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.
  • http://www.globallookpress.com/
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

108 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +69
    27 September 2015 09: 08
    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. +37
      27 September 2015 09: 22
      When the enemy praises you, there is nothing good, they again pursue their self-interest.
      1. +10
        27 September 2015 10: 11
        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. +50
          27 September 2015 10: 40
          They don’t panic, they’re not bad at all, and they have a lot more. They unwind politicians to loot.
          1. +9
            27 September 2015 11: 59
            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 don't think it is correct to compare our 4 ++ fighters with their 5th. The USA has a prototype of the F-15SE "Silent Eagle" also belonging to the 4 ++ generation, and our Su-35S should be compared with it. And the F-22 must be put on a par with our PAK FA. The F-35 would not be included in the comparison, because it is a light-class fighter-bomber and is intended primarily for strike operations against ground 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 is also worth mentioning that there is no radar with AFAR on the Su-35S (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 Sushka, it is not yet mass-produced (3-4 prototypes in total).

            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. +3
              27 September 2015 17: 47
              Quote: supertiger21
              Yes, but it is also worth mentioning that there is no radar with AFAR on the Su-35S (there is a radar with PFAR "Irbis")

              These are details, the target detection range matters, for the Irbis it is up to 400 km on a collision course (for the F-22 = 200, that is, half as much), under this radar and the air-to-air missile - KS- 172, respectively (theirs is the farthest AMRAAM, up to 180 maximum, and in fact 120 km or less. Themselves limited the size of the missiles due to hiding weapons in internal compartments to preserve the mythical invisibility). AFAR, which is 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 ...), 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. +1
                27 September 2015 20: 00
                You forgot to mention that the 22nd problem with oxygen regeneration, and above 8 thousand the pilot may suffocate.
              2. +4
                27 September 2015 20: 25
                Something primitively comparing, I'm sorry! No.

                Quote: hrych
                These are details, the target detection range matters, for the Irbis it is up to 400 km on a collision course (for the F-22 = 200, that is, 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 the air-to-air missile - KS-172, respectively (their farthest AMRAAM, up to 180 maximum, but 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
                Themselves limited the size of the missiles because of hiding weapons in the internal compartments to preserve the mythical invisibility). AFAR, which is 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 ...), 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 ?! feel
                1. +4
                  27 September 2015 21: 17
                  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. +2
                    28 September 2015 08: 58
                    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, nothing "invisible" happens, which was confirmed by the Serbs by shooting down the F-117. LOW DISTANCE is another matter, and such machines as F-22, T-50, F-35 and J-20 have it at a very high level compared to the fighters of the previous generation Su-27, F-15, Mirage-2000, etc. Discover stealth planes are POSSIBLE, but much MORE COMPLEX 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. +2
                      28 September 2015 18: 44
                      Quote: supertiger21
                      to be the 5th generation, you must comply with all its points

                      Let's say - the item "drastic reduction of the aircraft's visibility in the radar and infrared ranges" and the item "the ability to carry out all-round bombardment of targets in close air combat, as well as to conduct multichannel rocket fire when conducting long-range combat" and "super maneuverability" simply contradict each other and practically incompatible. Super-maneuverability requires thrust vector control, and naturally a decrease in the IR range is unacceptable. On the radar, we have already discussed, either you see yourself, far away, but you can also be seen, or you sneak and hope for passive means, i.e. no hope. Here they and we disagreed in the estimates of the 5th generation. In fact, we have abandoned stealth in favor of a "keen eye" and "far hand". Regarding the KS-172 and R-37, I again cannot 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 the rocket is always superior to the airplane, because the latter is limited by the ability to withstand the pilot's overload. Another KS-172 is essentially an aircraft missile of the S-300 complex, the mere appearance of which in certain places causes hysteria in Tel Aviv and Washington ...
                  2. Mih
                    +1
                    28 September 2015 22: 15
                    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. -7
                27 September 2015 20: 44
                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. +1
                  27 September 2015 21: 27
                  Yes, of course, and he will fly to save Ukrainians ...
                  More phrases like "couch layouts", and you yourself probably hold Lockheed's top-secret data in front of you and check it with similar Sukhoi Design Bureau.
                  So enlighten http://aftershock.su/?q=node/293198
                  1. -5
                    27 September 2015 21: 32
                    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. +2
                      27 September 2015 21: 35
                      Quote: Kosta
                      He will never see f-22 on the same 100 km

