Military Review

US Air Force: Russian Aviation Close to US Capability

114
Russia has invested in its VKS and now they are close in capabilities to the American aviation, said US Air Force Commander in Europe, NATO Air Force Commander Frank Gorenc.




"It is clear that since 2007, Russia has directed large funds and efforts to develop its armed forces and the troops have received new equipment, which is very close in its capabilities to that which we have," the newspaper quoted the general. Look.

According to him, “Russia has demonstrated that it has the capacity and the will to use its air force, and the US has the task of ensuring the superiority of its air force.”

Touching upon the situation in the Black Sea region, the commander noted that after the annexation of Crimea to Russia, “the strategic situation in the region has changed drastically and the United States must be vigilant.”

When asked about the deployment of a missile defense system in Europe, the general noted that "there are opportunities for developing a missile defense system."

“We are acting on this issue within the framework of NATO,” he noted. “We are now on our way to gaining the initial operational capabilities of this system.”

In addition, Gorenk said that "I would not characterize individual cases of the entry of Russian aircraft into the airspace of NATO countries as a threat."

“This rarely happens,” he added. “More often we meet in international airspace.”
Photos used:
http://www.melkon.lv/
114 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. alekc73
    alekc73 12 January 2016 15: 04
    41
    The general is lying to give money to the U.S. Air Force. Our aircraft just got out of a coma and she is far from a good condition. hi
    1. cniza
      cniza 12 January 2016 15: 07
      13
      Quote: alekc73
      The general is lying to give money to the U.S. Air Force. Our aircraft just got out of a coma and she is far from a good condition. hi


      Maybe he is disingenuous, but on the whole a competent answer from a professional.
      1. bort4145
        bort4145 12 January 2016 15: 11
        +6
        Russian aviation in its capabilities approached the American
        sir, you flatter yourself.

        Rept, but measure must be known
        We act in this matter within the framework of NATO, - he noted. - We are now on the way to gaining the initial operational capabilities of this system
        There are still quite a few fairy tales, for example, the Prompt Global Strike Concept (who cares http://www.rg.ru/2015/12/02/udar-site-anons.html)
        Solomonov, the creator of the "mace":
        The Americans could not do anything in implementing the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), except for the scam that was revealed by the US Congress in 1989, and those from the US Department of Defense who openly lied were simply imprisoned. But the Soviet Union reacted, took it at face value and spent huge funds to fend off these tales
        1. krot
          krot 12 January 2016 16: 05
          +6
          Finally, our enemy says that he is an enemy, not a friend !!
      2. Sasha 19871987
        Sasha 19871987 12 January 2016 15: 21
        +6
        this year the fleet replenished with 150 new birds - this is great news, even the mattresses put into operation fewer new birds !!!
        1. kenig1
          kenig1 12 January 2016 16: 00
          +3
          And how many planes?
          1. Truth
            Truth 12 January 2016 16: 05
            +4
            the situation in the region has radically changed and the US needs to be vigilant

            The last word in this sentence does not reflect the actual need for action.
            To replace "vigilance" with "vigilance" - it is necessary to bring down from OUR Black Sea.
      3. Luga
        Luga 12 January 2016 17: 33
        +2
        Quote: cniza
        Maybe he is disingenuous, but on the whole a competent answer from a professional.


        This is what annoys.
        I think about it remains to be heard. I liked his answers, not their content, but the calm and confidence that the military should have. We must remember the name - Frank Gorenk.

        It is urgent to hint to McCain that the general with the initials of the FG, appointed by the democratic president to Europe - a defeatist and a Russophile, does not cope well with his duties, refuses to recognize the heroism of some politicians during the Vietnam War and will vote for Trump in the next election.
      4. Ros 56
        Ros 56 12 January 2016 21: 57
        +4
        Quote: cniza
        Maybe he is disingenuous, but on the whole a competent answer from a professional.


        Guys, what are you talking about, yes, these striped Indians did on Su 30MKI, like a tortoise god. They did not win a single training battle. By the way, they Induced something to the Indians with radars, Those well done, without a bazaar, agreed to all the striped conditions. And the F-15 and F-16 were blown to pieces. So our aviation today will wipe everyone’s nose. Amerovskaya pilots themselves flew in our cars, and admitted that there were no fools to communicate with our planes, in the sense of fighting. This year, they will complete the T-50 tests and launch them in a series, this is not the 90s for you.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Vend
      Vend 12 January 2016 15: 07
      +3
      Well, we’ll never get close to the fifth generation mattress plane laughing
      1. alex-s
        alex-s 12 January 2016 15: 09
        23
        Especially by the amount of sawn dough!
      2. vlad66
        vlad66 12 January 2016 15: 09
        12
        Quote: Wend
        Well, we’ll never get close to the fifth generation mattress plane laughing

        For the price, that's for sure. hiAnd since he asks for money for the same fifth mattress generation, it is now fashionable for financiers to scare the Russian threat. hi
      3. Inok10
        Inok10 12 January 2016 15: 12
        11
        Quote: Wend
        Well, we’ll never get close to the fifth generation mattress plane

        .. especially at a price .. here we catch up and catch up .. laughing
      4. dmi.pris
        dmi.pris 12 January 2016 15: 13
        +2
        By the way, the design of the Soviet YAK-vertical was laid as the basis for the development of F35, even a prototype was built.
        Quote: Wend
        Well, we’ll never get close to the fifth generation mattress plane laughing
        1. dauria
          dauria 12 January 2016 15: 38
          +1
          By the way, the design of the Soviet YAK-vertical was laid as the basis for the development of F35


