Military Review

A peculiar comparison of the latest fighters of the Russian Federation, the People's Republic of China and the United States in the "National Interest"

122
In the edition National Interest The author named Dave Majumdar gives his thoughts on the comparison of the latest fighters of the three countries of the world. We are talking about American F-35, Chinese J-20 and J-31, as well as Russian Su-35 and T-50 (PAK FA). Madjumzhar writes that the article on the comparison of new military aircraft of Russia, China and the United States was prompted by numerous questions about "which aircraft is better" and "how effectively the F-35 will be able to withstand the Russian generation fighter 4 ++ and 5".


A peculiar comparison of the latest fighters of the Russian Federation, the People's Republic of China and the United States in the "National Interest"


Without citing any of the most important characteristics of the aircraft, Majumdar reports that it would be easier for him to compare if the tests of the American F-35 were conducted using a full set of weapons and using all elements aviation electronics. According to the author of the material in the Western media, the F-35 was tested without 100% use of stealth technologies, and the pilot did not use a special helmet. The declared value of this helmet for the F-35 pilot, by the way, is about 700 thousand US dollars.

Madjumdar writes that the F-35 probably will not overcome the Russian air defense system, which includes the Triumph C-400 anti-aircraft missile systems. In this case, the material states that the advantage of the F-35 can be considered "excellent training" of American pilots, as well as the presence of stealth technology, implemented in the plane, with which Russia and China "have problems." As an advantage of Russian and Chinese fighters, Majumdar cites their maneuverability and dynamics.

As a result, Majumdar declares that comparing is, in principle, difficult, and only a real air battle between the aircraft will give answers to all questions about the advantage of a fighter. At the same time, the author adds that it would be better if such a battle never happened.
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com
122 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. razv35
    razv35 10 September 2015 17: 07 New
    +44
    The main advantage of American technology is that it is American - a very serious argument))))
    1. mQn
      mQn 10 September 2015 17: 13 New
      +32
      what is this comparison ?? a set of obscure words and a brilliant insert:
      "only a real air battle between planes will give answers to all questions about the advantage of a particular fighter."
      1. lelikas
        lelikas 10 September 2015 17: 23 New
        +20
        Quote: mQn
        what is this comparison ?? a set of obscure words and a brilliant insert:

        It can be seen that the author receives for the article and not for the content, and I can write about a dozen of them. How not to confuse warm with soft for example.
        1. Aleksey_K
          Aleksey_K 10 September 2015 17: 45 New
          +13
          Quote: lelikas
          It can be seen that the author receives for the article and not for the content, and I can write about a dozen of them. How not to confuse warm with soft for example.

          No offense, but who gets in the way? This site allows any reader to write their own article. After checking by the moderator, the article will be published if it complies with the rules of the site. Though write every day.
          1. lelikas
            lelikas 10 September 2015 18: 54 New
            +10
            Quote: Алексей_К
            No offense, but who gets in the way? This site allows any reader to write their own article. After checking by the moderator, the article will be published if it complies with the rules of the site. Though write every day.

            No offense hi - conscience interferes - without me there are enough repetitions and other misunderstandings like "what is there with the Ukrainians."
        2. Observer2014
          Observer2014 10 September 2015 19: 14 New
          +11
          "only a real air battle between planes will give answers to all questions about the advantage of a particular fighter"
          Ha ha yes it’s just a childish excuse for all American and about American experts! How can you compare the f 35 “iron” with the t50 ?! Have you seen 50 aerobatics at MAKS 2015? You gentlemen, first for yourself personally decide on what you would fly into battle.
          He writes about super-trained American pilots. Probably he saw a movie in his childhood “TOP GAN”. Our training pilots in the early 90s torn American pilots to su 27 against f15 in the trash. And the Indians tore into the trash, in the training battles of the same Americans and the British to heap. and when there’s nothing to say about it, they start to excuse them, about supply, real battle, and so on. Read nauseous American nonsense.
          1. Hello
            Hello 10 September 2015 19: 32 New
            -11
            Quote: Observer2014
            "only a real air battle between planes will give answers to all questions about the advantage of a particular fighter"
            Ha ha yes it’s just a childish excuse for all American and about American experts! How can you compare the f 35 “iron” with the t50 ?! Have you seen 50 aerobatics at MAKS 2015? You gentlemen, first for yourself personally decide on what you would fly into battle.
            He writes about super-trained American pilots. Probably he saw a movie in his childhood “TOP GAN”. Our training pilots in the early 90s torn American pilots to su 27 against f15 in the trash. And the Indians tore into the trash, in the training battles of the same Americans and the British to heap. and when there’s nothing to say about it, they start to excuse them, about supply, real battle, and so on. Read nauseous American nonsense.

            And how do you suggest comparing them? Based on your aesthetic preferences?
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 10 September 2015 19: 34 New
              +9
              Quote: Hello
              And how do you suggest comparing them? Based on your aesthetic preferences?

              Excuse me, is it correct to compare the F-35 with the PAK FA in your opinion? Doesn’t it bother you that the class of cars is slightly different and the tasks too ... I will not say anything about the mass.
              Sincerely. hi
              1. Hello
                Hello 10 September 2015 19: 45 New
                +3
                Quote: NEXUS
                Quote: Hello
                And how do you suggest comparing them? Based on your aesthetic preferences?

                Excuse me, is it correct to compare the F-35 with the PAK FA in your opinion? Doesn’t it bother you that the class of cars is slightly different and the tasks too ... I will not say anything about the mass.
                Sincerely. hi

                And I don’t compare them, I’m not very strong in aviation. But to say that one of them is better than the other in my opinion is strange, despite the fact that neither one nor the other have combat experience and were not even in long-term operation in the field.
                To you too with great respect good
                1. Cherdak
                  Cherdak 10 September 2015 21: 44 New
                  +5
                  Quote: Hello
                  I'm not very strong in aviation


                  Yes, you, my friend, are just super pros, when compared with the X-Perts of Popular Mechanics, see this opus for September of this year. (hopefully clickable)

                  From SW. hi
                  1. Observer2014
                    Observer2014 10 September 2015 22: 01 New
                    +3
                    Dear Cherdak, what you demonstrated is a complete flight. This is called “sailed.” My teacher once said: Being a good student does not mean being a good teacher.
                    So here, they hired a journalist. Maybe they’re likely to do something, and IQ is lower than the plinth. That's why all kinds of articles are made by boobies. I’m even ashamed of them. I am silent about the editor-in-chief of that magazine. I’m shocked. beer in the fridge littered.
                    1. Cherdak
                      Cherdak 11 September 2015 10: 40 New
                      +1
                      I also hoped that the time of monstrous mistakes was long gone ...
              2. Tusv
                Tusv 10 September 2015 20: 57 New
                +4
                Quote: NEXUS
                Excuse me, is it correct to compare the F-35 with the PAK FA in your opinion? Doesn’t it bother you that the class of cars is slightly different and the tasks too ... I will not say anything about the mass.

