russia doesn’t need them anymore, now let them drown in that shit and f 35 they will not help.
  • Andrey Peter
    Andrey Peter 22 January 2014 20: 33
    0
    Quote: Kyrgyz
    the decisive role in the battle will be played by pilot training, the coordination of services and systems, the unexpectedness of the episode for the enemy, the number of units involved.

    I completely agree with you, but I want to add that this will solve the issue only in local wars. And if World War 3 begins? It is unlikely that tanks and planes will help, nuclear weapons will be more decisive and in this regard we have an advantage, if only because of the territory. I hope this does not come to this, and the United States and Europe understand this. At the moment, in my opinion, there is a struggle for prestige and a market, and more simply - the arms race continues not so much to solve global issues, but for economic ones. What can I say, all politics
    built on the economy. I'm sorry that I left the topic of aviation hi And on the topic of aviation, for example, I recently spoke with a pilot flying a MIG-29 and asked his opinion. The answer was ambiguous- DRYs are superior in everything, so I understand why MIGs are now not so in demand. And this is not my opinion, but the opinion of a pilot who has already served.
  • anarky
    anarky 22 January 2014 20: 33
    +2
    If they make those 2020 Pepelats by 3000, they will be the undisputed leaders. And there is probably a bunch of any related equipment. And UAVs, and communication systems, and ACS, and AWACS aircraft, and air defense systems. It will all cost very decent money, and the effectiveness of the entire complex is in question. By no means do I divorce patriotic hat-thinking thoughts here, but this whole complex was not tested in real databases against a serious adversary. I’m all for nothing, it’s not an act that someone other than the richest NATO countries will buy this.

    PS: In any case, to ensure protection against such power, obviously not enough units of equipment laid down in GPV 2020. The same PAK-FA needs at least 300-400 (do not forget about the Chinese). Yes, and 28 planned for the adoption of S-400 air defense systems are not enough. True, it is not known how many S-350 and S-300B4 are planned with the M2 Bukami, but anyway, they take doubts. Also, do not forget about the armada of UAVs and cruise missiles. So do not throw hats, comrades.
  • pawel1961
    pawel1961 22 January 2014 20: 39
    0
    and who draws forecasts?
  • tilovaykrisa
    tilovaykrisa 22 January 2014 21: 23
    +2
    According to foreign analysts, the leading player in this market will be the American company Lockheed Martin.

    Standardly, who pays for the game of musicians (journalists) and orders a repertoire, nothing new.
  • Nayhas
    Nayhas 22 January 2014 21: 45
    0
    Quote: Stiletto
    For 3 thousand state toys, 4-5 thousand warheads for the S-400 will be quite enough. In perspective.

    You think like Tukhachevsky, he also considered the need for naval anti-aircraft artillery on the principle of one plane, one barrel ...
    1. anarky
      anarky 22 January 2014 23: 39
      0
      That is yes. For each aircraft you need to have a minimum of 3-4 missiles + how much will go to UAVs (2-3 I think the goal is simpler), 2-3 for each cruise missile + how many divisions will be disabled, and how do you missiles located in the neighboring district will help.

      By the way, in Vietnam, taking into account the counteraction to our S-75, the consumption increased to 7-10 SAM / aircraft.
  • alone
    alone 22 January 2014 22: 19
    0
    there wasn’t even a real training battle between the planes, so it’s hard to guess who is who. to rot something just because it’s western is not for me.
  • Nayhas
    Nayhas 22 January 2014 22: 44
    -1
    Against the background of comments about PAK-FA, an article in the Indian newspaper Business Standard of January 21, by Ajai Shukla looks rather amusing. The article is titled "Russia can't deliver on Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft: IAF", or "Russia can't deliver FGFA - Indian Air Force."
    The bottom line is that the Air Force leadership at the meeting 24.12.2013/41/1. with the secretary of the defense industry said that the FGFA project has several shortcomings. The main three are: a) Russians are reluctant to share important information about the design of the aircraft; b) the installed engines AL-31FXNUMX does not meet the requirements and are just an upgrade to the AL-XNUMX; c) too expensive.
    15.01.2014/XNUMX/XNUMX At a discussion of the prospects for FGFA in the Ministry of Defense, the Air Force representatives continued to attack this project. The Deputy Chief of Staff of the Air Force, the procurement officer, said roughly that the engine was unreliable, the radar was bad, the stealth technology was useless (I quote: its stealth features badly engineered), at the time of adoption operation, the price of the machine will be prohibitive.
    There was a situation in which the future operator (Indian Air Force) declares that he does not need the FGFA, but the Defense Ministry and the HAL Corporation are in favor of the project (which is understandable, they will warm their hands well on this). How it all ends is incomprehensible, on the nose is the signing of a contract for 6 billion US dollars under the FGFA ...
    1. Lyokhin63
      Lyokhin63 22 January 2014 23: 23
      +1
      "Against the backdrop of comments," we staged a big sale of the F-35 to satellite countries, not adopting it. Think logically. Who gave B-2 to whom? "a) the Russians are reluctant to share important information about the aircraft design; b) the installed AL-41F1 engines do not meet the requirements and are just an upgrade of the AL-31; c) too expensive." And thanks to the Indians, the way more often the defense export is hit on the mordas. You can sell your weapons only if your own army is saturated with them and there are promising models.
    2. anarky
      anarky 22 January 2014 23: 42
      0
      Hindus just want cheaper, and that’s pulling our udders. The budget is not rubber.
      1. Conepatus
        Conepatus 23 January 2014 00: 33
        +2
        Hindus don't want cheaper. Hindus want MORE, for the same money.
        Why was it necessary to connect Indusov? From them one gimmoroy.
        Any contacts between Russia and Pakistan, India is extremely negative. But whoever they want, they will turn it off. Almost all the latest tenders in India were won by anyone, but not Russia.
        Interestingly, but the United States, would India lease the Sea Wolf nuclear submarine, or at least Los Angeles, but not 20 years ago, but new?
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 23 January 2014 06: 41
          0
          Quote: Conepatus
          Why was it necessary to connect Indusov? From them one gimmoroy.

