Military Review

Su-30M and F-22: advantages and disadvantages

101
Russia sent at least four Sukhoi Su-30SM modern aircraft to its base near Syrian Latakia. This is another batch of military equipment deployed by Russia in this Arab country destroyed by the war. And she sent to Syria Tanks, armored personnel carriers, heavy artillery and considerable infantry forces.


Apparently, the Russian troops deployed in this region have the task of supporting the weakened regime of Bashar al-Assad in the fight against ISIL. But without close cooperation with the United States and the forces of its allies, which operate in the region, there is a real danger of unintended confrontation. That is why US Secretary of Defense Ash Carter phoned his Russian counterpart, Sergei Shoigu, to rule out the accidental conflict between US and Russian forces. "The defense ministers talked about areas where the United States and Russia have close positions, and about where they diverge," the Pentagon said in a press release. The time for the call was chosen very unfortunate, since the Su-30CM fighters appeared in Syria several hours after this conversation.

Su-30M and F-22: advantages and disadvantagesThe fact that Russia has sent Su-30CM to Syria is quite logical. This aircraft carries a powerful combat load and has an excellent range. Moreover, it is multipurpose and can be used both in aerial combat and in the fight against ground targets. And this means that he does not need combat escort fighters. In addition, the crew of the Su-30CM consists of two people, which is very useful when performing complex tasks. For the same reason, the US Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle aircraft and the US Navy F / A-18F Super Hornet, which are in many respects direct analogues of the Su-30CM, are also two-seater.

Although the Russian forces can play a significant role in maintaining the Assad regime, in the unlikely event of a clash with American troops, the Su-30 handful will have little chance and they will hold out for a short time against overwhelming American superiority. The US forces in this region have a rich arsenal of modern fighters, the most powerful of which is Lockheed Martin's F-22 Raptor. Moreover, the American forces in the Middle East region have a huge numerical superiority over the Russian ones.

Although the Su-30CM is a very efficient fourth-generation fighter, it has no chance against the Raptor, especially if the air combat is out of line of sight. The F-22 has literally all the advantages with the exception of range and combat load. The combination of stealth and detection devices will lead to the fact that Russian planes are likely to be destroyed even before their pilots realize that they have become a target. During regular flight training in the USA, a group of four F-22 fights 20 enemy planes so that the pilots can acquire useful skills.

The only unpredictable moment is if there will be an air battle between the US and Russian aircraft in the visible range. In such a battle, the Su-30 has some chances to resist the F-22. He has a missile with a passive infrared rejecting homing head P-73, while the Raptor is armed with an outdated version of the Sidewinder AIM-9M rocket - for now. Of course, the excellent performance of the F-22 can compensate for this drawback, but the lack of missiles with passive infrared deflected homing heads on an American aircraft is a serious miscalculation that the US Air Force hopes to eliminate in the coming years.

“Raptor” is sure to inflict a crushing defeat on the Russian Su-30CM, but if an armed clash occurs between the armies of these two states, it will become a nightmare on a global scale that no one wants to try. The result will be a powerful escalation of tensions, which is very easy to get out of control and lead to a serious war. Let's hope that doesn't happen.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/27619
101 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Arktidianets
    Arktidianets 24 October 2015 06: 33 New
    59
    The author is Dave Majumdar and that’s it.
    1. Aleks28
      Aleks28 24 October 2015 06: 41 New
      17
      Quote: Arctidian
      The author is Dave Majumdar and that’s it.

      http://inosmi.ru/world/20150923/230418712.html Вот и первоисточник..Понятно от куда ветер.Да и пованивает статейка.Она от 21 сентября.
      1. Observer2014
        Observer2014 24 October 2015 13: 15 New
        +5
        "Moreover, American forces in the Middle East have a huge numerical superiority over Russian ones."
        Yes, the "poplar" does not care how much it blows at one blow at a time, one hundred or a million pieces of equipment. There were lizbs in the affected area.
        1. goncharov.62
          goncharov.62 24 October 2015 19: 09 New
          +8
          "Moreover, the American forces in the Middle East have a huge numerical superiority over the Russian" - where are we going to bury them all, Yoklmn?
      2. Sterlya
        Sterlya 24 October 2015 18: 36 New
        +6
        Quote: Alex28
        second Dave Majumdar and that’s it.

        Clear. don't pay attention
    2. Aleksandr72
      Aleksandr72 24 October 2015 07: 02 New
      65
      The aforementioned Dave Majumdar has given birth to a whole series of articles in which he compares the Su-30 with both the American F-22 and the European Typhoon, and I think I have come across his article where he compares the Su-30 to the F-35. Absolutely all articles have one conclusion: the Russian aircraft, although it is a successful 4th generation fighter, nevertheless will definitely yield to Western opponents in battle, because the Russian fighter either has a non-kosher radar or has no stealth technology, and so on. etc.
      This can be answered with an oriental saying: the dog barks, the caravan goes on.
      Or in Russian: every sandpiper praises its swamp.
      Do not pay attention to this nonsense of the pseudo-expert D. Majumdar.
      I have the honor.
      1. yugan
        yugan 24 October 2015 09: 43 New
        16
        Bullshit! As far as I remember in the joint Indo-Amer exercises of the Air Force, just the same, the Indians removed the mattresses in 3 cases from 4. At the same time, the Americans put them in obviously bad conditions, adding a bunch of restrictions. What does it mean that the interval between sorties 4 landmines mines? More than once I saw how they took off and landed in pairs.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 24 October 2015 10: 21 New
          -3
          Quote: manganese
          Bullshit! As far as I remember in the joint Indo-Amer exercises of the Air Force, just the same, the Indians carried out the mattress in 3 cases out of 4.

          In fact, the results of air battles are more likely to be described by the saying "once at a time it is not necessary"
          Quote: manganese
          At the same time, the Americans put them in obviously bad conditions, adding a bunch of restrictions

          Yes, it was. For example - the Americans limited themselves by refusing to use AMRAAM missiles, which the Indians had no analogues :)))
          And finally, nothing that the Indians fought with the F-15, and often not the latest modifications?
          Although in general, the Su-30MKI will be better than the F-15 C / D
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 26 October 2015 19: 20 New
            0
            I am delighted :))) 21 (TWENTY ONE) minus, and not a single objection on the merits.
      2. gladcu2
        gladcu2 24 October 2015 17: 01 New
        0
        Alexander 72

        And the flag in his hands and a drum on his neck. Let this Indian train in English.

        I suppose I sculpted my articles with a fly simulator. So to speak, a gamer for a gamer.