                Count it up. Aftarishko Raptor lowered in generation in comparison with the F-35. I laughed for a long time. After all, f-22 is the only one serial fifth generation aircraft, and the second lightning does not have a supersonic cruising
                1. NEXUS
                  NEXUS 10 September 2015 21: 03 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Tusv
                  and the second lightning does not have a supersonic cruising

                  I’ll say more, it’s even slower than the 29th ... what kind of grandmother is Nyura of the 5th generation? At the price it is even 6 generations, but by functionality we will see who is XU. hi
          2. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 10 September 2015 21: 31 New
            +7
            Quote: Observer2014
            And the Indians tore into the trash, in the training battles of the same Americans and even the British to the heap.

            Of course! Hindus flew in the Russian SU-30MKI VIMANS, and the Yankees in their super-duper wunderwaffles !!! The Angles climbed into their Typhoons, but again the Russian WIMANS gave them a shit ... What a bad luck!
            And the Russians also do not brag about their T-50s, they are hiding something ... Surely there will again be VIMANA-UFO !? Well then, for sure - there will be an “iron caput” impudently to the Saxons! And this despite the fact that it is openly recognized that the Penguin will not be able to break through air defense based on the S-400.
            Well, absolutely, NOT ICE!
      2. dmi.pris
        dmi.pris 10 September 2015 19: 45 New
        +9
        In the 90s there were training battles on real planes of ours and fighters. The score 9-1 was not in their pocket. After such embarrassments, our pilots were no longer invited to the event.
        Quote: mQn
        what is this comparison ?? a set of obscure words and a brilliant insert:
        "only a real air battle between planes will give answers to all questions about the advantage of a particular fighter."
      3. Kent0001
        Kent0001 10 September 2015 21: 51 New
        +1
        A colleague, modeling showed that f-35 against our 4 ++ machines has nothing to boast of. And about the "Triumph" - well, just triumphantly, really liked it, only the adversaries do not know that we can beat them even with the three-hundredth.
        1. Tusv
          Tusv 10 September 2015 22: 04 New
          +2
          Quote: Kent0001
          only the adversaries do not know that we can beat them even with the three-hundredth, it will not seem enough.

          The adversary knows very well that his three hundred is easy to get, because he does not bring democracy to the places where Favorit lives
      4. Oleg14774
        Oleg14774 10 September 2015 23: 38 New
        0
        Quote: mQn
        a set of obscure words and a brilliant insert:

        From the point of view of banal erudition, it is that erudition is banal obvious!
    2. Temples
      Temples 10 September 2015 17: 15 New
      +15
      the advantage of the F-35 can be considered “excellent preparation” of American pilots, as well as the presence of stealth technology implemented in the aircraft, with which Russia and China “have problems”.


      In this case, the best aircraft by the standards of the “writer” can be recognized as a bunker buried in the ground somewhere in Alaska, which naturally has a unique stealth technology (not a single radar sees it) in which well-trained am are sitting. the pilots.
      1. Yuri from Volgograd
        Yuri from Volgograd 10 September 2015 18: 26 New
        +5
        Quote: Temples


        In this case, the best aircraft by the standards of the “writer” can be recognized as a bunker buried in the ground somewhere in Alaska, which naturally has a unique stealth technology (not a single radar sees it) in which well-trained am are sitting. the pilots.

        As I understand it, the author has in mind the great flying practice with the Americans. Ours began to fly more than in the 90s (although in the 90s they practically didn’t fly), but up to 3/14ndos on the fly far.
        And experience makes professionals. Here I agree with the author.
      2. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 10 September 2015 21: 42 New
        +2
        Quote: Temples
        you can recognize a bunker buried in the ground somewhere in Alaska which naturally has a unique stealth technology (not a single radar sees it)

        I’m a little disappointing: now there are means of detecting objects buried up to 10 meters. And this is serious. So that,
        from * bombs * do not hide, do not hide!
        Amsky faces, tell me, what do you dream about?
    3. prosto_rgb
      prosto_rgb 10 September 2015 18: 03 New
      +3
      Quote: razv35
      The main advantage of American technology is that it is American - a very serious argument))))

      For the US Air Force it is.
      Actually, for the Air Force of any country producing military aircraft. soldier
    4. APASUS
      APASUS 10 September 2015 18: 45 New
      +3
      Quote: razv35
      The main advantage of American technology is that it is American

      Its advantages are that more money was spent on advertising than production and short combat clashes with third world countries confirm this.
    5. X Y Z
      X Y Z 10 September 2015 21: 35 New
      +3
      You are absolutely right! And often its characteristics are not of particular importance. The purchase of this equipment is not only aimed at strengthening the armed forces of any country, but rather signing a vassal agreement, a test of fidelity, belonging to the elite (my beloved gentleman sold me his hard drive).
    6. Air Force captain
      Air Force captain 11 September 2015 10: 09 New
      0
      I apologize for my French .... but this is not an article but some kind of vyser .... nothing
  2. vadimalehin76
    vadimalehin76 10 September 2015 17: 08 New
    +3
    An attempt to compare what cannot be compared. And to the grandmother, this "stealth" has already been shot down, if I remember correctly over Yugoslavia. repeat
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 10 September 2015 17: 17 New
      +18
      Quote: vadimalehin76
      An attempt to compare what cannot be compared. And to the grandmother, this "stealth" has already been shot down, if I remember correctly over Yugoslavia. repeat


      Very interesting conclusions suggest themselves, looking at some frames of this video.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 10 September 2015 17: 33 New
        +19
        Quote: NEXUS
        Very interesting conclusions suggest themselves, looking at some frames of this video.


        MAX-2015 ... FROM DISCHARGE-TO YOU, ON YOUR MACHINES, WEAKLY?
        1. Sling cutter
          Sling cutter 10 September 2015 17: 44 New
          +7
          Quote: NEXUS
          MAX-2015 ... FROM DISCHARGE-TO YOU, ON YOUR MACHINES, WEAKLY?