          In order to create vertical thrust on the SKVVP, it was decided instead of the vertical lifting turbojet engines (as it was on the Soviet VTOL Yak-38 and Yak-141) to use a fan with a vertical axis located in the bow behind the cabin, driven by a long shaft from the lifting-marching engine (PMD ), located in the rear part, in combination with the rotary nozzle of the latter, which in design repeats a similar Soviet Yak-141 unit.
          And that's all, nothing more. But we will have to copy their new products (and there are really a lot of them). sad By the way, there is nothing wrong with that.
          1. podgornovea
            podgornovea 12 January 2016 20: 21
            0
            Actually, the development of the Yak-43 and Yak-201 had already begun at that time, and the Yak-141 had already begun test flights. So there is progress, another thing is the need now vertical lines, without an aircraft carrier fleet.
            1. 73bor
              73bor 12 January 2016 21: 25
              0
              In fact, the Yak-38 was made not only for the fleet, but military tests were carried out together with the Su-25 in Afghanistan and lost to the "rook", after which the Navy took it in !!
              1. Scraptor
                Scraptor 13 January 2016 03: 28
                0
                Yak-38 came to Afghanistan from the Navy. And he won against everyone there, because at the request of an advanced airman, he flew faster than aerodrome aviation (the aerodrome is far) and helicopters (their maximum speed is too low).
            2. Scraptor
              Scraptor 13 January 2016 03: 25
              0
              Yak-141 passed them - without them, flying vehicles are not allowed to test flights from ships.
              Tests did not have time to pass the Yak-43
          2. Scraptor
            Scraptor 13 January 2016 03: 21
            0
            Quote: dauria
            vertical axis fan located behind the cab

            Quote: dauria
            everything, nothing more.


            they didn’t change anything else in the muffled technology for 500 thousand, so that there was at least something American
            fan from XV-5 of the 60s
          3. GSH-18
            GSH-18 20 December 2016 18: 04
            0
            Quote: dauria
            In order to create vertical thrust on the SKVVP, it was decided instead of the vertical lifting turbojet engines (as it was on the Soviet VTOL Yak-38 and Yak-141) to use a fan with a vertical axis located in the bow behind the cabin, driven by a long shaft from the lifting-marching engine (PMD ), located in the rear part, in combination with the rotary nozzle of the latter, which in design repeats a similar Soviet Yak-141 unit.

            This is absolutely true. F-35B is an adapted version of the Yak-141, nothing more.
          4. GSH-18
            GSH-18 20 December 2016 18: 10
            0
            Quote: dauria
            But we will have to copy their new products (and there are really a lot of them). By the way, there is nothing wrong with that.

            Why copy? We are not Kopikitaytsy request Just add something to an existing, modernized project request Business then ... Our intelligence also works. And what? Do you think the Americans didn’t insert anything from our MIGs and Sushki into their efics? bully The CIA is not asleep, but when the collapse was .. That’s why they soldered F-35 on our technologies .. but they cannot finish it without OUR brains! lol
      5. Alexanast
        Alexanast 12 January 2016 16: 34
        +7
        And why, let his rockets catch up ... let him fly
    4. seti
      seti 12 January 2016 15: 13
      +6
      As follows from the previous articles, Russian aviation is more quickly replenished with the latest aircraft, but all of them are still not enough, even though the output is growing. But we rejoice in the small then the big will come.
    5. The comment was deleted.
    6. g1v2
      g1v2 12 January 2016 16: 15
      +1
      The condition is improving, but it is still far from comparing with mattresses. And the point is not in technology - their main superiority over us is not in f35 and f22, but in the huge number of f15 and f16 in the ranks and in storage. On any of our aircraft, they can put two or three. request On the other hand, we have excellent defense - so the odds are good. But the fact that the VKS are strengthened is a fact and Syria shows it. soldier
      1. Kasym
        Kasym 12 January 2016 20: 17
        0
        g1v2. They can put two or three UAVs on one Russian, but air defense systems are still operating by air. And here is the advantage for the Russian Federation, and this Amer. the general says nothing for this. But in fact, due to a couple of long-range complexes in Syria (S-400 and on the ships Moscow and Varyag S-300), all Turkish aviation disappeared from there. And whose aviation dominates in Syria under the cover of such complexes, Comrade. amer. general? hi
        1. g1v2
          g1v2 12 January 2016 21: 46
          0
          Our air defense has an advantage, but this means that our aviation will have to constantly stay in the area of ​​its air defense. And this is not a buzz. request And it’s also not worth overestimating the air defense - it can be suppressed from the ground or by a massive airstrike. How much la beating, but certainly not all. Yes, and you can’t cover the whole country with air defense - between the air defense zones all space must be covered. So, it’s necessary to increase the number of fighters, even if not of the latest models. request Well and yes - the main air forces of the Yankees are based at their home, and the rest are scattered around the world.
          1. serg 21
            serg 21 12 January 2016 22: 14
            0
            New, and if you, being a pilot and knowing the efficiency of a certain complex, are not afraid to fly to destroy it? Sorry, I forgot that you, couch, are all "daredevils".
      2. 73bor
        73bor 12 January 2016 21: 32
        0
        The strength of our Air Force in greater mobility throughout the proposed theater of operations, all US planes are scattered around the world and collect them in one fist oh how long!
      3. Ros 56
        Ros 56 12 January 2016 22: 05
        +2
        Quote: g1v2
        On any of our aircraft, they can put two or three.