        Not serious. And not critical.
      3. goncharov.62
        goncharov.62 24 October 2015 19: 11 New
        0
        "expert D. Majumdar" - expert, let me correct you ...
      4. Captain nemo
        Captain nemo 24 October 2015 19: 35 New
        0
        Quote: Aleksandr72
        The aforementioned Dave Majumdar gave birth to a whole series of articles in which he compares the Su-30 with both the American F-22 and the European Typhoon, and I think I came across his article where he compares the Su-30 with the F-35

        In this article, he compares the SU-30 with the F-22, not because of how to show how the F-22 will distribute the SU-30. And due to the fact that these aircraft were currently on the Arabian Peninsula with a high probability of meeting each other.
        Don’t help Syria, not Russia, but for example, China, the author would most likely compare the F-22 with some Chinese aircraft made in China.
        No matter what generation, Chinese planes are helping Syria.
      5. skifd
        skifd 24 October 2015 21: 33 New
        +2
        Quote: Aleksandr72
        The mentioned Dave Majumdar gave birth to a series of articles,



        "Gavrila served (Majumdar) "article-pёkom" ... "Articles" Gavrila (Majumdar) "baked" ... "(almost (c))
        I already wrote, got this "Gavriliada". Question to admins maybe already Enough publish "articles" of this, damn it, "an expert"?? negative
    3. CRONOS
      CRONOS 24 October 2015 08: 00 New
      38
      Comparison of the Su-30SM and F-22 is as correct as x @ i with a cigarette ... But what? Both phallic forms and both objects are taken into the mouth, the similarities end there. With the discussed aircraft in the same way. Article minus and the site - too. Let's retype all the jaundice now, m? negative
      1. inkass_98
        inkass_98 24 October 2015 09: 12 New
        -11
        Quote: CRONOS
        Article minus and the site - too.

        And what then come here? Find a lesson, watch a TV series.
      2. papik09
        papik09 24 October 2015 09: 40 New
        11
        Quote: CRONOS
        Comparison of the Su-30SM and F-22 is as correct as x @ i with a cigarette ... But what? Both phallic forms and both objects are taken into the mouth, the similarities end there. With the discussed aircraft in the same way. Article minus and the site - too. Let's retype all the jaundice now, m? negative

        What? Comparison excellent "... with a cigarette" good Well done! Sit down! Eight! Tomorrow you will come to school with your dad and mom! You "+", article "-". Even 2 minus ... Gee wassat hi
        1. Lt. Air Force stock
          Lt. Air Force stock 24 October 2015 10: 44 New
          30
          To compare two aircraft you need to know the secret performance characteristics, namely:
          1) A genuine EPR F-22 (not 0,0000 ...... what they write in various articles).
          2) The real capabilities of the F-22 and Su-30SM radar, the maximum detection range and target acquisition.
          3) The capabilities of the Su-30CM radiation warning station to detect radiation from the F-22 radar operating in the low probability of signal interception (the so-called LPI) mode.
          3) F-22 and Su-30SM radar interference immunity from enemy airborne radio stations.
          4) The capabilities of enemy EW stations to suppress GOS of enemy missiles.
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 24 October 2015 16: 51 New
            +6
            There is some doubt that the target capture mode itself can be masked; this is, by definition, a powerful source of radiation.
    4. vladimir_krm
      vladimir_krm 24 October 2015 10: 51 New
      27
      Yeah. For a long time I want to ask the editors to put the names of the authors immediately at the beginning of the article, in order to know whether to read further? :)
    5. GSH-18
      GSH-18 24 October 2015 11: 53 New
      0
      Quote: Arctidian
      The author is Dave Majumdar and that’s it.

      What do you dislike? The man wrote everything as is, starting from real TTX. And the hedgehog is clear that superiority will be on the side of a more modern and advanced aircraft. And here they compare the Su-30cm and F-22, that is, generation 4 (albeit with pluses) and generation 5! Such a comparison itself is incorrect. It’s the same as comparing the F-16 and the Su-35, yes, of course, who will control anyone faster in this case. The author had to compare at least F-22 and T-50!
      This means that we should soon introduce PAK FA into our Air Force, and more.
      You have to be realistic. This is useful in military affairs.
      1. Locksmith
        Locksmith 24 October 2015 13: 30 New
        +6
        Quote: GSH-18
        What do you dislike? The man wrote everything as is, starting from real TTX.

        they are really upside-down, he writes the rattle doesn’t have missiles with a passive infrared head, so a missile with a radio command guidance system will aim ... turning off your radar wink Is it like that ?! Even if with a minimum power BUT THE RADAR WILL WORK !! And then already do not care that the EPR racks have 0.0000001kv microns laughing , this radiation is TENS of THOUSAND times more reflected from the indicated, and even the moment-SU30 has an optical station AUTOMATIC guidance to a warm-blooded target, rattle while warm-blooded smile , albeit with a reduced signature BUT HE NEEDS LIGHT in the far IR range. laughing
        1. Falcon
          Falcon 24 October 2015 16: 36 New
          0
          Quote: Locksmith
          no passive IR missiles


          Has aim-9. only what does it have to do with it. Missiles with an Ik head are launched in close combat, you still need to live up to it. But

          Quote: Locksmith
          therefore it will be a missile with a radio command guidance system


          This is a long-range missile and at this range without radio correction in any way. And after launch it will be too late to respond.

          Yes
          Quote: Locksmith
          ESR 0.0000001kv micron


          It will turn out to be very important when capturing the RVV-AE seeker, and immediately it will not be so much fun

          Quote: Locksmith
          . Turning off your radar, is it like that ?! Even if with a minimum power BUT THE RADAR WILL WORK !!

          Quote: Locksmith
          then the radiation is tens of thousands of times more reflected from the designated


          What joy is that? The LPI radiation will be located in the aisles of the side lobes of the bottom of the radar of the Su, he will see nothing but noise.

          And that Pafar Su-30 knows the phase and frequency of radiation AN / APG-77? Or maybe a pro-missile rocket will be launched against the emitter?

          Quote: Locksmith
          and also momentik -СУ30 has an optical station AUTOMATIC guidance on a warm-blooded target


          And what exactly is he inducing ?! OLS detects a thermal target at close range. That's just the F-22 has MLD, and at best they will find each other at the same time. This is if without a fight at long distances ...
          1. Locksmith
            Locksmith 24 October 2015 17: 05 New
            -1
            Quote: Falcon
            Radiation LPI will be located in the aisles of the side lobes of the bottom of the radar Su,

            Figured it out myself ? wink Cool, and the guys do not know damn ...
            PS: For such people who walked the physics, a reference, a radar with a frequency close to the observer, for the observer will roughly look like the headlight of a car in the distance, that is, we are quite observing, the propagation of radio waves of such a frequency is very characteristic of the propagation of visible light radiation, because we do not understand "why is he blinking there" - does not mean at all that we do not see him, wink alas, the holiday did not work out laughing
            1. Falcon
              Falcon 24 October 2015 18: 24 New
              +4
              Quote: Locksmith
              Figured it out myself ? Cool, and the guys do not know damn ...


              We didn’t go over to you.