          Awesome video! good
          Thank you
        2. vyinemeynen
          vyinemeynen 10 September 2015 17: 54 New
          +9
          thanks for the video! hi Feels like DELIGHT and MISCEPTION (how can you do this on an airplane at all !!). I caught myself thinking "maybe he can fly forward with his tail!"
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. NEXUS
            NEXUS 10 September 2015 18: 22 New
            +7
            Quote: vyinemeynen
            thanks for the video! hi Feels like DELIGHT and MISCEPTION (how can you do this on an airplane at all !!). I caught myself thinking "maybe he can fly forward with his tail!"

            Chiort Russian UFO hi laughing
          3. SSeT
            SSeT 10 September 2015 20: 21 New
            +3
            It doesn’t even hang on Cobra, but it STANDS like a stop! Amazingly simple! good
        3. Yuri from Volgograd
          Yuri from Volgograd 10 September 2015 18: 28 New
          +2
          Quote: NEXUS
          Quote: NEXUS


          MAX-2015 ... FROM DISCHARGE-TO YOU, ON YOUR MACHINES, WEAKLY?

          And PAK FA is put on the wing!
          Progress on the face)
          For more of these would be in operation.
        4. ferdiperdozzz
          ferdiperdozzz 10 September 2015 21: 32 New
          0
          www.youtube.com/watch?v=vR-JGs2CxdY
          And this is just a Chinese foam model ...
        5. CRASH
          CRASH 11 September 2015 01: 29 New
          -4
          But why the hell do they need to spin, if they launch rockets on 6 T50 planes for 500 km, and ours don’t understand where it came from. No one will understand that in a real battle, there will be no time for all these pirouetics and hangs, they are beautiful at parades and exhibitions, but not in a real battle, everything is decided there with whom the radar is more powerful, and who has the missiles flying further. And yes, it flies beautifully.
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 11 September 2015 02: 33 New
            +3
            Quote: CRASH.
            But why the hell do they need to spin, if they launch rockets on 6 T50 planes for 500 km, and ours don’t understand where it came from.

            Let them try to see the PAK FA first without Avax. This is the second time. The second, as for us, and rockets that are not inferior to the Amer’s ones, can fly to them, and I would like to see these somersaults that Lightings would do with their poor maneuverability from ours missiles. And third, remember what the F-35 is a fighter-bomber, and the PAK FA is a front-line aviation complex whose tasks include intercepting and conquering the sky. That is, it is “imprisoned” for such purposes as Lightings and Raptor including.
            Quote: CRASH.
            No one will understand that in a real battle, there will be no time for all these pirouetics and freezes

            In real combat, all these pirouettes, hangs, etc. just have quite practical applications, for example, throwing the enemy off the tail, getting away from the rocket, etc. And at the opposite speeds the “dog dump” is very real, and that’s why our designers relied on SUPER MANEUVERABILITY but at the same time arming fighter jets and long-range missiles.
            Quote: CRASH.
            everything is decided there with whom the radar is more powerful, and with whom the rockets fly further

            And why did you get the idea that the PAK FA has a weaker radar and less long-range missiles? Besides, Vietnam is again remembered. The phantoms were better armed, and the radar was more powerful, and what? Did it help them greatly?
            In addition, we do not forget that there are also air defense systems (and on the S-500 approach), of various ranges, electronic warfare systems, which no one canceled either, etc. ... so yours “will not even see how they are shot down” does not sound convincing .
            Best regards hi
            1. noWAR
              noWAR 11 September 2015 02: 50 New
              0
              I urge you to stop, respect, everyone. A joke (almost). Regards, Nexus.
      2. Alexei
        Alexei 10 September 2015 19: 25 New
        +5
        When you look at all this, the knowledge that we have poor household appliances, the car industry is weak, video equipment, etc. BECOMES SUCH AN IMPOSSIBLE ...
        1. tatarin_ru
          tatarin_ru 10 September 2015 22: 23 New
          +2
          Quote: Alexej
          when you look at all this, the knowledge that we have poor household appliances, the car industry is weak, video equipment, etc. BECOMES SUCH AN IMPOSSIBLE ...


          But on the contrary, it is not clear to me how a country that builds airplanes, tanks, ships, spacecraft cannot come up with and arrange the production of modern engines in a domestic auto industry or assemble a refrigerator, is it really easier to use an aircraft engine.
      3. cuzmin.mihail2013
        cuzmin.mihail2013 10 September 2015 21: 39 New
        +1
        From Indian media: Reward the pilot of Prince Dakar (call sign "Captain Nemo") participating in training battles with US aircraft with the Vyyusen Award with the Air Force Medal.
        From the order of the Civil Code of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation: For excellent performance of the task during the exercises and professional skills shown, assign Captain Ivanov I. I. the rank of major ahead of schedule.
    2. Aleksey_K
      Aleksey_K 10 September 2015 17: 54 New
      -1
      Quote: vadimalehin76
      An attempt to compare what cannot be compared. And to the grandmother, this "stealth" has already been shot down, if I remember correctly over Yugoslavia. repeat

      You are probably counting on the sly, how many planes with stealth technology were shot down? Why aren't you reporting? And how many Russian planes were shot down over the entire period of the existence of stealth technology? In a bummer or something to inform curious readers? And then just a phrase: "this" stealth "has already been shot down" it sounds like these planes are shot down every day and soon the bill will go by the thousands.
      1. vadimalehin76
        vadimalehin76 10 September 2015 17: 59 New
        +2
        I apologize as long as I have information about only one thing over Yugoslavia for sure. Report is not a bummer. Just reliable data, the cat cried. And to write something that I can’t confirm, I can’t. I apologize again. hi
        1. vyinemeynen
          vyinemeynen 10 September 2015 19: 15 New
          +3
          there was an interview with a brow who was involved in the destruction of this stealth. In short: the Yugoslavs put on the hill a microwell with an open door and turned it on from the akk as the sound of the plane approached. The alarm went off on the plane when the radar was under the fire, he made a U-turn by substituting a belly for the rocket (there was enough reflection area to aim the rocket).
          The United States actively used anti-radar missiles, so to speak, microwaved them.
          I understand that it sounds like nonsense, but it was like in Russia24
        2. Aleksey_K
          Aleksey_K 11 September 2015 17: 40 New
          +1
          Quote: vadimalehin76
          I apologize as long as I have information about only one thing over Yugoslavia for sure. Report is not a bummer. Just reliable data, the cat cried. And to write something that I can’t confirm, I can’t. I apologize again. hi

          No need to apologize. You have not offended me at all. Just for the entire existence of stealth technology, the entire 2 American aircraft was shot down. And about the plane in Yugoslavia - he was simply unlucky with the air defense system. She was not in an active state. And when the invisibility came so close that it could no longer shoot the station, it just became active and was able to shoot down the plane after it. This information was repeatedly shown on television as the chief designer found out from the Yugoslavs how events had happened.
      2. NEXUS
        NEXUS 10 September 2015 17: 59 New
        +5
        Quote: Алексей_К
        And then just a phrase: "this" stealth "has already been shot down" it sounds like these planes are shot down every day and soon the bill will go by the thousands.