        Remember the dear A.V. Suvorov "win not by number, but by skill"
        To defeat such beauties, I beg you.
        1. g1v2
          g1v2 13 January 2016 17: 26
          0
          We are not fighting with the Arabs if we are preparing, but with the same pilots as ours, and with great combat experience. Th in all respects should be considered equal. And if so, then the banal numerical superiority decides.
    7. mirag2
      mirag2 12 January 2016 16: 22
      0
      General is lying
      - I agree. I wanted to say: "I do not believe him."
    8. mirag2
      mirag2 12 January 2016 16: 22
      0
      General is lying
      - I agree. I wanted to say: "I do not believe him."
    9. Uran
      Uran 12 January 2016 16: 34
      0
      it would be better if you Americans with 19 trillion foreign debt paid
    10. 33 Watcher
      33 Watcher 13 January 2016 06: 12
      0
      You are wrong, as is the general. Our aviation has always outnumbered them, as have the ground forces. For one simple reason, we carry out the assigned tasks, even if they seem to be impossible. They have "Do or Die", we have "Die But Do"!
      We just a long time ago, not for nothing, did not undertake. And now we have found a business for ourselves, and we will do it, and do it efficiently.
    11. GSH-18
      GSH-18 20 December 2016 17: 34
      0
      US Air Force: Russian Aviation Close to US Capability

      But what about the Jews? belay
      Are they so happy with the two promoted but unfinished 35th shushpanzery?
      Okay .. specially for our Israeli friends (I apologize for breaking the template):
  2. Vladimyrych
    Vladimyrych 12 January 2016 15: 05
    15
    Do not believe the enemy. When the enemy praises - wait for trouble. And big!
    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 12 January 2016 15: 24
      +2
      Quote: Vladimir
      Do not believe the enemy. When the enemy praises - wait for trouble. And big!

      Well, yes, they Nabiuline already licked all the holes.
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. VNP1958PVN
    VNP1958PVN 12 January 2016 15: 08
    +2
    And now attention is the question - is not the American aviation afraid after approaching for its "rear nozzle"? laughing
    1. iliitchitch
      iliitchitch 12 January 2016 15: 16
      +1
      Quote: VNP1958PVN
      And now attention is the question - is not the American aviation afraid after approaching for its "rear nozzle"?


      People said about vigilance in the Black Sea region. Ek broke with the Crimea, they still hiccup. Now they would finish building their base in Sevastopol.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 12 January 2016 15: 49
        +1
        Quote: iliitch
        Ek broke with the Crimea, they still hiccup. Now they would finish building their base in Sevastopol.

        Yushchenko promised Crimea to NATO back in 2006 (count the US). And in 2013 the Americans adopted a program of assistance (count the occupation) to Crimea. So what date should you count from? If from June 2006, when the anti-NATO actions in Crimea began, then everything would it was ready and there was no our fleet in the Crimea. Well, under Yanukovych and the "seven-boyars" before the elections of the Piglet, well, our POLITE PEOPLE, together with the population of Crimea, managed to take Crimea to Russia.
      2. Alexanast
        Alexanast 12 January 2016 16: 38
        +7
        It seems to me that all the kneading in Ukraine was for the sake of the Crimea and its naval bases. And without him (Crimea), all this suburb of Nakh is not needed.
        1. Amurets
          Amurets 12 January 2016 16: 49
          0
          Quote: Alexanast
          It seems to me that all the kneading in Ukraine was for the sake of the Crimea and its naval bases. And without him (Crimea), all this suburb of Nakh is not needed.

          Read the post: from which Crimea was saved. He just appeared
  5. McLuha-MacLeod
    McLuha-MacLeod 12 January 2016 15: 08
    +3
    General wants new airplanes
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 12 January 2016 16: 04
      0
      Quote: McLooka-MacLeod
      General wants new airplanes

      Everyone wants a brand new one, including airplanes.
  6. shinobi
    shinobi 12 January 2016 15: 08
    +7
    The only thing we do not reach, until we reach the United States in quantity. We have already bypassed the quality.
    1. TiGRoO
      TiGRoO 12 January 2016 16: 51
      0
      Impact UAVs, here we are very much in the red, but as soon as our drums finish the tests, we will begin to catch up with the amers.
  7. sl22277
    sl22277 12 January 2016 15: 09
    +4
    Already surpassed. In addition, it significantly surpassed the morale of the flight personnel, there’s nothing to even compare. And regarding Crimea, apparently there was an agreement in advance with Dill, on the NATO base in Crimea.
  8. Belarus
    Belarus 12 January 2016 15: 09
    +5
    US Air Force: Russian Aviation Close to US Capability


    Go to the garden commander The U.S. Air Force in Europe, the commander of the NATO Air Force, Frank Gorenk. The Russian Air Force has long surpassed you, but you just do not understand it. Because only civilians and hospitals are bombed.And yes, you miraculously miss your "terrorists".So go like you commander of colonial forces in europe to the garden or Are there any other options where to send you to command!
  9. kursk87
    kursk87 12 January 2016 15: 10
    +3
    The Americans thought that they could do anything with impunity in the sky. But no, the Russian Air Force is a powerful competitor for the US Air Force. It is important not to stop at what has been achieved and continue to supply the army with modern weapons
  10. SAM 5
    SAM 5 12 January 2016 15: 11
    +2
    In general, that is competent, sober reasoning.
  11. Kadavercianin
    Kadavercianin 12 January 2016 15: 14
    +3
    If I’m not mistaken, the US Air Force is a total of 2 times more numerous than the Russian Air Force, so formally they have an advantage. Another thing is that with their composition and location, it can easily be that if the Russian air forces do not degrade and begin to grow, plus if their location is slightly changed, then the Americans may consider that their air force in the region will not be enough for decisive superiority. I almost forgot that there is still a factor in the developed air defense system, which the Americans cannot particularly boast of, it certainly is, but the general level of organization and development is a little different, and the missile defense system is quite expensive and specialized.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 12 January 2016 18: 18
      +2
      Quote: Kadavercianin
      If I’m not mistaken, the US Air Force is a total of 2 times more numerous than the Russian Air Force