              Quote: Locksmith
              PS: For those who skipped physics help, a radar with a frequency close to the observer, for the observer, roughly speaking, will look like a headlight of a car in the distance, that is, we can see for ourselves that the propagation of radio waves of such a frequency is very characteristic of the propagation of visible light radiation, because we do not understand.


              For those who did not go to physics at all:

              https://yadi.sk/i/qFWSDkzyjyAcu

              Then we read

              https://yadi.sk/i/qAacmHEpjyAip

              Then we look for what LPI is (emits low-energy pulses in a wide frequency range using a technique called broadband transmission. When multiple echoes return, the radar signal processor combines these signals.)

              I will not give a tip. Well, if we are on you, then you will dig BRO yourself.

              And then we argue how the lights shine, what is the power of the pulse from Barca and the signal accumulation time.

              Quote: Locksmith
              alas, the holiday did not work out

              We will celebrate wink
              1. Locksmith
                Locksmith 24 October 2015 21: 42 New
                -3
                Quote: Falcon
                We didn’t go over to you.

                Well then, "Did you come up with it yourself?" This is not a transition to you, this is a definition.
                1. Falcon
                  Falcon 24 October 2015 21: 56 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Locksmith
                  Well then, "Did you come up with it yourself?" This is not a transition to you, this is a definition.

                  fool Learn the etiquette of communication. Intelligence gushed over the edge, as there were no arguments
                  Quote: Locksmith
                  So the target from which the signal is reflected will not react to radiation at all?


                  https://yadi.sk/i/qAacmHEpjyAip

                  She will be nervous and blush tongue

                  Quote: Locksmith
                  many different words for nothing


                  This fully defined competency. Why then answer stop
              2. Locksmith
                Locksmith 24 October 2015 21: 43 New
                -2
                Quote: Falcon
                When multiple echoes return, the radar signal processor combines these signals.)

                So the target from which the signal is reflected will not react to radiation at all?
                1. opus
                  opus 24 October 2015 23: 12 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Locksmith
                  So the target from which the signal is reflected will not react to radiation at all?

                  Here's the thing (roughly):
                  - there is a sensitivity threshold of the receiving antenna / and equipment (the irradiated signal is below the threshold) ... will not respond
                  -frequency of radiation pulses. below 4 (for example), the equipment considers this exposure to interference
                  Well and a number of factors.
                  and LPI radar is a really good thing:
                  ultra-low beam scanning and low level of side lobes, abrupt frequency change (when scanning a sector), pulse shape change,
                  pulse repetition rate (PIT), power is just what is needed (calculation method), compressed pulse, intra-pulse modulation, and even to the heap.
                  There the power can be in 1W (compare with the pulse in 10kW)

                  Rough-on (LPI) disguises itself as noise (radio, of course).
                  Further, the same reflected "noises" (right and left) are processed by the radar computer.
                  Noise-like, no-like-purpose

                  LPI has a drawback: range, applicable, in fact, on an inconspicuous medium.
                  Although they already put on ships


                  Quote: Falcon
                  he will see nothing but noise.

                  Shield and sword ... eternal history
                  Device for detection and direction finding of LPI-radars by the detected signal ("Radiotekhnika" Nonlinear world / No. 5 for 2014)
                  A 4-channel low-probability of intercept (LPI) signal detection and direction-finding device is described, which is a board for processing detected signals arriving from antennas. The structure of the board and the methods for processing the detected signal are considered in detail, the main characteristics of the device and its comparison with analogues are given. With a comparable level of sensitivity, the developed device has a reduced level of energy consumption and can be used as portable equipment.

                  S.A. Borodin - engineer, OJSC “Research Institute“ Vector ”(St. Petersburg). Email: [email protected]
                  D.N. Pavlenko - Head of Department, Research Institute “Vector” (St. Petersburg). E-mail: [email protected]


                  Phillip E. Pace Detecting and Classifying Low Probability of Intercept Radar // Norwood. Artech House. MA 02062.
                  Denk A. Detection and jamming low probability of intercept (LPI) radars // Monterey. Naval Postgraduate School. 2006.
                  Denk A. Detection and jamming lorobability of intercept (LPI) radars // Monterey. Naval Postgraduate School. 2006
              3. Locksmith
                Locksmith 24 October 2015 21: 50 New
                -2
                Quote: Falcon
                what is the pulse power of Barca and the signal accumulation time.

                a lot of different words for nothing, he flies out of town at an altitude of 3 meters, between cell towers that can hide him, he flies at an altitude where there are NO OTHER emitters, and absolutely do not care what kind of super-duper modulation he has, he emits, at least and a little, but it can be seen by the air defense systems and the board that he is irradiating at the moment, there are also no Papuans who did the antennas and understand that the guidance system works for you, even if you have learned the most modern for a long time.
                1. yehat
                  yehat 25 October 2015 08: 43 New
                  0
                  It seems that many FORGOTTEN, what, in fact, the strength of the F-22
                  and its strength lies in equipping a full range of highly advanced passive surveillance systems. The Su-30 also has a similar system - an opto-electronic surveillance station, but the F-22 has others. For example, direction finders of radiation in the radio range. Therefore, before talking nonsense about the operation of the guidance system, first think again.
          2. opus
            opus 24 October 2015 21: 31 New
            +3
            Quote: Falcon
            OLS detects a thermal target at close range. That's just the F-22 has MLD, and at best they will find each other at the same time.

            is not a fact.
            OSF (Optronique secteur frontal) Raphael haws the EC at 100km.


            Which, by the way, was proved by Rafal, having flunked the vaunted F-22 (though having come out on WVR (within visibility)) from 1st Fighter Wing's Raptors in Al Dhafra in 2009



            French Mo writes that in UAE and 1 Mirage 2000 he painted 1 predator on his fuselage

            just like the Pakistanis F-16 Falcon (model 1970s) in 2011 beat the brand new Eurofighter Typhoon Super Fighters

            "The European Typhoon kicks butts!"
            1. Falcon
              Falcon 24 October 2015 22: 02 New
              +2
              Quote: opus
              OSF (Optronique secteur frontal) Raphael haws the EC at 100km.


              The French know a lot about IRST.

              Not for nothing that the Sapsan container was planned to be made on their matrices
        2. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 25 October 2015 00: 48 New
          +1
          Quote: Locksmith
          HE'S NECESSARY LIGHT in the far infrared.

          You're right! "+"!
          But please explain what is "far infrared"? What is its wavelength (frequency)? Maybe I missed something in the physics course and urgently need to learn the quantum theory that has gone ahead?
      2. vladimir_krm
        vladimir_krm 24 October 2015 17: 57 New
        +2
        And that's not the point. It's just that Majumdar is remembered for many articles with a bunch of blunders and distortions, that's all. And "starting from real performance characteristics" is a typical mistake of sofa analysts like this same Majumdar. If it were that simple, then Americans would not be spending millions on Top Gun. And analysts would not draw possible schemes of air battles - why? I looked at the characteristics in Wikipedia - and everything is clear, we write an article, we get a fee :) Although in Wikipedia and other sources, the lion's share of the data is secret or deliberately distorted in one direction or another.

