Military Review

NI: the Russian Su-35 in the West has no analogues

108
The Russian super-maneuverable multipurpose fighter Su-35 is a great threat to any American aircraft, according to a publication in the pages of The National Interest magazine. Article leads RIA News.




“Only the American analogue of the F-22 can compete with the Russian aircraft. Even the latest development of American aviation - the fifth generation fighter-bomber Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) F-35 - can not compete with the Su-35. For the American machine, this is possible only if the crew manages to maximize the benefits of stealth technologies and electronic warfare systems, ”the newspaper writes.

Earlier developments, such as the F-16 (Fighting Falcon) are inferior to the Russian aircraft in many ways. “The F-16 does not have a powerful radar with an active phased antenna array (AFAR), while most AFAR aircraft are not in principle. Only a few F-16E / F cars have these radars, the program for upgrading other fighters has been curtailed because of the sequestration of the US military budget, ”the author reports.

In addition, the F-16 is not able to launch rockets at such speeds and from such heights, as the all-weather X-NUMX-generation fighter F-4 Eagle (Boeing), for example, does, “which could be compared with the Su-15”, - notes the magazine.

According to the author, "when confronted with a Russian plane in the air, the F-16 pilot will have to rely solely on professionalism in operating the machine."

“Su-35 and other Sukhoi aircraft are very powerful vehicles. Fighters of the fourth generation, in service with the Pentagon, can no longer boast a technological advantage, as it was before. The United States must invest resources in the development of next-generation fighter aircraft in order to replace current vehicles as quickly as possible, ”the publication sums up.
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com/
108 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. oleg-gr
    oleg-gr 27 September 2015 09: 08 New
    69
    They are warming attention to our new aircraft. The budget needs to be increased and the loot to continue to cut. Naturally and predictably.
    1. INVESTOR
      INVESTOR 27 September 2015 09: 22 New
      37
      When the enemy praises you, there is nothing good, they again pursue their self-interest.
      1. Kostyar
        Kostyar 27 September 2015 10: 11 New
        10
        When the enemy praises you, there is nothing good, they again pursue their self-interest.

        So the enemy does not praise, he panics ..... and praises and panics, these are two big differences !!!!!
        1. INVESTOR
          INVESTOR 27 September 2015 10: 40 New
          50
          They don’t panic, they’re not bad at all, and they have a lot more. They unwind politicians to loot.
          1. supertiger21
            supertiger21 27 September 2015 11: 59 New
            +9
            For the most part I agree with the article, put a plus!
            But there are some drawbacks:

            “Only the American counterpart of the F-22 can compete with the Russian aircraft. Even the latest development of American aviation - the fifth-generation fighter-bomber Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) F-35 - can not compete with the Su-35. For the American car, this is possible only if the crew is able to maximize the benefits of stealth technology and electronic warfare systems, ”the newspaper writes.


            I do not think it is correct to compare our 4 ++ fighters with their 5th. The USA has a prototype F-15SE "Silent Eagle" also related to the 4 ++ generation, and it is with it that our Su-35S should be compared. But F-22 must be put on a par with our PAK FA. F-35 would not include in the comparison, because it is a light class fighter-bomber and is intended primarily for attack on surface and surface targets, and not for air superiority (where it is clearly inferior to the F-22, Su-35 and PAK FA).

            Earlier developments, such as the F-16 (Fighting Falcon) are inferior to the Russian aircraft in many ways. “The F-16 does not have a powerful radar with an active phased antenna array (AFAR), while most AFAR aircraft are not in principle. Only a few F-16E / F cars have these radars, the program for upgrading other fighters has been curtailed because of the sequestration of the US military budget, ”the author reports.


            Yes, but it’s also worth mentioning that there is no radar with AFAR on the Su-35S either (there is a radar with PFAR Irbis). Of course, we have another 4th generation fighter that has a radar with AFAR - the MiG-35, but unlike Drying, it has not yet been produced in series (total number of 3-4 prototypes).

            In addition, the F-16 is not able to launch rockets at such speeds and from such heights, as the all-weather X-NUMX-generation fighter F-4 Eagle (Boeing), for example, does, “which could be compared with the Su-15”, - notes the magazine.


            I don’t agree here, because the usual F-15C is quite old and should be compared with our Su-27SM, but not with the latest Su-35S.
            1. hrych
              hrych 27 September 2015 17: 47 New
              +3
              Quote: supertiger21
              Yes, but it’s also worth mentioning that there is no radar with AFAR on the Su-35S either (there is a radar with PFAR Irbis)

              These are details, the target detection range is important, for Irbis it is up to 400 km at heading courses (for F-22 = 200, i.e. half as much), under this radar and an air-to-air missile - KS- 172, respectively (their farthest AMRAAM, up to 180 maximum, but actually 120 km or less. They themselves limited the size of the missiles due to the concealment of weapons in the internal compartments to preserve mythical invisibility). AFAR, which is located on the F-22 (detection range: 225 −193 km), is not the best option - it has unimportant “side lobes”. Therefore, the F-22 flies at 20 kilometers (the higher the more visible itself ...), and if lower, the detection range will be no ...
              Quote: supertiger21
              And F-22 must be put on a par with our PAK FA
              The maximum speed of the Su-35 and F-22 at 2,25 Mach, a little bit more uncontaminated at the Raptor, is a trifle. The ceiling is 20 km long, the drying range due to the PTB is higher. There is nothing to compare with anymore, I'm afraid our 4 ++ surpasses them 5, oh yes, it's invisible, like in fairy tales ...
              1. Alex_Rarog
                Alex_Rarog 27 September 2015 20: 00 New
                +1
                You forgot to mention that the 22nd problem with oxygen regeneration, and above 8 thousand the pilot may suffocate.
              2. supertiger21
                supertiger21 27 September 2015 20: 25 New
                +4
                Something primitively comparing, I'm sorry! no

                Quote: hrych
                These are details, the target detection range matters, for Irbis it is up to 400 km on the opposite courses (for F-22 = 200, i.e. half as much)


                The fact that the passive phased array is longer than the active one was no secret. Another thing is that AFAR works more clearly and in detail.

                Quote: hrych
                under this radar and an air-to-air missile - KS-172, respectively (their farthest AMRAAM, up to 180 maximum, and actually 120 km or less.


                They mixed salty with green) KS-172 missile designed to attack large targets, i.e. AWACS and refueling planes, but not fighters. And the AIM-120 missile that you mentioned, along with our R-77, is precisely a long-range air combat missile. The AIM-120C-7 has a range of 120 km, and the promising AIM-120D has 180 km.

