Military Review

Be wary of the super-weapons of the Russian Air Force: Invisible Fighter T-50

89
The Russian stealth fighter T-50 PAK FA from Sukhoi could become a formidable rival of fifth-generation American combat aircraft such as Lockheed Martin’s F-22 Raptor and the F-35 single strike fighter. In fact, in some ways, the new Russian aircraft will surpass both American fighters, but the PAK FA has its drawbacks.

Be wary of the super-weapons of the Russian Air Force: Invisible Fighter T-50


"The analysis data that I saw on the PAK FA indicates that it has a very modern design, which at least is not inferior, and according to some experts, even surpasses fifth generation American aircraft," the former chief of intelligence of the Air Force said to National Interest United States, Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula (Dave Deptula). “Of course, he has better turning characteristics combined with a deviation of the thrust vector, the tail unit surface than the F-35, and an excellent aerodynamic design.”

It seems that the PAK FA is more optimized to achieve air superiority than the multipurpose and shock F-35, being similar in this regard to the F-22. Like the Raptor, the PAK FA, due to its design, can fly high and fast, providing maximum kinetic energy for launching its long-range air-to-missile missiles, which significantly increases their range.

"In terms of performance, he is fully capable of competing with the Raptor aircraft," one senior military commander, who has extensive experience working with fifth-generation US fighters, told National Interest.

Like the F-22, the Russian machine will be able to fly at supersonic speed for a long time. Perhaps her cruising speed will be greater than Mach 1,5. The maximum speed of the aircraft must be greater than the Mach number 2,0, if only this load can withstand its coverage with low-profile characteristics.

But unlike the fifth generation of American aircraft, in the PAK FA much less importance is given to stealth, and much more maneuverability. In terms of purely kinetic characteristics, it can compete with the Raptor, but it surpasses the F-35 much and in many ways. And this superiority in performance can increase even more.

At present, an improved version of the Su-30 engine, called the 117 Product or the AL-41Ф1 engine and developing a thrust near 15000 kgf, is installed on the Russian aircraft. This engine has much more speed than its predecessor, the AL-31, from which it comes, but it was far from as reliable as the designers had hoped. However, this engine is temporary. The serial variants of the PAK FA must be equipped with a new engine. The product 30, which is to be put into service in the 2020 year.

The Russian fighter will also be equipped with a powerful on-board radio-electronic system, which is a continuation of Sukhoi’s work on Su-30 avionics. “There is information that the complex of on-board electronics is taken from the Su-35C with the addition of a very powerful multi-function radar with an active X-band phased antenna array,” said Deptula.

Further, there are indications that the PAK FA is equipped with an L-band radar, which is capable of detecting invisible aircraft of the size of a fighter. L-band radar will not allow the PAK FA to fight invisible planes, but the pilot will be able to focus other detection devices on one or another part of the sky.

In addition to radar and electronic support equipment, the PAK FA is equipped with search and tracking tools in the infrared range.

The Russians have made tremendous progress in the field of sensory systems, but American military aircraft still have advantages in terms of synthesizing data from detection devices, which is extremely important in modern warfare. “Now the real question is whether the Russians will be able to achieve the same level of data synthesis and networking as the F-22 and F-35 machines have reached. Now I would put my money in the plan on the USA and our allies, ”said Deputla.

A senior representative of the American military industry agrees with the estimates of the Depth. In terms of avionics, the PAK FA is closer to the F / A-18E / F Super Hornet or to the F-16E / F Block 60, rather than the F-22 or F-35. “Someone might say that the PAK FA is the fifth generation fighter, but by American standards it is more about the 4,5 generation aircraft,” he said.

In fact, the absence of a combination of various sensors and universal data receiving and transmitting lines in the PAK FA may be its Achilles heel. American strategists are developing a concept in which any aircraft and surface ship can act as a detection device for any aircraft, ship, or vehicle with weapons on board. The plane from which the launch of the weapon is launched may not even control it after launch. The Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) is already being developed in the US Navy (Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air), which will do just that. Something similar is created in the Air Force.

“In the future, the aerodynamic characteristics will remain important, but speed, range and combat load will be much more important than maneuverability. More universal will be the universal ability to share information so that we can make decisions faster than the adversary, ”said Deputla. - This is a concept that can be called a "combat" cloud. What is more important is how we integrate the sensors and shooters present in the new systems than the new systems themselves. ”

The representative of the military industrial complex agrees with Deptula, but notes that the PAK FA has another vulnerability. The Russians as a whole have no need to fight in the framework of a dense, modern and well-integrated air defense system, like the Americans. As such, the PAK-FA actually has stealth characteristics, but it gives much less attention to stealth technology than in F-22 and in F-35. "Due to their lack of priorities such as stealth and data synthesis from detection devices, they are vulnerable to both fifth-generation western fighters, especially for the F-22," said the military industry representative. “If you look at the concept that the United States Air Force uses in F-22 / F-35 aircraft, it becomes clear that the PAK FA will face considerable difficulties.”

But the Chinese in this regard is different история. “It is because of this scenario that the Chinese value their J-20 and J-31 cars so much,” said the MIC representative.

In any case, although Russia has the capacity to develop a very efficient fifth generation fighter, the important question remains whether it can launch its production. The Soviet industrial base has always been aimed at creating a large number of fairly rough samples of low-quality equipment. However, stealth technology requires a level and precision of production that Russia has never demonstrated before - especially after the collapse of its industrial base with the collapse of the Soviet Union. “She has a long way to go before she reaches the initial readiness of this system weapons for effective use, said a spokesman for the military. - Neither the Russians nor the Chinese have yet managed to set up production of their new generation fighters. The Russians first need to restore their production facilities in aviation industry. Neither Russia nor China possess stealth technologies, experience of production and operation to such an extent as the United States. "

Military leaders from the Air Force agree with his opinion. “I will say that it is extremely difficult to bring the fifth generation aircraft from the image in the catalog to a fully functional and reliable sample,” said one of them. - They do not have such experience and such an industrial base as we have in those issues that they want to solve. And it’s quite difficult for us to solve them, so I foresee great difficulties with deliveries to the troops. ”

A comprehensive assessment of the PAK FA before adoption is a difficult task, even for those who have access to military intelligence. “It’s hard to talk about this until the production of the PAK-FA has begun,” said another Air Force representative. - I doubt that they will be on an equal footing with our fifth-generation aircraft, but we also have few of them. And, most likely, they will surpass the fourth generation [F-15, F-16 and F / A-18] cars. ”

However, the US has already begun to develop requirements for the F-22 and F-35 successor aircraft, which will be the FX Fighter Superiority Air Fighter, as well as the next generation F / A-XX attack fighter aircraft. But even before this, the Pentagon may take certain steps to reduce the threat from Russian and Chinese stealth fighters.

