Military Review

In the United States for the first time flew the newest F-16V

121
The company Lockheed Martin conducted the first test flight of a new fighter F-16V, reports Look with reference to defense news.


F-16

“This flight marks historical stage in the evolution of the F-16 models. The new F-16V equipment allows you to be in the highest positions of international security and strengthen your position for proven fourth-generation fighter aircraft, ”said Rod MacLean, vice president of the company.

According to the publication, the upgraded fighter "received a new radar APG-83 SABR with an active phased antenna array, significantly improving the ability of the aircraft to detect and hit targets."

The cockpit is equipped with a new instrument panel with a multi-function display. A modernized flight mission management system is installed on board. All systems are connected by high-speed data bus. In addition, the fighter received a new EW system.

According to the developers, "the whole set of improvements can be installed on already operated F-16".

For the first time, the company announced plans to develop the F-16V variant at 2012 at an air show in Singapore.

The newspaper recalls that on Thursday, John McCain expressed a desire to reduce purchases of the expensive F-35 (the Pentagon plans to purchase an 2443 aircraft for the Navy and Marine Corps), since it "doesn’t fit well with the planned budget."

Publication Reference: “The F-16 Fighter was developed in the first half of the 1970's. At the moment, the fighter is in service with the order of 25 countries of the world. In total, over the entire production time of the F-16, more than 4,5 have been produced in thousands of such aircraft. A fighter with a maximum take-off weight of 19,2 tons can reach speeds of up to 2,1 thousand kilometers per hour. "
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com/
121 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 24 October 2015 09: 45
    50
    Fu-35 smoothly goes to junk ... Lohid is trying to make something like our MiG-16 from Fu-35. Something "boyars are summing up" that they can.
    1. SRC P-15
      SRC P-15 24 October 2015 09: 52
      33
      The newspaper recalls that on Thursday, John McCain expressed a desire to reduce the purchase of the expensive F-35 (the Pentagon plans to purchase 2443 aircraft for the Navy and the Marine Corps) because they "do not fit well with the planned budget."

      - "I have a desire to buy a cow, but I have no opportunity, I have the opportunity to buy a goat, but I have no desire!"
      1. supertiger21
        supertiger21 24 October 2015 10: 05
        38
        Well, they’re doing it right. If it is possible to maximize the aging aircraft and if there is a demand for it, then why not ?! I think that the F-16 will serve even at least until 2030.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. gjv
          gjv 24 October 2015 10: 28
          +3
          Quote: supertiger21
          and if there is a demand for it, then why not ?!

          Lockheed Martin is currently implementing contracts for the supply of 36 F-16C / D Block 52+ aircraft to Iraq, 12 F-16C / D Block 50+ to Oman and 30 F-16E / F Block 61 UAE. Pakistan wants another 8 F-16s. Will Pakistan be given a new modification of V? request
        3. logix1312
          logix1312 24 October 2015 12: 21
          13
          Right! Our SU-24 finally manifested itself in Syria, and before that it had not been seen much by anyone. And how many years already, how did he enter service? Near the SU-34, it looks like a dinosaur, but they put in new equipment, guidance systems, and the barmalei scatter in different directions (who managed).
          1. avt
            avt 24 October 2015 12: 39
            +3
            Quote: logix1312
            ! Our SU-24 finally manifested itself in Syria, and before that it had not been seen much by anyone.

            Yah !? laughing
          2. Vadim237
            Vadim237 24 October 2015 13: 17
            +7
            Su 24 is still seen, especially 3 reports every year about the crash of these aircraft.
            1. NIKNN
              NIKNN 24 October 2015 15: 21
              +5
              This is true :( It was difficult to get an airplane. In the process of testing, few planes had so many losses. Proper modernization and use of the existing fleet is a good way out if the design had the potential for this. It allows us to solve many problems with minimal costs (we are given time to increase the fleet of SU34) but it doesn’t solve all the problems. America has already refused F111 and we will eventually leave Su24, a temporary measure.
              With flapping wings a dead end branch. Only the B1 remained in the USA, we have the Su24 and Tu160. The latter I think will be upgraded a couple more times until PAK YES see.
              1. leon1204id
                leon1204id 24 October 2015 20: 35
                +3
                But what about the TU-22M3?
              2. Archon
                Archon 25 October 2015 05: 04
                0
                how to distinguish Su24 from MiG23 in the sky?
                just in Syria there is still a MiG23 and it also has a variable wing geometry
                1. SIvan
                  SIvan 25 October 2015 19: 31
                  0
                  The MiG-23 has a narrower nose and a long keel (this can be seen from the side). And so, they are really very similar.

                  Su-24:


                  MiG-23:
          3. Prapor-527
            Prapor-527 24 October 2015 13: 21
            +7
            Quote: logix1312
            Our SU-24 finally manifested itself in Syria, and before that it had not been seen much by anyone. And how many years already, how did he enter service? Near the SU-34, it looks like a dinosaur, but they put in new equipment, guidance systems, and the barmalei scatter in different directions (who managed).

            Suddenly... hi 1) In the Afghan War (1979-1989), the Soviet Su-24 was used to a limited extent. They were involved in combat work only during the Panjshir operation of 1984 and the cover of the withdrawal of Soviet troops in 1988-1989. Su-24s were never based in Afghanistan, operating from Soviet air bases in Central Asia. There were no combat losses.

            2) Iraqi Su-24s during the Persian Gulf war did not make any sorties and were flown to Iran (appropriating these planes after the end of the war).

            3) Aircraft inherited by Azerbaijan were used to a limited extent during the Karabakh war.

            4) Uzbek Su-24s participated in the civil war in Tajikistan, one machine was shot down.

            5) The most intensive combat use was in Russian aircraft during both Chechen wars. In total, three Su-24s were shot down or crashed in the North Caucasus, and three more were burned at the airfield in preparation for a sortie.

            6) Also, the Russian Su-24 was used during the war in South Ossetia in 2008. The official Russian reports of the losses of the Su-24 were not mentioned, however, some experts indicated the loss of two aircraft of this type (see in more detail). In 2012, Lieutenant Colonel Vladimir Bogodukhov, who received the title Hero of Russia for combat missions in South Ossetia, said in an interview with Argumenty i Fakty that during the war one Su-24 was shot down, the crew of the aircraft ejected and landed at the location of Russian troops .

            7) One Libyan Su-24 was shot down by rebel fire during the civil war in Libya in 2011.

            8) Used by the Ukrainian army during the conflict in the east of the country. According to Ukrainian data, on October 4, 2014 two Su-24Ms were shot down from the ground by fire and one Su-24 was lost as a result of equipment failure.

            9) Used by the Syrian Air Force in a civil war. On September 23, 2014, a Patriot rocket shot down a Su-24, which invaded Israel’s airspace 800 meters.

            10) 12 Su-24M since September 30, 2015, the Russian Air Force has been involved in Syria to fight against the Islamic State terrorist organization.
            1. NIKNN
              NIKNN 24 October 2015 15: 42
              +8
              6) Also, the Russian Su-24 was used during the war in South Ossetia in 2008. The official Russian reports of the losses of the Su-24 were not mentioned, however, some experts indicated the loss of two aircraft of this type (see in more detail). In 2012, Lieutenant Colonel Vladimir Bogodukhov, who received the title Hero of Russia for combat missions in South Ossetia, said in an interview with Argumenty i Fakty that during the war one Su-24 was shot down, the crew of the aircraft ejected and landed at the location of Russian troops .