                Quote: hrych
                They themselves limited the size of the missiles due to the concealment of weapons in the internal compartments to preserve mythical invisibility). AFAR, which is located on the F-22 (detection range: 225 −193 km), is not the best option - it has unimportant “side lobes”. Therefore, the F-22 flies at 20 kilometers (the higher the more visible itself ...), and if lower, the detection range will be no ...


                Strange logic. In our internal compartments, PAK FA also does not fit large-sized missiles, including and KS-172.

                Quote: hrych
                The maximum speed of the Su-35 and F-22 at 2,25 Mach, a little bit more uncontaminated at the Raptor, is a trifle. The ceiling is 20 km long, the drying range due to the PTB is higher.


                I agree here!

                Quote: hrych
                There is nothing to compare with anymore, I'm afraid our 4 ++ surpasses them 5, oh yes, it's invisible, like in fairy tales ...


                Yeah) So avionics and stealth technology is so, secondary toys ?! repeat
                1. hrych
                  hrych 27 September 2015 21: 17 New
                  +4
                  Quote: supertiger21
                  Something primitively comparing, I'm sorry!

                  So it’s not necessary to complicate, the flight characteristics, capabilities of radar and weapons are subject to comparison. What else is needed? Vintage?
                  Quote: supertiger21
                  Mixed salty with green) KS-172 missile designed to attack large targets

                  What difference does it make? What is worse fighter? Pak Fa is our answer to Chamberlain, who will also have a limited amount. In the near future, the Su-35 will be smoothly called the 5th generation and everyone will calm down. I will not argue for invisibility, or rather for conditional invisibility, however, it’s a frank snowstorm that it is no more noticeable for a radar than a metal ball the size of a ping-pong ball does not pass. I read an article by an expert on electronic warfare, I will give a couple of theses:
                  1) To be invisible, you must not see for yourself. To fly, at least with the radar turned off, differently, even though completely transparent, but the radar is shining ... But how then can you intercept the enemy, direct missiles, etc. If this is not done, what is the point of using an airplane?
                  2) The fairing on the face itself can be made to absorb the radio echo, but it must be radio-transparent for its radar, which means it is transparent for the radiation of the enemy. What is a tennis ball here, the diameter of an AFAR under a meter, even though the radar is off ...
                  3) Stokes theoretically scatters and absorbs only radiation from a direct emitter and makes it difficult to receive, but if someone irradiates it from the side, it glows very well ... And so on.
                  1. supertiger21
                    supertiger21 28 September 2015 08: 58 New
                    +2
                    Quote: hrych
                    What difference does it make? What is worse fighter? Pak Fa is our answer to Chamberlain, who will also have a limited amount.


                    The fact is that such missiles have very little maneuverability, and therefore have very little chance of shooting down a fighter compared to short- and medium-range missiles.

                    Quote: hrych
                    In the near future, the Su-35 will be smoothly called the 5th generation and everyone will calm down.


                    You know, to be the 5th generation, you need to meet all of its points. The same F-35 does not meet the 2 requirements of the 5th generation (super maneuverability and cruising supersonic speed), but contrary to this, it belongs to the next generation. Su-35S, in principle, is no longer possible to upgrade to the 5th generation, because so that they need to also have stealth technology, and for this there must be a completely changed or even a new glider. But it will not be Su-35 ... request

                    Quote: hrych
                    1) To be invisible, you must not see for yourself. To fly, at least with the radar turned off, differently, even though completely transparent, but the radar is shining ... But how then can you intercept the enemy, direct missiles, etc. If this is not done, what is the point of using an airplane?


                    Well, "invisible" nothing happens, which was confirmed by the Serbs shooting down F-117. LOW LIFE is another matter, and such machines as the F-22, T-50, F-35 and J-20 have a very high level in comparison with the previous-generation fighters Su-27, F-15, Mirage-2000, etc. stealth planes are POSSIBLE, but much DIFFICULT than simple planes.

                    Quote: hrych
                    2) The fairing on the face itself can be made to absorb the radio echo, but it must be radio-transparent for its radar, which means it is transparent for the radiation of the enemy. What is a tennis ball here, the diameter of an AFAR under a meter, even though the radar is off ...


                    The advantage of an active PAR also is that it is compact, and it does not require the very nose of an airplane to accommodate a very painful nose, like a passive PAR.

                    Quote: hrych
                    3) Stokes theoretically scatters and absorbs only radiation from a direct emitter and makes it difficult to receive, but if someone irradiates it from the side, it glows very well ... And so on.


                    I also heard about this from one documentary about a Russian scientist who created the theory of stealth technology in 1962. It was said that stealth aircraft can be seen from L-band radars.
                    1. hrych
                      hrych 28 September 2015 18: 44 New
                      +2
                      Quote: supertiger21
                      to be the 5th generation, you must comply with all its points

                      Say - the item "dramatically reducing the visibility of the aircraft in the radar and infrared ranges" and the item "the ability to carry out multi-angle firing of targets in close air combat, as well as conduct multichannel rocket firing during long-range combat" and "super maneuverability" simply contradict each other and practically not compatible. Over-maneuverability requires control of the thrust vector and, naturally, a decrease in the IR range is unacceptable. According to the radar, they’ve already discussed, either you see yourself far away, but you can also see you, or you sneak and hope for passive means, i.e. no hope. Here, they and we differed in the estimates of the 5th generation. In fact, we abandoned stealth in favor of the "keen eye" and the "far hand". Again KS-172 and R-37 again I can not agree, the fighter does not have the ability to evade, and the distance does not matter, the main thing is that the GOS would capture the target. The maneuverability of a rocket always surpasses the plane, because the latter is limited by the ability to withstand pilot overload. Another KS-172 is essentially an aircraft missile of the S-300 complex, one appearance of which in certain places causes hysteria in Tel Aviv and Washington ...
                  2. Mih
                    Mih 28 September 2015 22: 15 New
                    +1
                    To be invisible you must not see for yourself. Fly at least with the radar turned off love

                    Well, yes, somehow it is. That's how ridiculous everything is! laughing
              3. Kosta
                Kosta 27 September 2015 20: 44 New
                -7
                If you are already comparing 1x1 and based on Internet data, then the su-35 will not have any advantages over the f-22.
                He will never see the f-22 on the same 100 km, why these sofa calculations
                1. hrych
                  hrych 27 September 2015 21: 27 New
                  +1
                  Yes, of course, and he will fly to save Ukrainians ...
                  More cool phrases such as "sofa calculations", and you yourself probably keep in front of you Lockhead's top-secret data and compare with the similar Sukhoi Design Bureau.
                  So enlighten http://aftershock.su/?q=node/293198
                  1. Kosta
                    Kosta 27 September 2015 21: 32 New
                    -5
                    Yes, I don’t care who he comes to save, did you try to hurt him?