“Airplanes and information technologies of the fifth generation allow us to create new concepts of hostilities that we have yet to develop. I would say that this is what we should devote our efforts to before we spend a lot of time and money on creating the next revolutionary fighter, ”said Deputla. “If a long-range strike bomber (LRS-B) is properly designed for future development, then it will be the next important component of this concept instead of FX and F / A-XX.”

According to Deptuly, if we fully integrate and ensure the interfacing of the various weapons systems of the Pentagon, so that they act as a single whole, new opportunities will appear that the new aircraft do not have. “Future advances in data exchange promise to drastically increase the combat impact when individual aviation systems are fully integrated with the sea, land, space and cybernetic systems, forming an all-penetrating complex,” he said. - Tied together and creating a self-creating / self-restoring "fighting" cloud "individual systems will be able to enhance their advantages, and at the same time it will be possible to ignore certain disadvantages and vulnerabilities of some systems. It is in this direction that we need to move. This may well become the basis of the next “compensation strategy”, which the Minister of Defense and his deputy are fighting for today. ”

Dave Majumdar has covered military issues since 2004. He is currently writing for the US Naval Institute, Aviation Week, The Daily Beast and other publications. He previously covered national security issues at Flight International, Defense News and the C4ISR Journal. Madjumdar was engaged in strategic research at the University of Calgary, and is currently studying the history of naval forces.
Author:
Originator:
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-russian-air-forces-super-weapon-beware-the-pak-fa-11742
89 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 29 November 2014 05: 03
    +25
    joyfully you dig into an article about PAK-FA and .... again the old stuff ...! apparently, from time to time they rake the topic, just so that they don’t forget ... request
    1. Sergei1982
      Sergei1982 29 November 2014 06: 56
      +14
      What exactly is the American right in the field of electronics, we are lagging behind no matter who else says foreign customers on our aircraft would not put Israeli and French avionics.
      1. shibi
        shibi 29 November 2014 08: 41
        +14
        the plane must solve independently any problem, and not rely on clues.
        Remember the story of the American ship when it was stunned by our old airplane?
        The mericosa were in a panic.
        The same thing can happen with their super-communicated aircraft if a modern jammer works.
        1. Kostyar
          Kostyar 29 November 2014 16: 19
          0
          What is there to read, this is the West - traders, in the most vile and contemptuous sense of the word !!! Their G.U.A.N.O. flying and standing like the whole army of the Baltic states ...., a hundred times, but what's there a thousand times better than Russian, real planes !!!
        2. slon82
          slon82 29 November 2014 18: 05
          0
          Who told you such nonsense. I rarely comment on such clowns here.
        3. gav6757
          gav6757 29 November 2014 22: 43
          +1
          YES, WE WOULD ONLY GET THEM THROUGH THEM, TO AMERICA THEM S.RANOY, AND THERE WILL ALREADY BE OVERLOADED WITH TEETH !!!
          Maybe with our equipment and not very much, but we are at war without "Coca-Cola" and toilet paper, pretty well ... So, what should be seen!
          Don’t say, mattress, gop - until you jumped !!!
          1. gridasov
            gridasov 29 November 2014 22: 51
            +4
            You see, what is the catch. You are now thinking how to get to the enemy's throat, and the position of other people makes them think about how to develop events and use the conditions of the situation after the war, which seems to be not in the future. "Myopia" is always a reason to take advantage of those who have this handicap.
            Russians should not even think one step ahead, but on the very algorithm of the laws of change in situations. And there are many people who want to destroy the Slavic world.
      2. Penzyac
        Penzyac 29 November 2014 08: 49
        +12
        Quote: Sergei1982
        What exactly is the American right in the field of electronics, we are lagging behind no matter who else says foreign customers on our aircraft would not put Israeli and French avionics.

        Are you an electronics specialist?
        Do not judge by household gadgets, but you will say that we are inferior to the Chinese in almost everything.
        Well, yes, PR in the West in general, and in the Americans in particular, really often works "miracles".
        Excellence in hardware does not necessarily mean superiority in the final product. Rather, on the contrary, it leads to the temptation to follow the path of frontal (not flexible, not optimal, not better) problem solving. There are concepts such as redundancy and sufficiency.
        1. Baikal
          Baikal 29 November 2014 09: 49
          +9
          The Soviet industrial base has always been aimed at creating a large number of rather rough samples of low-quality equipment.

          Even commenting on it somehow ... inconvenient wink
        2. Sergei1982
          Sergei1982 29 November 2014 09: 57
          +1
          Well, yes, PR in the West in general, and in the Americans in particular, really often works "miracles".
          Excellence in hardware does not necessarily mean superiority in the final product.

          SAY THEN WHY MOST OF OUR CUSTOMERS PUT FRENCH AND ISRAELI ELECTRONICS (I am a patriot of the country but?) Answer the question or all the fools do not understand what
          1. bif
            bif 29 November 2014 11: 50
            +3
            Quote: Sergei1982
            SAY THEN WHY MOST OF OUR CUSTOMERS PUT FRENCH AND ISRAELI ELECTRONICS (I am a patriot of the country but?

            Most is Who? Figures and facts in the studio, each case please!)
            1. And Us Rat
              And Us Rat 29 November 2014 14: 24
              +2
              Quote: bif
              Quote: Sergei1982
              SAY THEN WHY MOST OF OUR CUSTOMERS PUT FRENCH AND ISRAELI ELECTRONICS (I am a patriot of the country but?

              Most is Who? Figures and facts in the studio, each case please!)


              Actually, this is a long-known and modestly silent fact. For example, the news announcements for the 2012 year.

              Algeria requested official explanations from Russia regarding the high percentage of Israeli components in avionics of its Su-30MKA fighters. This happened after the Algerian Air Force began servicing the first aircraft received at 2007. The Algerian Air Force fears that the on-board computer - the Su-30MKA think tank - is heavily influenced by Israeli technology and interacts with the Israeli IAI Elta EL / M8222 [airborne jamming system - P.2] and an indicator on the windshield of Elbit Systems SU967. Fears were caused by the fact that avionics in the new generation of Su-27 fighters could become the target of cyber attacks by Israel in the event of hostilities.
              1. Dali
                Dali 30 November 2014 02: 16
                +1
                Everything flows, everything changes ... and the yard is already the end of 2014 wink

                By the way ... in Russia launched the production of silicon carbide single crystal good - it doesn’t mean anything to you ...
                1. And Us Rat
                  And Us Rat 30 November 2014 14: 37
                  +2
                  Quote: Dali

                  By the way ... in Russia launched the production of silicon carbide single crystal good - it doesn’t mean anything to you ...

                  Just now ?! belay
                  1. Dali
                    Dali 2 December 2014 19: 57
                    0
                    Not just now ... but super-quality, back in the summer ...

