Military Review

Two new Su-35С transferred to the Ministry of Defense

48
In 2015, deliveries to the Ministry of Defense are proceeding as planned. Today Komsomolsk-on-Amur aviation the plant - a branch of the Sukhoi company transfers two Su-35S aircraft.



"This year, it is planned to deliver another twelve Su-35С aircraft and five Su-30М2 aircraft. Obligations to the state customer will be fulfilled on time with proper quality," the technical director of the Yu.A. Gagarin Alexander Chipizubov.



Su-35S - Russian multipurpose super-maneuverable fighter generation 4 ++. In 2009, a contract was signed between Sukhoi Company and the Ministry of Defense for the supply of such aircraft to 48.



And in Novosibirsk at the same time two Su-34s were handed over.





Originator:
http://fotografersha.livejournal.com/693611.html
48 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. Utlan
    Utlan 18 July 2015 06: 07
    0
    Cool! Let's have more of these beauties!
    1. crazyrom
      crazyrom 18 July 2015 06: 08
      +2
      How are they still small, complex things however, but beautiful soldier
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 18 July 2015 08: 53
        +2
        Quote: crazyrom
        How are they still small, complex things however, but beautiful soldier

        Beauty is not the main thing there. The main thing is that in a fight, a foe can very well be piled on. hi
        1. ancient
          ancient 18 July 2015 19: 00
          +2
          Quote: NEXUS
          . The main thing is that in a fight, the adversary can very well pile on


          I agree, but only if there is something, but for now .... if only we can "get close" .. "closer" recourse

          1. Sling
            Sling 19 July 2015 14: 53
            +1
            [quote = ancient] [quote = NEXUS]. The main thing is that in a fight, the adversary can very well pile [/ quote]

            I agree, but only if there is something, but for now .... if only we can "get close" .. "closer" recourse

            We have a problem with long-range missiles, or with deliveries. Or have not brought it to mind?
        2. spinner
          spinner 18 July 2015 21: 14
          +1
          Only a beautiful airplane can fly well.
    2. ATATA
      ATATA 18 July 2015 09: 43
      +6
      Quote: Utlan
      Cool! Let's have more of these beauties!

      Quote: crazyrom
      How are they still small, complex things however, but beautiful

      Than to write here such comments it is better to be silent in general!
      Maybe for the smart you will.
      Is it really hard to understand?
      1. Homo
        Homo 18 July 2015 11: 52
        +3
        Quote: ATATA
        Than to write here such comments it is better to be silent in general!
        Maybe for the smart you will.
        Is it really hard to understand?

        You contradict yourself. Let me remind you of a proverb - a fool will not notice, but a smart one will keep silent! It's about nonsense. Yes, one more remark, do not use "fenya" "in a decent society. You are not a" gangway "but on a military forum.
    3. Retvizan 8
      Retvizan 8 18 July 2015 10: 36
      +1
      July 7, 2015 09:59 Chkalovsky Plant (Novosibirsk) handed over two Su-34 aircraft to the Air Force.
  2. itr
    itr 18 July 2015 07: 12
    0
    It’s interesting how many fighters in Russia can be made per month ?????
    1. ATATA
      ATATA 18 July 2015 09: 47
      -2
      Quote: itr
      It’s interesting how many fighters in Russia can be made per month ?????

      Not knowing how much a month, but somewhere I read that the construction of a modern fighter lasts about a year.
      So consider how many planes should be in the stocks at the plant, to make them as many as you want. hi
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 18 July 2015 12: 55
      +1
      Quote: itr
      It’s interesting how many fighters in Russia can be made per month ?????

      So far, very few Americans are making one F-35 per day! We need specialists, new plants, simple workers and money for all this. It’s still very foggy with all this, that's why we release only 14 cars a year. And we need an order of magnitude more to create and introduce into the syrah of such machines.
      1. The point
        The point 18 July 2015 15: 15
        +3
        Quote: NEXUS
        Americans do one F-35 per day!

        recourse

        and where old utilize? Let's get without hyperbole. And I can say one thing about the speed of building aircraft — if it weren’t for the mess arranged by our defective managers (I'm talking about KnAAZ), we could work better and produce more products. And now there are not even their own workshop cleaners; now a third-party enterprise, not related to the workshops, is engaged in this.
        Against this background, it’s still nice to see the material embodiment of our labors — airplanes.
        Yes, here's what I forgot about. Orders Well, they don’t order us by plane per day, even though you crack. And no one will do it for free or at their own expense, excuse me. hi
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 18 July 2015 16: 22
          +1
          Quote: Maksud
          And I can say one thing about the speed of building aircraft — if it weren’t for the mess arranged by our defective managers (I'm talking about KnAAZ), we could work better and produce more products. And now there are not even their own workshop cleaners; now a third-party enterprise, not related to the workshops, is engaged in this.

