Military Review

Identified another problem F-35. Now in the fuel tanks

227
Another technological flaw has been revealed in the multipurpose fighter of the new generation F-35, which was previously praised by the American media. Barely there were reports that Washington was going to spend another 2 billion dollars to bring to the pilot's seat, which is now capable of injuring a pilot with a body weight less than 61 kg, as new information about the need to eliminate errors began to be published in the press.


Identified another problem F-35. Now in the fuel tanks


Rossiyskaya Gazeta with reference to the information portal World Military Power writes that the American military aircraft F-35 showed serious problems in the fuel tanks. The manufacturing company said that the modification of the fuel tanks needs urgent improvement. Details as to exactly which problems in the fuel tanks were revealed by the developers are not reported. But it is reported that Lockheed Martin demanded that the US Department of Defense allocate additional funds in the amount of almost 29 million dollars to eliminate these problems.

Among the American experts, rumors have spread that representatives of the developer company are doing everything to increase government funding for aircraft development. It is known that all work on creating F-35 has already spent (attention!) Over 100 billions of dollars. This suggests that the cost of one F-35 aircraft reaches 110 million dollars, while the car still remains "raw."
Photos used:
https://www.facebook.com/thef35
227 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 15 January 2016 15: 11 New
    28
    The Chinese have one hundred thousand warnings, the F-35 has one hundred thousand faults. And they say that East and West do not understand each other - how else to understand! :)
    1. vlad66
      vlad66 15 January 2016 15: 15 New
      43
      Truly not only golden, but a plane encrusted with diamonds is obtained, well, mattresses will print papers then. repeat
      1. vovanpain
        vovanpain 15 January 2016 15: 20 New
        17
        The dog’s tail fell into the cart’s wheel, now shout, but run away. So the mattresses have nowhere to go, so much has been spent and how much more will be spent.
        1. Persistent
          Persistent 15 January 2016 17: 33 New
          +4
          Totally agree with you !!! Seret loudly - no sense !!!!
      2. Maxom75
        Maxom75 15 January 2016 18: 27 New
        +2
        invest so much in the plane and still invest a lot of money, and its effectiveness is already being called into question. One would like to say: "Stubbornness is the dignity of donkeys!"
        1. ty60
          ty60 15 January 2016 23: 04 New
          +8
          We need to rejoice, the problems of the enemy are our small victory.
        2. ty60
          ty60 15 January 2016 23: 04 New
          0
          We need to rejoice, the problems of the enemy are our small victory.
        3. dauria
          dauria 16 January 2016 11: 51 New
          +8
          One would like to say: "Stubbornness is the dignity of donkeys!"


          Yes, I want to say so - about the VO website, repeating like a spell: “the plane is bad, bad, bad and it will be even worse ....” But there’s never even a decent technical article about the history of creation and just educational program They didn’t post it on the plane.
          1. Scraptor
            Scraptor 16 January 2016 21: 13 New
            +2
            subtly troll ... laughing
            Quote: dauria
            about the history of creation

            and I would also like to know that all the same he has tanks good
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 20 January 2016 20: 05 New
              0
              maybe which nut from the 90s from Yak with a metric thread loosened and stuck? lol
          2. prostofily
            prostofily 17 January 2016 03: 09 New
            0
            Yes, he is both good and not good - they measure money. Well, not really expensive.
        4. the47th
          the47th 17 January 2016 19: 45 New
          +2
          And where do they go? Score on the F-35 and start a tender for a new plane? This is still a lot of money, and most importantly several (maybe even tens) years of development. And the army will be all with the same F-16. Lockheed Martin managers already understand that the military can’t get anywhere from them, so the state budget is being milked.
      3. serkhan
        serkhan 16 January 2016 07: 14 New
        +2
        What can I say, a typical example of a suitcase without a handle. Suitcases usually fly poorly, but they are unlikely to throw it away, that's for sure, there will be even more million stickers on it.
      4. Dilshat
        Dilshat 17 January 2016 13: 26 New
        +1
        Well, Lockheed Martin is simply an analogue of our Sakhalin governors.
      5. Nick
        Nick 17 January 2016 19: 53 New
        0
        Quote: vlad66
        Truly not only golden, but a plane encrusted with diamonds is obtained, well, mattresses will print papers then. repeat