                      Typical fable.
                    2. +2
                      28 September 2015 21: 32
                      Screaming women cheers! And caps were thrown into the air!
                2. +2
                  28 September 2015 21: 30
                  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. 0
                29 September 2015 05: 07
                These are details, the target detection range matters, for the Irbis it is up to 400 km on a collision course (for the F-22 = 200, that is, half as much), under this radar and the air-to-air missile - KS- 172, respectively (theirs the farthest AMRAAM, up to 180 maximum, and in fact 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. 0
                  29 September 2015 17: 17
                  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 ground-based air defense systems was taken as a basis ... The missile itself is not a problem, especially since it takes a grated roll as a basis, the problem was with the radar, only when it became possible to see at 400 km, it became necessary and smash at 400 km. And the R-37, with a range of over 300 km, has been in operation since the Gorbachev era, in terms of range to match the Zaslonu radar, although its latest modifications are not inferior to the Irbis.

                  General Director of JSC "Research Institute named after V.V. Tikhomirov "Yuri BELY:" At one time, when we showed the Irbis (a system for the Su-35) to the Italians and said that the average power of the radar radiation is 5 kW, and the detection range is 400 kilometers, they immediately faded - they do not have there are no such carriers and there are no such tasks. The Americans will not buy either, they have their own pride. Although, in our opinion, the radar with AFAR, which is 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, and if lower, there will be no detection range. It is not for nothing that the Americans launched a program to develop a new radar. And we tested the Irbis at 500 meters, and the parameters were not lost. "
                  http://topwar.ru/81003-s-dalnim-pricelom.html
            2. 0
              27 September 2015 18: 22
              Quote: supertiger21
              I do not think it is correct to compare our 4 ++ fighters with their 5th.

              I agree. They do not reach us ... Su-35 at the moment would have no equal in the air, but the modernized MiG-31, sees and hits at no less distance, thanks to the Zaslon radar, but is inferior in flight range, I don't even know, considering its phenomenal speed ...
        2. +22
          27 September 2015 11: 00
          Quote: Bone
          So the enemy does not praise, he panics ..... and praises and panics, these are two big differences !!!!!

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

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

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

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


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

                    Nexus, Stroporez, my dears .. Thank you for Anisimov. I sing, play, compose myself. I am writing .. as far as possible. But all my diplomas and laureates fall like an autumn leaf, listening to such texts. I have never been a bard, I was beaten and "driven" (joke), "he does not fit into the format of a bard song. Too light and defiant in pop music (the resume of the" specialist "in the article, (though 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. +1
                      30 September 2015 01: 30
                      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. +7
      27 September 2015 09: 23
      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. +2
        27 September 2015 11: 42
        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. +1
      27 September 2015 09: 38
      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. +8
        27 September 2015 09: 51
        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. -20
          27 September 2015 10: 00
          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. +3
            27 September 2015 10: 35
            Quote: Basarev
            Oh, to see an absolutely Russian plane ... But what is not, that is not!


