The National Interest: Does the PAK FA outperform American fighters?

75
New Russian military equipment projects are attracting attention both in our country and abroad. Foreign media are trying to follow up with Russian work and keep their audience up to date. One of the topical issues is the development of the fifth generation fighter as part of the PAK FA project (“Perspective aviation front-line aviation complex ”). Various statements by Russian officials have contributed to maintaining interest.

June 3: The American Interest has published the article F-22 and F-35? (“Is the Russian fighter PAK-FA superior to the American F-22 and F-35?”). As is clear from the title, the author of the publication, Zachary Keck, decided to study the state of the three projects and to compare their possibilities using open sources. The actual reason for the appearance of the publication were the statements of Russian officials, voiced in the last days of May.

The National Interest: Does the PAK FA outperform American fighters?


Z. Keck begins his article with a direct statement about the characteristics and capabilities of the new Russian aircraft. Referring to high-ranking Russian officials, the author writes that the fifth-generation Russian-designed fighter will surpass its American "classmates" in the face of the F-22 and F-35 aircraft.

Such an opinion was voiced at the end of May by the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Air Force, Colonel-General Viktor Bondarev. According to this commander, the PAK FA aircraft will be able to effectively counter existing fifth-generation American fighters. Bondarev noted that the PAK FA is no worse than analogs of American development. In addition, there is reason to believe that it is superior to the F-22 and F-35 aircraft in some characteristics.

In general, V. Bondarev evaluates the new Russian project quite highly. He believes that the existing capabilities and the achieved characteristics will provide the new aircraft with superiority over all existing and prospective fifth-generation fighter jets, which have already been created or are being developed in foreign countries.

Z. Keck recalled the parameters due to which, in the opinion of the Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force, superiority over foreign technology is achieved. Such characteristics include the possibility of flying at speeds greater than M = 2. In addition, V. Bondarev noted other features of a promising aircraft, which should ensure its superiority over competitors. Much attention is paid to stealth for the means of detecting the enemy, weapon systems and characteristics of maneuverability.

At the moment, according to V. Bondarev, the PAK FA aircraft shows good performance of various systems. In particular, the armament complex will allow effective work on air and ground targets. In addition, it provides the lowest possible visibility for enemy radar stations. Also, the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Air Force noted that the PAK FA will be able to attack not only ground, but also surface targets.

The National Interest journalist notes an interesting approach to the use of technology, revealed by V. Bondarev. According to the commander in chief, the newest technologies are used in the PAK FA project as they appear and are developed. At the moment, the project uses the latest components and technologies. In addition, the introduction of new developments currently being created is underway.

According to the latest data, the PAK FA prototype aircraft are currently being tested. The first cars are scheduled to be handed over to the air force next year. A year later it is expected to begin the delivery of serial equipment. These are the deadlines for the implementation of various stages of the project confirmed by the Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force in his recent statements.

At the end of May, Colonel General Bondarev also touched upon the number of fighters planned for procurement. According to him, the military department wants to purchase as many of such equipment as industry can produce. It is assumed to purchase the maximum possible number of aircraft. Naturally, the industry will not be able to quickly build a batch of 24 aircraft required. For this reason, the military will buy as many vehicles as they can build businesses. If it is possible to produce only four aircraft, then four will be bought; if they build ten, then the Air Force will buy ten.

The author of The National Interest notes that the latest statements by V. Bondarev to some extent contradict the plans of the military department, announced earlier. Thus, in March of this year, Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov said that due to economic difficulties, plans to purchase PAK FA aircraft could be reduced. In this case, it is supposed to start operation of the fifth generation fighter jets, and also to use the 4 + generation technique in the face of the Su-30 and Su-35 aircraft in the most active way. However, according to Borisov, by 2020, as mentioned earlier, the Air Force must receive a new generation 55 aircraft.

Z. Keck also mentions reports in the Russian state media. They mention the PAK FA aircraft (the alternative designation T-50 is also used) as an unobtrusive single-engine twin-engine aircraft, which will become the first type of Russian-made aviation technology with full use of the so-called. stealth technology. Also in the Russian press it is mentioned that the PAK FA is a multi-purpose aircraft and is capable of performing various combat missions, both to gain air superiority and attack ground targets.

The available information about the PAK FA project, as noted by Z. Keck, causes concern among American specialists. So, last year, the former chief intelligence officer of the US air force, Dave Deptul, expressed his opinion on the fifth-generation Russian fighter project. In an interview for The National Interest, he said that the available information and analyzes indicate a rather complex project that will provide high potential. According to its capabilities, the new Russian fighter can be equal to American developments. There is also an opinion that the Russian PAK FA surpasses the American F-22 and F-35 in a number of characteristics.

As the reasons for the possible superiority over the American planes, D. Deputla named several characteristic features of the PAK FA fighter. This is the ability to change the thrust vector, full turn tail, as well as excellent aerodynamics. Thanks to these things, the PAK FA can surpass the latest American fighter F-35.

As you can see, foreign media are trying to monitor the news Russian projects, primarily the most famous. For obvious reasons, publications on the PAK FA or Armata projects being created in Russia regularly appear in the foreign press. High hopes are pinned on these projects, which is why foreign journalists are trying to keep their audience up to date.

The latest publication of The National Interest on the progress of the PAK FA project attracts attention, primarily due to the demonstration of interest shown by foreign experts in Russian projects. In addition, it is interesting because the author, considering the statements of Russian military leaders and American experts, raises the heading question: does the PAK FA plane outperform its foreign counterparts?

For objective reasons, Zachary Keck cannot answer this question yet. Moreover, the exact answer is still unknown, even to specialists and the military. To answer the question from the title of the article, you need to know the many characteristics and parameters of the compared aircraft, and this is not only the maximum speed and range, or the payload weight. When analyzing the real combat capabilities of aircraft, it is necessary to take into account a host of other factors, some of which are unlikely to be declassified and published in the near future.

Nevertheless, and in the current situation with a lack of necessary information, specialists on both sides of the ocean express an opinion, which may be a cause for concern among the US military. Judging by the known data, the Russian fighter PAK FA, by its characteristics and capabilities, is at least not inferior to its main competitors in the face of American aircraft F-22 and F-35. How far this opinion is true is not completely clear. Perhaps in the future, the public will know the exact answer to the question from the title of the article in the American edition.