                    Well, the fact that in 2014 it’s so understandable ... it's hard to get up from knees to feet!
        3. MAXUZZZ
          MAXUZZZ 30 November 2014 15: 09
          0
          I’ll confirm that the Su-30SM delivered to the BBO this year has an Israeli-French HUD sight, although it can only because it is an export version of the aircraft for India.
      3. Giant thought
        Giant thought 29 November 2014 09: 53
        +1
        It is not necessary to belittle the advantages of the T-50, which more than justifies the minor flaws.
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. TECHNOLOGY
        TECHNOLOGY 29 November 2014 14: 31
        +4
        That's the same yokarny babay!. Having looked through a lot of some literature, I came to the conclusion that the machines are incomparable. In no characteristics. The T-50 is completely higher than the mattress ones. By the way, infa slipped somewhere that the United States was removing the Raptors. In the 15th year. As an unjustified and expensive construct.
      6. Old old
        Old old 30 November 2014 01: 20
        +1
        Marketing has not been canceled. Our export equipment is significantly "fat-free".
      7. DanSabaka
        DanSabaka 1 December 2014 15: 23
        0
        maybe technically - yes, but not so much we are behind on the results ....
        American strategists are developing a concept in which any aircraft and surface ship can act as a detection device for any aircraft

        But didn’t such a system be embodied in the MiG-31 concept even under the USSR?
    2. Pervusha Isaev
      Pervusha Isaev 29 November 2014 08: 46
      +6
      the plane is not finished, what is now to discuss what will be and what will not be, they will make the plane then and compare ...
      1. ya.seliwerstov2013
        ya.seliwerstov2013 29 November 2014 10: 30
        +2
        the plane is not finished, what is now to discuss what will be and what will not be, then they will make the plane comparable.
        America opted to integrate stealth into its aircraft to compensate for superior Russian air defense. Russia did not need a stealth, because in Europe or America there was no such powerful air defense that could not be overcome by numerical superiority.
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 29 November 2014 12: 04
          +5
          Quote: ya.seliwerstov2013
          Russia didn’t need a stealth, because in Europe or America there wasn’t such a powerful air defense,

          Air defense is not only ground-based air defense systems, it is also "air patrols" with AWACS. Therefore, stealth is needed in order not to blow through the air battle to the fighter "barrier", to knock down SENTRI in a timely manner, and so on.
          Quote: ya.seliwerstov2013
          which could not be overcome by numerical superiority.

          We are no longer the Soviet Union with unlimited production and mobility resources. There may not be enough "hats" if they are irrationally spread. And in general, it's time to move from extensive database management methods to intensive ones. "Mass" pilots on the T-50 are not foreseen in view of the uniqueness of this aviation complex: each trained pilot of the T-50 will literally be worth its weight in gold, and maybe even ruthenium!
    3. Yun Klob
      Yun Klob 29 November 2014 11: 51
      +3
      It is necessary to yell less at all angles about your achievements, then to find opposition to them, and it will be much more difficult to just find a potential enemy.
    4. SAXA.SHURA
      SAXA.SHURA 29 November 2014 13: 46
      +2
      Let him teach his grandmother cabbage soup. In what years did our fighters turn out to be worse than the American ones since the Korean War, in Vietnam their phantoms fell like peas from our MIG-19 and MIG-21, one of which we shot down on five shot down Americans along with the goat Biden, he still has there is no roof. They can never defeat our pilots in aerial combat, and I know this firsthand.
      1. Penelope
        Penelope 29 November 2014 14: 39
        +1
        The T-50 is currently the best aircraft in the world.
        1. Pajamas
          Pajamas 29 November 2014 19: 58
          +2
          Yeah, the best, both as a steamboat and as a snowmobile, I'm sorry, but what year are you from, otherwise there is something T-50 in the present tense.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    5. Denis fj
      Denis fj 29 November 2014 13: 57
      0
      The Americans are counting on their concept of computer warfare, but these "toys" immediately fail and they themselves understand this, declaring the need to enter ground forces in the fight against ISL, and how they promised to get rid of them by pressing buttons from around the corner
    6. Denis fj
      Denis fj 29 November 2014 14: 00
      0
      The F-22 and F-35 T-50 PAK FA surpasses in aerodynamic qualities, which is important in close combat and in the use of anti-ballistic maneuvers, but we lose as electronic filling, which is important in a modern war that is tactically oriented towards the horizontal detection of the target and its subsequent destruction. Work further gentlemen, designers, Russia is behind you! ..
    7. Denis fj
      Denis fj 29 November 2014 14: 00
      0
      "Every sandpiper praises his swamp" - it is clear that the American expert will never recognize the superiority of our aircraft over theirs. Particularly convincing is his promise to put his hard-earned money on the superiority of American planes with a particle "would"): "if only, if only" ... I would be sure - I would invest without hesitation and without promising. And so it is clear: he has such a job!
    8. Denis fj
      Denis fj 29 November 2014 14: 05
      0
      In the event of a war with America ... Let's better not think about it. Here, not the characteristics of the aircraft will play a major role.
      Now in the war, the coordinated work of all units and units is important.
      One aircraft will not do the weather - it should have appropriate support.
    9. Zhekson
      Zhekson 29 November 2014 17: 48
      0
      and without planes, if that, we’ll just blow your hands ...
    10. yehat
      yehat 1 December 2014 18: 37
      0
      they are tedious, but there is one detail: the delivery dates of the engine were not named 2015, as planned, but already 2020. This info really surprised me.
  2. Same lech
    Same lech 29 November 2014 05: 03
    +9
    Now I would put my money in this regard to the United States and our allies, ”said Deptula.


    Yeah, look, make no mistake ... SAAKASHVILI also put his tie on the line ... then I had to urgently chew it.

    I am sure the T-50 will be brought to mind and will become a reliable and necessary aircraft in the Russian Air Force.
    1. Buran
      Buran 29 November 2014 06: 05
      +10
      The Soviet industrial base has always been aimed at creating a large number of rather rough samples of low-quality equipment. However, stealth technology requires a level and accuracy of production that Russia has never demonstrated before.


      After that I stopped reading.
      1. Penzyac
        Penzyac 29 November 2014 09: 02
        +6
        Quote: Buran
        The Soviet industrial base has always been aimed at creating a large number of rather rough samples of low-quality equipment. However, stealth technology requires a level and accuracy of production that Russia has never demonstrated before.


        After that I stopped reading.