            You have a strange logic.
          2. 0
            28 September 2015 00: 44
            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!


            no one has completely "his", it is unprofitable, too expensive and not optimal.
        2. 0
          27 September 2015 15: 12
          And which of the specialists will tell you: Why did they deliver Su-30, and not Su-35, as fighters to Syria?
          1. +5
            27 September 2015 17: 12
            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. +3
            27 September 2015 18: 52
            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, but it takes a long time to cook them, and even an intense hunt will begin from the side of NATO "partners".
            1. +3
              27 September 2015 21: 13
              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-BOMBER. He, as a demonstrator against flights and overflights of aircraft of "partners" and performs strike functions on the ground against ISIS.
              So everything is logical.
              1. 0
                28 September 2015 16: 04
                Well, yes, I just realized that the fighters (just that there are only 4 of them ??? not enough !!!) precisely for the creation of a no-fly zone over the SAR from our "partners, so that there would be no temptation to bomb the Armed Forces of Syria. -35 are not accepted in the Air Force? It seems that several dozen have already been riveted.
              2. The comment was deleted.
            2. +2
              28 September 2015 15: 09
              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. +5
                28 September 2015 16: 48
                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. +4
        27 September 2015 12: 12
        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. +3
        27 September 2015 12: 56
        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 will only affect the old F-15 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
      +5
      27 September 2015 10: 09
      Etr NI. Poppy resource that no sane reads, do not exaggerate the influence of this jaundice
    5. +1
      27 September 2015 11: 09
      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. 0
        27 September 2015 13: 01
        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 point here is more that the allies of the West want to buy the 5th generation of the F-35, and not just the modernized 4th, which is the F-15SE Silent Eagle.
      2. 0
        27 September 2015 19: 43
        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. +2
      27 September 2015 11: 09
      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. +1
      27 September 2015 12: 03
      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. +2
      27 September 2015 13: 08
      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. 0
      27 September 2015 13: 54
      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. +4
    27 September 2015 09: 09
    No, don’t invest !!! )))
  3. +15
    27 September 2015 09: 09
    From one extreme to another ... They shoot films like "Top Gun", then they scream "Everything is lost, boss, everything is lost!"
    Not otherwise, the congress for money is again untwisted. American Peeling)
  4. +6
    27 September 2015 09: 09
    “The Su-35 and other Sukhoi aircraft are very powerful machines. Never doubted !!!
  5. +4
    27 September 2015 09: 11
    What's this? Hidden PR company of our aircraft by the Americans? Yes, and here is the "hand of Moscow".
  6. +7
    27 September 2015 09: 12
    They knock out new funds for the arms race, pretending to be poor, sick and helpless.
  7. +3
    27 September 2015 09: 13
    One can only be glad for our designers from the famous design bureau. "Sukhoi" is a brand that everyone in the world knows ...
    1. SSR
      +3
      27 September 2015 09: 49
      Quote: moskowit
      One can only be glad for our designers from the famous design bureau. "Sukhoi" is a brand that everyone in the world knows ...