        Well, in Korea and Vietnam, there were thousands ... but only the vaunted stealths did not participate in a protracted war with an equal opponent, as was the case in the above conflicts.
        But the fact that the old 19 Mugs of the Yugoslavian forces could not be liquidated by the coalition forces for a relatively long time, says a lot, I believe. Moreover, according to some (unverified) data, I lost 3 stealth.
        Best regards hi
      3. Awaz
        Awaz 10 September 2015 19: 13 New
        +2
        and they would have been shot down if they had flown within the reach of more or less modern air defense systems manufactured by the USSR or Russia. It has long been proven that there is nothing so super-duper about Stealth technologies. By the way, this technology was invented in the USSR, but it was abandoned from low efficiency. No matter how these Americans boast, they have long renamed "invisibility" to "stealth"
        1. Aleksey_K
          Aleksey_K 11 September 2015 17: 55 New
          0
          Quote: AwaZ
          and they would have been shot down if they had flown within the reach of more or less modern air defense systems manufactured by the USSR or Russia. It has long been proven that there is nothing so super-duper about Stealth technologies. By the way, this technology was invented in the USSR, but it was abandoned from low efficiency. No matter how these Americans boast, they have long renamed "invisibility" to "stealth"

          If you looked first into the English-Russian dictionary, you would have understood by now that the word "stealth" is translated as "secret, secretive," and "invisible" is "invisible". The Americans themselves call their technology virtually "inconspicuous" rather than "invisible." These are Russian, our journalists, in order to add brightness to this technology, incorrectly made the translation, and ordinary people who do not know English well bought a bright phrase. The enemy's language must be known GOOD or VERY GOOD.
      4. cuzmin.mihail2013
        cuzmin.mihail2013 10 September 2015 21: 58 New
        0
        And how many of these Russian aircraft were these stealth technologies? Something I do not remember that the SU-27 or TU-160 or others had protection by the technology of "invisible"!
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 10 September 2015 22: 07 New
          +1
          Quote: cuzmin.mihail2013
          that the SU-27 or TU-160 or others had protection by the technology of "invisible"!

          Invisibility does not exist ... there are LOW-PRESENT LA ... hi
        2. Tusv
          Tusv 10 September 2015 22: 09 New
          +2
          Quote: cuzmin.mihail2013
          Something I do not remember that the SU-27 or TU-160 or others had protection by the technology of "invisible"!

          Ours went along the path of creating radar absorbing paint. But here are the toys that the White Swan carries with a very low ESR
    3. Revolver
      Revolver 10 September 2015 19: 02 New
      +4
      Quote: vadimalehin76
      . And to the grandmother, this "stealth" has already been shot down, if I remember correctly over Yugoslavia.

      Wrong remember. Not this one was shot down, but the F-117, which was not supposed to be mass-produced at all. He was conceived as a technology demonstrator and an argument for getting money to develop something like the F-22. Someone at the Pentagon came up with a whim to dump a bunch of dough into the mass production of a crude, barely flying machine ...
      They shot it down with an S-125M using TVC guidance, because the radar did not see it, and optical invisibility had not yet been invented. The pilot or those who planned the departure were to blame for this in many ways. He walked at an average height, without maneuvering, and in clear weather. He walked along the route already studied by the Yugoslavs and at a certain time. Here, as they say, God himself ordered to shoot down.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 10 September 2015 19: 27 New
        +3
        Quote: Nagan
        Not this one was shot down, but the F-117, which was not supposed to be mass-produced at all

        Sorry, isn't the F-117 a stealth?
        Quote: Nagan
        They shot it down with an S-125M using TVC guidance, because the radar did not see it, and optical invisibility had not yet been invented. The pilot or those who planned the departure were to blame for this in many ways. He walked at an average height, without maneuvering, and in clear weather. He walked along the route already studied by the Yugoslavs and at a certain time.

        It whistled quietly, low flying, the skis did not go, the pilot was drunk at the helm of a new and expensive car, the wind was blowing in the wrong nozzle, the sun was shining in the ass, the wife did not remember the pilot's conjugal duty (without a mat, but I understand everything). .. Reasons can be gained unmeasured. But the fact is on the face.
        I repeat, Phantoms were also advertised as super-duper fighters, but our 21 washed the glorious American aces, in a ratio of about 1 to 3 (and according to some reports, 1 to 4).
      2. Amurets
        Amurets 11 September 2015 01: 16 New
        +3
        There are radio emission ranges in which these expensive “TOYS” are clearly visible. And you don’t have to lie about the optical channel. Successful work on optics has been carried out both in the USSR and in the USA since the early 60s of the 20th century. Then the work began on long-range laser guidance. By 1970, an optical guidance channel for the S-75 and S-125 air defense systems had already been developed. They were only waiting for an order to be adopted. By the way, for the American Hawk too.
    4. Amurets
      Amurets 11 September 2015 00: 57 New
      +4
      Remember, the hits were three stealth aircraft (presumably the data is still classified). But in one interview, Raspletin talked about these hits. Literally, an hour later, in the news, this episode was cut out. I didn’t see this episode anymore. confirmation is that the F-117 stopped participating somewhere in the hostilities and began to shoot in various films. The second F-117, badly damaged, was seen on the island of Sicily. All the footage shot by local journalists disappeared. V-2 “The Spirit of Kansas” after the Belgrade raid, for several years disappeared from sight and was not tracked in flight. By the way, according to some reports, the Chinese got pieces of covering invisible planes and for this reason a blow was struck at the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, and not by mistake.
  3. old pioneer
    old pioneer 10 September 2015 17: 09 New
    +3
    Comparison Very peculiar, I would not call such a comparison ...
    1. demon1978
      demon1978 10 September 2015 17: 14 New
      +3
      Quote: old pioneer
      Comparison Very peculiar, I would not call such a comparison ...