      No ... in total, every 5, or maybe more ...
      In the USA:
      Rockwell B-1B Lancer-63
      Northrop B-2 Spirit-19
      Boeing B-52 Stratofortress-72
      Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II-289
      Lockheed AC-130 Specter (AC-130H Specter-8
      AC-130U Specter-17) -25
      F-15E Strike Eagle-291
      F-15 Eagle-227
      F-16 Fighting Falcon-913
      F-22 Raptor-187
      F-35 Lightning II (in three versions) - about 160
      And UAVs of different classes of the order of 7.
      At the Russian Aerospace Forces:
      Su-27 (IN DIFFERENT MODIFICATIONS) -389
      Su-30-58
      MiG-29-224
      Su-35-45
      MiG-31-about 120
      SU-24-115
      SU-25-200
      SU-34-83
      TU-22 (VARIOUS MODIFICATIONS) -50 (Plus 109 units in reserve.
      In February 2012, a contract was signed to upgrade 30 Tu-22M3 to the level of Tu-22M3M)
      TU-160-16
      TU-95-36 (+ about 50 in storage, as of 2012 [42].
      Since 2013, the Tu-95MSM has been upgraded to the Tu-95MSM version in order to extend the life of the aircraft until 2025.)
      Aircraft AWACS, transporters, naval aviation do not even think. hi
      1. Kadavercianin
        Kadavercianin 12 January 2016 18: 38
        +2
        A bit of criticism, but in addition to the main aviation in the form of fighters, a bomber, etc., you somehow threw UAVs into a bunch and only from the American side, after all, the Russians also use some amount of them, despite the fact that everything -so most of the drones are not combat vehicles; this is closer to reconnaissance and AWACS. But naval aviation (combat) is still worth calculating, since these are still real combat vehicles that also move with the airfield.

        I would need to look for somewhere American analytics came across at the expense of military aviation in the middle of 2015, there they were just talking about 2x numerical superiority.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 12 January 2016 19: 14
          +2
          Quote: Kadavercianin
          A bit of criticism, but in addition to the main aviation in the form of fighters, a bomber, etc., you somehow threw UAVs into a bunch and only from the American side, after all, the Russians also use some amount of them, despite the fact that everything - so most of the drones are not combat vehicles

          At the end of the 15th year, Russia had about 1200 UAVs (mostly reconnaissance UAVs), while the United States had MQ-1 Predator (reconnaissance-strike) -195, Boeing X-45 multipurpose, X-47 Pegasus-heavy strike ... these are those UAVs that Russia does not have so far. And the total number of UAVs in the USA is from 7 to 10 thousand of different classes.
          Quote: Kadavercianin
          But naval aviation (combat) is still worth calculating, since these are still real combat vehicles that also move with the airfield.

          If we take into account naval aviation, the gap will be much greater. 11 aircraft carriers an average of 90 aircraft each (2 under construction). And we have one Kuzya, on which about 20 aircraft.
          1. Kadavercianin
            Kadavercianin 12 January 2016 19: 33
            +1
            X-45 and X-47, - can you give more details about the current status of the projects? And the one on some resources, these programs are either closed or on the self-sufficiency of Boeing, just curious. Predator - really reconnaissance - shock and their number 195, which would be 1000. The rest is intelligence, that would be the wrong number. Either you need to count everything, or choose on a common basis. I was simply surprised that you turned on all the American drones, and the Russian did not even hit, although you yourself wrote that there are about 1200 of them.
            Let's subtract all reconnaissance UAVs from the calculations, except for the drums.

            Sorry for the deck aviation, but according to the same pedagogy on Kuznetsovo, there are a maximum of 30 cars, this is certainly not important, but still we are arguing about accuracy. This is another question at the same time, all aircraft carriers in the ranks, as far as I understand, are not assigned to each of them a certain number of planes or not, and if the ship in the wing dock is waiting for its return?
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 12 January 2016 19: 40
              +1
              Quote: Kadavercianin
              X-45 and X-47, - can you give more details about the current status of the projects?

              Two prototypes were built for the X-45. As soon as it became known that the Air Force had stopped the UAV program (X-2, X-45), the Navy began its own UCAS program. The requirements for this program were determined during the summer of 47. Boeing fought for the contract with its X-2006N UAV and Northrop Grumman with the X-45. Ultimately, the contract went to the X-47 UAV, which resulted in the end of the X-47 program.

              Take-off weight, kg .:
              3 630.00
              Range, km .:
              2 400.00
              Speed, km / h:
              920.00
              Practical ceiling, m .:
              13 200.00
              Manufacturer:
              Boeing Integrated Defense Systems
              X-47V - heavy strike UAV. Last year, the X-47V UAV landed on the deck of an aircraft carrier.
              1. Kadavercianin
                Kadavercianin 12 January 2016 20: 01
                +2
                That is, in fact, they are still being run in, we will see what happens to them next.
                What about the wings of aircraft carriers?
                1. NEXUS
                  NEXUS 12 January 2016 20: 06
                  +1
                  Quote: Kadavercianin
                  That is, in fact, they are still being run in, we will see what happens to them next.