        And I read that the self-conceit of the Americans is simply amazing, they even forget about Vietnam.
        1. Iline
          Iline 29 November 2014 09: 39
          +3
          You will not praise yourself, then who will praise you? This is the main conclusion from the article.
          The impression is that the Americans are struggling to justify to the people the colossal funds invested in both aircraft with unclear capabilities.
          Only direct sparring of planes can put everything in its place, but this is what the Americans are very much afraid of. You can really get into a puddle and then tell "where is the money, Zin?" Therefore, they give examples of contacts with the Iranian ancient F-4.
          1. Iline
            Iline 29 November 2014 09: 57
            +4
            An article in the topic.
            "Military Parity." F-22 Raptor fighters still hone their close-to-air combat skills with T-38 Talon training aircraft at deployment bases in Holloman, Tyndall and Langley, reports The Aviotionist on November 26.
            The T-38s were removed from the Davis Montana storage base and equipped with modern avionics systems, including the AN / ALQ-188 jamming station. These outdated aircraft perfectly mimic potential enemy fighter jets, helping to hone the skills of F-22 pilots. The cost of an hour of flight of the T-38 is less by 18 thousand dollars than that of the F-22.
            Pilots participating in training battles with the F-22 say: "We know that the Raptor is here, but we cannot see it." This superb combat feature allows the F-22 to occasionally do things worthy of the Top Gun series.
            For example, in March 2013, two Iranian Air Force Su-25 attack aircraft tried to shoot an American MQ-1 drone in international airspace. After this incident, drones began to fly, accompanied by carrier-based F-18 Hornet aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis or stealth fighter F-22 Raptor, based at the Al-Dhafra airport in the UAE,
            In one episode, two Iranian Air Force F-4 fighters tried to intercept a drone, one of them approached him for 16 miles. The Raptor suddenly appeared next to the Phantom, which was a complete surprise to Iranian pilots. The F-22 dived down to check if the fighter was armed with missiles, then on the radio made a message: “you really ought to go home” (you really ought to go home). Frightened Iranian pilots immediately headed for the deployment base. US Air Force Chief of Staff General Mark Welsh confirmed that it was the F-22 that was involved in the incident. .

            Funny enough.
            1. aviator65
              aviator65 29 November 2014 18: 21
              0
              All that remains is to scream something like "Akhtung! Akhtung! Raptorch in the air!" And ... scattered. lol
    2. Very old
      Very old 29 November 2014 06: 48
      +5
      ALEXEI, every time I have to read about the T-50 (and the DAK-50), I think about the lost time when prospective programs were curtailed - either spruce Cynicism, then Serdyuchkin jackets ... how much time we lost It’s harder to catch up
      1. Sergei1982
        Sergei1982 29 November 2014 07: 44
        +1
        every time I have to read about the T-50 (and the DAK-50), I think about the lost time when prospective programs were curtailed - either spruce Cynicism, then Serdyuchkin showers ... how much time was lost.
        No doubt, it might have been easier to continue project 1.42, but what happened happened, we hope that the T-50 will be quickly brought to mind, although it seems to me that we will not see it in service before 2020.
        1. Penzyac
          Penzyac 29 November 2014 09: 05
          +1
          Quote: Sergei1982
          every time I have to read about the T-50 (and the DAK-50), I think about the lost time when prospective programs were curtailed - either spruce Cynicism, then Serdyuchkin showers ... how much time was lost.
          No doubt, it might have been easier to continue project 1.42, but what happened happened, we hope that the T-50 will be quickly brought to mind, although it seems to me that we will not see it in service before 2020.

          It all depends on the political will, including in the personnel issue, especially in terms of personal responsibility and sufficient and timely financing of all real performers.
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 29 November 2014 12: 37
            +5
            Quote: PENZYAC
            It all depends on the political will, including in the personnel issue, especially in terms of personal responsibility and sufficient and timely financing of all real performers.

            "Will - will rosy, if you do not have the strength to turn ..." (c)
            It is impossible to fill the pool in 20m1000 in 3 minutes through the pipe d = 30mm!
            I mean, we need a NEW production base and TRAINED personnel for it.
            A simple example: in order to expand the production of a new battle tank based on the ARMATA platform, they invested 24 billion rubles into technical re-equipment of production in the Uralmashzavod, trained personnel ... And this is time!
            T-50, like the Yascher, it is a piece, expensive ($ 100 million) high-tech product. We plan to have 30 T-50 squadrons, 12 units each. the Americans only received orders for the Penguin (F-35) for 2443 units, with a total value of 382 billion dollars. So the US production base is more powerful than ours, and in order not to lose, IT must be destroyed by "dropping" the dollar - our asymmetrical answer!
            And the second: remove the aegis from their STELS, this is the task of our air defense system and RTV. So the task of combating the Reptors is multifaceted and extremely expensive. Americans hope that we don’t have the strength and resources to do this. IMHO.
  3. aszzz888
    aszzz888 29 November 2014 05: 09
    +2
    Shake and be afraid! And so that no one would have delusional thoughts about any military action against Russia.
  4. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 29 November 2014 05: 25
    +6
    Well, how could a American not praise his own. And talk about the backwardness of Russia in technology. And especially in the "intellectual" ones. Difficult to verify controversial judgment. With one "stealth" mattress toppers have already screwed up (F 117), and so they waved their hands ...
    1. Afinogen
      Afinogen 29 November 2014 05: 52
      +3
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      With one "stealth" mattress toppers have already screwed up (F 117), and so they waved their hands ...


      Yes, not with one, but with all the "stealth" screwed up laughing and not only with "stealth".


      1. Andrea
        Andrea 29 November 2014 06: 24
        +2
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        With one "stealth" mattress toppers have already screwed up (F 117), and so they waved their hands ...

        In these airplanes the whole thieves' essence of the Anglo-Saxons was expressed. Sneak up to stick a knife in the back and run away.
        1. Letun
          Letun 29 November 2014 06: 59
          +9
          Quote: Andrea
          In these airplanes the whole thieves' essence of the Anglo-Saxons was expressed. Sneak up to stick a knife in the back and run away.

          Don’t say it. Here to go honestly against the enemy, put a thousand or two of their soldiers, this is patsansky!
        2. Wick
          Wick 29 November 2014 07: 13
          +2
          If this is so bad then why do you need a T-50? Or do you also say this to snipers, scouts, submariners? Sneaky you, sneaking up. And not in full growth on the enemy preet.
          1. Andrea
            Andrea 29 November 2014 07: 44
            -2
            Quote: Wick
            If this is so bad then why do you need a T-50? Or do you also say this to snipers, scouts, submariners? Sneaky you, sneaking up. And not in full growth on the enemy rushing

            PAK FA does not emphasize invisibility (and in my opinion this is not achievable by 100%), and there is no need to compare the incomparable sniper on the battlefield with the hunter. The sniper shooting at civilians is the killer. And these are "flying goblins", can work only on civilian objects and then only at night.
            1. Letun
              Letun 29 November 2014 10: 08
              +4
              Quote: Andrea
              . And these "flying goblins" can only work on civilian objects and then only at night.

              What a terrific knowledge of the material! lol
            2. yehat
              yehat 1 December 2014 19: 34
              0
              not true! f-22 from the Japanese air base can ram in the afternoon! fellow
          2. Penzyac
            Penzyac 29 November 2014 09: 10
            +2
            Quote: Wick
            If this is so bad then why do you need a T-50? Or do you also say this to snipers, scouts, submariners? Sneaky you, sneaking up. And not in full growth on the enemy preet.