      Well, this is in the style of Western "analysts" (and not only Western):
      I don’t know about this subject, and it would be better for me to never know that !!!! wassat
  4. manguest
    manguest 10 September 2015 17: 09 New
    +6
    All hope for stealth. And how will they notice? yes no, they won’t notice)
    1. marlin1203
      marlin1203 10 September 2015 17: 20 New
      +2
      Nah ... This is our chip! laughing
  5. Altona
    Altona 10 September 2015 17: 11 New
    +2
    Without citing any of the most important characteristics of the aircraft, Majumdar reports that it would be easier for him to compare if the tests of the American F-35 were conducted using a full set of weapons and using all elements of aviation electronics. According to the author of the material in the Western media, the F-35 was tested without 100% use of stealth technologies, and the pilot did not use a special helmet.
    -------------------------
    A strange comparison in general, they and the F-22 did not experience in a real battle ... So, only virtual simulations and stress tests, that a kakbe plane is powerful, it drives Su flocks ...
    1. skifd
      skifd 10 September 2015 21: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: Altona
      they and F-22 did not experience a real battle


      The "Lizard" was overrun by Syrian air defense in the fall of 2013, after which the draftsmen sharply stopped thinking about the "unmanned zone" above the country. The "Lizard" slammed in Jordan, not reaching the base. After that, the Jordanian authorities closed their airspace for the "voyages" of the mat ... races, so that nothing fell on their heads. This was written here at VO at the same time.
  6. Vladimir 1964
    Vladimir 1964 10 September 2015 17: 11 New
    +4
    Madjumdar writes that the F-35 probably will not overcome the Russian air defense system, which includes the Triumph C-400 anti-aircraft missile systems. In this case, the material states that the advantage of the F-35 can be considered "excellent training" of American pilots, as well as the presence of stealth technology, implemented in the plane, with which Russia and China "have problems." As an advantage of Russian and Chinese fighters, Majumdar cites their maneuverability and dynamics.


    National Interest, this is a rather interesting magazine, but Mr. Majumdar was somewhat surprised. There are many other criteria for comparative evaluation. And if the author undertakes to compare so it is necessary to compare, there is a good saying about this: whoever wants is looking for opportunities, who does not want it is for reason.
  7. Koronik
    Koronik 10 September 2015 17: 12 New
    0
    "In the end, Majumdar states that it is difficult to compare, in principle, and only a real air battle between planes will give answers to all questions about the advantage of a particular fighter."
    Who would doubt that.
  8. hydrox
    hydrox 10 September 2015 17: 12 New
    +3
    === F-35 probably will not overcome the Russian air defense system, which includes the S-400 Triumph anti-aircraft missile systems. ===
    If he does not overcome our air defense, then to hell need such a fighter priced at $ 300 million?
    Then it makes no difference whether there are stealth technologies in Russia (and they are!) Or we are just mastering them!
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 10 September 2015 17: 47 New
      +1
      Quote: hydrox
      If he does not overcome our air defense, then to hell need such a fighter priced at $ 300 million?

      Well, this is what the Americans admit that the F-35 project is a failure. But let me clarify, not 300 million, but about 120 million per pipelats.
      Quote: hydrox
      Then it makes no difference whether there are stealth technologies in Russia (and they are!) Or we are just mastering them!

      Stealth technologies in the USSR began to be mastered and studied long before the amers ... another question that our and Americans further relied on in the construction of new fighters and bombers. hi
      1. Kosta
        Kosta 10 September 2015 19: 00 New
        +2
        Who recognizes this? You or David Ax with the Daily Beast? laughing

        About the article is very funny. When the Indian Dave makes the same non-informative articles with the words F-35 DOES NOT FLY, where there is also 0 information, then everyone shouts cheers and pluses the article laughing
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 10 September 2015 19: 10 New
          +1
          Quote: Kosta
          Who recognizes this? You or David Ax with the Daily Beast?

          This was not said by me, but by the main Russophobe of the USA, McCain ...
          Here is a link to one of the articles http://cassad.net/armiya-i-opk/17528-samolet-f-35-provalnyy-proekt-ssha.html
          And about MY PERSONAL OPINION, forgive me, but put that kind of money into a plane that is really not a bomber or a fighter or even a deck, because it performs the functions of all these classes of aircraft, but badly. Why? we are up to successfully crossing a hedgehog with a rasp, the level of technology and science is not at that level yet. hi
  9. raiart
    raiart 10 September 2015 17: 13 New
    +5
    What is the article about? Tried to compare, but failed?
    1. Siberia 9444
      Siberia 9444 10 September 2015 17: 53 New
      +3
      I understand if a helmet was put on then everyone won but the helmet bites at a price
  10. Pacifist
    Pacifist 10 September 2015 17: 16 New
    +3
    Those. the article is generally about nothing ... but about excellent preparation, given that they had to fight mainly against a obviously weak enemy, this is still a question, and our training is at least no worse, which has been repeatedly proved in clashes with the same Americans . And about stealth technology, let's stretch your stealth against L-band radars and long-range air-to-air missiles. That will be a laugh. Long-range combat ends after the first missile launches, and our electronic warfare systems will be stronger and maneuverability better. Naturally, there are much more than three battle parameters, but with all other things being equal they have no advantages. Simplified, as usual, approximate parity.
    1. marlin1203
      marlin1203 10 September 2015 17: 22 New
      +1
      One trouble. We do not have a T-50 in service.
      1. Pacifist
        Pacifist 10 September 2015 17: 45 New
        0
        But to combat these van der wafers they are not needed. The previous generation is enough 30s and 35x enough. And the T-50, well, they will be, then in general everything will be in chocolate. I want to give a simple example, there was a video in which the pilot of Rafal drove an uber vandervaflu called F-22 as a sidorov goat and no stealth technologies knocked down the aim, and he could not shake himself off. And here attention is another fact. A certain country compared the characteristics of weapons systems, avionics and maneuverability of Rafal and SU-30MKI and said that Rafal in aggregate is inferior. I think further you can not continue the logical line.
    2. Kosta
      Kosta 10 September 2015 19: 05 New
      -1
      Doubtful claims that airborne electronic warfare is better.
      That is, long-range missiles will destroy the stealth board before its missiles are not stealth board?
      What kind of collisions are we talking about?
    3. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 10 September 2015 22: 47 New
      +2
      Quote: Pacifist
      battle parameters are much more than three, but with all other things being equal they have no advantages. Simplified, as usual, approximate parity.
      Victor, two comments.
      1. We have better cars, they proved it in training battles, but we have few of them, or they are generally not yet accepted for service.
      2 Their economy is 7 times stronger than ours. They will vulgarly restore their air force potential faster than we are. Then. They have such an organization as the National Guard, where the penultimate generation aircraft are in service. Pilots fly, train, as well as combatant ... But DOSAAF was dispersed here, and ROSTO can’t be made in any way ...
      It is sad to admit, but the history of WWII may be repeated, when the Samurai vulgarly could not restore the number of their pilots, not to mention the level of their flight training.
      Therefore, if you sweep away this neglect, then only with the vigorous broom of the doomsday weapon. We will not overcome them “economically” with conventional weapons. It is mournful, but it is a payment for 20 years of timelessness. The Yankees know this very well, so they will try to tear us down with conventional weapons in local clashes and the fifth column of collaborators from the inside.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 10 September 2015 22: 57 New
        +3
        Quote: BoA KAA
        They will vulgarly restore their air force potential faster than we are.