        But the same Americans in the same Top Gun on the ancient MiG-21 of the second generation managed to defeat the F-15 of the fourth generation. Clearly, in close combat.

        So it is here. It is not necessary to look at the fighter, but at the whole complex of equipment, including ground-based, AWACS-type aircraft, the possibility of fighter radar interacting with each other, etc. And none of the journalists does this - otherwise it will be boring and no one will read :)

        So here too, the lines themselves are funny: "The F-22 has advantages in literally all indicators, except for range and combat load." Not only is this a lie (the super-maneuverability of the Su-30 is real, the F-22 is conditional), but also the radar and EPR data are secret, the range of the Raptor missiles is only 120 km, etc.
      3. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 25 October 2015 00: 40 New
        +2
        Quote: GSH-18
        It’s the same as comparing the F-16 and the Su-35, yes, of course, who will control anyone faster in this case.

        Is not a fact! You assume that the PM is better than the TT, because it was made later, and the skill of the shooter is taken out of the brackets. With this approach-assumption, our pilots flying I-16, in the first border battles were not supposed to shoot down the Messerschmitts.
        Your statement would be true if drones met in the sky. In the meantime, a man sits in LA, who completely wins depends on him. Because now the pilot owns the tactics of air combat, which can negate the technical advantage of the enemy.
    6. vyinemeynen
      vyinemeynen 24 October 2015 15: 45 New
      +1
      And where is the comparison as such?
    7. marlin1203
      marlin1203 24 October 2015 20: 48 New
      +1
      Of the entire article, the only indisputable thing is that the Su-30 has 4 aircraft so far. Here the "expert" is probably right. laughing
    8. retardu
      retardu 25 October 2015 13: 37 New
      0
      Yeah, just something when he writes about f-35, sofa marshals here saliva pour in what kind of expert
  2. Aleks28
    Aleks28 24 October 2015 06: 37 New
    +9
    Quote: Arctidian
    The author is Dave Majumdar and that’s it.

    I agree. Bredota complete ..
  3. alexej123
    alexej123 24 October 2015 06: 42 New
    17
    Another strange thing. About a year ago, the F-35 was compared with the T-50, still afterwards with the Su-35, now with the Su-30СМ. What is it for? It can be seen amers with F-35 in general, things are bad. If it goes on like this, I think soon and get to the MiG-15 in comparison.
    1. Andrey NM
      Andrey NM 24 October 2015 10: 07 New
      +8
      With I-16 and Po-2 have not been compared? :) The Po-2 EPR is also small, and the heat from the engines is several orders of magnitude less. And if you put silencers on the engine, it will not be heard. What is not STELS? There are Farman, Sopvich, etc. Compare to health. But the question is, did the F-22 pilots cease to lose consciousness due to the work of the oxygen system? And they defeated corrosion? And what else will come out?
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 24 October 2015 12: 29 New
        +3
        Quote: Andrey NM
        With I-16 and Po-2 have not been compared? :)

        1. Andrey NM
          Andrey NM 24 October 2015 18: 28 New
          +3
          Mark Hannah died in September 1999 on demonstration flights ... He gave a second life to many "donkeys".
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 24 October 2015 16: 53 New
        +3
        And Po-2 is a night stealth bomber. A more technologically advanced analogue of the same era was the "Mosquito", also solid wood, invisible on radars and distinguished by an exceptionally high survival rate.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. alexej123
      alexej123 25 October 2015 00: 21 New
      0
      Sorry, I meant F-22. Although radish is not sweeter. That one is compared, that the second.
  4. Bongo
    Bongo 24 October 2015 06: 43 New
    +9
    Frankly, after reading this:
    For the same reason, the U.S. Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle and the U.S. Navy F / A-18F Super Hornet, which are largely direct analogues of the Su-30СМ,
    even a little upset. I thought that some of the regular authors of "VO" had "fallen so low". But I saw this:
    Posted by Dave Majumdar
    - and everything fell into place. fellow
    1. Falcon
      Falcon 24 October 2015 09: 14 New
      +3
      Quote: Bongo
      Frankly, after reading this:
      For the same reason, the US Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle and the US Navy F / A-18F Super Hornet, which are in many ways direct analogs of the Su-30SM, were even a little upset. I thought that some of the regular authors of "VO" so "fell down"


      And what is the problem of comparing Su-30 with f-15 strike eagle and f / a-18? Do you want to say they are not analogues in the class of drummers?
      1. zyablik.olga
        zyablik.olga 24 October 2015 11: 58 New
        +5
        Quote: Falcon
        And what is the problem of comparing the Su-30 with the f-15 strike eagle

        As they say, knowledgeable people of F-15E should be compared with Su-34, or am I mistaken?
        1. Falcon
          Falcon 24 October 2015 12: 35 New
          +2
          Quote: zyablik.olga
          As they say, knowledgeable people of F-15E should be compared with Su-34, or am I mistaken?


          I disagree.

          Su-30 and F-15 strike eagle are multi-functional fighters or fighter-bombers, or strike (as you like).
          Su-34 more bomber jackets.
          See:
          On 34- the plane plane aiming complex has already been installed


          For some reason, he has an armored cabin - which is a very controversial moment. Since it is still a little expensive for an attack aircraft. He has limitations on aerobatics; maneuverable combat is not his. No OLS. Enough old radar - for air combat ...

          F-15E as well as Su-30 is quite suitable for air combat. AFAR F-15 surpasses BARS, not to mention the su-34 - AIM-120 hang without problems.

          2-th pilot performs the functions of an operator of weapons - with a hanging sighting container.

          Sniper for F-15


          And for su-xnumx

          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 24 October 2015 16: 55 New
            0
            Well, fly against high-altitude air defense standards. Here the missile launchers will rejoice. Booking Su-Xnumx is absolutely justified.
            1. Falcon
              Falcon 24 October 2015 17: 12 New
              -2
              Quote: EvilLion
              Well, fly against high-altitude air defense standards. Here the missile launchers will rejoice. Booking Su-Xnumx is absolutely justified.


              And what will the reservation save from? From pzrk? Or maybe from shilka?
              Or a lot of Su-24, F-15, F / A-18, F-16 from Kalash choked?
    2. opus
      opus 24 October 2015 23: 46 New
      +1
      Quote: Bongo
      But I saw this:

      Sergey, why did this Indo-Pakistani not please you?