        And the vassals have nowhere to go, they’ll take it, otherwise they’ll turn off the gas
    2. NIKNN
      NIKNN 15 January 2016 15: 16 New
      +9
      Among American experts, rumors spread that representatives of the developer company are doing everything to increase government funding for aircraft development


      This is probably the main reason. After all, it was not considered on the accounts ... request
      1. Haettenschweiler
        Haettenschweiler 15 January 2016 15: 16 New
        25
        - To hell with it, with the F-35. Where is our T-50?
        1. kil 31
          kil 31 15 January 2016 15: 18 New
          25
          I will say this. We constantly write about the problems f 35. But they do not write about the problems of PAK FA. You don’t understand the certainty of propaganda. I think so; let's first declare ourselves to the whole world PAK FA and then we will compare the shortcomings of ours and their aircraft.
          1. Kent0001
            Kent0001 15 January 2016 15: 28 New
            64
            PAK FA is being tested, and it probably has problems, it doesn’t happen otherwise. But this is actually an experimental machine and it is not being sucked in by anyone, and the Americans first rassirovany their offspring and therefore any rumors about this plane immediately turn on the net.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 15 January 2016 18: 57 New
              +8
              Quote: Kent0001
              PAK FA is undergoing tests, and he probably has problems,

              Of course there is ... that's why the series was moved from the 16th year to the 18th. It is useful to recall the assurances of Rogozin, who voted like a parrot that the serial T-50 will be in the 15th year.
              1. jjj
                jjj 15 January 2016 20: 03 New
                +3
                And remember how it was before. For several years the cars were finished. Which is right. So they serve for decades. And in Soviet times, problems arose in the series. Recall the MiG-25
              2. Vadim237
                Vadim237 15 January 2016 21: 10 New
                +1
                Focus on 2020 - PAK FA will not go into the series earlier, due to the fact that there is no new engine yet.
                1. NEXUS
                  NEXUS 15 January 2016 21: 16 New
                  +7
                  Quote: Vadim237
                  Focus on 2020 - PAK FA will not go into the series earlier, due to the fact that there is no new engine yet.

                  He and the engine of the first stage can withstand all the speed characteristics of a generation 5 fighter ... I believe that it is not the engine.
            2. _my opinion
              _my opinion 15 January 2016 19: 05 New
              +3
              Quote: Kent0001
              PAK FA is being tested, and it probably has problems, it doesn’t happen otherwise. But this is actually an experimental machine and it is not being sucked in by anyone, and the Americans first rassirovany their offspring and therefore any rumors about this plane immediately turn on the net.

              Tests are a useful and necessary thing, it’s better to spend some time on them than to launch a crude machine in a series and then rake this “damp” to the fullest ...
              about the F-35: that’s what you can’t bring to mind (without a radical alteration) so it single engine scheme.
              1. Aaron Zawi
                Aaron Zawi 15 January 2016 19: 26 New
                10
                Quote: _my opinion

                about the F-35: that’s what you can’t bring to mind (without a radical alteration) so it single engine scheme.

                F-35 is a fighter-bomber, like the F-16, and it has been working quite well for 50 years with a single-engine scheme.
                1. andj61
                  andj61 15 January 2016 19: 43 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Aaron Zawi
                  F-35 is a fighter-bomber, like F-16 and it has been working quite well for 50 years with a single-engine scheme.