              The terrible (there is no other word) losses in this conflict are due only to the terrible planning of management and preparation of combat operations (reminds of June 41), it was not worse anywhere. The feeling that general mechanics from the collective farm "40 years without a crop" or stupid people from the madhouse were in command :(
          4. inkass_98
            inkass_98 24 October 2015 17: 06
            +1
            Obviously su-xnumx. But he is already 34 years old, he has not yet reached the wide screen.
          5. 717
            717 24 October 2015 19: 30
            -1
            no one at all wink he just was not such a favorite for the media as a su-27 or instant29
      2. Konstantm
        Konstantm 24 October 2015 10: 37
        17
        Quote: СРЦ П-15

        - "I have a desire to buy a cow, but I have no opportunity, I have the opportunity to buy a goat, but I have no desire!"

        So let's drink for the fact that their desires do not coincide with their capabilities !!!
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. ZU-23
          ZU-23 24 October 2015 12: 43
          -8
          We have a TU-160 at a maximum speed of 2200 kmh flies, and this sucks 2100 laughing
          1. inkass_98
            inkass_98 24 October 2015 17: 25
            +1
            Circulations compare.
    2. Vitaly Anisimov
      Vitaly Anisimov 24 October 2015 09: 52
      +1
      I feel sorry for the American aircraft manufacturers ... There is no "soul and flight of thought" in them ... hi
      1. Temples
        Temples 24 October 2015 10: 01
        +6
        Amer aircraft manufacturers do not have a soul flight.
        Beauty is incomprehensible to them.
        They don’t need the beauty of the flight, therefore the maneuverability of the aircraft is on their side.
        And how can one fly without inner freedom, without freedom in the sky?
        For us, the first thing is airplanes, but then the girls.
        And they are guided by pragmatism.
        Soul cannot be bought !!! You can sell, but buy no crap !!!
        We are different.

        So the result is different.
        Our planes are handsome !!!
        1. PN
          PN 24 October 2015 10: 07
          14
          And this glider is not bad in appearance.
          1. GRAY
            GRAY 24 October 2015 10: 31
            +2
            Quote: PN
            And this glider is not bad in appearance.

            The glider is just in doubt, the Americans had a program to extend the life of the F-16 and it is not cheap - 9,5 million dead presidents on one plane.
            This despite the fact that the average age of the F-16 has already exceeded 20 years.
            And they still want to put new avionics there, it probably also stands well - half a plane, for the money, it all pulls together for sure.
            It turns out that there is no point in carrying out one modernization without another. Looks like striped things are bad, since they decided to shell out so.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. gjv
              gjv 24 October 2015 11: 00
              +4
              Quote: GRAY
              The glider is just in doubt, the Americans had a program to extend the life of the F-16 and it is not cheap - 9,5 million dead presidents on one plane.

              They have another program - conversion of 126 F-16 fighters into target aircraft, which have exhausted their resource. There costs are at the level of 550 thousand "deadheads" for one target.
              1. GRAY
                GRAY 24 October 2015 11: 19
                +4
                Quote: gjv
                They have another program - conversion of 126 F-16 fighters into target aircraft, which have exhausted their resource. There costs are at the level of 550 thousand "deadheads" for one target.

                They are strange, they take planes from a garbage dump in Arizona and take relatively new F-16s which can be used as donors of spare parts.
                And this despite the fact that there are still "Phantoms" from the times of the war in Vietnam are going out, and a bunch of different planes taken out of service.
                1. just exp
                  just exp 24 October 2015 11: 22
                  +8
                  these are not phantoms, this is f-111.
                  1. GRAY
                    GRAY 24 October 2015 12: 01
                    +1
                    Quote: just explo
                    these are not phantoms, this is f-111.

                    Not fundamentally, the base is large, a lot of things. About "Phantoms" I turned down, though - the latter, recently, completely, in 2013, were cut into non-ferrous metal.
                2. kpd
                  kpd 24 October 2015 12: 13
                  +3
                  And there is nothing strange there, the F-16 is equipped with an electronic remote control system, the Phantom is not. So on the F-16 it's just easier to "screw" the flight control unit.
                  1. VeryBravePiggy
                    VeryBravePiggy 24 October 2015 19: 34
                    +4
                    Gentlemen, let me suggest that the F16 will still serve well. With new "brains" and missiles, with an old base (glider). Despite the furious and merciless puffing of cheeks, the heroic Pindoctan is unlikely to unleash a global war with a high-tech adversary such as Russia. And you can also chase monkeys through the jungle and sands without encountering serious resistance on stormtroopers from the Second World War. Plus, to supply banana-technology "latest aircraft" to the banderlog states, having from this a neat gesheft.
                3. Bayonet
                  Bayonet 24 October 2015 12: 59
                  0
                  Quote: GRAY
                  they take relatively new F-16s which can be used as donors for spare parts.

                  Apparently they have enough new parts, so as not to put junk. BU - from poverty, and reliability is falling.
                4. NIKNN
                  NIKNN 24 October 2015 15: 54
                  +5
                  Do you think we’ve handed over Mosin’s rifles to scrap metal?
                  1. Wheel
                    Wheel 25 October 2015 00: 21
                    0
                    Quote: NIKNN
                    Do you think we’ve handed over Mosin’s rifles to scrap metal?
                    I don’t know how things are with rifles, and Kalash novices in the grease slaughtered Kalash from storage only for good.
                    As well as the 55th with full engine life.
          2. dauria
            dauria 24 October 2015 13: 39
            +7
            And this glider is not bad in appearance.


            An excellent car, developed by the company at its own expense at its own peril and risk as a competitor to the finished VF-17 (future F-18) and ousted the competitor from the Air Force. Had Mikoyan had such an engine at the time, the MiG-29 would have been born single-engine and fate would have been different. Upgrading weapons and electronics, rightly so. How long did we ourselves "squeeze" the modernization reserve out of the MiG-21? "encore" for export was collected in Gorky and in the mid-80s
            1. grayling
              grayling 24 October 2015 20: 54
              +1
              Well, yes, yes ... A pilot-kamikaze rocket ...
        2. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 24 October 2015 10: 33
          +1
          Quote: Temples
          Soul cannot be bought !!! You can sell, but buy no crap !!!

          Well, if someone is selling, then someone is buying?
          1. Temples
            Temples 24 October 2015 10: 48
            +2
            A person cannot buy.
            And you know who you sell it to.
        3. whiteeagle
          whiteeagle 24 October 2015 11: 39
          +2
          This is a very beautiful plane.

          http://cs622220.vk.me/v622220495/3a926/IEP19rFSUAE.jpg
        4. Vitaly Anisimov
          Vitaly Anisimov 24 October 2015 11: 44
          +1
          Quote: Temples
          Amer aircraft manufacturers do not have a soul flight.
          Beauty is incomprehensible to them.
          They don’t need the beauty of the flight, therefore the maneuverability of the aircraft is on their side.
          And how can one fly without inner freedom, without freedom in the sky?
          For us, the first thing is airplanes, but then the girls.
          And they are guided by pragmatism.
          Soul cannot be bought !!! You can sell, but buy no crap !!!
          We are different.