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

      And when an article about the developments of DARPA comes out, few of ours say that the adversary does not stand still, but immediately begin to argue that they will be knocked out of the "shilka" or knocked out of the SVD))) and you can immediately see what kind of masters 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. +3
        27 September 2015 10: 11
        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. +3
          27 September 2015 10: 43
          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 the miscalculation of algorithms !!!!!! Here is a dead end! And this is not a hoo-quack, this is a fact! And for them a complete "fak".
          That is why the Iskander has an unpredictable flight path, the S-300 has its own algorithms for the missile's flight, at the acceleration stage, target acquisition, and approaching the target. Therefore, you can copy it, but you can't make it fly !!!! "Patriots", complete "kekando", in comparison. Mattresses "Mstu" could not be repeated, even in the worst case. In general, not at all! Having spent 15 years on it.
          So do not be upset too much. And they have iPhones as "Patriots", "Kekando". Their development in them is zero!
        2. +4
          27 September 2015 10: 48
          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 fatal. The level of electronics is determined not only by the components, but also by the ability to make the most of them, the same can be said about the software. The Americans, as you know, are characterized by straightforwardness (stereotyped) in solving problems, "advanced" components only help them in this, since they "forgive" (for the time being) some mistakes of the developers of final 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. 0
            27 September 2015 11: 23
            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. 0
          27 September 2015 10: 55
          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. +3
          27 September 2015 11: 14
          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. 0
          27 September 2015 13: 09
          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. +2
    27 September 2015 09: 18
    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. +4
    27 September 2015 09: 19
    "The Russian super-maneuverable multi-role Su-35 fighter is a big thunderstorm for any American aircraft ..."
    And if the GDP itself is sitting in the cab, then in reality - krants! belay fellow
  10. +5
    27 September 2015 09: 21
    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. 0
    27 September 2015 09: 22
    We have the best airplanes for anyone !!!
  12. 0
    27 September 2015 09: 25
    As a specialist in diabetes, I’ll say that it probably is.
    1. -1
      27 September 2015 11: 04
      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. 0
        27 September 2015 11: 38
        As long as the Yankee-mothers do not learn to give birth to Gastello, Talalikhins, Kozhedubs, Pokryshkins, Thunders, our "Sushki" will be better than any Fashington planes!
        Selflessness, heroism and devotion to the motherland will always be above false pride, cowardly arrogance and arrogance!
      2. +3
        27 September 2015 12: 32
        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 significantly increase the survivability of an airplane. This was clearly demonstrated by the "rooks". Many times they sat down when one engine was destroyed.
      3. 0
        28 September 2015 17: 37
        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. -1
    27 September 2015 09: 32
    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. 0
      27 September 2015 11: 01
      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 an American to urgently tick or use a catapult, our "parachutists" are not finished off (they are not hitting those who are lying down) ...
    2. 0
      27 September 2015 11: 44
      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. +3
    27 September 2015 09: 35
    They know that no one is going to attack them, but they want money, oh, how they want. So they frighten the American inhabitants and their "representatives" in the Congress.
    1. +2
      27 September 2015 09: 50
      Quote: Denis DV
      They know that no one is going to attack them, but they want money, oh, they want to. So they frighten the American inhabitants and their "representatives" in the 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. 0
        27 September 2015 11: 06
        Quote: APASUS
        Quote: Denis DV
        They know that no one is going to attack them, but they want money, oh, they want to. So they frighten the American inhabitants and their "representatives" in the Congress.

        The National Interest is not a popular magazine ...

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

          For the people there is a channel Fox News, which is like the newspaper "Pravda" in the USSR. He is their constant brain
          polishes in the right direction.
  15. +2
    27 September 2015 09: 36
    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. +15
    27 September 2015 09: 39
    Nauseous already from this miserable cliché about "has no-analogues-in-the-world." The same F-22, for example, of which there are almost two hundred in service. The F-35 is on its way. And it’s very, very foolish to hope that the United States will make the main (and almost the only) aircraft of its Air Force a wretched unreliable machine, which is so fond of exhibiting the F-35 by our pots.reotic media. 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 at the world soberly, and not to throw hats.
    1. +7
      27 September 2015 10: 13
      Quote: Velesovic
      Nauseous already from this miserable cliché about "has no-analogues-in-the-world." The same F-22, for example, of which there are almost two hundred in service. The F-35 is on its way. And it’s very, very foolish to hope that the United States will make the main (and almost the only) aircraft of its Air Force a wretched unreliable machine, which is so fond of exhibiting the F-35 by our pots.reotic media. 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 at the world soberly, 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. 0
      27 September 2015 11: 21
      Quote: Velesovic
      Already nauseous from this wretched cliché about "has no-analogues-in-the-world." The same F-22, for example, of which there are almost two hundred in service ...