F-22 and F-35 Is Russia's Lethal PA-FA Fighter Superior?
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-lethal-pak-fa-fighter-superior-americas-f-22-f-35-13034
75 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. anakonda
    +18
    11 June 2015 06: 06
    Surpass, not surpass, the main thing is that these new Russian fighters would be issued for more, and not the big differences in the same type of aircraft are not very significant, otherwise it will turn out like in 1941, as my grandfather told him, they gave him a Mosin rifle for battle, you won’t believe it with five rounds, and the battle was not a joke, the grandfather said that the Germans threw tanks against their units.
    1. +7
      11 June 2015 06: 17
      The main thing is that 800 billion was allocated for the project of a 6+ generation fighter-bomber-attack aircraft smile
      1. +4
        11 June 2015 08: 39
        Faster would have brought to mind the plane and put on the conveyor. Of course, this is a very technologically advanced thing, there may be funny things like with the T-14 during the preparations for the Victory Day parade, plus the engine is not ready for the fighter - difficulties to hell. However, it is necessary to cooperate with the entire industry and produce a quality product, then, as they say, it will be finalized with a file. Just the international situation today requires the best state of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.
        1. +5
          11 June 2015 08: 55
          Quote: aktanir
          Faster would have brought to mind the plane and put on the conveyor.

          In the 2016 year, PAK FA will go into series. In the 2017 year, the engine of the second stage will be ready.
          Quote: aktanir
          oddities may arise, as with the T-14 during preparation for the Victory Parade

          I don’t think. PAK FA has been under development for quite some time (relatively) and all systems are surely tested and verified many times. And what happened during the training of the Parade with the T-14 was just a curiosity, not a breakdown.
          Quote: aktanir
          However, it is necessary to cooperate with the entire industry and produce a quality product

          If, as you say, you hadn’t cooperated, then there would have been no PAK FA.
          Quote: aktanir
          as they say, it will be finalized with a file.

          Now tests are in the final phase. Without fuss and jerking, so as not to let the "raw" machine into the series, the systems and nodes are being fine-tuned. Everything is planned.
          1. +4
            11 June 2015 11: 56
            Quote: NEXUS
            In the 2016 year, PAK FA will go into series. In the 2017 year, the engine of the second stage will be ready.

            Will there be a stealth coverage (like F-22/35)? Or limited to a composite case?
            1. +6
              11 June 2015 12: 08
              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              Will there be a stealth coverage (like F-22 / 35)?

              Nowhere is there any information about this. I think that it is not in vain that they started talking about "plasma screens" again. Maybe our scientists managed to eliminate the problems with this technology. And if so, then the coating is not needed for free. Although these are all my assumptions.
            2. +1
              11 June 2015 15: 27
              Somewhere this article was already being printed ...
            3. 0
              11 June 2015 17: 41
              Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
              Quote: NEXUS
              In the 2016 year, PAK FA will go into series. In the 2017 year, the engine of the second stage will be ready.

              Will there be a stealth coverage (like F-22/35)? Or limited to a composite case?


              As far as I know, stealth technologies do not consist in covering the hull, but in its forms. The symmetry of the fuselage, wings, air intakes with each other and their deviation back a certain and equal number of degrees provides less noticeability on radars. Look at the shape of the glider PAK FA, F- 22, F-35, they all have a similar structure.
              1. +4
                11 June 2015 19: 43
                Quote: supertiger21
                As far as I know, stealth technologies are not in the coating of the body, but in its forms.

                There is coverage too. But our scientists went further and if sclerosis doesn’t fail me, then around the 80s (I may be mistaken over the years) we worked on the plasma screen technology, and ideally the cocoon covering the whole plane. At the same time, the radar seems to go blind and then the form of the aircraft is not so important. We installed and tested this system on the TU-160. At what stage of development I can’t say these works (very little information). But it’s absolutely certain that our scientists are working on this.
                1. -5
                  11 June 2015 22: 34
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  I can make mistakes over the years) have worked on the technology of a plasma screen, and ideally a cocoon covering the entire plane. In this case, the radar seems to go blind and then the shape of the aircraft is not so important

                  Enlighten, kindly
                  1. How are plasma and electromagnetic radiation (radar radiation) connected and how can it hide an aircraft?
                  2.How do you hold
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  cocoon covering the whole plane
                  from plasma under dynamic pressure of the medium (air)?
                  3. what are you going to generate on board and how to "inject"?
                  4. So for HELP (suddenly again
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  sclerosis
                  ):
                  The plasma is divided into low temperature (temperature less than a million K) and high temperature (temperature million K and higher)
                  1 000 000K is 999727grS
                  let it be cold plasma (which will be used in garbage processing), there in the torch 5000-1000grS.
                  HIDE:
                  --LUMINOSITY?
                  -IR SIGNATURE?
                  Your plasma stealth will look like this:



                  Even a radar is not needed and the same ECO.
                  You can point at the eye
                  1. +1
                    12 June 2015 00: 15
                    Here is one of the articles, read it. I repeat, I did not dig this topic deeply.
                    http://www.cnews.ru/news/top/?2005/10/19/190317
                    http://otvet.mail.ru/question/26566298
                    it is so offhand. There is very little information on these works.
                    Two years ago I came across an article on this subject, where there was a phrase that prototypes of plasma generators are put and tested on the TU-160.
                    1. 0
                      12 June 2015 01: 14
                      Quote: NEXUS
                      Here is one of the articles, check out

                      I won’t even. On the fingers, at the 7 level of the school class, I justified this stupidity
                      Quote: NEXUS
                      I repeat, I did not dig this topic deeply.

                      dig in. You will learn a lot of useful things.
                      About quasineutrality, reflection of electromagnetic waves (radio waves), a plasma antenna is an actively developed type of radio antenna, in which instead of metal conductors, ionized gas - plasma is used to receive and transmit radio waves (1919 patent J. Hettinger) and so on
                      Quote: NEXUS
                      it's so offhand

                      have time to think.
                      You might find a more decent argument than an article by a foolish journalist who doesn't know the number Pi, probably
                      Quote: NEXUS
                      where was the phrase that the prototypes of plasma generators are put and tested on the TU-160.

                      folly
                      -WHAT FOR?
                      -WHERE?
                      -Where to get lipestrism?
                      (The Tu-160 itself is not enough: four non-contact direct current generators and four AC drive-generators on engines, APU TA-12 generators are not up to the GP).
                      ~10 to the power of 5 A / cm2 min current density at cathodes


                      As a rule, the functional basis of a gas discharge is a gas discharge (arc, glow, high-frequency, microwave discharge, laser, beam-plasma). For plasma generation, ionization of the working substance by resonant radiation is still rarely used, but in the future, in connection with the development of lasers, such G.'s can get meaning. Spread. G. p. Working on gases at pressures comparable to atmospheric, usually called. plasmatrons.

                      5. In "what and how" to store?
                      in plasmatrons of one of the main structural difficulties is the protection of the walls of the gas discharge channel from large heat fluxes

                      6.What to apply for a covering?