                    I do not hold anything, the same information as yours is the Internet.

                    Nevertheless, I do not tell fables
                    1. hrych
                      hrych 27 September 2015 21: 35 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Kosta
                      He will never see f-22 on the same 100 km

                      Typical fable.
                    2. ty60
                      ty60 28 September 2015 21: 32 New
                      +2
                      Screaming women cheers! And caps were thrown into the air!
                2. ty60
                  ty60 28 September 2015 21: 30 New
                  +2
                  Fu-22 is too expensive for such a showdown. The main thing is that it is! And we will fight on the Fu-35. It’s cheaper. And the show-offs bash on the Fu-22. Although both this and the other are ffuuu ....
              4. Sergei1982
                Sergei1982 29 September 2015 05: 07 New
                0
                These are details, the detection range of the target matters, for Irbis it is up to 400 km on the opposite courses (for F-22 = 200, i.e. half as much), under this radar and an air-to-air missile - KS- 172, respectively (their farthest AMRAAM, up to 180 maximum, but actually 120 km or less
                And nothing, that for the Su-35 400 km only in the zone of 100 degrees and with an ESR of 3 m, and in the zone of 300 degrees it is only 200 km, and for the f-22 225 km it is with an ESR of 1 m which corresponds to an ESR of 3 300 km each. And the fact that KS-172 is not and will not be in the public does not bother anyone.
                1. hrych
                  hrych 29 September 2015 17: 17 New
                  0
                  Quote: Sergei1982
                  KS-172 is not and will not be

                  She is not, and this is a mirage (not to be confused with the plane of the same name) ...
                  The well-proven 3M83 missile of the S-300 air defense ground systems was taken as the basis ... The missile itself is not a problem, especially since it takes as a basis grated kalach, the problem was with radar, only when it became possible to see 400 km, it became necessary Pour into 400km. And the R-37 with a range of 300 km has been in operation since Gorbachev’s times, in range to match the Zaslon radar, although the latest modifications are not inferior to the Irbis.

                  General Director of JSC NIIP named after V.V. Tikhomirova ”Yuri BELYY:“ At one time, when we showed the Irbis (system for the Su-35) to Italians and said that the average radar power was 5 kW, and the detection range under 400 kilometers, they immediately withered away - they don’t have there are no such carriers. Americans will not buy either, they have their own pride. Although, in our opinion, the locator with AFAR that is located on the F-22 (Detection range: 225 −193 km) is not the best option - it has unimportant side lobes. That’s why the F-22 flies 20 kilometers, and if it’s lower, the detection range will be no. It’s not for nothing that the Americans launched a program for developing a new radar. But we tested the Irbis at 500 meters and the parameters were not lost. "
                  http://topwar.ru/81003-s-dalnim-pricelom.html
            2. hrych
              hrych 27 September 2015 18: 22 New
              0
              Quote: supertiger21
              I do not think it is correct to compare our 4 ++ fighters with their 5th.

              I agree. They do not reach us ... the Su-35 at the moment would have no equal in the air, however, the upgraded Mig-31 sees and pounds at a considerable distance, thanks to the Zaslon radar, but is inferior in flight range, I don’t even know given its phenomenal speed ...
        2. Sling cutter
          Sling cutter 27 September 2015 11: 00 New
          22
          Quote: Bone
          So the enemy does not praise, he panics ..... and praises and panics, these are two big differences !!!!!

          1. Manul
            Manul 27 September 2015 12: 26 New
            +3
            Nikolai Anisimov - Somewhere in the Sky
            Good song. Cool text. And great footage. Sling cutter, thanks. hi
          2. Mih
            Mih 28 September 2015 22: 29 New
            +1
            Oh!! How nice !! Sumptuously. It's fine. Many thanks. A song is just a class. love
          3. The comment was deleted.
          4. NEXUS
            NEXUS 28 September 2015 22: 56 New
            +4

            I support, if such a thing. drinks
            1. Sling cutter
              Sling cutter 28 September 2015 23: 29 New
              +1
              Quote: NEXUS
              I support, if such a thing.

              Here is a great video! Magic!!!
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 28 September 2015 23: 37 New
                +3
                Quote: Stroporez
                Here is a great video!

                1. NEXUS
                  NEXUS 28 September 2015 23: 41 New
                  +2
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  Here is a great video! Magic!!!


                  drinks
                  1. Manul
                    Manul 30 September 2015 01: 23 New
                    +1
                    Quote: NEXUS
                    Here is a great video! Magic!!!

                    Nexus, Stroporez, my dears .. Thank you for Anisimov. I sing, play, compose. I am writing .. as far as possible. But all my diplomas and laureates fly around with an autumn leaf, listening to such texts. I was never a bard, there was a beat and “driven” (a joke), “it does not fit into the format of a bard song. It’s too easy and provocative to pop (resume of the“ specialist ”in the article, (though about 15 years ago wink )) I will definitely learn his songs and sing. Because they tried to feed me with similar (I will not compare) musicians in the spirit of music. But the essence of the song is in poetry. And the languid weathered world of too self-sufficient poets causes a desire to vomit or shoot oneself. And the person who writes such songs is close to Vladimir Semenovich.
                    1. Sling cutter
                      Sling cutter 30 September 2015 01: 30 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Manul
                      And the languid weathered world of too self-sufficient poets makes you want to puke

                      That's for sure!
                      Quote: Manul
                      or shoot yourself

                      They will not wait! drinks
    2. BDRM 667
      BDRM 667 27 September 2015 09: 23 New
      +7
      Quote: oleg-gr
      They are warming attention to our new aircraft. The budget needs to be increased and the loot to continue to cut. Naturally and predictably.


      Let them saw, let them chase after catching.

      But definitely, thanks to The National Interest for the free ad.
      1. Altona
        Altona 27 September 2015 11: 42 New
        +2
        Quote: BDRM 667
        But definitely, thanks to The National Interest for the free ad.

        --------------------
        John McCain with the latest issues of National Interest will go to the Senate and Congress to yell: "The Russians are coming! Stop Vlad Putin!"
    3. Civil
      Civil 27 September 2015 09: 38 New
      +1
      So they all switch to F-35, put f-15 for storage .. and f-16 are converted into target drones. Our t-50 is not ready.
      1. Lord of the Sith
        Lord of the Sith 27 September 2015 09: 51 New
        +8
        Quote: Civil
        So they all switch to F-35, put f-15 for storage .. and f-16 are converted into target drones. Our t-50 is not ready.