        They won’t recover, because they didn’t bomb them while they were recovering losses at the factories ... and the children on two boxes near the machine will not stand with them. And we will go under the arms of both children and the elderly, and you know this very well. that from "TORGASH" is about the same warrior as from Obama Schwarzenegger (recalling his charge). In the war, not everyone decides money. But at the same time, no one says that it would be easy with them. But by the snot, MERCENARIES from our WARRIORS and PEOPLE would be raked.
        Because they are at war with the state, and they are fencing off the Lyuli from their homeland. (Zadornov)
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 11 September 2015 01: 07 New
          +2
          Quote: NEXUS
          They won’t recover, maybe they didn’t bomb them while they were recovering losses in factories

          Nekrus! You are "excellent" for patriotism!
          But together with the armies, the fighting potentials of countries and coalitions are fighting, which include: the economy, human resources, infrastructure and transport, the level of science and technology, production capacities and the level of technology ... territory, availability and reserves of natural, mineral, energy and other resources.
          Do you think people in the General Staff sit who love your homeland less than yours? But they cannot afford to incorrectly assess their capabilities and the enemy.
          For the worst mistake (akin to betrayal) is an incorrect assessment of the enemy, his and his capabilities.
          Your position ... is patriotic, but the enemy’s assessment is incorrect in it, therefore it is harmful, because presents the enemy in the wrong light. No one doubts the courage and determination of our people.
          But the states can be defeated only in a vigorous war, or in a conventional one, but supporting the Celestial Empire in their battle with the Amer.
          The easiest way is to scream * ury * before losing consciousness, but this objective does not change the balance of power of the parties. Therefore, one cannot allow oneself to be drawn into military adventures of low intensity, but rather into regional conflicts.
          Economics is the battlefield for us today.
          "Long live the thriving economy - the foundation of the country's military power!" - this is the slogan of the real military! and real patriots!
          Sorry, but they taught me that in due time.
          Yours faithfully, hi
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 11 September 2015 02: 11 New
            +1
            Quote: BoA KAA
            But together with the armies, the fighting potentials of countries and coalitions are fighting, which include: the economy, human resources, infrastructure and transport, the level of science and technology, production capacities and the level of technology ... territory, availability and reserves of natural, mineral, energy and other resources.

            You’re good for arguing. But, let’s remember Vietnam. With the help of the Union and the limited human resources, as well as a weak economy, but with support from outside economically, technically and tactically, the Americans have left the spat on and humiliated from there. And this despite the fact that The USSR did not invest all the power of its economy, human and technical resources, etc.
            Quote: BoA KAA
            Do you think people in the General Staff sit who love your homeland less than yours? But they cannot afford to incorrectly assess their capabilities and the enemy.

            But they do not evaluate it incorrectly, increasing not only the nuclear power of the triad, but also the non-nuclear component of the army and navy.

            Quote: BoA KAA
            Your position ... is patriotic, but the enemy’s assessment is incorrect in it, therefore it is harmful, because presents the enemy in the wrong light.

            Did I really say that the adversary is weak? In my opinion, I said that TORGASH will never get a good WARRIOR. It’s a warrior, not a warrior. Let's not forget that most of the US army are mercenaries from Mexico and other countries , which also does not add military spirit. Next, we look at the technical relationship of non-nuclear potential.
            The main investments are in the fleet, and not in the land component. And the depth of our country, I'm sorry, is not Vietnamese at all.


            Quote: BoA KAA
            But states can only be defeated in a vigorous war,

            All the members of the nuclear club will be stuck in a nuclear conflict, and therefore this issue cannot be considered as a conflict only between Russia and the USA. Moreover, if there is a winner (which I strongly doubt), it will be a feast of victory.
            Quote: BoA KAA
            The easiest way is to scream * ury * before losing consciousness, but this objective does not change the balance of power of the parties.

            But am I really shouting URA? My opinion is that the United States will not stand in a long military conflict with a well-trained and armed opponent, for the simple reason that bombs never fell on the territory of this country and this people is not capable of suffering deprivation and loss of state scale. You will never hear the cry “FOR MOTHERLAND!” From the lips of an American soldier! And you know why. Although I agree on one thing, the adversary is very strong, but not indestructible, due to many factors and circumstances.
            The Americans do not want war on their territory, maybe if it is, the Americans will not become patriotic
            work in factories under bombardment with posters-ALL FOR THE FRONT, ALL FOR THE VICTORY.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 11 September 2015 02: 12 New
              +1
              Quote: BoA KAA
              "Long live the thriving economy - the foundation of the country's military power!" - this is the slogan of the real military! and real patriots!
              Sorry, but they taught me that in due time.


              But is this your saying somehow contradicts mine?
              Quote: BoA KAA
              Yours faithfully,

              With no less respect hi
              1. Boa kaa
                Boa kaa 11 September 2015 08: 20 New
                +2
                Quote: NEXUS
                But is this your saying somehow contradicts mine?