                      "holes" drilled in "white swans"?
                      ================================================== ======
                      most importantly WHAT DOES IT DO?
                      Have you heard about this Northern Lights?
                      This is how the T-160 will "fly" (with the same effect)

                      how hard to detect ......
                  2. toaster666
                    0
                    12 June 2015 05: 59
                    Yes, how can you !! 1 Plasma power shields - the oldest fetish of pseudo-patriots, launched by Himself! Maxim Kalashnikov !! 1
                2. Shur
                  0
                  11 June 2015 23: 44
                  They will create, but only with us?
                  For doubters.
                3. 0
                  12 June 2015 15: 02
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  worked on plasma screen technology,

                  Plasma is gas preheated to millions of degrees, it is not clear how to generate it at supersonic speeds in order to withstand the casing, and so that the gas concentration does not decrease around the plane.
                  1. +1
                    12 June 2015 16: 58
                    Heating to high temperature is only one of the methods for producing plasma.
                    http://www.femto.com.ua/articles/part_2/3515.html
                    This article describes a number of methods for producing cold plasma. The article has an indirect relation to the plasma screen itself, but the principle is the same.
                  2. +1
                    16 June 2015 14: 26
                    Plasma is an ionized gas, and ionization methods can be different. hi
            4. toaster666
              0
              12 June 2015 05: 56
              Americans have worked on coatings for decades. It is unlikely that over the years our people will be able to do something at least minimally effective.
            5. toaster666
              0
              12 June 2015 05: 56
              Americans have worked on coatings for decades. It is unlikely that over the years our people will be able to do something at least minimally effective.
          2. +8
            11 June 2015 11: 57
            A lot of talk, but I want more work. They have had airplanes for a long time, but we, unfortunately, have not. We really lagged behind in due time. Now catching up. How can one compare what is with what is not yet? It reminds a saying about sharing a bear skin ... Everything will be clear with the advent of PAK FA in the Air Force. Moreover, their modernization is expected in the future (at least engines).
            1. toaster666
              0
              12 June 2015 06: 02
              Both YF-22 and F-22 had all the main features for a period much shorter than 5 years. The hull, coating, engines, avionics, missile launches from the compartments.
              Of all this, the pack has only a housing :)
          3. +4
            11 June 2015 12: 34
            The cycle of development and testing of 4th generation machines took on average 10 years. On the T-50, work has actually been carried out since 2010 (before that, more and more in language). On the engines of the second stage, it is still clear that work is underway, but the Indians (the main investors) are somehow They behave uneasily in this respect. In general, the creation of an engine is such an expensive and technically risky task that I would not trust the promises / assurances of all sorts of "specialists." Well, I would not say that work on the T-50 is going "without fuss "judging by the publications in open sources and some experience in the aviation industry, I can say that the car is being created" hastily and unconsciously "and is far from being as smooth as they are trying to teach the public, and most importantly the same Indians. This is indirectly confirmed by several facts: for a pre-production vehicle, there are too few flying sides (the MiG-29 had 9, the Su-27 had more than 15). The absence of the T-50 over the red square on 09.05.2015/XNUMX/XNUMX is of great concern. So, "Let's see!" , but miracles do not happen.
            1. toaster666
              0
              12 June 2015 06: 05
              And the recent suspension of missiles on pylons under the wings does not cause concern for you?
              Pak does not even know how to even open the shutter doors on the fly, I'm not talking about real launches.
              Both YF-22 and F-22 had all the main features for a period much shorter than 5 years. The hull, coating, engines, avionics, missile launches from the compartments.
              Of all this, the pack has only a housing :)
          4. -2
            12 June 2015 13: 06
            Quote: NEXUS
            In the 2016 year, PAK FA will go into series. In the 2017 year, the engine of the second stage will be ready.

            where did you get such infa? second stage engine in 2017? belay
            at least by 2020 done.
            Quote: NEXUS
            oddities may occur

            oddities have already arisen, like a fire was on board 5. quite a serious fire and the fact that the car has already sat down a huge plus design. and of course Bogdan has great respect as a master.
            Quote: NEXUS
            Now tests are in the final phase. Without fuss and jerking, so as not to let the "raw" machine into the series, the systems and components are being fine-tuned.

            Purely based on the practice of our Air Force, the refinement will ALWAYS go. Then just changes will be made and modifications will go. Now the main thing is to bring all systems to a satisfactory state, and childhood diseases are still worth defeating.
        2. 0
          11 June 2015 23: 11
          When there is clarity of purpose (technical), you do not need a file, you just need to do what is necessary according to the design documentation, which has no fundamental problems. Organizational issue.
          1. 0
            13 June 2015 20: 18
            You do not work with your hands Alexander: a file, like golden hands and a clear head of a fitter-assembler is always needed. Sometimes you look at the KTD, beautifully designed in "Compass", you want to shove a real compass to the developer in a known place. That's where you have to include all three of the above It is very difficult to ask the designer to put + - or * above the specified size. They do not admit their mistakes.
      2. -2
        12 June 2015 03: 31
        And what will you eat? What will be thrown off him?
      3. 0
        12 June 2015 13: 02
        in in. purely concussion talk of superiority, equality of aircraft, etc.

        For objective reasons, Zachary Kek cannot yet answer this question. Moreover, the exact answer is still unknown even to specialists and the military.

        not only Z. Kek cannot, NOBODY can, because nobody knows the capabilities of the aircraft to the end. Surely even the developers still do not know until the end, because not yet fully designed.
        As I know. new ideas are introduced into the project, some nodes are changing, systems are being finalized.
        Americans love to come up with a horror story to knock out a grandmother from Congress!
    2. 0
      11 June 2015 16: 37
      Quote: anakonda
      Surpass, not surpass, the main thing is that these new Russian fighters would be issued for more, and not the big differences in the same type of aircraft are not very significant, otherwise it will turn out like in 1941, as my grandfather told him, they gave him a Mosin rifle for battle, you won’t believe it with five rounds, and the battle was not a joke, the grandfather said that the Germans threw tanks against their units.

      The question is, if your grandfather was given a rifle with five rounds of ammunition, and tanks were shot against them, how could he tell you this?
      Specify at least where and when it was, + your grandfather's unit (part number at least) - on the "feat of the people" all this can be tracked and if the data is confirmed then there are no questions, but if not, then everything is also clear
    3. 0
      11 June 2015 18: 39
      '' In general, V. Bondarev estimates the new Russian project quite highly. He believes that the existing capabilities and the achieved characteristics will provide the new aircraft with superiority over all existing and promising fifth generation fighters already created or still being developed in foreign countries. '' A bold statement. How does he know what will be created in other countries tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. And will there be something that will make all modern aircraft obsolete.
      1. toaster666
        0
        12 June 2015 06: 08
        Yes, he’s just bluffing. The only thing that can be learned from his speech is that the money is unlikely to be enough for 4 packs. Everything else is populist pseudo-patriotic nonsense.
        Both YF-22 and F-22 had all the main features for a period much shorter than 5 years. The hull, coating, engines, avionics, missile launches from the compartments.
        Of all this, the pack has only a housing :)
      2. toaster666
        0
        12 June 2015 06: 08
        Yes, he’s just bluffing. The only thing that can be learned from his speech is that the money is unlikely to be enough for 4 packs. Everything else is populist pseudo-patriotic nonsense.
        Both YF-22 and F-22 had all the main features for a period much shorter than 5 years. The hull, coating, engines, avionics, missile launches from the compartments.
        Of all this, the pack has only a housing :)
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. 0
      12 June 2015 13: 12
      PAK FA ... the couple dragged on the process
  2. +20
    11 June 2015 06: 15
    I read the headline and did not read. How can one compare a production car with a prototype. That's when the T-50 becomes SU-50 then we will compare it with the F-22 or something else.
    1. +6
      11 June 2015 06: 25
      Quote: Marconi41
      I read the headline and did not read. How can one compare a production car with a prototype. That's when the T-50 becomes SU-50 then we will compare it with the F-22 or something else.