        But the Su-35 is ready
        1. Basarev
          Basarev 27 September 2015 10: 00 New
          -20
          Current avionics in the thirty-fifth is entirely imported, and not current avionics. Oh, to see an absolutely Russian plane ... But what is not, that is not!
          1. Cherdak
            Cherdak 27 September 2015 10: 35 New
            +3
            Quote: Basarev
            Oh, to see an absolutely Russian plane ... But what is not, that is not!


            You have a strange logic.
          2. BlackDragon
            BlackDragon 28 September 2015 00: 44 New
            0
            Quote: Basarev
            Current avionics in the thirty-fifth is entirely imported, and not current avionics. Oh, to see an absolutely Russian plane ... But what is not, that is not!


            nobody has completely “their own”; it is unprofitable too expensive and not optimal.
        2. mitrich
          mitrich 27 September 2015 15: 12 New
          0
          And which of the specialists will tell you: Why did they deliver Su-30, and not Su-35, as fighters to Syria?
          1. SIvan
            SIvan 27 September 2015 17: 12 New
            +5
            Quote: best seller
            And which of the specialists will tell you: Why did they deliver Su-30, and not Su-35, as fighters to Syria?

            Because ISIS does not have airplanes, and NATO members on the F-22 have not yet climbed there.
            Su-30SM is double, therefore it can work well both on air targets and on the ground. He also has rotary nozzles and, therefore, super maneuverability,
            Su-35 is a single-seat fighter. Moreover, he has just begun to appear in our Air Force.

            Here's a movie about the Su-30SM. There are, by the way, very beautiful shots.
          2. Cherdak
            Cherdak 27 September 2015 18: 52 New
            +3
            Quote: mitrich
            Why did our people deliver to Syria as Su-30 fighters, and not Su-35?

            With full respect to the Syrians, but the plane has many secret developments, and local flyers are rather weak.
            The car is expensive, and it takes a long time to cook them, and even an intensive hunt will begin on the part of the NATO "partners."
            1. Kasym
              Kasym 27 September 2015 21: 13 New
              +3
              mitrich.
              ISIS has no aviation, why is there a fighter !?
              Su-35 is a fighter for gaining air supremacy. Its supply would be clearly and unequivocally against the neighbors of Syria (Israel, Turkey). And the Su-35 is not adopted by the Russian Air Force, if memory serves.
              A Su-30SM fighter-BOMBERS. He is a demonstrator against the spans and flights of the “partners” aviation and performs strike functions on the ground against ISIS.
              So everything is logical.
              1. mitrich
                mitrich 28 September 2015 16: 04 New
                0
                Well, yes, I understood that fighter jets (just 4 of them ??? are small !!!) just to create a no-fly zone over the SAR from our partners, so that there wouldn’t be the temptation to bomb the Syrian armed forces. -35 are not accepted in the Air Force? It seems that several dozen riveted.
              2. The comment was deleted.
            2. eagle11
              eagle11 28 September 2015 15: 09 New
              +2
              What does the Syrian pilots have to do with it? No one will let them into our SM. And the Su-35 has not yet been brought to mind, to say the least.
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 28 September 2015 16: 48 New
                +5
                Quote: eagle11
                No one will let them into our SM.

                Of course he will not allow it, therefore, our Li Xi Qing will fly on them ...
                Quote: eagle11
                And the Su-35 has not yet been brought to mind, to say the least.

                Su-35 is a cheaper variation of the PAK FA, which is sharpened for air combat. And who should he fight with if ISIS has no aircraft? And the SU-30 works wonderfully on the ground, and besides, many modern western fighters will lose their nose in air dump. hi
        3. The comment was deleted.
      2. zyablik.olga
        zyablik.olga 27 September 2015 12: 12 New
        +4
        Quote: Civil
        So they all go to F-35, f-15 put in storage .. and f-16 convert into drones target.

        Well, not exactly no They are “stored” and are being converted into remotely piloted target airplanes of the first series, which have developed a resource and do not have modernization prospects.
      3. supertiger21
        supertiger21 27 September 2015 12: 56 New
        +3
        Quote: Civil
        So they all go to the F-35,


        Yes, but it is unlikely that the F-35 will be able to occupy the niche F-5, F / A-16, A-18 and A-10 in the next 8 years. It will take time.

        Quote: Civil
        f-15 put in storage ..


        This applies only to the old F-15 modifications C and D. The upgraded F-15E "Strike Eagle" will serve at least until 2040.

        Quote: Civil
        and f-16s are being converted into target drones.


        The U.S. is currently armed with about 1000 F-16s. Obviously, in order to completely remake this whole bunch into drones, to dispose of, put in storage or sell to other countries, you will need to wait until 2025-2030.

        Quote: Civil
        Our t-50 is not ready.


        Yes it is! But I think that in 2020 he will already be in our troops.
    4. VP
      VP 27 September 2015 10: 09 New
      +5
      Etr NI. Poppy resource that no sane reads, do not exaggerate the influence of this jaundice
    5. antoni73
      antoni73 27 September 2015 11: 09 New
      +1
      lobbying Lockheed Martin to resume production of the F 22 and upgrade the F 16. Russia has few Su 35 aircraft to threaten American hegemony in the air. Moreover, the Su 35 is not a great discovery in the field of military aviation. Old Su 27 plus new radar and avionics. F 15 Silent Eagle is an upgrade to the F 15 to a greater extent. Ho, no one wants to buy, because it does not give a big advantage over the old F 15.
      1. supertiger21
        supertiger21 27 September 2015 13: 01 New
        0
        Quote: antoni73
        Old Su 27 plus new radar and avionics.


        + New engines with UVT system. wink

        Quote: antoni73
        F 15 Silent Eagle is an upgrade to the F 15 to a greater extent. Ho, no one wants to buy, because it does not give a big advantage over the old F 15.


        The thing is more that the Western allies want to buy the 5th generation of the F-35, and not just the upgraded 4th, which is the F-15SE Silent Eagle.
      2. igor.borov775
        igor.borov775 27 September 2015 19: 43 New
        0
        You are mistaken !! SU-35 is a descendant of SU-30. The Su-27 is selected all the rest is limited by limitations. And the SU-30 is just a gift for the line of cars.
    6. antoni73
      antoni73 27 September 2015 11: 09 New
      +2
      lobbying Lockheed Martin to resume production of the F 22 and upgrade the F 16. Russia has few Su 35 aircraft to threaten American hegemony in the air. Moreover, the Su 35 is not a great discovery in the field of military aviation. Old Su 27 plus new radar and avionics. F 15 Silent Eagle is an upgrade to the F 15 to a greater extent. Ho, no one wants to buy, because it does not give a big advantage over the old F 15.
    7. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 27 September 2015 12: 03 New
      +1
      Quote: oleg-gr
      They are warming attention to our new aircraft. The budget needs to be increased and the loot to continue to cut. Naturally and predictably.