                  Next will be a series. And we have a drummer up to 20 tons as it was, and no. Development is underway, but mattresses in a year, another series will be launched. And taking into account developments on the X-47, a 6th generation fighter is also at war. And we have a PAK The FA is not even in the series yet.
                  These are the facts.
                  1. Kadavercianin
                    Kadavercianin 12 January 2016 20: 21
                    0
                    When they let me go then we will talk, but for now I'm sorry, but the situation is unclear, in fact, it can still change several times.
                    And if it's not a secret, what is a 6th generation fighter? What unique qualities should he possess?
                    And another clarification, how many years have passed since the start of work on the 5th generation fighter to the start of its full-fledged mass operation?
                    As far as I know, from development to commissioning of new equipment it is good if they fit in at 10 years.
                    1. Kasym
                      Kasym 12 January 2016 20: 28
                      0
                      To compare the capabilities of the Air Force, it is necessary to consider air defense systems. Syria and Vietnam are an example of this. hi
                    2. NEXUS
                      NEXUS 12 January 2016 20: 51
                      +1
                      Quote: Kadavercianin
                      And if it's not a secret, what is a 6th generation fighter? What unique qualities should he possess?

                      Presumably ... stealth technologies, hyper sound, it is possible to fly in near space, and it may also be unmanned. The arsenal is still foggy, but the mattresses are seriously talking about laser weapons, as well as the likeness of a relstrone. But that's all for now at the level of conversations and assumptions.
                      Quote: Kadavercianin
                      And another clarification, how many years have passed since the start of work on the 5th generation fighter to the start of its full-fledged mass operation?

                      On April 23, 1991, the US Air Force announced the Lockheed / Boeing / General Dynamics group of companies as the winner of the fifth generation fighter competition.
                      The first pre-production car took off on September 7, 1997.
                      Serial production of the aircraft began in 2001. On January 14, 2003, the first F-22 entered the Nellis military base in the Nevada desert.
                      According to PAK FA ... The plane made its first flight on January 29, 2010. By 18, they promise to deliver the first production cars.
              2. podgornovea
                podgornovea 12 January 2016 20: 50
                0
                Of course, I wildly apologize, but it seems to me that heavy shock UAVs, this is a breeze of clean water. Today, you can make a drone from virtually any aircraft (and more precisely any aircraft).
                The question is in devices, computers, software.More precisely, data processing, management and decision making software is in FIRST place.

                "Buran" flew into space in 1988 and landed in autonomous mode.

                And the X-47B is actually testing the 6 generation of an unmanned fighter, bomber, and attack aircraft.
                With all the additional bonuses - aerodynamics, materials, etc.
                1. NEXUS
                  NEXUS 12 January 2016 20: 59
                  +2
                  Quote: podgornovea
                  Of course, I wildly apologize, but it seems to me that heavy shock UAVs, this is a breeze of clean water.

                  Why is it? The creation of a strike UAV up to 20 tons is conducted not only in the United States. We have been dealing with this issue by the MIG design bureau, creating the SKAT prototype. But the tender has lost and now these are being worked by the SOKOL design bureau, the DRY design bureau and a couple more design bricks. The topic is quite rational. Let's take at least the cost of a combat aircraft and UAV. Plus, you don’t need to train pilots (time, money), and the safety of human lives. Plus, the time of construction.
                  Quote: podgornovea
                  And the X-47B is actually testing the 6 generation of an unmanned fighter, bomber, and attack aircraft.

                  Not quite so. The Kh-47V is a UAV on which some technologies are being tested, which may be used in a 6th generation fighter.
                  1. Kadavercianin
                    Kadavercianin 12 January 2016 21: 17
                    +2
                    Quote: NEXUS
                    Presumably ... stealth technologies, hyper sound, it is possible to fly in near space, and it may also be unmanned. The arsenal is still foggy, but the mattresses are seriously talking about laser weapons, as well as the likeness of a relstrone. But that's all for now at the level of conversations and assumptions.


                    Sorry, but this is a hodgepodge of different names and assumptions, and some are generally not yet very compatible with real features, so in the coming years it’s good if an intelligible concept appears even in words.

                    Quote: NEXUS

                    On April 23, 1991, the US Air Force announced the Lockheed / Boeing / General Dynamics group of companies as the winner of the fifth generation fighter competition.
                    The first pre-production car took off on September 7, 1997.
                    Serial production of the aircraft began in 2001. On January 14, 2003, the first F-22 entered the Nellis military base in the Nevada desert.
                    According to PAK FA ... The plane made its first flight on January 29, 2010. By 18, they promise to deliver the first production cars.