            With wolves live - wolf howl.
            Every enemy needs his own answer, and shoving like a zulu with spears on a machine gun is certainly brave, but stupid.
      2. Humpty
        Humpty 29 November 2014 06: 39
        0
        Shooting Obama at a basketball game on the deck of an aircraft carrier does not look believable.
        Obama without chewing gum? I can’t believe it ((.
      3. Very old
        Very old 29 November 2014 07: 22
        0
        My video doesn’t start?
        I can not view
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. siberalt
        siberalt 29 November 2014 07: 34
        +3
        On the deck of the aircraft carrier they sang a hymn to the tune "Khazbulat the daring" laughing
  5. Andrea
    Andrea 29 November 2014 05: 27
    +2
    Bright heads in Russia have never been translated. Everything will be mastered if officials and envious people do not interfere, as we always have.
    1. Tektor
      Tektor 29 November 2014 10: 57
      0
      The aircraft from which the launch of the weapon is launched may not even operate it after launch. The US Navy is already developing a "Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA), ...
      This is my favorite place, in the light of the fact that the Su-50 will have Himalayas ...
  6. Wolka
    Wolka 29 November 2014 06: 04
    0
    Now let the Yankees light a cigarette if they can ...
    1. Penzyac
      Penzyac 29 November 2014 09: 13
      0
      Quote: Volka
      Now let the Yankees light a cigarette if they can ...

      They quit smoking, now chewing gum more and more, like a cow. sad
  7. arthur_hammer
    arthur_hammer 29 November 2014 06: 40
    0
    Does anyone know when the T-50-6 will go to the test, it seems it should be before the serial
  8. sv68
    sv68 29 November 2014 06: 47
    +2
    I read this opus, the Yankees wouldn’t be themselves, so as not to praise their own but someone else’s shit. All of them have a super duper and warriors they hurt themselves about the corner and from overclocking angry the blind man said, let's see what happens with us and you finish your shodevrf35, here it’s for sure you have a tingling 5 ---.
    1. Sergei1982
      Sergei1982 29 November 2014 07: 48
      +1
      and you finish your shodevrf35, here it is for sure you have a tingling 5 ---
      Well, yes f-35 obviously didn’t work out, if they wouldn’t like much from him, maybe it would not be a bad plane like f-16.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 29 November 2014 13: 55
        +5
        Quote: Sergei1982
        Well yes f-35 obviously didn’t work out,

        This is our opinion different from that of the Yankees. F-35 is made for all kinds of forces: Air Force, Navy, MP Corps. And for some reason they don’t refuse it ... WHY? Are they, well, sooooo stupid, as MN says Zadornov? Or do not know how to count money?
        With this attitude, I got into an argument with our colleagues from the "winged system". Half drunk company I convinced, as far as I could, that the Penguin - sucks! There was one lieutenant colonel among them, with smart, sad eyes, who listened more than spoke ... During a smoke break, he came up to me and asked where I was "so knowledgeable in aviation" from. Learning that he was a sailor, he calmed down. But then he started asking me questions. (That he is from the office - don't go to the grandmother!) But from communication with him, I came to the following conclusion for myself.
        1. The Yankees will finish the F-35 and bring it to the stated conditions;
        2. It will be imposed on everything by NATO, and satellites will buy this wunderwaffle, thereby unifying the entire IA park.
        3. This is a "second stage" aircraft (?)
        -- Then I asked a few questions !!!
        It turned out that after all airfields and sections of highways suitable for landing IA were destroyed in Europe (the amers had no talk about state territory at all!), And small flat areas remained next to the front line, this was where the starry hour of our "fat man". After him, the Americans leave the second half of the air show!
        - And about our aviation?
        Oleg advised me to remember the 41st year and the domination of the Germans in the air. I said that this is unlikely to happen again! To which I heard: "Well, well, the crow swore to peck! If we don't recover, it will be even worse."
        And not so long ago the Decree of the Darkest came out - young men from the military-industrial complex (defense) are exempted from the draft! This reminded me of the 39 year with its transfer of the defense industry to a round-the-clock mode of operation ... I recalled this conversation on the November, it was not ICE!
        So the wick, apparently, already lit up. IMHO.
        1. gridasov
          gridasov 29 November 2014 20: 45
          0
          The "wick" has been burning for a long time and with a bright flame, only amateurs cannot see it. It means not everything is so simple. Let's speculate. Everything we know about key strike aircraft, boats, is only a fraction of the information. The main thing is that these aircraft, ships and boats are capable of being upgraded in the shortest time periods. And I think not everyone knows this. Of course, we can talk about the aggregate potential of the capabilities of certain "products", which means that there is a general balance of technologies and the possibilities of reproducing something on their basis. And this is where Russia loses. So you need to have something that is an order of magnitude more effective. That is why I am talking about engines for all kinds of aircraft. ships, power plants, which are built on new algorithms for organizing processes in them. It's only a matter of time, but all the same, everyone will rest on this decision. We, now, are ahead of everyone. I understand that an apple that has come off a branch cannot be immediately on the ground. It must pass all areas of space along the flight vector. Perhaps I am also rushing things.
  9. Gans1234
    Gans1234 29 November 2014 06: 54
    +1
    "..they will most likely surpass the fourth generation [F-15, F-16 and F / A-18]."
    Is this a joke or something ??))) Of course, he will surpass them by head. This is how to compare the MiG-21 with the Harrier II.
    Our 4 generation aircraft have always excelled in aerodynamics and maneuverability on American 4s. But lagged behind on a number of issues in electronics. Nevertheless, although we could lose the battle in the long-range match, we undoubtedly outperformed the Americans in the close air combat.
    In the Su-35 and the latest modifications of the Mig-29, this gap was largely overcome.
    Moreover, there was serious talk about comparing the Su-35 with the 5 generation of Americans.