      And you need to use this advertisement, for example, Iran, Syria, for example, to offer to buy Su-35 from Russia. The countries that are threatened by the United States and NATO, first of all, need to buy modern fighters, air defense systems, and electronic warfare systems, because US interventions always begin with air, they practically do not conduct ground operations (with the exception of Iraq).
    8. little girl15
      little girl15 27 September 2015 13: 08 New
      +2
      According to the author, “in a collision with a Russian aircraft in the air, the F-16 pilot will have to rely solely on professionalism in operating the machine.” - Eject in time.
    9. marlin1203
      marlin1203 27 September 2015 13: 54 New
      0
      According to the author, "when confronted with a Russian plane in the air, the F-16 pilot will have to rely solely on professionalism in operating the machine."
      They can count on a catapult, only on her darling laughing
  2. Izotovp
    Izotovp 27 September 2015 09: 09 New
    +4
    No, don’t invest !!! )))
  3. Rattenfanger
    Rattenfanger 27 September 2015 09: 09 New
    15
    From extreme to extreme ... Either films a la "Top Gun" are being shot, then they are yelling with good obscenities "Everything is lost, boss, everything is lost!".
    Not otherwise, the congress for money is again untwisted. American Peeling)
  4. azbukin77
    azbukin77 27 September 2015 09: 09 New
    +6
    “Su-35 and other Sukhoi aircraft are very powerful machines. I never doubted !!!
  5. Kos_kalinki9
    Kos_kalinki9 27 September 2015 09: 11 New
    +4
    What's this? Hidden PR company of our aircraft by Americans? Yes, and here is the "hand of Moscow."
  6. A1L9E4K9S
    A1L9E4K9S 27 September 2015 09: 12 New
    +7
    They knock out new funds for the arms race, pretending to be poor, sick and helpless.
  7. moskowit
    moskowit 27 September 2015 09: 13 New
    +3
    We can only be glad for our designers from the famous design bureau. "Dry" is a brand that everyone in the world knows ...
    1. SSR
      SSR 27 September 2015 09: 49 New
      +3
      Quote: moskowit
      We can only be glad for our designers from the famous design bureau. "Dry" is a brand that everyone in the world knows ...

      Now, as soon as this is our "car", so immediately be afraid of adversary and glory blah blah blah ...)))
      Or - aaa want another dough cut! They knock money out of congress!

      And when an article about the development of DARPA is published, few of ours say that the adversary does not move in place and immediately they begin to reason what they will knock from the “shilka” or be knocked from SVD))) and it’s immediately clear what kind of a master they write))))
      If the enemy soberly assesses his capabilities - then this is good for them, if the enemy evaluates his capabilities according to the principle of oracle, then this can be a big tragedy.
      It is impossible not to underestimate and it is better to keep your nose in the wind.
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 27 September 2015 10: 11 New
        +3
        So I am about the same. It should be soberly aware that in electronics the United States is the world leader and specifically our country, Russia, bypasses at least four generations under this article - look at least at the A-10 unmanned attack aircraft - in the United States this is a workable project. For us it's fantastic. Or, for example, the F-15, which many decades ago freely lifted more than 10 tons - we still can’t get close to this, and in the USA it’s a long-worn tramp. Or at least remember Apache, who needed a small jump to destroy tanks - he rocketed rockets into that steppe and screw from there at full speed. We still use technology that the Americans refused even in Vietnam - to manually direct missiles, hanging in the affected area to the delight of all anti-aircraft gunners.
        1. quote
          quote 27 September 2015 10: 43 New
          +3
          Quote: Basarev
          that in electronics the USA is a world leader and specifically our country, Russia, bypasses at least four generations in this article

          In electronics, yes, I agree, but not in programming, And not in miscalculation of algorithms !!!!!! Here is a dead end! But this is not out of the blue, this is a fact !!! And for them a complete "fact".
          Therefore, the Iskander’s flight path is not predictable. The S-300 has its own missile flight algorithms, in the acceleration section, target capture, and approach the target. Therefore, you can copy, but make it fly, it doesn’t work !!!! And they "Patriots", complete "kekando", in comparison. Mattresses "Mstu" could not be repeated, even in the worst case. In general, nothing! Spending 15 years on this.
          So do not be very upset. And they have iPhones like “Patriots”, “kekando.” Their development in them is zero!
        2. Penzyac
          Penzyac 27 September 2015 10: 48 New
          +4
          Quote: Basarev
          So I am about the same. It should be soberly aware that the US is the world leader in electronics ...

          Not in electronics, but in electronic components, and even then not in all and not fatally. The level of electronics is determined not only by the components, but also by the ability to maximize their use, the same can be said about software. Americans, as you know, tend to be straightforward (stereotyped) in solving problems, "advanced" components only contribute to this, as they "forgive" (for the time being) some mistakes made by developers of finite electronics ...
          By the way, the advantage of the Yankees in electronic components is determined mainly by the presence of technologies with the maximum degree of microminiaturization to date (also, by the way, one example of a straightforward approach, as well as a constant increase in the clock frequency, as the main way to increase productivity), a number of others technologies they received from our own emigrants (multi-core processors, for example) ...
          1. Aleks28
            Aleks28 27 September 2015 11: 23 New
            0
            Quote: PENZYAC
            Not in electronics, but in electronic components, and even then not in all and not fatally

            I wanted to plyusanut, but missed ... lol Apparently the electronics failed ... hi I would like to add that our programmers are recognized as the best in the world and this is objective.
        3. Aleks28
          Aleks28 27 September 2015 10: 55 New
          0
          Quote: Basarev
          Or at least remember Apache, which needs a small jump to destroy tanks - it rockets out into that steppe and screw from there full steam

          Where did you read this nonsense? There was guidance, it will be there, it will not do without it ... Guidance systems are different, but it is, but it always takes time.
        4. Aleks28
          Aleks28 27 September 2015 11: 14 New
          +3
          Quote: Basarev
          Or, for example, the F-15, which many decades ago freely lifted over 10 tons - we still can’t get close to this, but in the USA it’s a long-worn tramp.

          Well, at least you would read the wiki, and then you already carried this nonsense. 15th takes 10, but our analogs and more will take. 27th in the first version did not take, and the rest take everything.
        5. supertiger21
          supertiger21 27 September 2015 13: 09 New
          0
          Quote: Basarev
          Or, for example, the F-15, which many decades ago freely lifted over 10 tons - we still can’t get close to this, but in the USA it’s a long-worn tramp.