                  Well, you exaggerated about the F-16! repeat
                  General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon is an American fourth-generation multi-functional fighter. Designed in 1974 by General Dynamics. It was commissioned in 1979, and in 1993 General Dynamics sold its aircraft manufacturing business to Lockheed Corporation (currently Lockheed Martin).
                  F-16, due to its versatility and relatively low cost, is the most massive fourth-generation fighter (more than 2014 aircraft were built in June 4540) and is successful in the international arms market (it is in service with 25 countries). The last of the 2231 F-16s for the US Air Force were transferred to the customer in 2005. The upgraded F-16 will be produced for export at least until mid-2017.
                  1. Aaron Zawi
                    Aaron Zawi 15 January 2016 19: 55 New
                    +4
                    Quote: andj61

                    Well, you exaggerated about the F-16! repeat

                    I agree. He added ten years. But in general, until 2019, the F-16 will still be actively used by many air forces.
                2. nemets
                  nemets 16 January 2016 09: 56 New
                  +1
                  single-engine scheme is ineffective, and call the f-16 a 4-generation aircraft?! rather 3 ++, 4p it became after modernization. f-35 can hardly be attributed to 5p precisely because of low maneuverability, even compared to the su-30, rather in terms of armament, it refers to 5p.
                  1. SIvan
                    SIvan 16 January 2016 20: 06 New
                    +2
                    F-16 from the very beginning was a 4-generation aircraft. Integral layout - this is the main feature of the 4th generation. He has it.
              2. mav1971
                mav1971 15 January 2016 23: 39 New
                +7
                Quote: _my opinion

                about the F-35: that’s what you can’t bring to mind (without a radical alteration) so it single engine scheme.


                Americans have a different experience.
                Once, the single-engine YF-16 won the twin-engine YF-17 at the competition, simply by "trumping" it in all respects. And he became one of the best fighters of our time.
                Almost 45 years since the first roll-out and so many upgrades, not a single aircraft in this class and purpose has yet been made ...
                Therefore, they can afford to consider a single-engine scheme more necessary.
                1. Sergey Guriev
                  Sergey Guriev 17 January 2016 02: 04 New
                  +5
                  After that, the IF17 fighter smoothly turned into a successful attack aircraft / front-line bomber FA18. Nothing was wasted. In my opinion, many of the technical tasks and solutions of f35 have not been tested anywhere before. The percentage of new solutions in this aircraft is extremely high. The Americans, having worked on the technology on it, will most likely quite painlessly create the next car, already much more advanced. And f35 will be sold (forcibly) to their partners, so to speak. They’ll buy it anyway. Nothing will be wasted. So instead of gloating it is worth considering what issues and technologies are being worked out on this ugly duckling. A similar story was in the USSR, from the ugly duckling tu22 to the magnificent tu22m3.
              3. dauria
                dauria 16 January 2016 21: 23 New
                +3
                about the F-35: that’s what it’s not able to bring to mind (without a cardinal alteration) because it’s a single-engine scheme.


                The trick is that the engine of this notorious single-engine circuit is the same as the twin-engine F-22. They simply repeated the successful exact same trick F-15 and F-16. This unification dramatically reduced the cost of both fighters and allowed them to conquer the market. They do everything right, and the error with the F-18 was taken into account. Yes, and the engine is excellent in itself, if there is an F-35 version of vertical take-off, where 80% of the aircraft parts are standard from the "ground"
            3. Vadim237
              Vadim237 15 January 2016 21: 12 New
              +2
              Most likely, rumors about the flaws of F 35 will remain rumors - "sources of information"
              1. Aqela
                Aqela 17 January 2016 14: 13 New
                +3
                I would agree with your remark if the F-35 were not in the series. Facts of the combat use of it 9 years after adoption are there? Estimates of real combat use, real effectiveness, are there?
                I would agree that, they say, yes, talk about talk, rumors about rumors and other nonsense. But there are no real facts at all. Given that at the moment the United States is involved in several military conflicts, let's compare the situation with Phantom (by the way, also, at the time, a former breakthrough aircraft):
                F-4 Phantom II. Developer - McDonnell Douglas. The first flight was May 27, 1958. Start of operation 1961.
                The Phantom was in production from 1958 to 1979 and a total of 5195 cars were built. 5057 of them were manufactured in St. Louis, Missouri, USA and another 138 were built under license at Mitsubishi factories in Japan. The peak production of F-4 occurred in 1967, when the McDonnell plant produced 72 aircraft per month. The US Air Force was armed with 2874 Phantoms, while the Navy and the Marine Corps - 1264 vehicles.
                -------
                The first war involving the Phantoms was Vietnam. After the "Tonkin incident" - a military clash of the American destroyer destroyers Maddox and Turner Joy with Vietnamese torpedo boats on August 2, 1964