      I support, I also don’t understand why to compare production cars with a prototype.
      1. iv_v virtual 2
        -2
        11 June 2015 08: 24
        How do you not understand this? This is FOOD! Now they’ll run, I think.

        In general, Cyril, well done. At first I thought that sucks were translated like his previous foray into NI, but no, really, the managing editor NI blog post is all about masturbation. Cyril handsome, found the same!

        There is no sense, of course, in this lesson, but there are a lot of fans, read any discussion on the forum.
    2. +11
      11 June 2015 06: 35
      Quote: Marconi41
      I read the headline and did not read. How can one compare a production car with a prototype. That's when the T-50 becomes SU-50 then we will compare it with the F-22 or something else.

      I still read it, however, only to be convinced - "the publication is about nothing."
      Does PAK FA outperform American fighters?
      - This can only be said when a significant number of new Russian 5 generation fighters will be adopted.
    3. +4
      11 June 2015 12: 25
      There is one more point. The characteristics of these machines, available in the public domain, are very approximate. Because Exact specifications are classified. For example, information on EPR F-22 is only estimated. There is no exact data (and even so from all angles). Therefore, comparisons, they say, who will see whom before, is a complete spheroconics.
      1. +2
        11 June 2015 12: 28
        Quote: Aviaded
        For example, information on EPR F-22

        I remember when Putin was told about PAKFA, he was informed that the EPR F-22 (apparently the average value of all angles) is somewhere between 0,3-0,4 square meters. The United States, which at all times loved to overestimate the characteristics of its weapons in the open press, says that EPR is 0,0001 square meters, which is doubtful.
        1. Karl
          0
          17 June 2015 15: 18
          It depends on the wear of the coating and on the coating of the fuselage itself, it can change and be finalized.
  3. +1
    11 June 2015 06: 23
    Perhaps the T-50 is better for some indicators, but the author is right in that it is not ethical to judge by certain parameters of the aircraft. Air superiority depends not only on the capabilities of the aircraft (this is also important), but also on the skills of the pilots, the ability to detect and destroy the enemy in a timely manner before the actual fire of their weapons enters.
    1. +1
      11 June 2015 11: 58
      Quote: bolat19640303
      opportunities to timely detect and destroy the enemy before the actual fire of his weapons enters the range.

      + It also depends on whether there are AWACS and EW aircraft. I remember reading the news in which European Eurofatters successfully attacked the F-22, but AWACS was on the side of the Eurofighters, which gave target designation.
      1. iv_v virtual 4
        -2
        11 June 2015 12: 40
        Generally speaking, about nothing. In order for a 5th generation aircraft to fly as intended (with active radars turned off), it needs external target designation in any way. It is very good if this external target designation is also valid for weapons.
        An airplane built on the "first saw, first fired, first killed" idea can generally be quite mediocre. If you hang all sorts of Meteor, CUDA, etc. on some Hercules, and highlight it with Sentry, then, say, Ethiopian or Angolan Su-27s most likely have little chance.
        1. +1
          11 June 2015 12: 45
          Quote: iv_v virtual 4
          In order for a 5th generation aircraft to fly as expected (with active radars turned off), it needs external target designation in any way. It is very good if this external target designation is also valid for weapons.

          It is not necessary to fly with the radars turned off. On the F-22, the radar can operate in LPI mode (low probability of interception), and detect 4th generation aircraft at ranges up to 193 kilometers.
          Quote from the English-language Wikipedia page (translated by Google translator)

          "Low probability of intercept-from-radar (LPIR) is designed for hard-to-detect passive radar detection equipment (such as a Radar Exposure Station - RWR) while it is looking for a target or engaging in target tracking. This feature is desirable in radar because it allows you to locate and track the enemy without warning them about the presence of the radar.

          Ways to reduce the radar profile include using bandwidth wider than the frequency (broadband), frequency hopping using a frequency-modulated Continuous signal, and using only the minimum required power to complete this task. Using pulse compression also reduces the likelihood of detection, since the transmitted peak power is lower, but the range and resolution are the same.

          Constructing a radar so as to radiate minimal side and rear lobes can also reduce the likelihood of interception when it does not indicate a radiation warning station. However, when the radar sweeps a large amount of space for targets, it is likely that the main lobe will repeatedly point to the RWR. Modern phased array radars not only control their side lobes, they also use very thin, fast-moving energy beams in complex search patterns. This technique may be enough to confuse the RWR so that it does not recognize the radar as a threat, even if the signal itself is detected. All military EM (EM) emitters, including fighter jets, naval vessels, and missile systems, are designed to reduce electromagnetic profiles to improve stealth. [edit]

          In addition to stealth considerations, lowering the side and back lobes is desirable, as this makes the radar more difficult to characterize. This can increase the difficulty in determining what type it is (hiding information on the carrying platform) and make it much more difficult to jam.

          Systems that show LPIR are equipped with state of the art active electronically scanned array (AFAR) radars such as that on the F / A-18E / F Super Hornet and passive electronically scanned array (PESA) on the S-300PMU-2 missile. "
  4. +2
    11 June 2015 06: 58
    This makes no sense. "Kek" some sort. What does all this have to do with it? There is our 5th generation aircraft and it needs to be PURCHASED, not "4" or "10" pieces. And the real number (at least hundreds). it seems that a certain "cake" and comrade are preparing us for the choice of "4" or "10".
  5. -2
    11 June 2015 08: 20
    Yes, at least something is being done and it is already pleasing. The hammer of GDP! Raptor Killer, sounds like music! Hurray to Russian weapons!
  6. +5
    11 June 2015 08: 35
    An empty article, some links to statements by dignitaries, and no specifics. All the news is only that someone from Mr. Kek honored our latest development.
  7. +9
    11 June 2015 08: 52
    sorry, what are we comparing? Prototype with serial?
    Nevertheless, according to Borisov, by 2020, as mentioned earlier, the Air Force should receive 55 new generation aircraft.