                    Only one clarification: the requirements for the new fighter were drawn up in 1981, and the start of the competition in 1986, well, from 81 to 86 you can’t consider flights of fancy there, but the real plane began to be developed and created already from 1986, and in 1991 it was only decided who won. By the way, if my memory didn’t completely disappear, then Douglas competed with YF-23, Boeing with X-32 and Lockheed with F-22.
                2. looker-on
                  looker-on 13 January 2016 09: 45
                  0
                  We are not living in 1988. "Buran" was fantastic. They all went nuts. But today the Russian Federation does not have drones with weapons on board capable of hanging in the air for 10 hours. And the enemy has. And even if a difficult uav divorce, as you think, we do not have this divorce. It means to fly the plane. And in it a pilot and potentially we risk not only a piece of iron but also an elite specialist, the loss of which is incomparable with technology.
  12. Primus pilus
    Primus pilus 12 January 2016 15: 17
    +2
    Soon they will revive and begin to print Soviet Military Power.
  13. pofigisst74
    pofigisst74 12 January 2016 15: 18
    +1
    The usual boasting of the "exceptional". It seems to me that he somewhat exaggerates the capabilities of his aviation, and underestimates, or does not realize the capabilities of ours.
  14. alex74nur
    alex74nur 12 January 2016 15: 18
    +1
    It’s time for the State Department to express deep concern !!!
  15. Yellow white
    Yellow white 12 January 2016 15: 19
    +3
    Perhaps in quantity, but not in the quality of the fleet, we are losing, but our pilots will give any American a hundred points any more, I mean, love for the Motherland, the ability to sacrifice, in general patriotism!
    In Vietnam, some still remember our ... hi
    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 12 January 2016 15: 27
      +1
      Quote: Black and White
      but our pilots will give a hundred points to any American, I mean, love for the motherland, the ability to sacrifice themselves, in general patriotism!

      For love of the Motherland, for sure, but unfortunately not for clocks flown.
      1. vadimtt
        vadimtt 12 January 2016 15: 41
        0
        It’s normal now with a raid, in some places more than in the USSR during the fat years.
        1. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 12 January 2016 17: 05
          0
          Quote: vadimtt
          It’s normal now with a raid, in some places more than in the USSR during the fat years.

          Normal from the word NORM. And everyone has her own. They began to fly more, I don’t argue, in some places, as you put it, more than in the USSR, but there were only a few pilots who flew by the clock more than the average for the US Air Force.
          1. Ros 56
            Ros 56 12 January 2016 22: 11
            -1
            Have you seen all the flight books?
            1. Ros 56
              Ros 56 13 January 2016 11: 15
              0
              Well, if there’s not enough mind for more, it’s only left, put the cons.
              Where are they miserable against the heirs of these Heroes.
              Who does not know, from left to right A. Pokryshkin, G. Zhukov, I. Kozhedub.
  16. Achilles
    Achilles 12 January 2016 15: 23
    +9
    Of course, our modern aviation is lying, for example: the SU-30SM, SU-34, SU-35 are superior to any Amekos aircraft, there are no such flying characteristics of US planes, our T-50 can do this in the sky that F-35 cannot.
    Recently, at a show at an international air show in the UK, it was suggested that any aircraft compete with the SU-35 in a training battle, everyone refused
    1. AlexTires
      AlexTires 12 January 2016 15: 35
      +1
      Quote: Achilles
      Recently, at a show at an international air show in the UK, it was suggested that any aircraft compete with the SU-35 in a training battle, everyone refused


      One can only imagine what the American military and politicians really are experiencing, observing and analyzing the actions of the Russian Armed Forces in general and the Russian Aerospace Forces in particular.
      1. Ros 56
        Ros 56 12 January 2016 22: 26
        0
        Quote: AlexTires
        One can only imagine what the American military and politicians really are experiencing, observing and analyzing the actions of the Russian Armed Forces in general and the Russian Aerospace Forces in particular.

        Quietly on the sidelines they write in pants from such power.
        The most beautiful sight, the take-off of a beautiful airplane.
    2. Ros 56
      Ros 56 12 January 2016 22: 20
      0
      Quote: Achilles
      Recently, at a show at an international air show in the UK, it was suggested that any aircraft compete with the SU-35 in a training battle, everyone refused


      Well, finally I found a kindred spirit, otherwise I read and chale, they probably are not fans of aviation. Here is the Su-34, and they remember the Yak-38, "the times of the Ochakovs, and the conquest of the Crimea." I would have inserted a photo here, but only one is inserted, you click another, it replaces the previous one.
      1. Scraptor
        Scraptor 17 January 2016 09: 43
        0
        Well, instruct, but what does the kick in the direction of the Yak-38?
  17. edeligor
    edeligor 12 January 2016 15: 26
    +1
    How I would like to believe the words of this potential enemy. To my great regret, they are only partly true with regard to technology, and then by interference (I mean the number) As for the infrastructure, we are far behind and are at the beginning of a long journey - the restoration of the destroyed. And what our potential adversaries will never get to is the "testicular strength" of our pilots. Of this i am sure laughing
  18. fa2998
    fa2998 12 January 2016 15: 26
    -8
    Quote: alekc73
    The general is lying

    I agree! Maybe he compares the VKS with one of the US aviation units. There is the Air Force, Navy aviation, marine corps aviation. The US ONLY on aircraft carriers pr. 1000 aircraft. And it can operate in any area of ​​the world, and Russia without a base anywhere . hi
    1. aleks 62 next
      aleks 62 next 12 January 2016 15: 38
      +1
      .... The United States ONLY ON AIRCRAFT pr.1000 aircraft ....