          So the result is different.
          Our planes are handsome !!!

          Temples you are talking nonsense ...! bully Liberast ???
          1. Temples
            Temples 24 October 2015 13: 01
            +4
            No, I'm not one of yours.
            I am Russian, Orthodox.
            1. Vitaly Anisimov
              Vitaly Anisimov 24 October 2015 14: 12
              +1
              Quote: Temples
              No, I'm not one of yours.
              I am Russian, Orthodox.

              You’re strange Russian ... I’m Orthodox too! I didn’t like your poems ... I’ll also observe. hi
              1. Temples
                Temples 24 October 2015 14: 53
                +9
                Who is stopping you?
                I’m not a poet to write poetry.
                I’m better to read Yesenin than scribble paper.
                Russian, and even more so Orthodox, is not strong in poetry, but by Faith.
                Have a nice day, and pleasant observations !!! hi
                1. supertiger21
                  supertiger21 24 October 2015 16: 33
                  0
                  Quote: Temples
                  Who is stopping you?
                  I’m not a poet to write poetry.
                  I’m better to read Yesenin than scribble paper.
                  Russian, and even more so Orthodox, is not strong in poetry, but by Faith.
                  Have a nice day, and pleasant observations !!! hi


                  Forgive me dear, but I, like MIKHAN, did not like the meaning of the words in your poems. Patriotism is certainly good, but it’s overkill! negative
        5. logix1312
          logix1312 24 October 2015 12: 25
          0
          Planes are handsome, that's for sure. But due to their maneuverability and speed, pilots will soon be unable to withstand overloads! what
        6. Bayonet
          Bayonet 24 October 2015 12: 55
          0
          Quote: Temples
          They don’t need the beauty of the flight, therefore the maneuverability of the aircraft is on their side.

          In a joke, too, the karate was jumping and jumping, and he was spanked from the colt.smile
        7. kot28.ru
          kot28.ru 24 October 2015 13: 29
          0
          As for the soul, if there is a seller, that is, a buyerwho will buy it, something like this hi Do those who sell their native country sleep peacefully, how else, because they have no honor, no conscience, no soul, respectively, all sold! hi
      2. Pimply
        Pimply 24 October 2015 11: 18
        +9
        Quote: MIKHAN
        I feel sorry for the American aircraft manufacturers ... There is no "soul and flight of thought" in them ...

        Mr. Lord, what nonsense do you hear here on a regular basis from pseudo-patriots
        1. Varyag_1973
          Varyag_1973 24 October 2015 11: 49
          0
          For Bumpy. Well, you are definitely a "patriot", the most that neither is! With the EU flag, where will you be comrade from?
        2. Vitaly Anisimov
          Vitaly Anisimov 24 October 2015 11: 51
          +2
          Quote: Pimply
          Quote: MIKHAN
          I feel sorry for the American aircraft manufacturers ... There is no "soul and flight of thought" in them ...

          Mr. Lord, what nonsense do you hear here on a regular basis from pseudo-patriots

          Well, bear with me ...! I tolerate you, like the "true patriots" of Russia ...)))) If you listen, then you need to close the site .. You are not here for nothing, "on duty" ... bully
      3. dmi.pris
        dmi.pris 24 October 2015 11: 57
        +1
        Well, let's be fair ... In America, the aircraft industry is at the highest level ... But the plane, no matter how perfect it is, is still a piece of iron .. The main thing is people. And can these people fight without a morning donut?
        Quote: MIKHAN
        I feel sorry for the American aircraft manufacturers ... There is no "soul and flight of thought" in them ... hi
        1. Vitaly Anisimov
          Vitaly Anisimov 24 October 2015 12: 24
          +2
          Quote: dmi.pris
          Well, let's be fair ... In America, the aircraft industry is at the highest level ... But the plane, no matter how perfect it is, is still a piece of iron .. The main thing is people. And can these people fight without a morning donut?
          Quote: MIKHAN
          I feel sorry for the American aircraft manufacturers ... There is no "soul and flight of thought" in them ... hi

          Okay, I agree.! Sometimes I overdo it, (90's syndrome, so to speak, come off now)))) hi
      4. Vadim237
        Vadim237 24 October 2015 13: 19
        0
        There is no flight of soul and thought - but in the aircraft industry, everything is realized in metal in them, unlike us.
      5. remy
        remy 24 October 2015 21: 04
        0
        Air defense missile systems S-300/350/400 / Fort / Redoubt / 500
    3. Penetrator
      Penetrator 24 October 2015 09: 53
      +9
      Quote: Stroibat stock
      Lochid is trying to make something like our MiG-16 from the Fu-35.

      Yeah, put a radar with a phased array, a new electronic warfare system and reflash the software - and the "latest fighter in the highest positions of international security" is ready. Apparently, things are quite sour for them with the F-35, if the overdue modernization of the aircraft's avionics almost half a century ago is presented as an awesome technological breakthrough.
      By the way, how are the Raptors doing there? Not scrapped yet?
      1. supertiger21
        supertiger21 24 October 2015 10: 15
        +8
        Quote: Penetrator
        Yeah, put a radar with a phased array, a new electronic warfare system and reflash the software - and the "newest fighter in the highest positions of international security" is ready. Apparently, they are doing quite sourly with the F-35, if the overdue modernization of the aircraft's avionics almost half a century ago is presented as an awesome technological breakthrough. By the way, how are the Raptors doing there? Not scrapped yet?


        If you follow your logic, then everything is "absolutely sour" with the PAK FA, because we are modernizing the Su-27 and MiG-29 that have long been in service.
        1. Penetrator
          Penetrator 24 October 2015 10: 28
          +2
          Quote: supertiger21
          If you follow your logic, then everything is "absolutely sour" with the PAK FA, because we are modernizing the Su-27 and MiG-29 that have long been in service.

          Yes, sour. Do you disagree? The deadlines for the adoption of the PAK FA for armament are being shifted, the number of vehicles ordered is decreasing ... sad But we also have a military budget 12 times smaller than the American one, so at this stage it is more expedient to invest in modernization.
          1. supertiger21
            supertiger21 24 October 2015 11: 44
            +1
            Quote: Penetrator
            Quote: supertiger21
            If you follow your logic, then everything is "absolutely sour" with the PAK FA, because we are modernizing the Su-27 and MiG-29 that have long been in service.

            Yes, sour. Do you disagree? The deadlines for the adoption of the PAK FA for armament are being shifted, the number of vehicles ordered is decreasing ... sad But we also have a military budget 12 times smaller than the American one, so at this stage it is more expedient to invest in modernization.


            I mean, the modernization of 4th generation fighters is not supposedly due to the failure of the 5th. It simply extends the life of obsolete weapons. A PAK FA and F-35 will be finalized and adopted.
            1. NIKNN
              NIKNN 24 October 2015 16: 09
              +5
              I mean, the modernization of 4th generation fighters is not supposedly due to the failure of the 5th. It simply extends the life of obsolete weapons. A PAK FA and F-35 will be finalized and adopted.