    And comrades of mattresses already flying f-22 and f-35 about 400 pieces almost. And a good 3/4 of this number in the army is flying, operating, etc. For comparison, the entire fleet of fighters of the Air Force of the Russian Federation is estimated at slightly less than 800 aircraft of the 4th and 4th generation (the last no more than 30%)
    So with the voiced pace of production of the T-50 at 10 machines a year, it will be possible to compare in 40 years .....
    All. You can minus.
    1. countergenesis
      +2
      11 June 2015 09: 43
      Quote: tchoni
      And comrades of mattresses already flying f-22 and f-35 about 400 pieces almost.


      yeah, su35 will be about thirty pieces, and twenty packa-pieces, and even cut off, how are you going to fight? NATO simply throws rockets, one hundred pieces on one of our aircraft or so that we had a nuclear bomb and remains the most important weapon, and the rest is invisibility ...
    2. Pol
      0
      11 June 2015 19: 48
      "And the companions of the mattress mats already flying f-22 and f-35 are about 400 pieces almost"
      I do not think that, in the near future, a direct collision of the US Air Force and the Russian Federation is possible. Moreover, a collision with several hundred American la. If there is a conflict in the near future, then at the theater of Europe or the East. They won’t be able to transfer such a quantity to any theater, and they won’t (it will be necessary to tighten the entire infrastructure, personnel .., and lose the f-22 from some sort of cheap MANPADS).
      PAK-FA is not designed specifically to counterbalance the ** ** raptor. It is created for excellence. For excellence on the Eurasian continent, to protect the borders.
      So to demand hundreds of PAK-FAs from production, as soon as possible - to harm the quality of the final aircraft and the quality of pilot training.
      The current, even with a hiatus of years at 5, defense tasks of the airspace of the Russian Federation and allies, will fully ensure our 4 ++.
      Let people work calmly.
      1. Garay dgonson
        +1
        11 June 2015 21: 01
        then they can, a storm in the desert up to half a million in total, bases and aircraft carriers and so on, a powerful fleet ...
        1. Pol
          0
          12 June 2015 00: 16
          Can not. What bases in Europe will they place at least a couple of dozen f-22, without fear of destruction by the Russian Federation? I am generally silent about the east .. There, their own fosterlings will tear them at the airport with great pleasure ... The Americans are not ready to take their raptors to their island ...
          1. Garay dgonson
            0
            15 June 2015 00: 07
            And what, let me ask, will they destroy, overcome the NATO air force and strike at bases? And if so, then all the air forces of the EU countries will suddenly remain no destiny? They will want to transfer, transfer and ask no one, and all that they will do is a formidable Chinese warning and send protest notes. Do not even remember about a nuclear strike, in response no less will fly, except ashes there will be nothing left.
      2. 0
        12 June 2015 09: 12
        Quote: Pol
        I do not think that, in the near future, a direct collision of the US Air Force and the Russian Federation is possible.

        With the United States Air Force - maybe not, But with the Air Force no matter what the recurrence of an armed F-35 mi - it’s quite .... Recently, the strategy of local wars is the US strategy ... and the 35th is designed specifically for export ...
      3. countergenesis
        0
        12 June 2015 16: 19
        that pin_dosy will not come to us? Well, thanks reassured, otherwise I thought it was not tight, but maybe they don’t do fighters at all, if they don’t arrive?
  8. +3
    11 June 2015 09: 36
    In fact, everything is simpler: a new aircraft is developed precisely to surpass a potential enemy, otherwise no one will give money for its development (or even drank it). Therefore, there is no point in arguing.

    In addition, Western "experts" do not even read open documents, and simply guess on the coffee grounds. Or it may be simply unprofitable for them to mention such works :) For example: A.N. Lagarkov and M.A. Poghosyan "FUNDAMENTAL AND APPLIED PROBLEMS OF STEALTH TECHNOLOGIES". http://kramtp.info/news/18/full/id=31922 A solid work in which there are many "goodies" :) In particular, that the "bare" tail parts of the engines, it turns out, are covered with stealth ceramics. There is also about plasma technologies of invisibility in the PAK FA.
  9. +4
    11 June 2015 09: 48
    And here is the patent application http://www.paralay.com/pakfa/pakfa.html, where PAK FA is just compared with the closest analogue - F-22:

    Multimode highly maneuverable aircraft integrated aerodynamic layout (patent)

    ... The engines are located in nacelles spaced apart horizontally from each other, and the engine axes are oriented at an acute angle to the plane of symmetry of the aircraft in the direction of flight. The influx includes controllable swivel parts. The invention is aimed at reducing radar visibility, increasing maneuverability at large angles of attack and aerodynamic quality at supersonic ...

    The disadvantages of F-22 include the following:
    - the impossibility of control in the channels of roll and yaw when flying at low speeds, since the engines are located close to each other, which does not allow to create enough moment to control;
    - the location of the engines close to each other makes it impossible to arrange cargo compartments in the fuselage;
    - the curved shape of the air intake channels requires an increase in their length, and, consequently, the weight of the aircraft;
    - the impossibility of ensuring the "descent" of the aircraft from supercritical angles of attack in case of failure of the control system of jet nozzles of engines
    - the use of fixed fins with rudders requires an increase in the required area of ​​vertical tail to ensure travel stability during supersonic flight modes, which leads to an increase in the weight of the tail, and, consequently, of the aircraft as a whole, as well as an increase in drag.

    ... the vertical tail is made all-turning with the possibility of in-phase and differential deviation.
    1. iv_v virtual 4
      -3
      11 June 2015 11: 27
      That is, "Sukhoi" has already "patented" the PAK FA as an "invention", and even wrote in the application about the shortcomings of the F-22, found the time and place? And this is not a fake, an hour?
      If not, I am deeply disappointed with the level of specialists of this manufacturer.
      1. +2
        11 June 2015 11: 46
        Invent better flag in hand :)
        1. iv_v virtual 4
          -2
          11 June 2015 12: 17
          I did not expect that this design could be patented. Secret topics are not patentable unless I confuse anything. And to make a patent entirely for an airplane, in several versions - is very similar to some kind of get along.
          1. +1
            11 June 2015 14: 44
            If the topic is secret, then there are options. In the USSR, some copyright certificates were kept secret, but secrecy was not grounds for refusal. As of now, I don’t know.
            Entirely on the plane - why not, if it has any fundamental differences?
      2. 0
        12 June 2015 00: 42
        Quote: iv_v virtual 4
        And this is not a fake, an hour?

        Poghosyan and Co.

        RUSSIAN FEDERATION

        FEDERAL SERVICE
        ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY,
        PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS (19) RU (11) 2440916 (13) C1
        (51) IPC
        B64D27 / 20 (2006.01)
        B64D33 / 02 (2006.01)
        (12) DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION TO THE PATENT
        Status: according to 17.01.2012 - no data
        Duty:
        (21), (22) Application: 2010131640 / 11, 28.07.2010

        (24) Countdown date of patent:
        28.07.2010

        Priority (s):
        (22) Application Date: 28.07.2010

        (45) Posted by: 27.01.2012

        (56) List of documents cited in the report on
        Search: RU 2140376 C1, 27.10.1999. US 5586735 A, 24.12.1996. US 5005782 A, 09.04.1991.