      He even (unlike me) climbed into the cockpit of the EA-18G Growler ..
      Well, the truth is for the 35th anniversary.

      chat


      "writes" a lot


      "covers" military issues since 2004. He is currently пишет for US Naval Institute, Aviation Week, The Daily Beast and other publications. He previously covered national security issues in Flight International, Defense News, and the C4ISR Journal. Majumdar was engaged in strategic research at the University of Calgary, and is currently studying the history of the naval forces.

      =====================
      Well, he writes and writes, let him write.
      He doesn’t have a military education, yes. Well, we and Rogozin don’t have any ...
      1. Bongo
        Bongo 25 October 2015 09: 03 New
        +4
        Quote: opus
        Well, he writes and writes, let him write.

        Anton, I’m used to writing only about what I understand a little, if I don’t know something then I consult with competent people. And even ashamed to read this ...
        Quote: opus
        He doesn’t have a military education, yes. Well, we and Rogozin don’t have any ...

        I have, albeit a specific one ... you can’t write an article on this subject. hi
  5. Petrik66
    Petrik66 24 October 2015 07: 11 New
    -2
    Original article - Su35 - F22 - real assessment of the battle against Russian scrap metal http://rusjev.net/2015/09/18/su35-f22-realnaya-otsenka-boya-protiv-rossiyskogo-m

    etalloloma / this opus was published on the portal "Russian Jew".
    1. sssla
      sssla 24 October 2015 08: 10 New
      +3
      Quote: Petrik66
      Original article - Su35 - F22

      I read thanks for the humor!
      The Americans were very disappointed with this drying. The disgusting quality of the engines, the extremely low reliability, the very weak programs of the on-board computers controlling the flight were indicated. Very quickly, the pilots of the American F-15 developed tactics that forced Indian pilots to maneuver using the thrust vector control, which led to a sharp decrease in speed and the “drawdown” of the Su-30MKI to the tail. As a result, during training melee battles, all Su-30s were conditionally shot down without causing damage to the conditional enemy. Drives of Dryers delivered a lot of trouble to the organizers of the exercises. Sushki required an interval of at least 4 minutes to take off from one runway. Otherwise, the engines could fail or “surge” could occur. At the cost of much effort, the Americans managed to reduce the take-off interval to 2 minutes, but this is also unacceptable if hundreds of cars must fly into the air. By the end of 3 days of flight, ALL engines were out of order and required replacement, and vehicles with interchangeable engines were late. When, finally, the engines arrived, it turned out that their replacement would take several days (on the F-15, the standard time for replacing the engine is 8 hours for a team of 3 technicians. By the way, on F-22 this standard is only 4 hours for 2 person). The hydraulics of the chassis cleaning mechanism caused a lot of complaints - constant leaks, puddles, topping up liquids during maintenance, etc. As a result of mass breakdowns, the Indians refused to continue participating in the exercises. I would like to think that the Su-35 was largely able to get rid of these diseases.
      1. Viktor fm
        Viktor fm 24 October 2015 08: 31 New
        +6
        On the MiG-29 in Soviet times, the engine was changed in the field in 6 hours.
      2. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 25 October 2015 11: 40 New
        0

        Original material here:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKEa-R37PeU&list=PLA0CD1788F6D0A3AD

        Colonel Terrence Fornof gives lecture on Red Flag 08, an F-15 pilot and the Director of the Requirements
        and Testing office at the United States Air Force Warfare Center, Nellis AFB, Nev. Indo-US Red Flag Air
        Force Exercise Lecture 2008 Part1 Posted by Tanay On Bharat-Rakshak.com.