              In my opinion, with F35, they really flew by and are trying to pull it out with the most advanced filling. As an option, trying to sell and justify invested funds may be a way out, but it is not suitable for improvement and modernization. It is necessary to develop a new one with a revised concept.
              1. CAMS
                CAMS 25 October 2015 12: 04
                0
                In my opinion, with F35, they really flew by and are trying to pull it out with the most advanced filling. As an option, trying to sell and justify invested funds may be a way out, but it is not suitable for improvement and modernization. It is necessary to develop a new one with a revised concept.
                absolutely agree. it is already clear to everyone that the f35 will be a stepping stone for the cars of the future, but by no means massive. they will try to repulse something from it, but no more
      2. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 24 October 2015 10: 30
        +7
        Quote: Penetrator
        Yeah, put a radar with a phased array, a new electronic warfare system and reflash the software - and the "latest fighter in the highest positions of international security" is ready. Apparently, things are quite sour for them with the F-35, if the overdue modernization of the aircraft's avionics almost half a century ago is presented as an awesome technological breakthrough.
        By the way, how are the Raptors doing there? Not scrapped yet?

        And what is a 4th generation fighter? This is primarily a powerful radar and electronic warfare system. A radar detects an enemy and missiles are launched at it, electronic warfare interferes with enemy missiles and its radar. What else should be on the 4th generation airplane? Interstellar engine and system making an airplane invisible in the optical range?
        The article says that you can upgrade any F-16 fighter to this configuration, this opens up a large market for potential customers.
        1. Penetrator
          Penetrator 24 October 2015 10: 49
          +5
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          And what is a 4th generation fighter?

          Tshchemta, "Fighting Falcon" and so refers to the aircraft of the 4th generation, this upgrade translates it into the category 4+ or 4 ++, I can not say for sure. But you are "Lt. Air Force stock", so correct if I'm wrong.
          1. Lt. Air Force stock
            Lt. Air Force stock 24 October 2015 11: 05
            +3
            Quote: Penetrator
            But you are the Air Force reserve lieutenant, so correct if I am mistaken

            I’m a lieutenant of the Air Force reserve, with a military specialty that is not directly related to the Air Force.
            Quote: Penetrator
            This upgrade translates it into the 4+ or 4 ++ category, I can’t say for sure.

            Well translates so what? If the glider has not developed its resource, it is possible to upgrade the fighter virtually to infinity. 4 / + / ++ generation airplanes can be as effective in combat situations as 5th generation airplanes. If you use AWACS aircraft and aircraft with a collective electronic warfare system.
            A DRLO plane will detect 100% fighter of the 5th generation and give target designation, the power of the on-board electronic warfare station and radar of a 5th generation fighter is not enough to counteract the DRLO radar and aircraft of an enemy group electronic warfare.
            The United States somehow tested its F-22 against German Eurofighter, according to the Germans, the flaws in the stealth of eurofighter at medium and long distances were compensated by the AWACS E-3 Sentry.
            1. Penetrator
              Penetrator 24 October 2015 11: 17
              0
              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              If the glider has not exhausted its resource

              If not, yes. And if it worked out? Plus, the engines also have their own resource, but it is easier to replace them than to strengthen the glider. But both will cost a pretty penny. My post, in fact, was that, apparently, technical problems and the high cost of implementing the F-35 project, makes the Americans start modernizing aircraft, whose average age is 20 years. And the F-22, apparently, did not live up to the hopes placed on them - they released about 200 pieces. that's all. So much for "the world's only serial 5th generation fighter". And this ... To call the modernized F-16 "the latest fighter" is, you see, sheer slyness. Something like this hi
            2. Altona
              Altona 24 October 2015 22: 03
              0
              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              Well translates so what? If the glider has not developed its resource, it is possible to upgrade the fighter virtually to infinity. 4 / + / ++ generation airplanes can be as effective in combat situations as 5th generation airplanes. If you use AWACS aircraft and aircraft with a collective electronic warfare system.
              A DRLO plane will detect 100% fighter of the 5th generation and give target designation, the power of the on-board electronic warfare station and radar of a 5th generation fighter is not enough to counteract the DRLO radar and aircraft of an enemy group electronic warfare.
              The United States somehow tested its F-22 against German Eurofighter, according to the Germans, the flaws in the stealth of eurofighter at medium and long distances were compensated by the AWACS E-3 Sentry.

              --------------------
              Finally ... And then there are many supporters of "knightly tournaments" on the forum, relying on the power of the onboard radar, which is used only to clarify the operational situation ... The plane is only part of the general complex of reconnaissance, guidance and interception (destruction) of targets, and its systems are corrected by the control of more powerful technical means - ground radars and command posts or AWACS aircraft ...
        2. Aleksey_K
          Aleksey_K 24 October 2015 10: 49
          +1
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          And what is the 4 generation fighter? This is primarily a powerful radar and electronic warfare system. A radar detects an enemy and missiles are launched at it, electronic warfare interferes with enemy missiles and its radar. What else should there be in the 4 generation airplane?

          There should be a modern computer control system for the aircraft with appropriate displays, and even better if the same information and control system will be built into the helmet.
    4. vovanpain
      vovanpain 24 October 2015 09: 54
      23
      We can do that.
      1. DIVAN SOLDIER
        DIVAN SOLDIER 24 October 2015 09: 58
        +1
        And now MiGs are not being bought from us, so we bought and forgot a shipload shipload, and Algerian abandoned ones.
      2. SPLV
        SPLV 24 October 2015 10: 00
        +7
        We can do that.

        I apologize, but can you in the upper or lower plane? Why not write honestly - our pilots, and not all, but only a few, can do that! And then right away we, our ... Greasing to the merits of others, gracious sovereign.
        1. vovanpain
          vovanpain 24 October 2015 10: 14
          14
          Quote: SPLV
          We can do that.

          I apologize, but can you in the upper or lower plane? Why not write honestly - our pilots, and not all, but only a few, can do that! And then right away we, our ... Greasing to the merits of others, gracious sovereign.

          I beg your pardon, dear sir, of course I can’t do this, I’m not a pilot, I want to rejoice for such guys who are pilots, if you are one of them, it’s an honor and praise to you.
          1. SPLV
            SPLV 24 October 2015 10: 45
            +1
            Quote: vovanpain
            if you are among them

            Indeed, I am not among them. Therefore, I do not consider it possible to write and say "we" in such cases. Now, if about myself, I would write that we (our team) have taken part in the construction of a dozen new factories in the Russian Federation over the past ten years, and I can be proud of that. This is what we can do. And to proclaim that "we" can do this and that, when I myself cannot - is nonsense. Since the pronoun "we" is a set, which also includes the pronoun "I". And further. I am comrade, comrade.
            1. Temples
              Temples 24 October 2015 10: 54
              10
              I apologize, but can you in the upper or lower plane? ... And then right away we, our ... Greasing to the merits of others, gracious sovereign.