                Dear Nekrus! I said, you - heard. You can bicker and prove the nuances of your position for a long time, but this will not change. We need to work to restore the status of a great industrial power, make friends and allies, grow demographically, so that we are not even thought to touch.
                And when in the open, not really hiding, an instant global blow is being prepared against us - here it is extremely wary to look at things.
                Yours faithfully, hi
            2. ydjin
              ydjin 11 September 2015 10: 44 New
              +1
              Quote: NEXUS
              But am I really shouting URA? My opinion is that the United States will not stand in a long military conflict with a well-trained and armed opponent, for the simple reason that bombs never fell on the territory of this country and this people is not capable of suffering deprivation and loss of state scale. You will never hear the cry “FOR MOTHERLAND!” From the lips of an American soldier! And you know why. Although I agree on one thing, the adversary is very strong, but not indestructible, due to many factors and circumstances.
              The Americans do not want war on their territory, maybe if it is, the Americans will not become patriotic
              work in factories under bombardment with posters-ALL FOR THE FRONT, ALL FOR THE VICTORY.

              During the 2 MV, they still worked, albeit not under bombing. And women got up to the machine, albeit not on such a scale as in the USSR. Therefore, I would not be in a hurry to blame the Americans for the lack of patriotism! Before the start of the Second World War, they also believed that the working class of Germany would not allow to start a war against the USSR, what we all remember! Never underestimate the enemy! Sincerely, accept my humble opinion! hi
              1. Boa kaa
                Boa kaa 11 September 2015 11: 08 New
                +1
                Quote: ydjin
                Never underestimate the enemy! accept my humble opinion!

                Thanks, Eugene! Exactly and to the point. yes
  11. Ashirbakiev N.B.
    Ashirbakiev N.B. 10 September 2015 17: 17 New
    0
    If the F-35 flies past the S-400, then it can be considered a pilot easily got off. But with wet pants from fear. How much time will it take for an American to understand that he is on earth?
  12. Anti-ukra
    Anti-ukra 10 September 2015 17: 17 New
    0
    I agree ...... Advertising engine trade. laughing
  13. Igor_kh
    Igor_kh 10 September 2015 17: 26 New
    0
    overseas is always better
  14. kil 31
    kil 31 10 September 2015 17: 26 New
    +1
    At the same time, the material says that the advantage of the F-35 can be considered "excellent training" of American pilots,I remember such statistics from the time of the USSR. Their pilots have always had more hourly flight than all countries in the world. But when they figured out what they were doing, I don’t remember like Germany (it turned out they just burned the allocated kerosene for a month, took off, and recorded that they were training, there was a big scandal)
    1. screw cutter
      screw cutter 10 September 2015 18: 08 New
      0
      In the early 90s there was a video cassette recording the visit of American pilots to Russia, and so one American pilot said there would be their dismissal from the Air Force without severance pay for what the Russians get up during training flights. a piece of paper, the initiative is punishable, no initiative and a bit of a catapult. Here I also recalled the scandal when the NATO hawks, if they did not spend the entire missile / bomb reserve after the bombing of Iraq, dumped it into the sea off the coast of Italy, so as not to risk landing.
  15. silver_roman
    silver_roman 10 September 2015 17: 29 New
    +1
    the presence of stealth technology implemented in the aircraft, with which Russia and China “have problems”.

    I wonder what are the problems with the t-50 with stealth? I hear it for the first time....
    But about the Chinese, I am silent at all. this is not a hatched chick.
    and in general to compare these aircraft is the same as to compare in childhood: who is stronger than a crocodile or a dinosaur? wassat
    1. kil 31
      kil 31 10 September 2015 17: 53 New
      +1
      Quote: silver_roman
      the presence of stealth technology implemented in the aircraft, with which Russia and China “have problems”.

      I wonder what are the problems with the t-50 with stealth? I hear it for the first time....
      But about the Chinese, I am silent at all. this is not a hatched chick.
      and in general to compare these aircraft is the same as to compare in childhood: who is stronger than a crocodile or a dinosaur? wassat

      I'm the same with this fucking. Did you irradiate it with air defense radars? As you can understand his problems with STELS.
  16. twincam
    twincam 10 September 2015 17: 32 New
    +3
    I propose to compare the bourgeois comparison with our comparison)))
  17. sir_obs
    sir_obs 10 September 2015 17: 34 New
    +2
    Tired of their invisibility, they are not seen only by the blind. A Hollywood fairy tale that everyone hangs on their ears and about the excellent training of pilots, too. Dudes are sitting on antidepressants tightly, the Americans themselves are openly talking about this.
    As always, the brilliant delirium of inflamed consciousness, another anal lytic.
  18. s.melioxin
    s.melioxin 10 September 2015 17: 37 New
    +4
    A kind of comparison ...
    Yes. Very peculiar. Type of war will show who and what is stronger, but war is not necessary. Interestingly, as they can, like ours.
    1. Rokossovsky
      Rokossovsky 10 September 2015 19: 51 New
      +3
      It even looks like the same airfield hi
      1. SSeT
        SSeT 10 September 2015 20: 54 New
        0
        It seems like that! And did someone dinosaur take this to the right?
    2. Kachesgm
      Kachesgm 10 September 2015 23: 05 New
      +2
      It's funny, but the pilot at the helm is a Pole, but our car is still Soviet-built.
  19. gladysheff2010
    gladysheff2010 10 September 2015 17: 38 New
    +2
    "It is a pity that it was not possible to hear the report of the head of the transport department ..." M. Zhvanetsky
    1. vadimalehin76
      vadimalehin76 10 September 2015 17: 40 New
      0
      He went to compare drinks
  20. Strashila
    Strashila 10 September 2015 17: 51 New
    +3
    Any war is an economy ... for example, during the Second World War, the payback of IL-2 was 2 sorties, but even in the most difficult months of the war, IL-2 made an average of 2,5 sorties.
    So here ... lope for one F-35 you can buy Sushok, MiGs and Chinese consumer goods ... the answer ... a lot.
    As life practice has shown ... he’s not so stealth this stealth ... he’ll be spotted and brought down anyway. It is good for local, briefly temporary operations against those who do not have a strong air defense and air force system ... but life has shown that in such conditions, it is not a panacea, they were shot down when the Americans had multiple numerical superiority ... and what will actually happen with equal strength ... zilch effect.
  21. Megavolt1
    Megavolt1 10 September 2015 17: 59 New
    0
    Without citing any critical characteristics of the aircraft, Majumdar reports