        Hindus comment here:
        Dissecting a dogfight: Sukhoi vs USAF at Red Flag 2008
        The Hindus explained why they needed such a long time interval between take-off aircraft.
        "The engines get clogged and fail due to the raised dust, and they are sent to Russia for repair. The Russians are sending in a new motor."
  6. artura0911
    artura0911 24 October 2015 07: 13 New
    +7
    Majumba))) how do you know how the radar works on the Su 30, you better write articles about the Majumba tribes)))))))
  7. Gray 43
    Gray 43 24 October 2015 07: 34 New
    +4
    I would write, "The Russians have bad planes, because I said so", the whole point of the article is that this ExpErd does not know that our planes are equipped not only with melee missiles, and our defense industry can unpleasantly surprise competing foreign firms
  8. Viktor fm
    Viktor fm 24 October 2015 07: 36 New
    11
    "The combination of stealth and detection means that Russian aircraft are likely to be destroyed even before their pilots realize they are being targeted." This nonsense is written in all such articles. These authors are as far from aviation as I am from ballet. The thing is that since Soviet times, all aircraft have a warning station about the irradiation of an aircraft by an enemy aircraft, indicating the direction, type of aircraft, range to it with the issuance of recommendations, or automatic decision making by means of destruction. So the Raptor sees you, but you don't know about it - this is from the realm of fantasy.
    1. dokusib
      dokusib 24 October 2015 07: 57 New
      0
      Well there are passive radars. For such a price, should he be able to at least something? ... Well, in the sense of fearing the enemy is bad, and not overestimate simply fatal. But we have missiles that turn on their radar only when approaching the target. True, at this time it is driven by an airplane radar.
      1. Viktor fm
        Viktor fm 24 October 2015 08: 14 New
        +2
        In order to launch a rocket at you, he still needs to irradiate you, no matter what waves, but automation plays a big role here, who will launch the rocket faster and whose rocket will fly faster. This is not to mention jamming and maneuvers.
        1. dokusib
          dokusib 24 October 2015 15: 06 New
          0
          Agree smile And if so: "Delta" in the bushes with passive-active radar? They quickly turned on, pointed and faded away until an anti-radar missile flew over them. And if they did, and so what, they write off them at expense in batches, not a fighter. It costs money.
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 24 October 2015 16: 57 New
      0
      How do you determine the type of radiation? Well, if the signatures are known, but these are also only assumptions. Actually, there was already a case when the Su-30СМ conducted a visual identification of the radiation source.
      1. NIKNN
        NIKNN 25 October 2015 15: 10 New
        +3
        There is a database of all known signatures and emissions, on this basis a modern electronic warfare is based.
  9. kuz363
    kuz363 24 October 2015 07: 46 New
    0
    "Russian planes will most likely be destroyed before their pilots realize that they have become a target" Something the author caught up with fear. The plane discovers that it is being irradiated even before the rocket is launched. There are anti-missile maneuvers that allow you to get away from the missile, because the inertia of the missile, due to its higher speed, is higher than that of an aircraft. And radio-electronic means of jamming, too, cannot be discarded, as well as heat traps.
  10. Taygerus
    Taygerus 24 October 2015 07: 54 New
    +1
    After full inadequate, article complete nonsense fool
  11. MDesant
    MDesant 24 October 2015 08: 05 New
    +5
    A man comes to a sex therapist.
    - Doctor, I have such a problem - I can only go with my wife two times in a row, and Vaska from the next entrance says that he can twelve times a night.
    “How do you know about this?”
    - So he said ...
    - What's the problem? And you say too ...
  12. Creosote
    Creosote 24 October 2015 08: 19 New
    +3
    The author Dave Majumdar - okay, but here is the title of the article - Su-30SM and F-22: advantages and disadvantages - somehow it requires no one to compare the characteristics and examples of combat use and other things .... but not like that: F22 is better because he is better. Article is nonsense.
  13. KirAntiglobov
    KirAntiglobov 24 October 2015 08: 36 New
    11
    I would like to understand, dear gentlemen, WHICH X .. A SIMPLE Nonsense IS PLACED ON MY FAVORITE PORTAL ???
    1. Petrix
      Petrix 24 October 2015 22: 00 New
      +1
      Comments are interesting to read. Also good.
      Here the scout got the task to collect the Old. Finds a site with professionals and makes a throw in the topic he needs. Sit, wait and watch how the links are being thrown.
  14. Dam
    Dam 24 October 2015 08: 39 New
    +3
    The guy needs to work out the loot. That is majumarit in black. There is nothing to discuss in the article, this is a psychiatrist.
  15. ararat
    ararat 24 October 2015 08: 43 New
    0
    Well, if they began to compare the su 30 and the raptor 22, maybe ours is inferior, well then where is the su 27, let them fly in a couple and of course not enough of our planes in Syria, more should be put there.
  16. afrikanez
    afrikanez 24 October 2015 08: 53 New
    0
    This is not an article but a continuous advertisement. Although the author is "Western", then there is nothing to be surprised at. Each sandpiper praises its swamp!
  17. AlNikolaich
    AlNikolaich 24 October 2015 09: 01 New
    +5
    No matter how many disputes are fought, which is better, only a real battle can reveal a real winner
    clash! Theories, theories, and in actual application there is always a nuance that solves everything!
    During the Second World War, the Americans cleaned their "Airacobra" so they shoved us under Lend-Lease!
    And it turned out that our pilots learned how to use this car very effectively!
    So, the comparisons available in the article are at least tense.
    And, in general, the main weapon of the fighter pilot!
  18. fkmdtn62
    fkmdtn62 24 October 2015 09: 18 New
    +2
    Apparently, this opus is inspired by a huge joint and a large portion of "tasty" mushrooms. Delirium of a gray mare, moreover, an American-English-Francophone breed. I even hate to read this nonsense.
  19. Support
    Support 24 October 2015 10: 09 New
    +2
    Don't worry too much. Writing nonsense? Well, good. In a real military confrontation, then let their pilots remember the articles of this "specialist" ..... if they survive.
  20. Curious
    Curious 24 October 2015 10: 21 New
    0
    even disgusting to read this nonsense. Why disgusting? It is interesting and even useful to know the opinion of the "partner" or, rather, the likely adversary about yourself and your weapon. Let him write.
  21. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 24 October 2015 10: 44 New
    0
    It is they who invigorate themselves to believe in the possibility of no flight zone in Syria
  22. tomket
    tomket 24 October 2015 10: 52 New
    -2
    Well, in general, the Indians blabbed about the fact that the Su-30MKI cut the Raptors on the exercises like a butter knife. It is curious that the F-22 was not officially displayed against the Su-30MKI. At the same time, the F-22 was not officially displayed against the "Raphael", although later the video still leaked into the network. In addition, the Malaysian press published a photo from the exercises, in which the f-22 was in the zone of destruction of the MiG-29 cannon.
    1. Forest
      Forest 24 October 2015 11: 39 New
      -1
      The RAPTOR ANYWHERE did not participate in ANY sales training and participated sufficiently in a limited number of training exercises. There were no raptors in India at all. Moreover, he did not participate in training with the hopelessly outdated MiG. No need to throw caps - the Raptor is a very dangerous and powerful aircraft, except that the Su-35 can compete with it. This is not Lightning, where they shoved everything that was available, didn’t they invent a nuclear reactor. This aircraft was developed and remains a fighter of gaining air supremacy.
      1. tomket
        tomket 24 October 2015 11: 54 New
        +4
        Quote: Forest
        Moreover, he did not participate in training with the hopelessly outdated MiG.

        Yeah really?)))))
        A photo apparently fake ????
        Quote: Forest
        There was no raptor at all in India

        But there were Indians in the United States. I noted that the F-22 was not displayed at the exercises against the Rafal either, but nevertheless there is a video.
        Quote: Forest
        The Raptor is a very dangerous and powerful aircraft, except that the Su-35 can compete with it.

        Malaysian Su-30 fought quite successfully.
        1. Forest
          Forest 24 October 2015 12: 15 New
          +4
          At the recent NATO exercises in Europe, the Young Europeans on their MiGs, together with the Raptors, participated in countering the "Russian aggression." In Malaysia, there were no F-22s at all. And no one would suggest anything to the Indians, because The Senate banned all sales of Raptors and participation in aerial training with non-US Air Force aircraft.
          1. tomket
            tomket 24 October 2015 12: 43 New
            +4
            Quote: Forest
            In Malaysia, F-22 were not at all

            Photos don't count? Or do you think this is a Polish MiG? Sorry for the rudeness, below is a photo from the 2014 Malaysian exercises for especially stubborn ones. I will comment ... on the photo in the same formation f-22, MiG-29, Su-30, Hawk, f-18 and f-15. By the way, in the course of the exercises, even the "hawk" was marked with a victory over the "sacred cow" f-22.
          2. tomket
            tomket 24 October 2015 12: 49 New
            +1
            Another photo, so that there would be no doubt that the flight took place in Malaysia, and not somewhere above the Czech Republic.
        2. retardu
          retardu 25 October 2015 13: 33 New
          0
          Do you have anything specific other than the fact that he participated in exercises?
          Under what conditions were the aircraft, were the lenses removed from the raptor, at what distance was the simulation conducted?
          While this is all the rumor, when the video appears then you can tell something. (And the dogfight against rafal is really funny)

          The raptor shot down 10000 su-35s, but is there a link?
          No, but there the Indian's grandmother told my mother that her second cousin
  23. rubin6286
    rubin6286 24 October 2015 11: 25 New
    +3
    The foreign author is poorly versed in military affairs and in military aviation, in particular. Since 1947, there has been no infantry in the USSR at all, but there is a type of Armed Forces — Ground Forces, which include such types of troops as motorized rifle troops, armored, artillery, special forces, etc. etc. There is no our infantry in Syria, but there are military units and units guarding the bases in Latakia and Tartus. The support of the Syrian forces is exclusively dealt with by the Russian Aerospace Forces and no Russian ground operation is planned. This was clearly stated by Vladimir Putin, and the author should have delved into the essence of the statements of the head of our state.

    Although the Su-30 SM is a two-seat multi-functional fighter, it is not a direct analogue of the American F-15E Strike Eagle and F / A-18F Super Hornet, as It was adopted much later and is made according to a different aerodynamic scheme.