          Here I am about that. And here PAK YES was going to build, without any factories, no specialists, no workers. "defective managers", so it is necessary to ask the bureaucrats, WHERE MONEY, ZIN ?!
          Quote: Maksud
          Against this background, it’s still nice to see the material embodiment of our labors — airplanes.

          Our planes are the best, which is recognized by many and many times. And then the question pops up: WHEN DO WE STOP THE PLUSES TO DRAW TO THE FOUR AND PUT TO THE PACK FA SERIES?
          Quote: Maksud
          Yes, here's what I forgot about. Orders Well, they don’t order us by plane per day, even though you crack. And no one will do it for free or at their own expense, excuse me.

          As I said, if you collect all the money that was stolen by Serdyukov and others like him, you can safely build an aircraft carrier fleet with support, support and cover ships and still have to resume the production of Swans.
          Best regards hi
      2. itr
        itr 18 July 2015 19: 09
        0
        Nexus attack guys and this is if you honestly ass as in the second world I think in a month no less than 500 did
        It’s shitty if you look at how they fought in dill, so these 14 planes were shot down for three months and the third they ended at all ((((modern war is not conceivable without planes
    3. NO PASARAN
      NO PASARAN 18 July 2015 13: 21
      +3
      Quote: itr
      It’s interesting how many fighters in Russia can be made per month ?????

      Here are the data for the USSR, somewhere between 60 and 70 per year of civilians, the rest are combat aircraft.
      At the time of gaining state independence, 214 enterprises of the industry were located in Russia, including 28 research institutes, 72 design bureaus and 114 serial factories that were previously under the jurisdiction of the USSR Ministry of Aviation Industry [9], that is, almost all organizations and institutions of industrial science, the main share of design and production potential of the Soviet aircraft building complex.
      But alas, over 25 years of reform, many enterprises have been privatized, looted and re-profiled into trading centers, etc.
  3. corporal
    corporal 18 July 2015 07: 21
    0
    Pancake! Nineteen cars a year? am
    The Yankees will die of laughter ....
    1. Samaritan
      Samaritan 18 July 2015 11: 43
      +2
      In 2014, Russia produced more aircraft than the United States.
    2. The point
      The point 18 July 2015 15: 29
      +2
      Yes, and let it go. We are better (this is according to the Yankees). If you are so funny or rich, then do it for free on an initiative basis. First of all, an airplane is a lot of money: for the purchase of raw materials (metal, rubber for rubber goods), tools (machines, consumables for them, coolant, cutters, drills, grinding wheels, sandpaper), energy costs (heat, electricity -), for depreciation of equipment, and in addition, for salaries by people like me, i.e. those who are behind these machines.
      But so shoutingly shouting about the fact that few planes are available, sorry, stupid. The question is clearly not for the factory workers. hi
  4. akm8226
    akm8226 18 July 2015 09: 07
    +1
    What are handsome !!!
  5. MilitaryKAZ
    MilitaryKAZ 18 July 2015 09: 39
    0
    if the pilots of the F-15 Battle Eagles learn this, then they will hang themselves)))
  6. Stabilization
    Stabilization 18 July 2015 11: 46
    -2
    This is perhaps the only serial fighter in our troops that can really pile up the enemy and leave whole.
    1. WUA 518
      WUA 518 18 July 2015 17: 24
      +4
      Quote: Stabilization
      pile on the enemy and

      Yeah, medium-range missiles R-27, and close maneuverable combat R-73. Dreams, dreams.
      1. ancient
        ancient 18 July 2015 18: 53
        +3
        Quote: WUA 518
        Yeah, medium-range missiles R-27, and close maneuverable combat R-73. Dreams, dreams.