    And that’s all the salt. And all analytics are concocted on the principle of "who pays, he orders the music."
  22. VP
    VP 10 September 2015 18: 02 New
    +1
    I have a strong feeling that this NI is an ordinary tabloid, not a single intelligible article from it has been dragged here yet, one humus
  23. Prince Gvidon
    Prince Gvidon 10 September 2015 18: 05 New
    +3
    American stealth technology is well known to everyone. During the war in Yugoslavia, their f-117 flying irons were not very badly visible on old radars and, accordingly, went astray.
    1. ferdiperdozzz
      ferdiperdozzz 10 September 2015 21: 47 New
      0
      Not "strayed", but "one still shot down." luring to the microwave.
      Well, do not throw hats. I also love ours more, but throwing hats for the sake of pluses is the last thing IMHO.
  24. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 10 September 2015 18: 10 New
    0
    Again, solid "deliberation", well, where is at least one clear justification for these silly fabrications! It’s like in that joke: How many wolves do not feed, but the elephant has something thicker! But Americans will never enter into a real clash (even without firing), because they are well aware of its final result: advertising by advertising, and combat use is something else and who has a higher level of training, what’s the question ????
  25. Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 10 September 2015 18: 47 New
    0
    "either I ... or the skis do not go", but where is the comparison? !!!!
  26. avia1991
    avia1991 10 September 2015 19: 26 New
    +1
    However, the author adds that it would be better if such a fight never happened.
    Well, well, at least the man’s thoughts are sober!
    Regarding the "excellent preparation" of Amer’s flyers: I would remind the author of the Korean and Vietnamese campaigns. And where did they demonstrate at least a semblance of "preparation" ?! They can only shoot those who are weaker and incomparably worse armed - but they pass with equal! The Hindus on our Su-35 have recently been doing it like a tusik heating pad! wassat
  27. Ze Kot
    Ze Kot 10 September 2015 19: 43 New
    +1
    ADMINISTRATORS: Again, the "Reply" button does not work. Repair it please!
  28. propolsky
    propolsky 10 September 2015 19: 45 New
    +1
    And it seems to me that our pilots on these types of planes will “comb the tambourines” without straining themselves very much. It’s painfully gorgeous piloting show on demonstration flights. It's hard to say something about the Chinese, there is little information.
  29. roskot
    roskot 10 September 2015 19: 55 New
    +1
    The elderberry garden, and the uncle in Kiev. That's all the comparison.
  30. Anchonsha
    Anchonsha 10 September 2015 21: 23 New
    +1
    Yes, this comparator decided at least not to drop the American F-35 and praised the American pilots as they were better prepared than Russian and Chinese It would be better not to take it, the F-35 completely dropped it.
  31. evge-malyshev
    evge-malyshev 10 September 2015 21: 32 New
    0
    Absolutely empty message: nothing intelligible, no TTX comparisons.
  32. Weyland
    Weyland 10 September 2015 21: 37 New
    +1
    I remembered:

    Americans are not afraid of Chinese tanks - because American ATGM guaranteed destroys the Chinese tank.
    And the Chinese are not afraid of the American anti-tank systems - because the rocket costs him, like 10 Chinese tanks ...
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 11 September 2015 01: 39 New
      +1
      And the RPG-7 is cheap and guaranteed to destroy everything that fell into its sight. Look at the footage of the Iraqi wars and see how Abrams are burning after firing from this grenade launcher.
  33. proletarian
    proletarian 10 September 2015 21: 41 New
    +2
    “Wise Majumar” said, “it’s not good to compare aircraft about which practically nothing is known,” but for all words like: Americans have good pilot training, Russians and Chinese have excellent dynamics and maneuverability; he just wanted to say: I don’t know about all these planes, what did you "get to the bottom of me", "unfasten", I just PR.
  34. BABAY22
    BABAY22 10 September 2015 23: 03 New
    0
    Comparison of aircraft?
    It’s like in the film “saboteur”, when young replenishment was brought to Galkin, he turns to the commander and asks: where is the replenishment? )) here as well.
  35. tralmaster.
    tralmaster. 11 September 2015 00: 21 New
    +1
    Well, why such articles. The headline is loud and then zilch. Article d ..........
  36. tolmachiev51
    tolmachiev51 11 September 2015 04: 07 New
    0
    . What the author wanted to say apparently he didn’t understand, he just wanted to talk. I think the most important thing is who is in the cockpit !!! for invisible planes are a bluff, and the training of pilots is doubtful, the euphoria of impunity for wars in the Middle East will play a bad job. They do not know real opponents and God forbid they meet with ours.
  37. Evil 55
    Evil 55 11 September 2015 04: 34 New
    0
    They crossed an elephant and a rabbit .... The result was an F-35 ... A multi-purpose aircraft is utopia, but Americans believe in it .. It will be difficult for them to break the stereotypes of their omnipotence, when the number of departures of serial F-35s will be equal to the number of non-returns from for design failures ..
  38. Wolka
    Wolka 11 September 2015 05: 02 New
    0
    , there is nothing to comment ...
  39. Platonich
    Platonich 11 September 2015 06: 14 New
    0
    We must ask Shoigu S.K. to create and air biathlon! And then we'll see who is who.
  40. Seryoga Ural
    Seryoga Ural 11 September 2015 06: 40 New
    0
    I can afford to compare the SU-35, T-50 with the F-22, but not like the F-35- the plane doesn’t, how much time can not bring to the series how much money has been invested, but how much more is needed, our Serdyuki nervously smoke aside. But you should not compare pilots when you are trying to compare aircraft, and what can he know about the training of our pilots if he could not even indicate at least some performance characteristics of these aircraft.
  41. cergey51046
    cergey51046 11 September 2015 06: 58 New
    0
    Pilots, and indeed all US warriors, are so trained that they run at the sight of Russian planes.
  42. SergeyIV
    SergeyIV 11 September 2015 08: 22 New
    -1
    Some kind of nonsense, but where is the comparison or is it like that Americans are comparing?
  43. vetlan19
    vetlan19 11 September 2015 09: 56 New
    0
    Quote: vyinemeynen
    I caught myself thinking "maybe he can fly forward with his tail!"


    Taken off the tongue good
  44. oberon 1
    oberon 1 15 September 2015 12: 57 New
    0
    The Americans won us only in the movies about Rimbaud lol