              We are the inhabitants of Russia. Formerly USSR, Russian Empire, etc.
              We were the first to fly into space. All 250 million (I don’t remember exactly how many of us were in 61. But I personally appeared only after 9 years)
              Gagarin flew. But we were all with him !!!
              We won the war and not one.
              And exactly WE can fly like that !!!
              1. Varyag_1973
                Varyag_1973 24 October 2015 11: 27
                +3
                "Gagarin was flying. But we were all with him !!!
                We won the war and not one.
                And it is WE who can fly like that !!! "


                Offset! Everything is right WE! Each of us, to one degree or another, is involved in the achievements of the country! Any citizen who simply works and pays taxes, not suspecting that he is involved in something there! You want to laugh, you want not, but it is with our taxes that the budget is being formed! And the budget also pays for the construction of aircraft and training pilots! So this is exactly what we fly!
            2. sabakina
              sabakina 24 October 2015 11: 04
              +4
              SPLV, why did you attack vovanpain? If he wrote instead of "we" "in Russia" - the meaning would change from this?
              And then, in Russia, "we" is not only a community ...
            3. vovanpain
              vovanpain 24 October 2015 11: 07
              +9
              Quote: SPLV
              Quote: vovanpain
              if you are among them

              Indeed, I am not among them. Therefore, I do not consider it possible to write and say "we" in such cases. Now, if about myself, I would write that we (our team) have taken part in the construction of a dozen new factories in the Russian Federation over the past ten years, and I can be proud of that. This is what we can do. And to proclaim that "we" can do this and that, when I myself cannot - is nonsense. Since the pronoun "we" is a set, which also includes the pronoun "I". And further. I am comrade, comrade.

              After all, you also put your hands and your skill in the construction of factories, not shopping centers, and this is also your contribution, like each of us at VO and many of us are comrades, I am also a comrade. drinks
              1. SPLV
                SPLV 24 October 2015 12: 29
                +5
                Vladimir! I admit that I was inappropriately harsh. It was just hard to read the comments on the site, too often I meet slogans and speeches, less and less competent speeches come across. So he unlawfully took advantage of his snobbery in communication. I will try to avoid in the future, but the person is weak. wink
        2. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 24 October 2015 10: 59
          +2
          Quote: SPLV
          Why not write honestly - our pilots, and far from all, but only a few, can do that!

          Why units? We not only all pilots are able to do so, but also helicopter pilots
          1. gjv
            gjv 24 October 2015 11: 12
            +9
            Quote: saturn.mmm
            We not only all pilots are able to do so, but also helicopter pilots

            I'm embarrassed to ask, but still I ask: - Are you Dutch?

            Our helicopter pilots, I think they will be able to show class on Apaches, but in general, they mainly pilot on our helicopters ...

            P.S. The minus is not from me. Dutch royal pilots minus "I dare not" ... bully
            1. saturn.mmm
              saturn.mmm 24 October 2015 16: 40
              +4
              Quote: gjv
              I’m embarrassed to ask, but still I ask: “Are you a Dutchman ?!”

              Feel free, I'm Belarusian.
              K-52 is a wonderful helicopter, but does not make such pirouettes as Apache, in particular in the Dutch version.
              It’s just a little tired of hatred, who flies with a soul, who flies without a soul, a pilot is a calling and a calling doesn’t care about nationality
              Here rip off the head of the Americans.
            2. MMX
              MMX 24 October 2015 21: 29
              +3
              Quote: gjv
              Quote: saturn.mmm
              We not only all pilots are able to do so, but also helicopter pilots

              I'm embarrassed to ask, but still I ask: - Are you Dutch?

              Our helicopter pilots, I think they will be able to show class on Apaches, but in general, they mainly pilot on our helicopters ...

              P.S. The minus is not from me. Dutch royal pilots minus "I dare not" ... bully


              Is that all? Well listen, here’s the same video (near by) where Apache puts somersaults, and you upload a video where the Ka-52 shows nothing at all. Was it so conceived?
              1. Rock616
                Rock616 26 October 2015 18: 20
                0
                Ah, you watched Apache to the end ?????????
                1. MMX
                  MMX 26 October 2015 20: 13
                  0
                  Quote: Rock616
                  Ah, you watched Apache to the end ?????????


                  Yes, both videos are familiar to me. I talked about the aerobatic team (very impressive, unlike the video from the KA-52 presented here).
      3. AID.S
        AID.S 24 October 2015 11: 04
        -4
        Beautiful, impressive, highly professional. And practically, why? To one rocket? Or for communication pilots without radio communications?
    5. donavi49
      donavi49 24 October 2015 10: 04
      +7
      And what is the MiG-35? Flying prototype for the Hindu tender? So that topic has already been buried for a long time. And the grave is forgotten.

      New MiG-35? So this is a boat without UVT, without AFAR, without anything breakthrough, originally called MiG-29M / M2 and sold for export (head showy MiG-35 = head MiG-29M for Syrians until the contract was frozen), for marketing purposes promoted under MiG-35 brand. Initially, the MO was going to buy a land boat in that person (a slotted ZhUK, an already old avionics, even with a glass cabin, but they had already died if not generations then ++ to the current avionics from the ship). However, then he changed his mind. Now they want to make up more stuffing in the ordered MiG-35, hence the regular puffs, transfers and the Air Force, therefore, so far they are not hoping to see replenishment of the LMFI in the coming years.
    6. KnightRider
      KnightRider 24 October 2015 10: 07
      11
      Quote: stock buildbat
      Fu-35 smoothly goes to junk ... Lohid is trying to make something like our MiG-16 from Fu-35. Something "boyars are summing up" that they can.

      The vast majority of countries do not need a generation 5 fighter. The F-16 is a successful aircraft, a proven fighter, reliable and inexpensive, so I won’t be surprised if a queue is lined up for the new F-16V. And for our MiG-35, so far you can only feel sad
      1. Aleksey_K
        Aleksey_K 24 October 2015 10: 57
        +3
        Quote: KnightRider
        The vast majority of countries do not need the 5 generation fighter in FIG.

        You are absolutely right. It's just that most countries are not going to rule the whole World, such as America. And America, Russia and China need these aircraft only for superiority over each other in the event of armed conflict. In addition, the US Congress banned the sale of the F-22 Raptor abroad, China would gladly buy to copy.
    7. supertiger21
      supertiger21 24 October 2015 10: 08
      +1
      Quote: Stroibat stock
      Fu-35 smoothly goes to junk ... Lohid is trying to make something like our MiG-16 from Fu-35. Something "boyars are summing up" that they can.


      Rave! Adoption of the F-35 into service is in full swing. And the modernization of the F-16 is more likely not for the United States itself, but for some of its allies who will still prefer the cheap 4th generation fighter. The F-35 is better than the 16 in all aspects except price. And this advantage of "Fighting Falcon" will disappear with the start of mass production of "Penguins".
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 24 October 2015 10: 16
        +1
        What is the difference between F-16V and F-16 Block 61?
        1. Sid.74
          Sid.74 24 October 2015 10: 37
          +1
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          What is the difference between F-16V and F-16 Block 61?

          The F-16 block 61 radar Northrop Grumman AN / APG-80 with active phased antenna array.
          And the F-16V station APG-83 SABR with an active phased antenna array. Well, and probably everything.
          1. Altona
            Altona 24 October 2015 14: 53
            0
            Quote: Sid.74
            The F-16 block 61 has a Northrop Grumman AN / APG-80 radar with an active phased array antenna.
            And the F-16V has an APG-83 SABR station with an active phased array antenna. Well, that’s probably it.