        Hi Sasha! drinks I agree, especially with the "weighing apparatus", I flew right up and ... bats on ... a lamp wassat
        But we have a lot of "cast-iron bombs" there is something ... "to pile on the enemy" wassat

        1. WUA 518
          WUA 518 18 July 2015 19: 05
          +3
          Quote: ancient
          just flew so and ... bang on ... the lantern

          Hello commander. drinks
          1. ancient
            ancient 18 July 2015 19: 31
            +1
            Quote: WUA 518
            Hello commander


            Offset ... 6 zeros fellow .. "I killed ... in the flour" (I lie there, but I look and look) everything is clear ... now just put the text of the comment on the movie and run ..... BESTSELLER drinks
      2. srelock
        srelock 19 July 2015 00: 28
        -1
        Quote: WUA 518
        Yeah, medium-range missiles R-27, and close maneuverable combat R-73. Dreams, dreams.
        Actually, why, with such a set, the Su-35 will not be able to "pile on the enemy and leave"?
        1. WUA 518
          WUA 518 19 July 2015 00: 43
          +2
          Quote: srelock
          Actually, why, with such a set, the Su-35 will not be able to "pile on the enemy and leave"?

          Look at the range of the R-27 missile (R-73 is not considered a BMW missile), given that the maximum is the range when attacking the front hemisphere, and the range of long-range missiles of our potential friends.
          1. srelock
            srelock 19 July 2015 00: 56
            -1
            Quote: WUA 518
            Look at the range of the R-27 rocket ...
            I watched more than once. Phoenixes They removed from service and did not put anything new and long-range request
            1. WUA 518
              WUA 518 19 July 2015 01: 56
              +2
              Quote: srelock
              Phoenixes. They are armed.

              God knows when. But I hope you will not deny that Phoenix has a greater range in the teaching staff?
              1. srelock
                srelock 19 July 2015 11: 35
                0
                No, I will not. And yet, why do you think that the ERCs of range are not enough? What missiles do you compare them to?
  7. Foxbet
    Foxbet 18 July 2015 12: 12
    -2
    Quote: ATATA
    but I read somewhere that the construction of a modern fighter lasts about a year.

    They read poorly. By the end of 2015, 48 such fighters should enter the Russian Air Force. So consider how much it takes for one such fighter.
  8. Stabilization
    Stabilization 18 July 2015 12: 44
    0
    When they start putting AFARs on all the latest SU models, then we can really talk about dangerous cars. Afrikans, they are putting afar on their f-15s and it turns out very badly.
    1. Odysseus
      Odysseus 18 July 2015 15: 36
      +2
      Quote: Stabilization
      When they start putting AFARs on all the latest SU models, then we can really talk about dangerous cars

      We do not have AFAR in serial production yet. By the way, AFAR has no special advantages in the range of detection of air targets.
      1. ancient
        ancient 18 July 2015 18: 56
        +2
        Quote: Odyssey
        We do not have AFAR in serial production yet.


        Tikhomirovites are already making "afarist" Bars for the Indians wink Well, a person simply may not know that "good rockets" are also needed, and not that .. what is now, and the rest is all .. "promises". drinks
  9. Watchman
    Watchman 18 July 2015 13: 01
    +1
    As much pathos as if passed 20 pieces.
    1. The point
      The point 18 July 2015 15: 31
      +1
      And how much was transferred to Independence?
  10. Foxbet
    Foxbet 18 July 2015 13: 49
    -3
    Quote: Stabilization
    When they start putting AFARs on all the latest SU models, then we can really talk about dangerous cars.

    On the MiG-31 has long been AFAR.
    1. Odysseus
      Odysseus 18 July 2015 15: 33
      +2
      Quote: FOXBET
      On the MiG-31 has long been AFAR.

      PFAR
  11. foma2028
    foma2028 18 July 2015 17: 17
    +3
    In the original source, the third photo is discussed on the site of the photographer.
    There are such lines: "This photo is especially pleasing. Almost corrugated skin, lagging hatches. And this is on new aircraft. It looks like someone is lying too much, talking about high-quality work and reduced ESR."