        Correspondence address:
        125284, Moscow, st. Polikarpova, 23a, JSC "OKB Sukhoi", the head of the Legal Department T.V. Mozharova

        (72) Author (s):
        Pogosyan Mikhail Aslanovich (RU),
        Davidenko Alexander Nikolaevich (RU),
        Sagittarius Mikhail Yurievich (RU),
        Runishev Vladimir Alexandrovich (RU),
        Tarasov Alexey Zakharovich (RU),
        Shokurov Alexey Kirillovich (RU),
        Bibikov Sergey Yurievich (RU),
        Krylov Leonid Evgenievich (RU),
        ev Pavel Borisovich (RU)
    2. +3
      11 June 2015 11: 51
      "- the location of engines close to each other makes it impossible to locate cargo compartments in the fuselage" ///

      Here are the inside compartments. On 6 rockets.
      1. +4
        11 June 2015 12: 09
        Quote: voyaka uh
        - the location of engines close to each other makes it impossible to locate cargo compartments in the fuselage "///

        Here are the inside compartments. On 6 rockets.

        Pakf has a morning compartment for 8 medium-range missiles (Product 180-BD launch range 110 + km) and 2 short-range (RVV-MD 40+ km somewhere).
        What surprises me the most is why PakFa has so many faces below. The F-22 has a flat bottom for the most part, and the Pakf with faces that increase the ESR from the bottom.
        1. +5
          11 June 2015 14: 57
          for Lt. Air Force Stock:
          "and Pakf has edges that increase the ESR from the bottom." ////

          The PAK-FA, as far as I read, focused on "stealth"
          in an air battle (against the radar of enemy aircraft),
          sacrificing, for the sake of super maneuverability, stealth
          from the enemy air defense radars.
          1. 0
            12 June 2015 01: 02
            Quote: voyaka uh
            in an air battle (against the radar of enemy aircraft),

            Just forehead to forehead?
            And if the opponent is in LA?
          2. +1
            17 June 2015 18: 24
            sides: look carefully, most of the additional faces are clearly structures for holding air flow. This was done not for over-maneuverability, but for maintaining flight performance under different flight modes. PAK FA has much less prohibitions on the choice of the motion vector in comparison with the F-22. Maneuverability in a broad sense.
        2. +1
          12 June 2015 01: 00
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          and in Pakf with faces that increase the EPR from the bottom.

          can you justify why "raise"?
          angle of incidence = angle of reflection (which is not absorbed), in the general case.
          Irradiate the T-50 radar from EARTH, or another aircraft.
          sometimes taking into account the underlying surface ...
          ================
          1.Pratt & Whitney F119: Length: 5160 mm, Outdoor Diameter: 1168 mm
          AL-41F1: more than length 4942 mm Outer Diameter 1277 mm(data for)
          The increase in thrust was obtained by increasing the diameter of the compressor from 905 to 932 mm and lengths (but that doesn't matter)
          109 mm + 30mm = 139 mm MINIMUM, in diameter
          2. Thrust vector control, ± 20 ° in the plane, ± 16 ° in any direction, and drive mechanisms including
          3 Vortex Zone Formation
          F-22: rib on the side of the nose of the fuselageswirling upper edge of the air intake and small influx in the root of the wing
          T-50: classic large wing influx
          4: A Different Approach to Opening Arms Compartment Flaps at Supersonic Speed
          5 Chassis:

          differently

      2. -2
        11 June 2015 14: 34
        That's right, now compare with PAK FA. Quantity and size.
    3. +1
      12 June 2015 00: 37
      Quote: vladimir_krm
      The disadvantages of F-22 include the following:

      do not repeat if you do not understand ...
      from the same paralay, MORE LITERATURE to man explains
      - roll speed F-22 without UVT already at an angle of attack of about 20 gr almost equal to that of the F-15.For control of yaw angle and roll angle at large angles of attack connects the UHT.In this case, the nozzles deviate in one siderather than different (At large angles of attack, when the angle of heel changes, the sliding angle also changes. When rotating around the velocity vector, the nozzles deviate upward and the plane behaves like a rear-engined car in rotation with an offset drift. The roll speed increases significantly.

      (y-axis roll speed, squares with uvt)
      -?

      - T-50 has the same curved (in 2x planes)

      -Using high-angle shock waves at large angles of attack for balancing.

      +
      rotation around the velocity vector at angles of attack greater than 55 gr
      what kind of "descent" are we talking about?

      Quote: vladimir_krm
      - the use of fixed keels with rudders requires an increase in the required area

      pearl .... poor mortally maneuverable Su-27 and MIG-29 ....
      F-22 NECESSARY stabilize track stability using vortex tows.

      therefore, they are not rotary + suppression of breakdown in a corkscrew, swirling veil + cruising supersonic (at such speeds keels are not great)
      Quote: vladimir_krm
      as well as an increase in drag.

      but what increases drag more?
      1. "high" keels (such tonusinke) or
      2. spaced apart air intakes and engines (plump ones)
      DO NOT THOUGHT?
      1. 0
        12 June 2015 10: 48
        Oh well. Teaching Poghosyan to build airplanes is bold! I quoted him :) "More literate" :) You are Pavel Bulat. I have nothing against Paul, but the quotes are mostly out of place. By the way, the same Bulat confirms that the UVT on the F-22 does not help super-maneuverability, but only compensates for the shortcomings of aerodynamics.

        In your own words: "do not repeat if you do not understand ..." :)
        1. 0
          12 June 2015 13: 39
          Quote: vladimir_krm
          Oh well. Teach Poghosyan to build airplanes

          Man .... WHERE (when) I TEACHED Mr. Poghosyan?
          here you have Ukrainians, what's in your blood: "Who's not a jump, he's ... (well, and so on)"?


          Quote: vladimir_krm
          I quoted him :)

          You quoted NOT HIS, not something from http://www.paralay.com/pakfa/pakfa.html, which in turn kicked off phrases from RU (11) 2440916 (13) C1
          You look at the patent application (ETU and others) and you will understand what I’m talking about, everywhere there: having no analogues in the world ...
          Quote: vladimir_krm
          You are Pavel Bulat

          It is true that I am also familiar with the works of the teachers who taught him.
          And what he writes is not verbiage, but logic, and he does not name holes as holes
          Quote: vladimir_krm
          but quotes are out of place basically.