    In general, 4th generation aircraft are more than modern. What can we say about the past modernization in electronics, with new missiles and radar. Half the planet has a bunch of 3th generation aircraft that are actively operated

    As for stealth technologies - yes, here we are lagging behind, and we have a lag in development experience, and most importantly, in operation - but this is a matter of time.
    And to put in superiority and priority stealth quality over aerodynamic (combat) is stupid. Where it is possible to combine and improve this and that, but not to the detriment of the flight performance of the aircraft (as with the F-35) - and in this I agree with our military.
    Do not forget what has been happening with our defense industry for the last 15 years - worse than nothing.
    Stealth is good, but the plane must fly first.
    As for the steepness of stealth technologies and their development in our country, as well as increasing the capacity and quality of the defense industry, this is a matter of time, it’s a matter of time, and we are determined to move in this direction, which concerns Americans most of all.
    The main thing is to move on, and look at the content of articles by the American media about our aircraft in 15-20 years. And I'm sure, when you read them, I will smile gloatingly
  10. andruha70
    andruha70 29 November 2014 06: 57
    +1
    read, racking my brains - what is the essence of the article? request whether "pepelats" would be completely invisible, or not completely invisible, but more maneuverable? maybe it's all about the tasks? IM - to fly to the "banana" republic and bomb (although the experience of Yugoslavia in shooting down the F-117 shows the opposite) and US - to repel the attack (and here already - the maneuverability rules) and even more, except for the radio frequency range there are all sorts of optical, infrared -different other ranges. can one of the specialists - enlighten. what
    1. Penzyac
      Penzyac 29 November 2014 09: 31
      +2
      Quote: andruha70
      read, racking my brains - what is the essence of the article? request whether "pepelats" would be completely invisible, or not completely invisible, but more maneuverable? maybe it's all about the tasks? IM - to fly to the "banana" republic and bomb (although the experience of Yugoslavia in shooting down the F-117 shows the opposite) and US - to repel the attack (and here already - the maneuverability rules) and even more, except for the radio frequency range there are all sorts of optical, infrared -different other ranges. can one of the specialists - enlighten. what

      I’m certainly not an expert, but I think that knocking down a modern Russian super-maneuverable fighter from a long distance is not very solvable, missiles are not invisible, but there is an opportunity to evade the fact that you can see. And at close range, what the hell is invisibility ?. In close combat, maneuverability is most needed, as well as in long-range combat (at least for missile evasion).
  11. Mainbeam
    Mainbeam 29 November 2014 08: 22
    +1
    American strategists are developing a concept in which any aircraft and surface ship can act as a detection device for any aircraft, ship or vehicle with weapons on board. The aircraft from which the launch of the weapon is launched may not even operate it after launch. The US Navy is already developing a “naval system for integrated fire control and gaining air supremacy

    In the future, aerodynamic characteristics will retain their significance, but speed, range and combat load will be much more important than maneuverability. More important will be universal ability to share informationso that we can make decisions faster than the adversary. This is a concept that can be called a "combat" cloud. More important here is how we integrate sensors and shooters present in new systems than the new systems themselves.

    This system is aimed at suppressing a weaker opponent, but not equal to itself. In a war with an equal adversary, it is precisely the connection of this "battle cloud" (destruction of satellites, jamming, electronic warfare ...) will be destroyed. And then maneuverability will become important, as before. But while we have to admit that the Americans are a couple of steps ahead.
  12. Wedmak
    Wedmak 29 November 2014 08: 30
    +3
    The Russians as a whole have no need to fight within the framework of a dense, modern and well-integrated air defense system, like the Americans.

    It killed simply! This is where the Americans fought with a dense, modern and well-integrated air defense system? What about Afghanistan? Iraq? Libya? Yugoslavia? Balabol ....
    1. wizarden
      wizarden 29 November 2014 08: 46
      +2
      F-22 was not created at all for the war in Afghanistan or Libya. This is a plane for breaking through and suppressing Soviet air defense, which was just modern and well integrated.

      In the war predicted by the Americans, they are attackers, and we are defending. Hence the conclusions that our planes do not need to deal with strong air defense, because the fighting will be on our territory. And they need to.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 29 November 2014 15: 47
        +3
        Quote: wizarden
        our planes do not need to deal with strong air defense, because the fighting will be on our territory.

        Well what are you, right! It is necessary to preempt the enemy, not to let him into our territory, not to repeat 41-42 years! And for this it is necessary to destroy his forces in the areas of concentration, on the march, in areas of deployment, at the transition of forces by sea, etc. And for this we need airplanes capable of breaking through a strong object and zonal air defense. But this is more about tactics and military operations, the building of forces, and the provision of front-line aviation databases.
        1. gridasov
          gridasov 29 November 2014 20: 48
          0
          I believe that preemption should be at earlier stages. But this part of the phase can no doubt be missed.
        2. Gans1234
          Gans1234 29 November 2014 20: 53
          0
          There are Iskanders for this.
    2. Gans1234
      Gans1234 29 November 2014 20: 52
      0
      Never fought a country with modern air defense
      Serbia had a miserable air defense of 70x, and then the F117 managed to bring down
      And we have air defense, that's where macaques are preparing
  13. Vasily Ivashov
    Vasily Ivashov 29 November 2014 08: 36
    +1
    The general meaning of the article: Russians cannot be better than us, because we are getting better and newer and any war will be the way we imagine it, not them.
    At least reading such articles, you understand why one Englishman said: "War is a continuous chain of catastrophes."
  14. Bayonet
    Bayonet 29 November 2014 08: 40
    +1
    "Beware of the superweapon of the Russian Air Force: the T-50 stealth fighter"
    Convinced, I'm already afraid!
  15. Penzyac
    Penzyac 29 November 2014 08: 44
    0
    Quote: “I doubt they will be on par with our fifth generation aircraft, but we also have few of them. And, most likely, they will surpass the fourth generation aircraft [F-15, F-16 and F / A-18] "
    He doubts, well, let him doubt it for now, and their fourth-generation airplanes are already surpassed in many respects by the latest modifications of our fourth-generation airplanes, especially the SU-35, there is nothing to say about PAK-FA.
    Americans are all hoping for "invisibility" and all sorts of "clouds", but how will they act in conditions of powerful electronic warfare or, in general, when we use pulsed electromagnetic weapons? How is that boat of theirs in the Black Sea?
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 29 November 2014 15: 08
      +1
      Quote: PENZYAC
      , and how will they operate in conditions of powerful electronic warfare or, in general, when we use pulsed electromagnetic weapons?

      They will fly on such things -
  16. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 29 November 2014 09: 21
    +1
    The advertisement is engine of the trade! Oh, how the Yankees praise their developments, but for some reason they forget to say about the huge problems of the same F-22 and why very often the pilots on them lose consciousness (not from overloads, but from banal oxygen starvation) !? And the same F-35, according to the statement of many Western analysts, is not at all capable of withstanding our 4 ++ vehicles! The main thing is to "sell" your "trough" (f-35), and then let the buyers solve its problems!
  17. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 29 November 2014 09: 37
    +3
    American thinkers always forget one thing: that they can never be taller, stronger and faster. For one simple reason: Russians always come up with three logs on a tambourine on any stick in the wheel!
  18. valokordin
    valokordin 29 November 2014 09: 40
    +1
    The more difficult it is, the more unreliable. From the article "In fact, in some respects the new Russian aircraft will surpass both American fighters, but the PAK FA has its drawbacks."
    The most important disadvantage is that the work is not "invisible man" by H.G. Wells
  19. silver169
    silver169 29 November 2014 09: 50
    +2
    Every sandpiper praises his swamp, and who, whom, but our sworn "friends" find fault with someone else's is no stranger. But in a real battle, we always beat them and will beat them.
  20. saag
    saag 29 November 2014 11: 14
    +1
    In my opinion, the T-50 will have one noticeable drawback - the price, and therefore there will be few of them
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 29 November 2014 16: 10
      +1
      Quote: saag
      In my opinion, the T-50 will have one noticeable drawback - the price, and therefore there will be few of them

      I cited the data above: It is planned to have 30 squadrons of 12 aircraft in each. Unit price == 100mpn dale. While ordered 60 units, of which 14 build to 2016.
      SU-35С costs 45 million dollars. According to GOZ: 48 units ready for 2015. And also ordered 48 units to 2020. Total --96 units It is possible to supply another 72 machines.
      That's all the wonders in the sieve!
      1. Tyumen
        Tyumen 29 November 2014 19: 10
        0
        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        So far, 60 units have been ordered, of which 14 are to be built by 2016.