    Well, the hatch really does not fit well. On aerodynamics, this may not affect, but on radio visibility?
    Interestingly, the lining on modern aircraft is the same or not. Or it is not so important.
    With the quality of the hatches, we lagged behind in World War II.
    1. foma2028
      foma2028 18 July 2015 17: 19
      0
      I like this photo.
      The picture is like a toy.
      They write that Americans are fought for every click to reduce the radio frequency
      1. WUA 518
        WUA 518 18 July 2015 18: 55
        +4
        [img] http://forum.keypublishing.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=233160&d=1415666
        539 [/ img]
        Quote: foma2028
        They write that Americans are fought for every click to reduce the radio frequency
        1. foma2028
          foma2028 18 July 2015 19: 49
          +2
          And what we see: the hatches fit where necessary, the gaps are uniform, the joints do not overlap, there is no "corrugated cardboard".
          And the last photo, a reproach for our aircraft builders
          1. foma2028
            foma2028 18 July 2015 20: 03
            0
            of course. only the tail of the F-22 spoils the picture, but nonetheless
            The level and culture of production is ours and American.
            1. foma2028
              foma2028 18 July 2015 20: 06
              +2
              True T-50 looks much more worthy than the Su-35С
            2. spiolist pas harp
              spiolist pas harp 19 July 2015 18: 35
              0
              Quote: foma2028
              last photo, reproach for our aircraft builders

              Quote: foma2028
              The level and culture of production is ours and American.

              Are you serious? wassat
              Even if you do not take into account the tips
              Quote: Shtynsky Dwarf
              photo of our aircraft under artificial directional lighting, foreign aircraft - day / reflected-fill. Che stupid then? If our plane is illuminated accordingly, there will be no "corrugated cardboard".
              is it really that hard to just THINK?
              Or does your "salary" require such "throwing on the fan"?
              And about the already annoying self-promotion of all American "super-duper" equipment and weapons ...
              a specialist in arfagrafii January 17, 2015 19:42
              Grandpa came to the sexologist:
              - Granddaughter, Chota and my grandmother ... Only once a month ...
              - Grandfather, so how old are you?
              - 80.
              - belay so what do you want? Still age, etc. etc.
              - Don't tell, don't tell, granddaughter. My neighbor over there is 90, so he says that every night his grandmother "tortures"!
              - Okay, okay. Open your mouth. Ta-a-ak, the language is fine, the vocal cords are fine. Well, I don’t see any reason that would prevent you from saying the same thing.
          2. Shtyn dwarf
            Shtyn dwarf 18 July 2015 23: 53
            +2
            photo of our aircraft under artificial directional lighting, foreign aircraft - day / reflected-fill. Che stupid then? If our plane is illuminated accordingly, there will be no "corrugated cardboard". It's just that they don't care about our image - and I consider it just sabotage. Regular magazines and all others should be FORBIDDEN to take pictures of equipment closer than 20 meters - all that is closer - must be photographed by a highly qualified personnel photo specialist. When will it finally reach MO !!!
  12. Maksus
    Maksus 18 July 2015 22: 34
    +2
    Explain to an amateur why the 35th is really "chewed"?
    1. cherkas.oe
      cherkas.oe 18 July 2015 23: 07
      +3
      Quote: Maksus
      Why is the 35th really "chewed"?

      Because technology, material, artist and salaries from a past life.
    2. WUA 518
      WUA 518 18 July 2015 23: 59
      +1
      [/ Center]
      Quote: Maksus
      Explain to an amateur why the 35th is really "chewed"?

      Not only our planes are affected by this. This effect appears in the investigation, so that it would be clear I will explain in a simple laughingAn air load that is directly perceived by the skin. This is so, especially without delving into the aerodynamic jungle laughing
      1. foma2028
        foma2028 19 July 2015 07: 22
        0
        Perhaps I will be mistaken regarding these photos of American planes, but I suppose that these are planes that have already flown for some time.
        At least we cannot say that they are new, only from the factory.
        True, we cannot say that they are forty years old.
        But our Dryers are new, only from the factory and completed only a few test flights and has the skin already so directly and directly absorbed air loads?
      2. foma2028
        foma2028 19 July 2015 08: 13
        0
        And this wavy copy of the Pakistani-Chinese JF-17.
        Pakistan and China are also not the most technologically advanced countries in aviation.