      .... Only half, or even less, can really take off at best .... Look at the photo of an aircraft carrier with exposed planes on deck - a maximum of 50-60 .... The rest are either in hangars or at ground airfields .. .. hi
    2. RUSIVAN
      RUSIVAN 12 January 2016 15: 45
      0
      And the USA without bases WHERE ??? ... You are a "real army general"
    3. TiGRoO
      TiGRoO 12 January 2016 17: 00
      -1
      Their aircraft carriers may not sail - this is the time, and our Air Force, together with air defense / missile defense, is the strongest of the NATO Air Force (and not just the United States). Do not forget about our advantage in electronic warfare, as well as about our MiG-31BM.
      1. looker-on
        looker-on 13 January 2016 09: 49
        0
        Can I have data? Especially about the advantages of our army in electronic warfare
  19. AlexTires
    AlexTires 12 January 2016 15: 34
    +4
    Americans, by definition, cannot recognize that Russian combat aircraft are equal or better than American ones. The words of the American general are the maximum that they are allowed to say so as not to traumatize the feelings of the American layman about his exclusivity and superiority of the United States militarily.
  20. Dimontius
    Dimontius 12 January 2016 15: 36
    +1
    to continue:
    Rick Gladstone | The new york times
    US Air Force general considers Russian missile defense "very serious"
    "On Monday, the head of the US Air Force in Europe and Africa expressed" very serious "concerns about the formation of large clusters of complex Russian missile defense systems that he noted, which increasingly threaten to block NATO's access to some parts of European airspace, including a third of the sky over Poland - Rick Gladstone reports in The New York Times - He also said that Russia began to create similar clusters of missiles on the Crimean peninsula, which it annexed almost two years ago, taking it from Ukraine, and in war-torn Syria, whose government is assisting the Russian army bombing rebels fighting him for the past three months. "

    According to the journalist, General Frank Gorenz called the Russian strategy of blocking access to certain regions (A2 / AD) one of the most disturbing trends. In an interview with The New York Times, the general said that the highest concentration of weapons for A2 / AD was in Kaliningrad, and this could impede NATO access to parts of Poland and the Baltic.

    "This is very serious," the general said. "Definitely, we continue to monitor this situation. They have every right to deploy this equipment. However, the increase in the number of weapons used for the A2 / AD and its concentration must be taken into account."

    Gorenz monitors the situation in Syria and believes that Russia has shown its updated arsenal there and "has demonstrated its readiness to use it."

    Source: The New York Times
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 12 January 2016 15: 59
      0
      Quote: Dimontius
      This is very serious, - said the general. - Definitely, we continue to monitor this situation. They have every right to host this equipment. However, the increase in the number of weapons used for the A2 / AD and its concentration must be taken into account. "

      Frank Gorenz is dangerous because he knows how to think and analyze the situation, unlike those politicians who only know how la la la.
  21. rassom
    rassom 12 January 2016 15: 37
    0
    New planes are good. What about training and retraining for a new technique?
  22. gergi
    gergi 12 January 2016 15: 37
    0
    Well, well, cheated! Bow to you benefactor! In terms of quantity, we are not even nearby, but in terms of quality, our VKS is already ahead. Come, count. So far, we have to storm your Ameritsa unnecessarily, it is you, exceptional, spring the tail. Yes, just a bit.
  23. 4ekist
    4ekist 12 January 2016 15: 40
    -6
    By the number of aircraft and by quality indicators, we are still in a deep ass. And strategic aviation is piece by piece.
    1. gergi
      gergi 12 January 2016 15: 44
      +2
      For what purpose? Not enough for an attack on usa, enough for the defense of beloved Russia. Proof-bombs do not fall on the head.
  24. Extraneous
    Extraneous 12 January 2016 15: 51
    +2
    Russian aviation is undoubtedly the leader in avionics. But losing in the number of modern aircraft. especially considering the total number of NATO aircraft. We have an adversary - not only the states, but the whole west en masse. In the electronic support of aviation - we are also lagging behind. Only, in fact, work has begun on the development and implementation of modern and promising electronic aircraft control systems. The balance of power is not in our favor.
  25. fa2998
    fa2998 12 January 2016 15: 59
    0
    Quote: RUSIVAN
    And the USA without bases WHERE ??? ... You are a "real army general"

    In addition to the aircraft carriers, the United States also has BASES (and many) that Russia cannot boast of. Well, there are ours in Armenia, in Syria, and in Central Asia, but this is near our borders. And you don't have to be an "army general" compare the aviation potential of Russia and the United States. yes hi
  26. Pete mitchell
    Pete mitchell 12 January 2016 16: 04
    +8
    Quote: alekc73
    The general is lying to give money to the U.S. Air Force. Our aircraft just got out of a coma and she is far from a good condition. hi

    The general is not just lying, he deliberately lobbies the interests of industrialists. Even in a state of "coma" the Russian Air Force is a big headache. The operation in Syria has shown the ability to concentrate a diverse squadron in the right place, and also the ability to control, regardless of distance, which really scares them. If the push to Pristina was almost a gesture of despair, now they see very confident coordinated action.
    Two competently implemented operations of the RF Armed Forces, Crimea and Khmeimim, finally undermined the faith of the "partners" in their own exclusiveness, they perfectly understand that the words of Alexander III about the allies "fell" into the right hands, and they will tear ...
    1. cergey51046
      cergey51046 12 January 2016 16: 08
      0
      Our aviation has long surpassed the aviation of the USA and NATO.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  27. cergey51046
    cergey51046 12 January 2016 16: 10
    -1
    Now rockets are more important than aviation. Can one day sink the entire fleet of NATO and the United States, shoot down all the planes that fly into the air, then what will they fight? Our missiles are covered ex. It looks like the scribe of the USA will soon fall apart or destroy the volcano. What can be done with the volcano? How to prevent? No way.
    1. Achilles
      Achilles 12 January 2016 16: 30
      0
      Of course, missiles are more important, there is the concept of irreparable losses, does that mean it’s enough for us to shoot down 300-400 planes (preferably together with the pilots), where then will they take so many qualified pilots? This is called irreparable loss. And accordingly, the entire remaining fleet turns into a pile of iron
  28. fa2998
    fa2998 12 January 2016 16: 18
    -1
    Quote: 4ekist
    By the number of aircraft and by quality indicators, we are still in a deep ass. And strategic aviation is piece by piece.