          And where is the money for PAK-FA? Hindus make 6 billion US dollars, not rupees, but dollars. And this is more than 180 billion rubles no matter how ...
          Quote: Conepatus
          Interestingly, but the United States, would India lease the Sea Wolf nuclear submarine, or at least Los Angeles, but not 20 years ago, but new?

          The US Congress lifted ALL restrictions on the sale of weapons to India, and this is a rather unprecedented case.
    3. Tektor
      Tektor 23 January 2014 11: 29
      0
      This is such a style of Hindu hitting: they beat themselves in the chest and shout that they themselves can do it, and are 100% better and cheaper ... And when it comes to practice, it turns out that it takes 10 years to develop a tank, an airplane - 15 years, a submarine - it is not known how many, because by the time they are accepted, they turn out to be morally obsolete, and they must be finalized in full: this music will be eternal ... And it has not yet been accepted. Therefore, it is simple: the dog barks - the caravan goes on.
  • Padla
    Padla 23 January 2014 00: 24
    0
    Well done, of course, in this regard, they do not stagnate, while we slap our airplanes they will already become obsolete ...
    1. nazgul-ishe
      nazgul-ishe 23 January 2014 01: 19
      0
      While we "spank" they produce.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • nazgul-ishe
    nazgul-ishe 23 January 2014 01: 24
    +1
    Why swear? By the time we serialize our PAK-FA, they will become obsolete a long time ago and they will have to spend money again.
  • jjj
    jjj 23 January 2014 04: 07
    +2
    I read, thought, introduced. There is a war. A lone F-35 is flying somewhere. Kilometers in three hundred flies Su-35. Gentlemen launch rockets. And around there is no airplane, no racket, no anti-aircraft gun, no satellite, no locator. So only the Israelis fly to bomb Syria and Iran. But in reality? It was all already: rockets, long distances. But in the end, the Americans had to urgently build the F-15 and F-16 for effective close combat. In the event of war, everyone will fly in groups, often of different courses. And flying is not for beautiful duels. And here completely different characteristics will be required than purely increased secrecy
  • MolGro
    MolGro 23 January 2014 06: 27
    +1
    F35 is the cut standard, how to cut the headstock and that doesn’t work)
    In my opinion, the F35 will occupy a niche in excess of expensive shit and no more.
    Seriously, in fact, this aircraft can be proud of invisibility on American radars and that’s all))
    It has an unsuccessful engine design, poor maneuverability (the better the maneuverability, the easier it is for an aircraft in difficult weather conditions), the largest fuel supply and a lot of shortcomings)
    But if we consider it as an aircraft to cover the air defense zone on an aircraft carrier, then yes it will be effective.
  • Platov
    Platov 23 January 2014 16: 15
    0
    For some reason, everyone argues that the battle takes place over a deserted place with unlimited fuel and ammunition and without a control flight of AWACS on the one hand and without help from the ground on the other. It will not be enough for an attack, but for defense it may be enough. Our military also has heads, although there are stools where and how much should be the excess of troops and military equipment in order to consider preparation for an attack and take a preemptive strike. Here the geyropa should think in which cave to live which roots are raw after the military conflict between RUSSIA and the USA.
  • Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 24 January 2014 00: 15
    0
    MOSCOW, January 23. (ARMS-TASS). The carrier-based version of the F-35C Lightning II fighter was tested with a full missile and bomb load, Lockheed Martin reported. The flight was conducted at the Patuxent River Naval Air Base. The test aircraft, designated CF-2, was equipped with AIM-01X Sidewinder air-to-air missiles and GBU-9 Paveway II laser guided aircraft bombs (UAB). ) and a container with artillery weapons. The representative of the program for the creation of the F-12 Lara Siebert said that despite the fact that the composition of the missile and bomb weapons placed on the aircraft was not the heaviest, all the hardpoints were involved. During the test flight, the aircraft was flown by British Air Force pilot, squadron commander Andy Edgell.
    Versions of the F-35B and F-35C fighter, designed for use by the United States Marine Corps (ILC), the Air Force and the British Navy, are equipped with a removable cannon container located at the bottom of the aircraft. The F-35A version, which is supposed to be delivered by the US Air Force, is equipped with an integrated cannon container.

    Well, here's another step forward.