          10 tons of combat load takes the shock F-15E, do not confuse it with the usual F-15 taking on board no more than 6 tons.
  8. Sergey333
    Sergey333 27 September 2015 09: 18 New
    +2
    Yes, let them PR - a good advertisement for our aircraft. And as for the knocking out of funds - that’s how the United States is used to living at someone else’s expense, they will spend their own - so they have the property of ending)
  9. Vasyan1971
    Vasyan1971 27 September 2015 09: 19 New
    +4
    "The Russian super-maneuverable multi-role fighter Su-35 poses a great thunderstorm for any American aircraft ..."
    And if the GDP itself is sitting in the cab, then in reality - krants! belay fellow
  10. pexotinec
    pexotinec 27 September 2015 09: 21 New
    +5
    Gentlemen of the Pentagon give better the money that you spend on f-35 with our design bureau and you will still see the 6th generation aircraft.
  11. Alex16051978
    Alex16051978 27 September 2015 09: 22 New
    0
    We have the best airplanes for anyone !!!
  12. oberon 1
    oberon 1 27 September 2015 09: 25 New
    0
    As a specialist in diabetes, I’ll say that it probably is.
    1. infantryman2020
      infantryman2020 27 September 2015 11: 04 New
      -1
      Ага.
      I don’t remember where I read. A conversation once entered into highly professional circles at a high level: why on the F-16 Light Fighter there is one engine, and on its counterpart MiG-29 - two. Indeed, one engine is more economical with other equal parameters (at least for a light fighter).
      The answer was something like this: well, when our engines have reliability and the resource is the same as on the Pratt and Whitney F100 (stands on the F-16), then you can put one.
      1. Vladimir Pozlnyakov
        Vladimir Pozlnyakov 27 September 2015 11: 38 New
        0
        Until the Yankee mothers learn to give birth to Gastello, Talalikhins, Kozhedubov, Pokryshkins, Thunders our “Dryers” will be better than any Phashington planes!
        Selflessness, heroism and devotion to the motherland will always be above false pride, cowardly arrogance and arrogance!
      2. Aleks28
        Aleks28 27 September 2015 12: 32 New
        +3
        Quote: infantryman2020
        The answer was something like this: well, when our engines have reliability and the resource is the same as on the Pratt and Whitney F100 (stands on the F-16), then you can put one.

        No, just two engines at times increase the survivability of the aircraft. This is clearly demonstrated by the Rooks. Many times they sat down when one engine was destroyed.
      3. Corsair
        Corsair 28 September 2015 17: 37 New
        0
        Quote: infantryman2020
        The answer was something like this: well, when our engines have reliability and the resource is the same as on the Pratt and Whitney F100 (stands on the F-16), then you can put one.

        laughing You still say that there is one spare on the MiG-29 and it turns on only when the first fails, you tell the rockets at NASA about reliability and resource. Our engines only during the Second World War were not very good because they did not have time to conduct experiments and tests, and after material science took a long step forward and not with small steps. And Americans as they stole other people's ideas / minds around the world continue.
  13. demo
    demo 27 September 2015 09: 32 New
    -1
    According to the author, "when confronted with a Russian plane in the air, the F-16 pilot will have to rely solely on professionalism in operating the machine."

    And more.
    Trust in God!
    1. Penzyac
      Penzyac 27 September 2015 11: 01 New
      0
      Quote: demo
      According to the author, "when confronted with a Russian plane in the air, the F-16 pilot will have to rely solely on professionalism in operating the machine."

      And more.
      Trust in God!

      Not yet, but only. The F-15 pilot will have to hope that a newcomer flies to the SU-35 who does not really know how to use all its advantages or that the BC has ended in the SU ...
      I would advise the American to urgently tick or use a catapult, our "paratroopers" do not finish (they do not beat the speed bumps) ...
    2. veksha50
      veksha50 27 September 2015 11: 44 New
      0
      Quote: demo
      Trust in God!



      If the pilot is not a professional, then no God will help him ... So rely on God - but don’t condone yourself ...
  14. Denis DV
    Denis DV 27 September 2015 09: 35 New
    +3
    They know that no one is going to attack them, but they want money, oh how you want. That scares the American inhabitants and their "representatives" in Congress.
    1. APASUS
      APASUS 27 September 2015 09: 50 New
      +2
      Quote: Denis DV
      They know that no one is going to attack them, but they want money, oh, they want to. That scares the American inhabitants and their "representatives" in Congress.

      “The National Interest” magazine is not popular, but rather for the political elite of the country. In such a tricky way they seek the allocation of additional funds from Congress
      1. Penzyac
        Penzyac 27 September 2015 11: 06 New
        0
        Quote: APASUS
        Quote: Denis DV
        They know that no one is going to attack them, but they want money, oh, they want to. That scares the American inhabitants and their "representatives" in Congress.

        The National Interest is not a popular magazine ...

        For the people there are yellow press and comics ...
        1. APASUS
          APASUS 27 September 2015 13: 42 New
          0
          Quote: PENZYAC
          For the people there are yellow press and comics ...

          For the people there is a Fox News channel, which is similar to the newspaper Pravda under the USSR. It’s always their brain
          polishes in the right direction.
  15. Coconut
    Coconut 27 September 2015 09: 36 New
    +2
    to replace current cars as quickly as possible

    in general, mattresses don’t even need to change cars ... they fight with the wrong hands ... and if you delve into the history, they merged most of the allies (even Britain got to the main state ally) the hegemon does not need allies but needs vassals
  16. Velesovich
    Velesovich 27 September 2015 09: 39 New
    15
    Already sick of this wretched cliche about "has no analogues in the world." The same F-22, for example, which are armed with almost two hundred. F-35 on the way. And it’s very, very stupid to hope that the United States will make the wretched, unreliable machine, which our pop.reotic mass media love to exhibit F-35, the main (and almost the only) plane of its Air Force. The Su-35 is an excellent aircraft, but we have less than fifty of them, and its rivals are very, very strong. It is necessary to look soberly at the world, and not to throw hats.
    1. Hagalaz
      Hagalaz 27 September 2015 10: 13 New
      +7
      Quote: Velesovic
      Already sick of this wretched cliche about "has no analogues in the world." The same F-22, for example, which are armed with almost two hundred. F-35 on the way. And it’s very, very stupid to hope that the United States will make the wretched, unreliable machine, which our pop.reotic mass media love to exhibit F-35, the main (and almost the only) plane of its Air Force. The Su-35 is an excellent aircraft, but we have less than fifty of them, and its rivals are very, very strong. It is necessary to look soberly at the world, and not to throw hats.