            -----------------------
            Which is better? Just for an ignorant person, this is a set of letters and numbers ...
        2. gjv
          gjv 24 October 2015 10: 56
          +1
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          What is the difference between F-16V and F-16 Block 61?

          The main achievement is the equipment of the new fighter radar with AFAR Northrop Grumman APG-83 SABR. In addition to it, the equipment of the cabin, the LMS, the data exchange system (in particular, the full support for Link-16) was naturally updated.
          At the request of the customer, F16-GE-110 increased thrust engines will be installed on upgraded to F-132V.
      2. Varyag_1973
        Varyag_1973 24 October 2015 11: 45
        0
        "The F-35 is better than the 16th in all aspects"

        Yeah, so much better that Fu-16, several times beat Fu-35 in training battles ...! For our "Drying" I generally keep quiet, both American Fu, she's not a candle!
    8. Altona
      Altona 24 October 2015 11: 24
      +3
      Quote: Stroibat stock
      Lochid is trying to make something like our MiG-16 from the Fu-35.

      ------------------
      Why foo? F-16 is a good platform, proven ... Only six months ago they wrote that drones also make simulators of targets for full-scale tests, but the Smoking-room turns out to be alive ... The fifth generation is still too expensive for the modern war, which is waged by savages and barbarians. ..
    9. Tor5
      Tor5 24 October 2015 12: 32
      -3
      Sawing on mattress creeps.
    10. The comment was deleted.
  2. avvg
    avvg 24 October 2015 09: 45
    0
    I guess we have something to oppose (at a lower cost) to the American F-16V.
    1. Junior, I
      Junior, I 24 October 2015 09: 52
      +3
      Not sure, but there!
      DRY, MIGs.
      1. NIKNN
        NIKNN 24 October 2015 16: 36
        +3
        Not sure, but there!
        DRY, MIGs.

        How to tell you? It depends on where to compare. When comparing in long-range opposition, only Su 35 and PAK FA can be opposed, because AFAR stands only on them (for now), although missile weapons and electronic warfare are not of little importance, other factors are decisive in other tasks.
  3. KAPITANUS
    KAPITANUS 24 October 2015 09: 46
    +1
    We have gone along the path of Ukraine - we will paint the tank, let's say that it is new.
    1. VP
      VP 24 October 2015 10: 00
      +8
      Absolutely not.
      Glider suits them. Replaced avionics greatly expanding combat capabilities, it is logical to do everything, scum. It would be better to rush with the 35th.
  4. nazar_0753
    nazar_0753 24 October 2015 09: 48
    +3
    The newspaper recalls that on Thursday, John McCain expressed a desire to reduce the purchase of the expensive F-35 (the Pentagon plans to purchase 2443 aircraft for the Navy and the Marine Corps) because they "do not fit well with the planned budget."

    I never would have thought that he was able to think adequately
    1. Penetrator
      Penetrator 24 October 2015 10: 02
      +1
      Quote: nazar_0753
      I never would have thought that he was able to think adequately

      Probably, the Lockheeds have ceased to unfasten their grandfather for lobbying their interests. Money ran out, drank everything. A curtain.
  5. tomket
    tomket 24 October 2015 09: 53
    +2
    A radar with displays is a good thing, only the exercises with the Indians showed that AFAR with AIm-120 are easily suppressed by electronic warfare. This is a question to think about ranged. And in terms of maneuverability, the heavier and sagging in rate of climb f-16 no longer clearly meets the requirements of the time.
    1. Aleksey_K
      Aleksey_K 24 October 2015 11: 03
      0
      Quote: tomket
      A radar with displays is a good thing, only the exercises with the Indians showed that AFAR with AIm-120 are easily suppressed by electronic warfare. This is a question to think about ranged. And in terms of maneuverability, the heavier and sagging in rate of climb f-16 no longer clearly meets the requirements of the time.

      You never thought that an aircraft using electronic warfare, itself does not lose control and communication. So any electronic warfare can be opposed to something new.
      And take-off speed is not the most important characteristic, because take-off is usually carried out long before the battle.
      1. tomket
        tomket 24 October 2015 12: 09
        0
        Quote: Алексей_К
        And take-off speed is not the most important characteristic, because take-off is usually carried out long before the battle.

        With all due respect, climb is not a take off speed. This is the main indicator for vertical maneuver, which is determined by the thrust-weight ratio, the ratio of engine thrust and aircraft weight. Initially, on the f-16 the thrust-to-weight ratio was close to unity, which theoretically allowed him to fly vertically like a rocket. But in recent versions, the thrust-to-weight ratio has fallen markedly.
    2. NIKNN
      NIKNN 24 October 2015 16: 49
      +3
      "The radar with displays is a good thing, only the exercises with the Indians showed that the AFAR with AIm-120 is easily suppressed by electronic warfare. This is a question to think about long-range combat. And in terms of maneuverability, the f-16, which is heavy and sagging in the rate of climb, clearly does not meet the requirements of the time. . "

      And where did you get the idea that the new equipment on the new elemental Bose is heavier (AFAR has no drives, and this is the heaviest in the antenna, the LCD is not heavier than a CRT, compare at least old and new monitors and TVs), but the released weight can be used with great benefit, if only to improve the noise immunity of this. "AFAR with AIm-120 are easily suppressed by means of electronic warfare."
  6. Russian jacket
    Russian jacket 24 October 2015 09: 55
    +2
    I’m embarrassed to ask, what about f-22 and f-35 .... Although ... how many dough money were laundered in pin dos tan in these chests, not a single state gene will be told by the prosecutor to Congress. What a pity ... It would be interesting to look at congressmen with senators ... wassat
  7. Vitaly Anisimov
    Vitaly Anisimov 24 October 2015 09: 56
    +9
    That's what our people do ... Thanks to the designers!
    1. Manul
      Manul 24 October 2015 10: 36
      +2
      Quote: MIKHAN
      That's what our people do ... Thanks to the designers!

      Is it Eurofighter prancing so on the tail?
      1. sabakina
        sabakina 24 October 2015 11: 18
        +5
        I also didn’t understand ... Hang tail down a few meters from the ground? Or are they radio-controlled models?
        1. Papakiko
          Papakiko 24 October 2015 12: 49
          0
          Quote: sabakina
          Or are they radio-controlled models?

          Yes they are MODELS!
          I watched it live a couple of times, completely dead!
          1. Manul
            Manul 24 October 2015 13: 47
            0
            Quote: Papakiko
            Yes they are MODELS!
            I watched it live a couple of times, completely dead!

            And exactly the model? It seems like they jump really very easily, it doesn't look like a multi-ton colossus, and the angle is such that it's incomprehensible, and it's somehow incredible to make a reactive model of this level .. Was it in vain or on business did I "run over" on the video? repeat
            1. Papakiko
              Papakiko 24 October 2015 14: 35
              +4
              Quote: Manul
              A modelki exactly?

              I am surprised at you.
              Not a single modern aircraft has such a thrust-weight ratio that would make such a prank. Can you imagine how much a powerful jet stream should be and the surface (concrete, soil) must withstand this stream?
              Well, compare the size of the tents (scale) and the forest against which the modelki are buzzing.
              There you are:

              Admire. drinks
              1. Manul
                Manul 24 October 2015 21: 20
                0
                Quote: Papakiko
                Not a single modern aircraft has such a thrust-weight ratio that would make such a prank //.