          Come on: PRIZE (that evidence) to the studio, be a weasel?
          Quote: vladimir_krm
          By the way, the same Bulat confirms that UVT on F-22

          he did not write that. he writes about the implementation of maneuverability up to level 4 on this "invisible" chest, with the help of SWT
          Quote: vladimir_krm
          In your own words: "do not repeat if you do not understand ..." :)

          So maybe a duel?
          Which of us Know-how and “know-why”?
          and whoever carries the blizzard, in the minds of not strong:
          Quote: vladimir_krm
          The engines are located in nacelles spaced horizontally from each other, and the axis of the engines are oriented at an acute angle to the plane of symmetry of the aircraft in the direction of flight

          what about the cos (this "acute" angle) X to the motor thrust =? how much% of thrust is lost (the pairs push against each other), and not to give speed
          1. +1
            12 June 2015 16: 49
            Patent RU (11) 2440916 (13) C1 You look at the patent application

            Don’t give a reference? And it would be better to put it here completely. Thanks in advance.
            And what he writes is not verbiage, but logic, and he does not name holes as holes

            And did I object somewhere, or is it your habit to argue with yourself? So this is the diagnosis :)
            here you have Ukrainians, what's in your blood: "Who's not a jump, he's ... (well, and so on)"?

            We pass on to the person? Oh well. Learn Russian to begin with, literate :)
            So maybe a duel?

            You can do self-service without me :)
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. 0
                12 June 2015 21: 29
                The full document is available at

                Well? They wanted to screw me up, and argued with Poghosyan. Brave boy :) Maybe he is not an ice, but you are nobody at all. Couch General :)
                on the person is when on Vladimir_km, and to equate the nationality and the individual person of a given nationality is stupidity

                I’ll tell you a secret: not only Ukrainians live here. And in our area - and not so much Ukrainians.
                No, I, unlike you in the bathroom

                Hamite, kid. Looks like not only the clave is broken-up.
                Farewell, I don’t want to communicate with the badly educated anymore.
                1. 0
                  13 June 2015 00: 28
                  Quote: vladimir_krm
                  Brave boy :)

                  Quote: vladimir_krm
                  We pass on to the person?

                  Hear.
                  I’m either at the end or you will understand.
                  Quote: vladimir_krm
                  but argued with Poghosyan.

                  Why argue? about 7 water on jelly?
                  Clever PidUkr- collect T-50 based on Rospatent data.
                  Well, like "Bison" for example .....
                  "argue" .... brain diarrhea?

                  Quote: vladimir_krm
                  And in our area - and not so much Ukrainians.

                  But they behave .... Typically, like them.
                  30% I have relatives with you, and not Khukhra Mukhra, but military colonels (father and sons), with wounds.
                  And?
                  And the same porridge.
                  Recommend: Tarmashev series "Cold", there is such a negroid, Michael in my opinion.
                  Mindset, especially part of 2. This is xnumx% mindset
                  Quote: vladimir_krm
                  not only Ukrainians
                  ,but
                  Quote: vladimir_krm
                  live here
                  .
                  This is karma.
                  Quote: vladimir_krm
                  Hamite boy

                  Found a guy.
                  My youngest probably would have eaten it, but it's not me who has "sand poured" with 17 pull-ups ...
                  Quote: vladimir_krm
                  Farewell, I don’t want to communicate with the badly educated anymore.

                  Aufwiedersein.
                  Who would doubt that we are not mature enough
  10. +5
    11 June 2015 10: 13
    . someone said something somewhere.
  11. Garay dgonson
    +2
    11 June 2015 10: 29
    It is more reasonable to compare the air force as a whole and the ability of these air forces to cooperate with the rest of the armed forces ...
  12. +3
    11 June 2015 10: 46
    The Americans will soon begin to recognize that their fifth generation aircraft are inferior to our third aircraft! With such a whining, they knock out additional budgets
    1. Zaq
      0
      11 June 2015 12: 35
      And in Russia they write that the MiG-21 can bring down the F-35. It is interesting that accountants of the PAK-FA project think about this.
      1. +1
        11 June 2015 17: 45
        Quote: Zaq
        And in Russia they write that the MiG-21 can bring down the F-35.


        I hope you were joking ?! hi
        1. Zaq
          0
          12 June 2015 19: 47
          No.
          http://warfiles.ru/show-56066-shestidesyatiletniy-mig-21-mozhet-pobedit-noveyshi
          y-amerikanskiy-f-35s-v-vozdushnom-boyu.html
  13. -7
    11 June 2015 11: 32
    I just don’t understand one thing! What the hell are they always pulling in comparison their piece of marriage that initially does not have any indicators and capabilities of the 5th generation F35! ??? this piece of tin was never and will not be the 5th generation! and considering that from the moment of the F35 project, they still can’t eliminate a bunch of shortcomings and breakdowns, they won’t do it by the 3000th year either!
    1. +4
      11 June 2015 12: 05
      Quote: HMR333
      Considering that from the moment of the F35 project, they still can’t eliminate a lot of shortcomings and breakdowns, then by the 3000th year they won’t do it!

      of these F-35 under two hundred already in the army ... you will forgive what?
      1. +5
        11 June 2015 12: 23
        Quote: tchoni
        of these F-35 under two hundred already in the army ... you will forgive what?

        It is possible that some are simply poorly informed. request Pictures correspond to the middle of the 2014 year, but they give some idea.

    2. Garay dgonson
      +7
      11 June 2015 15: 57
      This "piece of junk" is already in regular units with the latest radar, improved weapons, stealth and an engine with a thrust-to-weight ratio of two for the mig-29, so your slogans pass by, to put it mildly.
      For comparison, the Pak-fa radar is still a prototype far from the series like I am from Mars, the engines are generally from su35, and new missiles are not ready, that's why the purchase of this designer was canceled ...
      1. Bliznec
        -3
        11 June 2015 18: 59
        I’m certainly an amateur, but I think that this is a map of America and how far can they fly from there? somewhere to Hawaii or Florida, and even Nicaragua can get to Cuba ...
        1. Garay dgonson
          0
          11 June 2015 19: 12
          Yes, no one is going to attack, the hysteria is just in the media for the sake of sensations
        2. iv_v virtual 2
          -3
          12 June 2015 12: 52
          Hello to the inhabitants of the parallel world! How is the weather there?
          1. iv_v virtual 2
            -1
            12 June 2015 22: 33
            Quote: iv_v virtual 2
            parallel world

            Applied to the bliznec replica
    3. 0
      11 June 2015 20: 08
      Quote: HMR333
      considering that from the moment of the F35 project, they still can’t eliminate a lot of shortcomings

      I hope stating such things, you have repeatedly sat down at the helm of the F-35, otherwise where is such confidence that the plane is crappy? Or maybe you have a relative in the Pentagon who cried bitterly over a bottle for a vest?
  14. +4
    11 June 2015 12: 14
    Again, the cabin was painted in the color of children's surprise. The question is, was there black paint?
    PAKFA cabin simulator:
    Since the inception of aviation, both the military and civilian cockpits of aircraft have been painted in this terrible color.
    1. +2
      11 June 2015 17: 16
      And in my opinion the best color, black, gray pumps ... and this calm one does not cause unnecessary unnecessary emotions.