      I agree completely. In addition, the article is an inaccuracy. When compared with the F-16, it is a question of AFAR. Su-35 as well as F-16 are not equipped with radars with AFAR.
    2. Penzyac
      Penzyac 27 September 2015 11: 21 New
      0
      Quote: Velesovic
      It’s nauseating already from this wretched stamp about “has no analogues in the world.” It’s the same F-22, for example, which are armed with almost two hundred ...

      Did the Yankees manage to solve the problem of increased hygroscopicity of its (F-22) wings? There are no deserts in Europe and dry weather is the exception rather than the rule ...
      And what about the survivability of the "anti-radar" coating F-22 (F-35 also applies)? But what about the time and cost of preparing each (!!!) flight of these aircraft? ...
      So, the praises of the American aviation industry, in my opinion, are clearly premature, as well as the decadent moods in relation to ours. Although, of course, I would like to have more and faster our new planes, but here it’s a matter of “small” replacing the “liberals” in our Government with “patriots,” I think it's better sooner than later, but it will certainly happen (at least when GDP and the "elite" will have no other choice) ...
  17. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 27 September 2015 09: 45 New
    0
    Russian Su-35 in the West has no analogues

    That praise seems to be good. And if you think about it, why would it?
  18. dsi
    dsi 27 September 2015 09: 55 New
    -1
    According to the author, "when confronted with a Russian plane in the air, the F-16 pilot will have to rely solely on professionalism in operating the machine."

    For the American machine, this is possible only if the crew is able to maximize the benefits of stealth technologies and electronic warfare systems, "

    Simply put, to snuff, maybe it will blow!
    1. Penzyac
      Penzyac 27 September 2015 11: 26 New
      0
      Quote: dsi
      According to the author, "when confronted with a Russian plane in the air, the F-16 pilot will have to rely solely on professionalism in operating the machine."

      For the American machine, this is possible only if the crew is able to maximize the benefits of stealth technologies and electronic warfare systems, "

      Simply put, to snuff, maybe it will blow!

      By the way, it seems that not so long ago an article was published at VO by an American "expert", where he complained about the huge lag of Americans behind us in the field of electronic warfare (about ten years, or even twenty at least), and then "suddenly" claims an advantage in this component. They would have decided, at least among themselves, or something ...
  19. Tusv
    Tusv 27 September 2015 10: 09 New
    +1
    F-15 Eagle (Boeing), "which could be compared with the Su-35," the magazine notes.

    Eagle - scavenger and the first Flanker is doing. Very successful glider. So don’t even compare. Do not pop into the sky of Syria. Our Pepelats Gravitsap have weapons and more powerful. Envy silently.
    And the T-50 so far only put on the wing, but already surpasses everything that flies
    1. Penzyac
      Penzyac 27 September 2015 11: 36 New
      0
      Quote: Tusv
      F-15 Eagle (Boeing), "which could be compared with the Su-35," the magazine notes.

      Eagle - scavenger and the first Flanker is doing. Very successful glider. So don’t even compare. Do not pop into the sky of Syria. Our Pepelats Gravitsap have weapons and more powerful. Envy silently.
      And the T-50 so far only put on the wing, but already surpasses everything that flies

      Here, you see, the “minus signer” from the “Censor” wandered, but minus in silence, without motivated explanations (I did not notice a single one).
      And seriously, even the Yankees don’t have enough Ka-Tse to fight seriously with our Pepelatsy and Gravitsaps, if only Ka-Tse had enough for us (with such a difference in prices with amers for the development, production and purchase of BT) ...
      1. Tusv
        Tusv 27 September 2015 13: 08 New
        0
        Quote: PENZYAC
        Ka-tse

        You speak. Ka Tse are our targets for air defense. They fly and are blinded by EW so that the radar station does not doze off. Bourgeois do not know how. Still visible
  20. exalex2
    exalex2 27 September 2015 10: 26 New
    +3
    You can say "halva" as much as you like, it won’t become sweeter. What is available is what it is .. And you need to compare something similar, and not be measured by pussy ..
  21. veksha50
    veksha50 27 September 2015 11: 31 New
    +2
    "According to the author," in a collision with a Russian aircraft in the air F-16 pilot will have to rely solely on professionalism in driving"" ...

    Hmm ... Just like ours ...

    No need to scatter slogans about the superiority of some cars over others only by their performance characteristics ...

    The key to success and victory is the pilot's high professionalism, thorough knowledge of the capabilities of both his own machine and that of the enemy ...

    The training of our pilots needs to be given more attention - and this is - first of all ...
    1. Tusv
      Tusv 27 September 2015 13: 37 New
      0
      Quote: veksha50
      The key to success and victory is the pilot's high professionalism, thorough knowledge of the capabilities of both his own machine and that of the enemy ...

      This is the first and most important factor. But there is also weapons. In WWII, the gun of Yak Hans feared like hell incense, and the RS also hung in the direction of back.
      Regarding to know the capabilities of someone else’s car, so in our Guards tons were imported mukulatura about the possibilities of enemy Pepelats. Cool it yes! But when you follow the sky, cooler than Sushka or in theirs - there are no Flankers
  22. rvsn90
    rvsn90 27 September 2015 11: 47 New
    +1
    Quote: dsi
    According to the author, "when confronted with a Russian plane in the air, the F-16 pilot will have to rely solely on professionalism in operating the machine."

    For the American machine, this is possible only if the crew is able to maximize the benefits of stealth technologies and electronic warfare systems, "

    Simply put, to snuff, maybe it will blow!


    Eject before the attack = professionalism in driving wassat soldier
  23. AstanaKZ
    AstanaKZ 27 September 2015 13: 00 New
    +1
    All these praises are ordered to promote the government for another order!
  24. Bayonet
    Bayonet 27 September 2015 13: 26 New
    -1
    The airplane itself, this is not all - armaments and their control systems decide a lot.
  25. k174oun7
    k174oun7 27 September 2015 14: 14 New
    0
    It is time for our Su and MiGs to seriously register and confirm their performance characteristics. Opportunities - more than enough. It is necessary to skillfully and sensibly prepare. This should be done by specially trained people, if they are of course available. This is certainly not about the pilots. You also need to be able to write. At school, we had the slogan: "Word-deed."
  26. Region 23
    Region 23 27 September 2015 14: 30 New
    +1
    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2015/813/widn49.jpg
  27. cergey51046
    cergey51046 27 September 2015 14: 49 New
    -2
    Know ours!
  28. Region 23
    Region 23 27 September 2015 14: 59 New
    +1
    Born to crawl cannot fly.
  29. afrikanez
    afrikanez 27 September 2015 17: 20 New
    -1
    I wonder how much dough Americans would like to have for the military budget? That honestly, it would be interesting to learn from their generals.
  30. wasjasibirjac
    wasjasibirjac 27 September 2015 18: 07 New
    0
    from the article:
    The United States should invest in the development of next-generation fighters in order to replace current aircraft as quickly as possible, ”the publication concludes.
    that’s how it all becomes clear - give money for new planes, otherwise the evil Russians will defeat us, they have what kind of dangerous planes, tanks, and artillery, and soldiers in general are terrified.
  31. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 27 September 2015 19: 03 New
    0
    Quote: Basarev
    Russia bypasses at least four generations under this article - look at least at the A-10 unmanned attack aircraft - in the USA this is quite a feasible project. For us it's fantastic.