    I'm just wondering why THIS COMMENT IS PASSED BY? We have thousands of PAK FA, Su-35 and other modern aircraft flying. And according to the "strategists", the relatively new Tu-160 (30-year-old) is only 16 (I don't know how many really combat-ready What do our "hurray-patriots" only show on the Internet? Dig on the Internet about the numerical strength of the US Air Force and Russia, and then shout "hurray!" request hi
    1. Achilles
      Achilles 12 January 2016 16: 45
      +1
      We currently have about 100 pcs. SU-34, 48pcs. SU-35 in 2016 another 48pcs. will be approximately 250pcs. Su27 and Su30, etc. And slowly the fleet is replenished with new aircraft, not all at once
    2. Ros 56
      Ros 56 13 January 2016 15: 49
      0
      Quote: fa2998
      We have thousands of PAK FA, Su-35 and other modern airplanes flying.


      And you are aware that three or four modern fighter jets hold a border section 800-900 km wide. This is how many Air Force divisions of the Second World War replace?
  29. Tomsk55
    Tomsk55 12 January 2016 16: 24
    0
    the general is lying. in Soviet times, our aviation was in no way inferior to America, and in some ways even surpassed it, and now even surpasses it.
    1. Ros 56
      Ros 56 13 January 2016 15: 59
      0
      Quote: Tomsk55
      the general is lying. our aviation in Soviet times was in no way inferior to America


      And let Vietnam remember how many B-52 and Phantom our MiGs dropped, and in Korea, in due time, they trained on the MiG-15.
  30. Manul
    Manul 12 January 2016 16: 29
    0
    Touching upon the situation in the Black Sea region, the commander noted that after the annexation of Crimea to Russia, “the strategic situation in the region has changed drastically and the United States must be vigilant.”

    And where is the protest from stubborn ukronatsii? Frank Gorenk actually recognized Crimea as Russian. Ukraine does not want to impose sanctions against the United States?
  31. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 12 January 2016 16: 51
    +1
    "Russia has invested in its aerospace forces and now" we must do the same. The main idea.
  32. Nikolay71
    Nikolay71 12 January 2016 16: 55
    +1
    First, the American admiral praises the Russian fleet, then the general praises our VKS. Looks like the guys conspired, maybe they can get more money for the military budget.
  33. Flat5160
    Flat5160 12 January 2016 17: 30
    0
    Navy, VKS, if there is an article about our nuclear forces from the next American general, you can be glad and understand that we are going in the right direction. Or something happened such that we still don’t know. All in one day.
  34. for_White_Only
    for_White_Only 12 January 2016 18: 40
    +1
    The amount is far behind .. Not everything is decided by the level of training
  35. pvv113
    pvv113 12 January 2016 19: 28
    +1
    Russia has invested in its aerospace forces and now they are close in capabilities to American aviation, said the commander of the US Air Force in Europe, the commander of the NATO Air Force, Frank Gorenk

    He flatters himself hi
    1. Yuri from Volgograd
      Yuri from Volgograd 12 January 2016 19: 31
      +1
      Quote: pvv113
      Russia has invested in its aerospace forces and now they are close in capabilities to American aviation, said the commander of the US Air Force in Europe, the commander of the NATO Air Force, Frank Gorenk

      He flatters himself hi

      Just a rationale for increasing the military budget.
  36. Dr. Bormental
    Dr. Bormental 12 January 2016 20: 31
    +1
    Talking "garrison cap" with ears ... tfu .. forgive me, Lord! Z
  37. behemot
    behemot 12 January 2016 21: 10
    0
    Comrade General, what about the F-16? Is this the best airplane of all time? How could the Russians get close then?
    1. Ros 56
      Ros 56 12 January 2016 22: 35
      +1
      Quote: behemot
      Comrade General, what about the F-16? Is this the best airplane of all time? How could the Russians get close then?

      And on the F-15, and on the F-16, and on any other striped crap, we have a worthy answer.
  38. vell.65
    vell.65 12 January 2016 22: 59
    +1
    Have you met with our "dryers", which were run by Indians_ when was it? And now you have been in the ass for a long time, so it will continue !!!
  39. Swed
    Swed 12 January 2016 23: 40
    +1
    If we count the battles "purely" one-on-one, then I think he is lying, they are not yet close. But if we take the complex of all the Armed Forces, then this level has not been established, since it will be visible only in a real combat situation.
  40. Mizhgan
    Mizhgan 12 January 2016 23: 47
    +1
    Not approached, but surpassed .... Judging by Syria, however. The Americans have too many misses ....
  41. sgr291158
    sgr291158 13 January 2016 05: 49
    +1
    This is not ours, and the mattress can no longer compare with us.
  42. Nitarius
    Nitarius 13 January 2016 06: 11
    0
    General GO ALREADY TURNS HOLES FOR NEW STARS ... Yes MONEY thinks how chopping off)))
  43. PatriotKZ
    PatriotKZ 13 January 2016 11: 20
    0
    The American general is lying, the US Air Force has long lagged behind the Russian Air Force. Examples don't want to write too many of them laughing
  44. Ros 56
    Ros 56 13 January 2016 18: 13
    0
    Just now, the news:
    The Russian Ministry of Defense has purchased 50 Su-35 fighters worth over 60 billion rubles