        Serial versions of the PAK FA should be equipped with a new engine Product 30, which should go into service in 2020.
        And whom to believe?
  21. Sultan Babai
    Sultan Babai 29 November 2014 11: 26
    +1
    I do not think that over-maneuverability completely loses its meaning. Stripes in Vietnam also thought that rockets would solve everything, but no, it didn’t work out. In close combat, the twinkies did just that. Then the striped changed their minds and sent the maneuverable F-5 tiger to the front. It will also be here, they in the Air Force also apparently have their own fifth column, they always step on the same rake. Why do I think super-maneuverability is needed, because it doesn’t go anywhere, air defense missiles or air-air can lose their target if they make a sharp turn or several such turns. Invisibility also matters, but invisibility also turns out to be visible, so it’s necessary to develop several directions and ensure maneuverability, invisibility, universality of work on goals (well, or the ability to quickly change equipment at the airport, to change the purpose of the flight — to work on the ground or the function of domination in air).
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 29 November 2014 16: 24
      +1
      Quote: Sultan Babay
      air defense missiles or air-air can lose purpose,
      Of course they can! If they burn the receiving channel of the EMP, or shit with an active sighting interference. There is a second option. At a long distance, when performing Pugachev's Cobra, the target is dropped as interference with the Doppler shift ... And there was also such a thing as "traps", including towed ones.
      Quote: Sultan Babay
      if you make a sharp turn or several such turns.

      Only in close maneuvering combat. And that is not an option: the helmet-mounted control system for BVB missiles, all-aspect missiles with overloads of up to 20g leave no chance for the "bend". Here we rely entirely on the pilot's skill! Took a position in the ZPS and have him, darling, lol in this position until he falls into a "steep dive" - ​​right, Drinkens? laughing
  22. saag
    saag 29 November 2014 11: 35
    0
    Quote: Sultan Babay
    air defense missiles or air-air can lose their target if you make a sharp turn or several such turns

    in such a case, why not be confused by the designers by installing a second IR matrix in the middle of the rocket’s body, or make the head one spherical
  23. YGV-97219
    YGV-97219 29 November 2014 11: 55
    0
    Each sandpiper praises its swamp!
  24. new communist
    new communist 29 November 2014 12: 00
    0
    Generally speaking, the superiority of fighters must understand the tactics of their use. For example, our -31 moment has the highest kinetic speed of rocket launch. Then everyone is fixated on the duel battles of fighters. In real life, the sky is big, some fighters can fly on a shaver, others at an altitude of 20 km and how the raptors spin there. Then the speed on the afterburner destroys the rapper's over maneuverability. Then invisibility is good, but modern locators already see the raptor, and even more so the F-35. In general, the raptor is a terrible thing, but it does not solve the main strategic tasks. And for China, in general, it does not present any threats, since all of them will be destroyed at the bases by vigorous strikes.
  25. Navy7981
    Navy7981 29 November 2014 12: 04
    0
    I think that everything is fine with us, with what is listed in the article. We still cannot imagine what the "Armata" will be, it is banally large, and what is invested in the new aircraft ... ??????
  26. zulusuluz
    zulusuluz 29 November 2014 12: 07
    +1
    The Soviet industrial base has always been aimed at creating a large number of rather rough samples of low-quality equipment. However, stealth technology requires a level and accuracy of production that Russia has never before demonstrated - especially after the collapse of its industrial base with the collapse of the Soviet Union. “She has a long way to go before she reaches the initial readiness of this weapon system for effective use,” said a spokesman for the military. - Neither the Russians nor the Chinese have yet managed to set up production of their new generation fighters. - RD180 analyst, of course, does not say anything ... Good sandpiper.
  27. Free Island
    Free Island 29 November 2014 12: 36
    +1
    today I just read the opinion of other American experts who say that the f-35 is not something that is not the fifth generation, it’s just today something like a "Corn")))) so there is no need to induce confusion, the F-35 is still They will be working on it for a long time, today it's just a flying cow)) and about how coolly disguised a-112 and "B" successfully detect shortwave radars on old Soviet S-135 and hammer these old Soviet stealths, many people know :))) ) and this American expert writes laudatory odes to the F-35 and poops on our PAK simply because they crap with their Ef, and before taxpayers you need to somehow make excuses, and the European partners from NATO have repeatedly stated that they want to give up this plane, because the dough has already been invested several times more than originally planned and the result is zero, and even the Americans are constantly demanding additional money. Just read today an interesting thing, I want to share on the account of the vaunted US military budget, not everything is so beautiful "in the Danish kingdom" ___))
    I quote ".. In the United States, the expenses of the defense department are not 700 billion, but after the sequestration of the budget of 580, only you forgot to note that it includes expenses on pensions, benefits, the maintenance of 720 bases abroad, payment of debts (which are only for fuel from the US Army exceed 45 billion dollars), education, family maintenance, medicine, there, in fact, the entire Pentagon is included in this money, and the expenditures on armaments themselves are only $ 210 billion, while American ships are 3-5 times more expensive in production than Russian ships , American planes are 3 times more expensive! The budget of the Russian defense department is not 90 billion, but 130 and things that are not characteristic of the defense department are not included in principle! Is it a lot or a little? Enough and the budget of the Russian defense department is sharpened under the ruble, which means the more expensive the dollar, the easier it is for our manufacturer in Russia and the more profitable it is to sell our weapons abroad, the greater the gain! The US army is offensive, that's just for a war of survival she's not ready. The Russian army is defensive-offensive, ready to conduct actions on any front in all climatic zones and not for 2 months, as all NATO countries are ready to do it together, but for quite a long time and for survival. Efficiency prices are not even comparable! An American 5th generation fighter costs from 200 to 330 million dollars, depending on the configuration - this is nonsense! This is more than a piece of gold equal in mass to it 2 times! The Russian T-50, which in terms of performance is higher in many respects and in no way inferior to at least 1,2 billion rubles, is 10 to 14 times cheaper than the American "analogue"! An American short-range ship costs $ 3,5 billion, while a nuclear submarine such as Vladimir Monomakh costs $ 800 million along with weapons) Is there a difference?)) 1 American aircraft carrier, along with weapons, equipment and fuel, costs $ 35 billion, along with people and the equipment is half more expensive and the fuck will drown only from two missiles at the cost of 200 thousand dollars fired from a distance of 80 kilometers) Here's a bloated army of s ... Money is not everything, it's just a show, the efficiency of this money is not great .. .? .. "The text is saved, I don't know the author, I found it in one forum, where some child from Ukraine brought up on Hollywood action films and confident in the invincibility of the American army and under the leadership of the great ukrov (or orcs, I always confuse) wrote, that Russia with its impoverished military budget does not even pull up to Papua New Guinea))
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 29 November 2014 16: 40
      +1
      Quote: Free Island
      An American short-range ship costs 3,5 billion dollars, while an atomic submarine like Vladimir Monomakh costs along with weapons 800 million dollars) Is there a difference?)) 1 American aircraft carrier along with weapons, equipment and fuel costs 35 billion dollars,