    Maybe the author is right that the link of Russian fighters in the event of a military conflict with the US Air Force in this region will not do weather, because “They fight not only with skill, but also with numbers”, but further claims about the superiority of American cars are ordinary amateurism. The chances of cars are approximately equal, as are the capabilities of on-board equipment and weapons. Neither the F-22 nor the F-35 have any significant advantages (speed, climb, practical ceiling, bend radius, flight range and combat radius, permissible overload). Absolute stealth in these machines is also not at long distances, nor in close combat.


    In the joint exercises of the Indian and US Air Force, the aircraft were not Su-30SM, but Su-30 MKI of the Indian assembly, the quality of which could be slightly lower than the Russian one and there were no nozzles with a variable thrust vector on this machine. In general, controlling an airplane by deflecting the thrust vector of the nozzle is a rather complicated procedure and only experienced pilots can master it. Indeed, when performing this kind of maneuver, a decrease in speed is observed, but this is inevitable, since there is a constructive restriction on overload. "Drawdown" when performing difficult aerobatics and elements of air combat is just as natural, justified and predictable, because allows you to perform the most effective maneuver when attacking an enemy aircraft, inaccessible to machines of a different design. The phenomenon of "surge" in aviation occurs and is associated with a delay in reaching the regime of one of the engines and if it is repeated often, the reasons should be sought in violation of the rules of maintenance. As for the mention of the takeoff interval from one runway, it depends on its characteristics and the level of readiness of the machines for launch. In any case, 4 minutes is enough for the pair to take off. In battle, the pilot makes the most full use of all the characteristics of the machine and minor malfunctions in the operation of systems and units (leakage of the hydraulic system of the chassis, violation of the tightness of the joints, etc., etc.) are quite natural. Without this, there are no victories and this is known both in the USA, in NATO, and in Russia. Replacing an engine is one of the most difficult and time-consuming operations, especially in the field. 8 hours is a lot, but 2 hours is also a lot, given the fleeting and fierce nature of modern warfare. It is often easier to “replace” a new aircraft, from where it would be .......

    The possibility of rising into the air with the onset of a conflict of hundreds of vehicles from one side or another is determined by their initial number and developed aerodrome network. To raise hundreds, you must have thousands - in the Middle East, no one has this.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 25 October 2015 15: 43 New
      0
      for rubin6286:
      "and the Su-30 MKI of the Indian assembly, the quality of which could be slightly lower than the Russian
      and this machine does not have variable thrust vector nozzles "////

      "Su-30MKI
      MKI stands for "Modernizirovannyi, Kommercheskiy, Indiski" meaning "Modernized, Commercial, Indian".
      Jointly-developed with Hindustan Aeronautics Limited for the Indian Air Force. Includes thrust vectoring control (TVC) and canards. Equipped with a multinational avionics complex sourced from Russia, India, France and Israel.

      Please note: "Includes thrust vectoring control"

      Build quality may be slightly lower than Russian, but avionics is more advanced,
      including French and Israeli appliances.
      1. Peterhof 73
        Peterhof 73 25 October 2015 16: 53 New
        0
        Build quality may be slightly lower than Russian, but avionics is more advanced,
        including French and Israeli appliances.


        Well, if they are Israeli, then of course.
        "British tanks are the best tanks in the world!" (film "Makar the Pathfinder")
      2. rubin6286
        rubin6286 25 October 2015 18: 44 New
        0
        It is very good if the Indians have this "more advanced" French and Israeli avionics, which means that within the framework of military-technical cooperation between India and Russia, it has already been properly studied, mastered and applied by Russian aviation specialists. Putin has set the task of achieving full import substitution in the military-industrial complex of Russia by 2020, and Deputy Prime Minister Rogozin in charge of the military-industrial complex will achieve this. In order not to further "disperse" the comments, I will say that today all Russian combat aircraft of the 4th generation and the technologies and structural materials used in their production are at the level of the best in the world. With this, it seems to me, none of the visitors to the site "VO" will argue.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 25 October 2015 19: 02 New
          0
          "it has already been properly studied, mastered and applied by Russian aviation specialists" ////

          I do not argue. But the reverse is also true: all Russian technologies used in Indian planes flow to the West.
          Mutual enrichment takes place, so to speak. drinks
  24. The comment was deleted.
  25. glavnykarapuz
    glavnykarapuz 24 October 2015 13: 07 New
    +4
    Dave Majumdar is an American sofa expert. For most of our site, so to speak, "colleague". wink laughing
  26. Lapkonium
    Lapkonium 24 October 2015 14: 00 New
    +2
    The odds in all of the ovs are quite strong in the comments. laughing But seriously, it's stupid to say that "your garbage Su-30SM raptor will tear everything." The raptor also has an OBT, and with a flat nozzle, but in addition to this, it has stealth and one less pilot carcass. To say that this will not give him any advantages is at least strange. If they weren't, we wouldn't have worked so hard on PAK FA, right?
    1. Locksmith
      Locksmith 24 October 2015 15: 11 New
      +1
      Quote: Lapkonium
      Saying that this will not give him any advantages is at least strange.

      A flat nozzle is just an element of a small exhaust signature, but when a raptor goes into an attack, it really attacks, and does not crawl 100 km / h, and in this case the tail will be like a comet, and it is absolutely all the same what shape it is, even say In a real battle, a round nozzle is preferable - it has a higher quality and the UHT VSERAKURSNY is obtained, the raptor only deviates up and down, this does not give him the opportunity to perform an anti-missile maneuver in the horizontal plane - of the "falling leaf" type, such a maneuver effectively knocks down the missile guidance.
  27. RUSLAN
    RUSLAN 24 October 2015 14: 43 New
    0
    Quote: alexej123
    Another strange thing. About a year ago, the F-35 was compared with the T-50, still afterwards with the Su-35, now with the Su-30СМ. What is it for? It can be seen amers with F-35 in general, things are bad. If it goes on like this, I think soon and get to the MiG-15 in comparison.

    THE ARTICLE IS SPEAKING ABOUT SYRIA, AND THERE IS NO SU-35 AND ALREADY MORE THAN T-50! YES AND ABOUT F-35 IN THE ARTICLE DO NOT SPEAK ANYTHING! DO YOU READ IT AT ALL?
    1. alexej123
      alexej123 25 October 2015 00: 16 New
      0
      I read an article, but have you read other articles? I'm not talking about Syria. I'm on comparison, I apologize for the F-22. I meant it. He was also compared. You, before anger pluck read other articles about comparing it with Sushki, by the way there were articles on this site.
  28. Lee_Mubai
    Lee_Mubai 24 October 2015 14: 51 New
    0
    F 22 is a plane at the price of an equilibrium piece of gold, and adapted only for filming in Hollywood films !!!
  29. X Y Z
    X Y Z 24 October 2015 15: 01 New
    +1
    Although the Su-30SM is a very efficient fourth-generation fighter, it has no chance against the Raptor, especially if the air battle is out of line of sight. The F-22 has advantages in literally all respects except for range and combat load. The combination of stealth and detection devices will lead to the fact that Russian aircraft are likely to be destroyed before their pilots realize that they have become a target.