                Thank you! drinks And then this was not the first time I saw this video, but there was no doubt at all. I will finally sleep peacefully laughing
                ZY There is also an air show - where do you hear that the models are buzzing, a solid real jet howl stands, which is confusing. It’s clear that the plane shouldn’t jump like that, but terrible thoughts climb into our heads, suddenly we are so behind that we learned how to make such engines wassat
                1. Papakiko
                  Papakiko 25 October 2015 10: 58
                  0
                  Quote: Manul
                  suddenly we were so behind that they learned how to make such engines

                  Then grandmothers would become grandfathers.
                  Do not watch a lot of science fiction films, from them you have a depresnyak. drinks
              2. Oleg16661
                Oleg16661 25 October 2015 17: 31
                0
                Thanks for the video, the first time I see it.
                I want the same fellow
    2. Aleksey_K
      Aleksey_K 24 October 2015 11: 08
      +3
      Quote: MIKHAN
      That's what our people do ... Thanks to the designers!

      This plane reverse sweep, designed a very long time ago and has some negative "points". Therefore, only one copy was made for further research. It was not adopted for service.
      1. Vitaly Anisimov
        Vitaly Anisimov 24 October 2015 11: 32
        +1
        Well, it's still beautiful, I'm glad you noticed ... hi
      2. Manul
        Manul 24 October 2015 12: 41
        0
        Quote: Алексей_К
        This forward-swept aircraft was designed a very long time ago and has some negative "points". Therefore, only one copy was made for further research. It was not adopted for service.

        I’ll tell you more - this is just a picture for a video where Berkut doesn’t appear at all. It’s like a video from some recent air show, and its patriotic name does not quite correspond to the content.
  8. KnightRider
    KnightRider 24 October 2015 09: 57
    +1
    But will this fighter go into the arsenal of the USA? Now they produce F-16 only for export.
    1. tomket
      tomket 24 October 2015 10: 00
      0
      Quote: KnightRider
      But will this fighter go into the arsenal of the USA? Now they produce F-16 only for export.

      In parts finalize. Changes in the glider seem to be no.
    2. supertiger21
      supertiger21 24 October 2015 10: 19
      0
      Quote: KnightRider
      But will this fighter go into the arsenal of the USA? Now they produce F-16 only for export.


      No, it won’t. The U.S. will have the F-35.
      1. Aleksey_K
        Aleksey_K 24 October 2015 11: 26
        0
        Quote: supertiger21
        No, it won’t. The U.S. will have the F-35.

        Until the number of F-35 reaches a level sufficient to wage war with Russia and China, the old aircraft will successfully serve, manufacture and modernize.
        1. supertiger21
          supertiger21 24 October 2015 11: 48
          0
          Quote: Алексей_К
          Until the number of F-35 reaches a level sufficient to wage war with Russia and China, the old aircraft will successfully serve, manufacture and modernize.


          What kind of war with Russia and China? F-35, like almost all American fighters, is created not for this, but for wars with other ISIS, Iraq, Libya, and so on. For a big war, both we and they have a cooler special weapon! am
    3. gjv
      gjv 24 October 2015 10: 44
      +1
      Quote: KnightRider
      But will this fighter go into the arsenal of the USA? Now they produce F-16 only for export.

      The nearest candidates for transformation into this "viper" are 20 F-16A Block 20 units formally belonging to the Air Force of the Republic of China (Taiwan), but located in the United States. Most of them are used for pilot training and training, but a couple serve in the 416th Test Squadron as flying laboratories to work out the integration of new systems into aircraft of their standard. By the way, the first F-16V is one of them, tail number 93-0702. Interestingly, the previously existing US Air Force markings have been erased.
  9. SIMM
    SIMM 24 October 2015 10: 08
    0
    Will not help!)))
  10. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 24 October 2015 10: 08
    +1
    The advertisement is engine of the trade! Only BUSINESS and nothing personal, but the fact that this "vaunted" F-16 was repeatedly beaten in training battles by our MiGs and Sushki, which, by the way, were not piloted by our pilots, says a lot: it looks like not everything is so smooth in the Stars and Stripes empire, if they try to revive the 50-year-old device to the modern level! And where is their Wunderwafli, which they promoted so hard (despite the price and quality)? No, gentlemen, our overseas "far from partners" surprises from GDP are not over for you yet, expect the appearance on the arena of PAK FA Su there is Su (well, you at least they were ashamed of launching their trash into space on other people's engines)! And you are also trying to scare us with something, but scare the hedgehog with your bare asses!
    1. supertiger21
      supertiger21 24 October 2015 11: 50
      +1
      Quote: kartalovkolya
      , but the fact that this "vaunted" F-16 was repeatedly beaten in training battles by our MiGs and Sushki


      You do not confuse by chance with the F-15 ?! Are there proofs?
      1. NIKNN
        NIKNN 24 October 2015 17: 19
        +3
        With downed F15 there is no reliable information, the Americans did not confirm a single loss in the WB. The forums say different things.
        http://forums.airbase.ru/2003/07/t21512--poteri-f-15-v-vozdushnykh-boyakh.html
        Closer discussion of F15 losses in VO
        http://topwar.ru/23890-nepobedimyy-f-15-kak-siriycy-podrezali-orlam-krylya.html
  11. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 24 October 2015 10: 09
    +4
    Cut the budget - a cut, and respond to the threat of the Russian aerospace forces than you need. We looked at the mattresses how the modernized drying works, and we wanted to. F 16 is certainly not a bad car, but not better than Mig or Rafale. And, characteristically, they did not say a word about the modernization of the engine or glider. Apparently, these issues are already problems. The engineering corps of the mattress is very weak. The prestige of the profession has fallen to nowhere below.
    No wonder there is a joke - the engineering departments of American universities are the place where Russian professors teach Chinese students.
    1. evge-malyshev
      evge-malyshev 24 October 2015 13: 15
      +1
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      The prestige of the profession has fallen to nowhere below.


      Yes, we have the same thing. Lawyers ... Economists, etc. ... ist. If so
      The 78-year-old "young" pensioner is asked to work a little more. And I would have worked, but there is already no health.
      Something like this ... As they say now. Sincerely, colleagues in VO.
    2. dauria
      dauria 24 October 2015 15: 26
      0
      they did not say a word about engine modernization


      what for? By the way, do you know why the F-16 "got out" and the MiG-29 "bent"? It is because of the engines that the F-16 and F-15 are initially the same engines, first the F-100, then the F110 (and a bunch of pribluda to them). And this greatly reduced the cost of both aircraft. Surprisingly, Americans do know how to count and make money. sad

      Incidentally, the F-22 and F-35 engines are the same. Information for consideration
  12. Lumumba
    Lumumba 24 October 2015 10: 10
    +1
    New?

    And what's new in it? Have you put a new display?
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 24 October 2015 13: 24
      0
      Glider old all guts new.
  13. gloomy fox
    gloomy fox 24 October 2015 10: 11
    -1
    very nice children for cutting the dough. an interesting contraption, it looks very serious. I really hope that it doesn’t go into the series. We’ll see.
  14. ewgen
    ewgen 24 October 2015 10: 15
    -2
    Quote: MIKHAN
    I feel sorry for the American aircraft manufacturers ... There is no "soul and flight of thought" in them ... hi


    But there is a thirst for money.
    1. Junior, I
      Junior, I 24 October 2015 10: 23
      -2
      But there is a thirst for money.