      It also merges better with the sky, which makes the subconscious focus less on the contours of the cabin and more on information on sensors and objects in the sky.
      1. +7
        11 June 2015 17: 32
        Here is the whole point:
        In the first picture, the windows and the arch are made in the colors of the cockpit, which allows the eye to focus on the "clock" device and the "table with a ball" target.

        On the second color of the frames on the windows and the arch creates an additional obstacle to the perception of objects and space.
        1. -4
          11 June 2015 20: 13
          Quote: Bagel
          Here is the whole point:
          In the first picture, the windows and the arch are made in the colors of the cockpit, which allows the eye to focus on the "clock" device and the "table with a ball" target.

          On the second color of the frames on the windows and the arch creates an additional obstacle to the perception of objects and space.

          Now all the important indicators are displayed on the helmet monitors. The dashboard acts as a backup source of information for the pilot.
      2. +2
        11 June 2015 20: 09
        Quote: Bagel
        And in my opinion the best color, black, gray pumps ... and this calm one does not cause unnecessary unnecessary emotions.

        It also merges better with the sky, which makes the subconscious focus less on the contours of the cabin and more on information on sensors and objects in the sky.

        The cabin of the new Russian medium-range passenger aircraft MS-21 (stands for 21st century long-haul aircraft) is not of this terrible color and does not distract, why in PAKFA and generally in military aircraft can not be painted in gray-black tones ?:
        1. +3
          12 June 2015 09: 30
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          Cabin of the new Russian medium-range passenger aircraft MS-21

          And this is the Tu-204SM. Maybe there’s some kind of meaning?
          1. countergenesis
            0
            12 June 2015 16: 31
            Well, where is tu204 and where is ms21?
        2. iv_v virtual 2
          0
          12 June 2015 12: 55
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          can not be painted in gray-black tones

          Finally. Great topic! The next stop is feng shui.
          1. 0
            13 June 2015 00: 20
            Quote: iv_v virtual 2
            Finally. Great topic! The next stop is feng shui.

            And be sure to cactus in a pot, they say EMP from the screens absorb laughing
    2. 0
      16 June 2015 14: 36
      I read somewhere that such a color was chosen specially, it is believed that this part of the spectrum is the least tiring to vision.
  15. +5
    11 June 2015 13: 50
    It’s not a plane that is fighting, a pilot is fighting. It’s not enough to create an airplane; you still need to train the air force. Of course, the level of technology matters, but she (technology) must be able to use it 100%, or rather use its combat capabilities 100%
  16. sergey908
    -2
    11 June 2015 16: 10
    Cool car! The Americans are just relaxing!
  17. +2
    11 June 2015 17: 58
    Pak fa the combat vehicle was never seen, only the layouts will show. If the Chinese were not shown on May 9, then we definitely can’t see it.
  18. +3
    11 June 2015 18: 38
    First you need to launch the aircraft in a series, and then compare which is better! I don’t praise Americans, but their plane has been in the series for several years now, and we have prototypes!
    1. +2
      11 June 2015 19: 57
      Quote: senima56
      First you need to launch the aircraft in a series, and then compare which is better!

      Gold words! When I saw the title of the article, I wanted to write about the same thing! + good
  19. +1
    11 June 2015 18: 44
    Quote: Gromm
    Yes, at least something is being done and it is already pleasing. The hammer of GDP! Raptor Killer, sounds like music! Hurray to Russian weapons!

    Oh, one "hurray-patriot" raptor killer. Tell me, my dear fellow, how many T-50s are in the troops and how many raptors they shot down. Don't jump ahead of the horse.
    1. toaster666
      0
      12 June 2015 06: 15
      Both YF-22 and F-22 had all the main features for a period much shorter than 5 years. The hull, coating, engines, avionics, missile launches from the compartments.
      Of all this, the pack has only a housing :)
      Hooray pseudo-patriotamm !! 1 :)
    2. The comment was deleted.
  20. Shur
    0
    11 June 2015 23: 51
    As the US military-industrial complex lobbyists rejoice excitedly scaring their own and the European layman in the hope of receiving new appropriations. They directly balm to the place where people have a soul, such articles and statements.
  21. +2
    11 June 2015 23: 51
    Article: "It is clear that nothing is clear." A set of adjectives and participles, throw them out of the text and the article will not. No facts, no clear definitions.
  22. toaster666
    0
    12 June 2015 06: 13
    Quote: rumor_today
    And what will you eat? What will be thrown off him?

    Russia now exports 3 times more wheat than in 1913!
    There will be no hunger! :)
  23. toaster666
    0
    12 June 2015 06: 16
    Quote: Raider
    Article: "It is clear that nothing is clear." A set of adjectives and participles, throw them out of the text and the article will not. No facts, no clear definitions.

    Yes, like people absolutely clearly expressed. There is not even money for 4 packs, but industry should try to make 10.
  24. toaster666
    0
    12 June 2015 06: 26
    Quote: voyaka uh

    Here are the inside compartments. On 6 rockets.

    And where are the inside compartments of the pack?
    He had never once opened them in flight.
  25. toaster666
    0
    12 June 2015 06: 34
    I wonder what kind of miracle rocket arm pack?

    Ukraine has endangered the export of Russian military aircraft by cutting off the supply of Mayak homing thermal heads for R-73E melee missiles, which all Russian military aircraft are equipped with. Promising missiles, which are being developed to replace the R-73, are not yet ready even for the Russian Air Force. When they begin to be exported, it is all the more unknown.

    Missile missile r-73 in the range


    AIM-9X hits under massive jamming conditions and during launch by the tail of the carrier
  26. +3
    12 June 2015 08: 40
    I don’t know how PAK FA will fly and how to kill ... Probably it really very much depends on the pilot. I look at the situation with him from my bell tower of a process engineer. To make an airplane is actually not enough to take parts and screw them. Details also need to be done. To do this, you need equipment, machines, these machines also need to be done on something. Millions of different products are needed, starting with bolts and nuts, heat-resistant bricks, metal, energy, gas for power plants ...

    How much steel in the plane? In order for the technological chain to work, steel needs four orders of magnitude more. How much plastic? The order is the same. Electronics? More. For one computer in an airplane - thousands in production control systems.

    And I see that all these related industries are now gradually accelerating. Demand for plastic, organochlorine, and metal is increasing. Historically, all of our industry has been tied to the military-industrial complex, and thank God that money was finally found for the army. Industry will rise, and how Armata will drive there and how PAK FA will fly - we'll see.
  27. 0
    25 June 2015 19: 03
    Who knows, 60 PAK FA procurement plans are valid?