    Majumdar lights up as before. That's right, the road to the checkout has long been trodden and I don't want to change anything, except in terms of increasing the size of the fee. In his enlightened opinion, it is even ridiculous to compare a real American pepelats with an Asian cocktail. This is a cool thing - a real American fighter, which in Hollywood film production puts enemies in hundreds, if not thousands, and enemies do not even see him. Don't make the "iksperts" laugh with your funny crafts.
  30. vv32167
    vv32167 24 October 2015 15: 29 New
    +1
    An idiotic comparison. Fk station wagon. He LOSES to both the fighter and the bomber and the stormtrooper. Stupid plane. In special forums for pilots, look for Old, even with the same amers.
  31. barbiturate
    barbiturate 24 October 2015 17: 05 New
    0
    maybe this Dave Majumdar and the expert, of course, only compares the advertising characteristics of the F-22 with the unknown characteristics of the Su-30SM, but here you don’t need to be an expert, you need to puff out your cheeks and poke where the advertisement is better and which is generally recognized cooler). Although the F-22 is probably preferable for air combat
  32. cosmos-PS
    cosmos-PS 24 October 2015 17: 23 New
    0
    Maybe the F-22 is even cooler than our Su-30, although I doubt it very much, but it’s clear that this is enough, so much so that Europe has scooped up water and the Americans keep flattery to where the Su-30 is hosted.
  33. Sterlya
    Sterlya 24 October 2015 18: 51 New
    0
    Quote: Sterlya
    The combination of stealth and detection devices will lead to the fact that Russian aircraft are likely to be destroyed before their pilots realize that they have become a target.

    It's a shame for the pilots and the plane recourse
  34. Krsk
    Krsk 24 October 2015 22: 26 New
    +1
    The Raptor is sure to inflict a crushing defeat on the Russian Su-30SM ... the lustful dreams of all the daves of the Naglosaksonskhih.

    and tempts to ask how Arnie in the "red heat" what kind of proofs ... except for letters in brochures Lockheed (his mother) Martin
  35. Alexy
    Alexy 25 October 2015 05: 52 New
    0
    "considerable forces of infantry", here for a more detailed prize.
  36. Sergey47
    Sergey47 25 October 2015 13: 22 New
    0
    Who publishes this majumudaka? already got anal whiner!
  37. NIKNN
    NIKNN 25 October 2015 16: 21 New
    +7
    Quote: Petrik66
    Original article - Su35 - F22 - real assessment of the battle against Russian scrap metal http://rusjev.net/2015/09/18/su35-f22-realnaya-otsenka-boya-protiv-rossiyskogo-m


    etalloloma / this opus was published on the portal "Russian Jew".


    Well, why nominated? The person just gave a link to the Jewish point of view, it was interesting to get acquainted. I noticed long ago how these comrades illuminate everything in their favor. And "their merkava is unkillable and they do not bear losses (I fear that they will not overpopulate the universe). No, don't think, I have nothing against nationality!"
    But closer to the topic:
    1. All comparisons given in both articles are conditional to the extent of discussion in kindergarten since compares data from the press, rather than the actual characteristics of aircraft and equipment.
    2. The battle conditions are given 1 on 1 and it is not known where.
    Citing the fact that the Su30, thanks to the weak avionics (and whoever said that it is weak) will not even see the "raptor" while it knocks it down, the author -> author -> the author completely forgot that the first enemy is detected by a ground radar or AWACS and only then a fighter is aimed at the target, so that the "invisible" raptor has no advantages here. To date, there are detection stations not for radar radiation, but for the operation of any electronic equipment, including any element of avionics, and covers an area with a radius of 400 km. (These have already been installed near Moscow and give target designation to electronic warfare systems for countering.) I do not even consider the option that one can be invisible only in a narrow wavelength range, and for example, for decimeter or meter wavelengths, it is not particularly invisible.
    The next factor in the range of destruction is the presence on board of the appropriate weapons and the range of its use. And even if you have three times negative visibility, but all long-range aerial combat missiles have an active seeker, it’s more than expensive to put an AFAR with a system similar to the one on the raptor that processes and identifies the signals. And therefore, it glows oh-oh and applying to it both boron electronic warfare and other means of jamming is not so difficult (although not so simple).
    Taking into account the launch range (and the launch range of 120 km is an advertisement), it is real 60–70 km and the approach speed of a kilometer per second, the advantages of long-range missile milking are minuscule in time, but then the shortcomings of a flat nozzle and the absence of melee missiles with helmet-mounted target designation go forward because no one can capture the TGSN from the internal weapons compartment, and if there are missiles on the external sling, little remains of STELS's advantages.
    I did not identify all aspects, did not take into account the tactics, did not consider the interaction with the land (sea) air defense zones, which is necessarily present and much more.
    Now I hope it’s clear how improper is the comparison of types of aircraft in true hostilities?

    P.S. By the way, it is always nice to read comments that are not even quite competent. And yet the enemy must be respected, such a plane as F22 fools could not have created.
  38. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 25 October 2015 21: 01 New
    0
    In addition to bookstores - AFAR Engines, etc., here it is necessary to compare the communication capabilities of cars with satellites, other aircraft, and ground equipment. The Americans have gone far ahead in this regard, and in some situations our good planes may turn out to be blind kittens, although in a 1: 1 fight they might even beat the enemy.
  39. Kir1984
    Kir1984 26 October 2015 06: 39 New
    +1
    "he has no chance against Raptor"

    Everything, we tremble ... laughing
    (in a whisper ...: you can still compare with the su-24m))) or better with the 33rd, by the way he is a little fighter)
    An article along the way came out entirely about the advantages of the f-22 and the shortcomings of the su-30 ...
    And, as I understand it, the main message of this composition
    ("if an armed clash occurs between the armies of these two states") -
    should be understood approximately as "our so-called. colleagues finally let slip about their hidden plans ..."?
  40. Kir1984
    Kir1984 26 October 2015 07: 20 New
    0
    "or better with the 33rd"

    PS was meant from 34th).
  41. Altona
    Altona 28 October 2015 11: 40 New
    0
    “Raptor” is sure to inflict a crushing defeat on the Russian Su-30CM, but if an armed clash occurs between the armies of these two states, it will become a nightmare on a global scale that no one wants to try. The result will be a powerful escalation of tensions, which is very easy to get out of control and lead to a serious war. Let's hope that doesn't happen.
    ------------------------
    If it rises above 6900 meters, then maybe something like that ... In the meantime, the issue is debatable ...