      And from here all the problems of their planes, "imperfections".
  15. BOB044
    BOB044 24 October 2015 10: 16
    -6
    Yes, they are up to our Sushki and Migov. As to Beijing backwards. laughing
  16. Zheka40
    Zheka40 24 October 2015 10: 28
    0
    Something the Israelis do not have, otherwise they would have been told by experts on what and how. they use them.
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 24 October 2015 10: 33
      +5
      Quote: Zheka40
      Something the Israelis do not have, otherwise they would have been told by experts on what and how. they use them.

      Personally, I served in the engineering units of tank brigades and on the urgent and reservists. What can I tell?
      In general, if you discard trolling, the car is intended for US allies who do not plan to have a fifth-generation car. For those Eastern European countries or parts of the Arab world.
  17. Horly
    Horly 24 October 2015 10: 37
    16
    The "urapatoiots" have a strange logic - when our MiGs are being modernized, this is a super-supernatural one in the world, and when the adversaries - it sucks and is cut. And the adversaries' Evaluation has always had cost / efficiency, and therefore the F-16 parameter is one of the best Western aircraft. Plus, pay attention to how many aircraft were produced - and no one is going to replace them at once with the F-35, taking into account the fact that the aircraft currently provides the tasks assigned to it ... Moreover, Russia and China have 5th generation aircraft in service not yet, but the modernization will bring it to the level of 4+ or ++, which is comparable to our Su-30 and MiG-35 .. At the same time, the costs are small, and there are a lot of potential customers. So it's quite a sensible idea
  18. Vladimir 1964
    Vladimir 1964 24 October 2015 10: 42
    15
    Dear colleagues, I read the comments and was somewhat surprised, to put it mildly, by a certain lack of objectivity. It is clear that we all do not feel great love for an overseas "partner", but sometimes we must at least recognize objective factors. The path of development of the American Air Force is fully analogous to ours. We are also modernizing far from new models of the Su-27 and MiG-29, and this causes a lot of enthusiastic responses from us. What is the need to throw mud at the actions of a potential enemy. We already tried to throw our caps on the enemy on the eve of the Great Patriotic War, but after the “caps” we had to develop the defense industry, in the areas that were necessary at that time.

    Something like that, colleagues. hi
    PS As for the F-16, the machine is well-developed, in large quantities, is in service and seems to have a modernization resource, otherwise the Americans would not have been wasting money, weren’t they.
    1. evge-malyshev
      evge-malyshev 24 October 2015 13: 30
      +1
      Finally, sound thoughts appeared. And those who support them. I mean Horly and Vladimir 1964.
      1. Vladimir 1964
        Vladimir 1964 24 October 2015 14: 18
        0
        Quote: evge-malyshev
        Finally, the


        Thank you, Dear colleague Eugene, a long time ago however no one accused me of sanity. laughing hi
  19. Zumich
    Zumich 24 October 2015 10: 47
    0
    They reported the same, released a winged "ostrich" into the world. As in the fable "and you friends do not sit down, all ...... no good." The number of sales of Americans, not an indicator, they only take nato (they have no options),
    and if you look at the countries a little bit free from the pressure of me, then everyone is interested in our MIGs and Sushki and other equipment, especially such a clear example of real exploitation in Syria. I think that foreign specialized colleagues will come to our military educational institutions, the professionalism of the Russian guys is above all praise. The pilots are handsome, all the glory to them, but many thanks to our hardworking technicians, what a colossal work, what specialists. Aircraft, watch, takeoff, landing, with such a load.
    But the NATO, the Hamers were stuck in the sand, so they dragged them while they made the whole world laugh, let alone talk about flight equipment. Neither build nor service.
    1. Vladimir 1964
      Vladimir 1964 24 October 2015 11: 06
      +1
      Quote: Zumich
      and if you look at the countries a little bit free from the pressure of me, then everyone looks with interest at our MIGs and Sushki and


      Dear colleague Zumich, I completely agree with you and consider it necessary to bring this your idea first of all to the Indians. They are completely unbelted, instead of Drying God knows where they are looking.

      Something like that, colleague. hi
  20. NDR-791
    NDR-791 24 October 2015 11: 01
    0
    John McCain expressed a desire to reduce the purchase of expensive F-35
    Even this ... and he realized that we must live within our means. And in F-16 how many new electronics do not shove it, it is still twice as unreliable as any of ours because the engine is still one.
  21. bos83bos
    bos83bos 24 October 2015 11: 14
    0
    wink threaten! But we will still be in front!
  22. cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe 24 October 2015 11: 18
    0
    Quote: KnightRider
    reliable and inexpensive, so I won’t be surprised if a queue is lined up for the new F-16V. And for our MiG-35, so far you can only feel sad

    So it will be if ..... sy the price will not be paid.
  23. Snob
    Snob 24 October 2015 11: 32
    0
    The states are doing everything right, they kill two birds with one stone. They will earn good money on updating the outdated f16 and, along the way, will significantly enhance the combat capabilities of both their own and their "partners", which may eventually result in hundreds of long-range fighters. For us, this is not nothing, but a serious threat.
  24. roskot
    roskot 24 October 2015 11: 44
    0
    Well, the flag in their hands. Let them spend and saw money.
    McCain said F-16, then F-16. He knows he has a lot of experience in Vietnam.
  25. mitya-k
    mitya-k 24 October 2015 12: 03
    0
    And "V" because it can fly upward! Voila!
  26. Resistance
    Resistance 24 October 2015 12: 14
    0
    Quote: Temples
    on this and the maneuverability of the aircraft in their roles


    There was a broadcast that some kind of Amer plane (the 70th plus or minus) did our 21st and 23rd as I wanted. They tested ours against ours, and they themselves told. Ours were still surprised that he had a supporting role and went on sale to Amer’s friends. So, don’t ...
  27. Lexagun
    Lexagun 24 October 2015 12: 26
    0
    Only old men go into battle
  28. Roust
    Roust 24 October 2015 14: 14
    0
    One pepper - garbage - for scrap !!!
  29. Val_y
    Val_y 24 October 2015 15: 15
    0
    Quote: PN
    And this glider is not bad in appearance.

    This glider is a licked and modified Yak-141 (or you forgot that the mattress. Sniki bought all the documentation for EBN for nothing, huh?) No. so there is no need to ascribe pin. dos to the flight of thought negative
  30. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 24 October 2015 20: 05
    0
    So the Americans are faced with problems of the military budget, they also have to save money to free up money for advanced research on hypersound in the hope of getting ahead of our 10 years to make a backlog for the disarming BSU in our strategic nuclear forces and aerospace forces. wink
  31. Felix
    Felix 24 October 2015 20: 09
    0
    Quote: KonstantM
    Quote: СРЦ П-15

    - "I have a desire to buy a cow, but I have no opportunity, I have the opportunity to buy a goat, but I have no desire!"

    So let's drink for the fact that their desires do not coincide with their capabilities !!!

    Drank it up!