      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 of the F-22 (the F-35 also applies)? And 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 sentiments in relation to ours. Although, of course, we would like to see more and sooner of our new planes, but then it’s up to the “little” to replace the “liberals” in our Government with “patriots,” I think it's better early than late, but this will certainly happen (at least GDP and the "elite" will have no other choice) ...
  17. 0
    27 September 2015 09: 45
    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
    -1
    27 September 2015 09: 55
    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. 0
      27 September 2015 11: 26
      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 by an American "expert" was published on VO, where he complained about the huge lag of Americans behind us in the field of electronic warfare (by ten years, or even all twenty at least), and then "suddenly" this component. They would have somehow, at least among themselves, decided something ...
  19. +1
    27 September 2015 10: 09
    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. 0
      27 September 2015 11: 36
      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" from "Censor" wandered in, but minus silently, 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. 0
        27 September 2015 13: 08
        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. +3
    27 September 2015 10: 26
    You can say "halva" as much as you like, it won't get sweeter. What is available is what it is .. And you need to compare something similar, and not be compared with pussy ..
  21. +2
    27 September 2015 11: 31
    "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. 0
      27 September 2015 13: 37
      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. +1
    27 September 2015 11: 47
    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. +1
    27 September 2015 13: 00
    All these praises are ordered to promote the government for another order!
  24. -1
    27 September 2015 13: 26
    The airplane itself, this is not all - armaments and their control systems decide a lot.
  25. 0
    27 September 2015 14: 14
    It's time for our Su and MiGs to seriously check in and confirm their performance characteristics. There are plenty of opportunities. You need to skillfully and sensibly prepare. This should be done by specially trained people, if they exist, of course. It's not about pilots, of course. You also need to be able to write. At school we had a slogan: "Word-deed."
  26. +1
    27 September 2015 14: 30
    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2015/813/widn49.jpg
  27. -2
    27 September 2015 14: 49
    Know ours!
  28. +1
    27 September 2015 14: 59
    Born to crawl cannot fly.
  29. -1
    27 September 2015 17: 20
    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. 0
    27 September 2015 18: 07
    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. 0
    27 September 2015 19: 03
    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, sir, do not exaggerate the capabilities of the SGA! Remember our unmanned "Buran" - what year was it ?! 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 tear your pants. Yes, everything is going hard - a special "thanks" to the corrupt perestroika who threw the country 30-40 years ago. But the country is moving forward, now it would still be able to overcome the resistance of the liberals in the economy, and then put the corrupt ones in their place, but the enemy does not sleep and constantly thrust spokes into our wheels in all areas - from culture to production, moreover, having accomplices inside Russia! hi
  32. +1
    27 September 2015 21: 23
    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. 0
      28 September 2015 02: 01
      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. +1
        28 September 2015 18: 49
        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
    +3
    27 September 2015 21: 49
    not tired of typing the same thing?
  34. +2
    28 September 2015 01: 53
    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. -1
    28 September 2015 07: 31
    and without NI, the Su-35 has no analogue in the world.
  36. +1
    28 September 2015 13: 13
    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. 0
      28 September 2015 19: 49
      thrust-to-weight ratio --- kg per horse-- and succession ... the so-called combat speed - 2 times more ... i.e. on the vertical, ours is gaining 2 times faster and 2 times higher, but nobody canceled the "height-speed-fire" .. in close combat (and the missiles are not so effective when raking and traps from afar, that's why the neighbor is so valued and our best) mountains to choose from
    2. 0
      29 September 2015 03: 22
      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. 0
    28 September 2015 19: 00
    Do you have AFAR? And if I find it?
  38. -1
    28 September 2015 20: 22
    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?
    How little the press says about this paradox with the "technical leadership of the West in the field of aviation"
  39. 0
    29 September 2015 10: 12
    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. 0
    29 September 2015 10: 34
    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. +1
    29 September 2015 13: 48
    Nice to hear. I agree with commentators who see not "panic" in the United States, but a divorce for loot. Su-35 is good, no words. But comparing it with the F-16 does not honor the comparing one. The enemy of the F-16 is the MiG-29. They should be compared. Well, the number, yes. The conclusion in the article sounded - it is necessary to move the 5th generation. And with him we still have an ambush. Backlog. By dvigl - for sure. I don't know about weapons. In terms of quantity - you can see for yourself, they have 187.
  42. 0
    29 September 2015 18: 39
    I read the original, they crap it there normally. Fake article

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"