    Well, Mr., do not exaggerate the capabilities of the SGA! Remember our unmanned "Buran" - what year was that ?! Yes, they lagged behind in technology, but not in all. Electronics is developing - I want it to be faster, but with a wide step, you can also break your pants. Yes, everything is going hard - a separate "thank you" to the corrupt reorganizers who threw the country 30-40 years ago. But the country is moving forward, now it would still be possible to overcome the resistance of the liberals in the economy, and put the corrupt ones in place, but the enemy is on the alert and constantly sticks us with wheels in all areas - from culture to production, and with accomplices inside Russia! hi
  32. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 27 September 2015 21: 23 New
    +1
    In the coming years, engines with OVT and phased array radars will be delivered to Rafal and Eurofighter. And there will be analogues. On the F-18 can also be modernized.
    1. dckx
      dckx 28 September 2015 02: 01 New
      0
      OBT on F22 is what? Thrust change only perpendicular to the plane of flight. Or do you mean IWT on these models? There is doubt about the possibility of using this modification, how ready is the aerodynamic design of these aircraft? Maybe experts will comment.
      1. kamil_tt
        kamil_tt 28 September 2015 18: 49 New
        +1
        The disadvantages of a flat nozzle are its heavy weight, traction loss, and bending loads are critical only for overmoveability, which is not a distinctive feature of F22. For example, in the F-35 variant for the Marine Corps, these factors are critically important, but stealth, just fades into the background. Therefore, a round nozzle is selected. At the same time, flat nozzles fit well on supersonic planes with flat fuselages. They can significantly reduce the bottom pressure at supersonic speed. For the F-22, this is crucial. In addition, flat nozzles make it relatively easy to use aerodynamic effects such as the Coanda effect (sticking of the jet to a close surface) and the supercirculation effect, which significantly increase the aerodynamic quality of the aircraft. The nozzle flaps may occupy a position consistent with other edges of the aircraft in order to reduce radar visibility and form the exhaust in such a way as to lower its temperature. And by the way, a new engine for PAK FA is considered, including a new generation flat nozzle. For example, remember the Su-27LL
  33. Tomich2
    Tomich2 27 September 2015 21: 49 New
    +3
    not tired of typing the same thing?
  34. rubidiy
    rubidiy 28 September 2015 01: 53 New
    +2
    damn, well, here again twenty-five ... Russian planes bend down. The news that we, poor Americans, have, cannot resist them. Junk too ...
    let me guess ... what
    F35 based on the article - turd
    F16 and F15 are also poop, and already dried
    F22 production is unlikely to return
    F18 remains! And we have a winner! McDonnell Douglas! That’s who ordered the article! bully
  35. BlackDragon
    BlackDragon 28 September 2015 07: 31 New
    -1
    and without NI, the Su-35 has no analogue in the world.
  36. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 28 September 2015 13: 13 New
    +1
    And what do you dislike about Rafal's aerodynamic design, or maybe the mass-to-thrust ratio is bad or the electronics are bad or the bomb load is small? Compare performance with Su 35.
    1. Yak-3P
      Yak-3P 28 September 2015 19: 49 New
      0
      thrust-weight ratio --- kg per horse-- and succession .. the so-called combat speed - 2 times more .. i.e. on the vertical, our gaining 2 times faster and 2 times higher well, but nobody canceled the "height-speed-fire" .. in melee (and missiles are not so effective at distance and traps from afar, so the neighbor is so appreciated and our best) bitch with mountains attack on a choice
    2. dckx
      dckx 29 September 2015 03: 22 New
      0
      I'm not saying that the aerodynamic design of Rafal is bad. As far as it will allow to realize all the advantages of arms and military equipment. It will be justified in terms of investment and result. After all, the installation of weapons and military equipment will primarily affect the processing of aircraft control algorithms, which directly depends on its aerodynamics. This is a huge amount of work. If I am mistaken, then I apologize, not a specialist in aircraft.
  37. CRASH
    CRASH 28 September 2015 19: 00 New
    0
    Do you have AFAR? And if I find it?
  38. Olezhek
    Olezhek 28 September 2015 20: 22 New
    -1
    F 15 F16 F 18 were very good 4-generation aircraft ..
    Then a muyka appeared with the F 22 - it ended incomprehensibly than .. and the F 35 - the fighter of dreams and finance ...
    In short - it did not work out.
    And who forgive will defend democracy?
    And do not talk about Rafali and Eurofighters ..
    In short, dead end.

    Australia suddenly found itself in a difficult situation - neighboring Indonesia buys - also 35, only Su ...
    And sho do?
    As the few in the press talk about this paradox with the "technical leadership of the West in the field of aviation"
  39. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 29 September 2015 10: 12 New
    0
    Proud for our aviation, for our pilots, the only thing that upsets is the quantity ... more 4 ++ and T-50 planes need to be circled faster, clouds are gathering more and more around Mother Russia.
  40. Plumbum
    Plumbum 29 September 2015 10: 34 New
    0
    Communize.
    Moreover, you do not have to go far for examples.
    The United States is already releasing a kalashnikov assault rifle and a grenade launcher.
    so that if they want to follow the example of great China, they will do copyright SU.
  41. lukewarm
    lukewarm 29 September 2015 13: 48 New
    +1
    It's nice to hear. I agree with commentators who see not a “panic” in the USA, but a loot divorce. Su-35 is good, no words. But comparing it with the F-16 does not honor the comparing. Enemy F-16go - MiG-29. They must be compared. Well, the quantity, yes. The conclusion in the article was that the 5th generation should be moved. And with him we have an ambush. Lagging behind. For dvigla - for sure. I don’t know about armaments. By quantity - you see for yourself, they have 187.
  42. Hammer
    Hammer 29 September 2015 18: 39 New
    0
    I read the original, they crap it there normally. Fake article