      Buddy! You got roughly fucked! Do not believe everything that cripples write on the forums. Well, there are no such prices even for amers! Look for yourself according to reliable sources (the program for the procurement of weapons and military equipment, maintenance costs and BP of the US Armed Forces - the so-called "White Book") and you will see that the coolest AVU with an air wing costs ... 6,0- 7,0 , $ XNUMX billion But if we take R&D, design, re-equipment of shipyards, etc., then the WHOLE program can pull even more.
      "But that's another story, kid!" (G.H. Andersen)
  28. 31rus
    31rus 29 November 2014 12: 42
    +1
    Now I have read this article and thought, where did the amers get the data? I think the data is taken from open sources and make sense, because all this is fortune telling on the coffee grounds, and the source in mo could give you what they wanted to hear. They will start exploiting then and see everything "+" and "-"
  29. Zveruga
    Zveruga 29 November 2014 12: 45
    +3
    The American general does not know that network-centricity appeared in Russia earlier than in the USA and is still actively used on the MiG-31.

    Avionics MiG-31 synthesizes data received from other aircraft and from the ground. The Americans here in the role of catching up. ;)
  30. Razvedchik
    Razvedchik 29 November 2014 15: 18
    +1
    It was inspired from the article by the decay and cemetery cold from the grave of Tom Clancy (RIP). Style and language are exactly evonious! The nightingale trills of the Pentagon. He also liked to write about rude non-technological and backward combat systems of the USSR. Which esessno gallant Yankees snapped like nuts on super-fabulous airplanes. Signature dish: a comparison of the USSR’s long-adopted military equipment with the promising one that is currently in use only in the brains of American designers!
  31. Krsk
    Krsk 29 November 2014 17: 57
    0
    rather rough samples of low quality equipment ...

    This is pearl !!! General you drive ...
  32. Victor-M
    Victor-M 29 November 2014 18: 25
    0
    You can talk about the superiority of some and the shortcomings of others as much as you like, but this whole dispute can be resolved only in the real confrontation of these machines in the sky, God forbid, of course. So everything else is just a PR move and warlike chants to intimidate opponents.
  33. Technologist
    Technologist 29 November 2014 18: 52
    0
    In my opinion, all of these stealth technologies are basically an excuse for obtaining financing, rather than real benefits.
  34. Ostap Bender
    Ostap Bender 29 November 2014 19: 22
    0
    However, stealth technology requires a level and accuracy of production that Russia has never demonstrated before.

    And the mattress toppers demonstrate "such a level of manufacturing precision" that their stealths fall apart in the air
    1. Gans1234
      Gans1234 29 November 2014 21: 06
      0
      Ahaha, the overload could not stand it ??
      Our planes crashed from dvigla failures and pilot errors
      But I don’t remember the airplane’s airplane falling apart in the air
    2. Alic
      Alic 1 December 2014 12: 28
      0
      great. Moreover, our ancient meter-range radars in Yugoslavia in 1999 perfectly saw and shot down the 117th, invisible to American taxpayers
  35. elephant-1671
    elephant-1671 29 November 2014 19: 24
    0
    I don’t remember who said it, but the point is that when their warplanes hit our airspace, they will encounter so many jammers, radars, false targets, inflatable air defense, and jeepies shifts that they will think that they are in a different reality. After all, any microwave will be on radar like a radar.
    1. Gans1234
      Gans1234 29 November 2014 21: 05
      0
      If necessary, and raise the balloons again)))
  36. HAM
    HAM 29 November 2014 20: 05
    0
    The opinion of one person is only the opinion of one person and is not true, especially since the "predator" is not an ideal, but it is necessary to learn, preferably on the mistakes of others. And for domestic electronics it is a shame ... because of one fool - the enemy of "cybernetics"
    1. Prager
      Prager 30 November 2014 08: 41
      0
      I absolutely agree with you to the last word - high-quality electronics has always been our weak point.
  37. Olkass
    Olkass 29 November 2014 22: 47
    0
    I am not an expert. Reflections of a layman.
    I just want to say that when their vehicles fly the same way as the T-50, then we can talk about something. As for the filling, I think that the grandmother said it in two. Their "invisible" in the meter range, if I'm not mistaken, are observed.
    Yes, and a bunch of questions: for example, what about the oxygen stations on the "super-duper" dry-age children? Have you decided? Or are the pilots on the F-35 still "shutting down" from the lack of oxygen? Why are the F-35s being actively "moved" while they try not to mention the F-22? And the further, the less they remember. Why are the F-22s "crowded" on the same site, away from eyes and ears? Why are the pilots of these machines still prohibited from using the full power of the power plant? They fly low and only quietly. What's with AFAR on these machines? Are they stretching with the T-50, or will they sing a song about a "common integrated system"?
    And why do not they mention the conclusions of their own allies, the Australians, who laid out the whole alignment of these machines, or let the Indians ask around. Something the latter are not very eager to buy these devices, but they buy Rafali (it seems) and invested in the T-50. And the latter are quite scrupulous in the quality of military equipment purchased.
    The loot has been drunk, and at the output, apart from enthusiastic reports of exclusively "exceptional", nothing is observed.
  38. Idel
    Idel 29 November 2014 23: 52
    0
    . The plane has not yet entered the troops. The largest amount of information is classified. And how to make comparisons in such an environment, especially in the field of on-board electronics. This is the first.
    Secondly, each aircraft is created not just like that, but within the framework of the general strategy and tactics of applying a specific sample.
    Thirdly. The incompetence of the author of the article is striking. American aircraft of the 4th generation have long been not a serious danger to our aviation. Our 4 pluses are beyond competition and there simply cannot be conversations. Yes, Americans can constantly repeat their mantras, but there is objective reality.
    Fourth. Real fighting will show who is more effective.
    Fifth. At the expense of foreign electronics on our aircraft. It is installed on export samples.
  39. Alic
    Alic 1 December 2014 12: 21
    0
    But our newest PAK has been over 20 years old ...