                For comparison, what do we have about the F-35 (briefly, without water):
                F-35 Lightning II. Developer Lockheed Martin Corporation.
                The design choice for the F-35 was made in 2001 as a result of a competition for the JSF program.
                The first flight is December 15, 2006. Start of operation - since 2012 it has been operated for training purposes. Initial combat readiness: US ILC - July 31, 2015 [2]. Full year 17, planned: US Air Force - August 2016, US Navy - August 2018.

                From the above information, we have a logical conclusion: as soon as the US military acquires a new convenient "club", they do not miss the opportunity to use it right away. F-35 is clearly not attributed to such a baton. request We have not rumors, but facts of life: they made a piece of iron, but they won’t decide where to put it in! yes
                So allusions about a suitcase without a handle and a running dog with a tail in the wheel look very true. laughing good
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 15 January 2016 15: 59 New
            22
            Quote: Kil 31
            I will say this. We constantly write about the problems f 35. But they do not write about the problems of PAK FA. You don’t understand the certainty of propaganda. I think so; let's first declare ourselves to the whole world PAK FA and then we will compare the shortcomings of ours and their aircraft.

            You see what the matter is ... The T-50 has not yet been put into service, is not commercially available and is at the stage of testing prototypes. Which are just designed to identify jambs and bugs.

            A F-35 in a small series since 2007. And then suddenly problems in the fuel tanks come to light.

            In short, the American military-industrial complex is confidently following the path of the Soviet military-industrial complex: "Well, yes, the product is a little damp. But you sign the acceptance certificate, put the product into service - and we will definitely finalize it in a series ... then ... on selected topics". smile
            1. Lt. Air Force stock
              Lt. Air Force stock 15 January 2016 17: 59 New
              +2
              Quote: Alexey RA
              T-50 has not yet been accepted into service, is not commercially available and is at the stage of testing prototypes. Which are just designed to identify jambs and bugs.

              And the development of the T-50 is in every way cheaper than the F-35.
            2. Oleg14774
              Oleg14774 15 January 2016 18: 31 New
              +1
              Quote: Alexey RA
              In short, the American military-industrial complex is confidently following the Soviet military-industrial complex:

              Not Soviet, but Russian 90s.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 18 January 2016 11: 38 New
                +2
                Quote: Oleg147741
                Not Soviet, but Russian 90s.

                Soviet-Soviet.
                Take the beginning of the 30s: after the adoption of the Grabin’s divisional cannon, it was brought into service for 3 years, it wasn’t brought up and replaced with a new SPM model. After the adoption of the machine gun, they brought it into service for 8 years - and finally received the DShK. The DS-39 machine gun was adopted ... and removed back. T-26 tanks were adopted with unfinished engines and non-armored steel hulls. BT tanks brought to mind only to the BT-7 model. To force the plant and design bureau to finalize the T-34 after it was put into service, the threat of a production stop was required. The KV tank was already being finalized during the war - before the war, Salzman and Kotin scored all the requirements of the GABTU, saying that it was easier for them to give a new tank. The leader of Leningrad was received by the fleet ... and went back to the factory. where he stood for another 2 years at the outfitting wall.
                Maybe after the war, something has changed? No. The same aircraft were regularly first taken into service, and then finalized to the requirements of the original TK. Destroyer Ave. 956 went on trial without weapons. 2 BOD Project 1155 were adopted by the fleet without an air defense system, another 2 and a half air defense systems (on Kulakov, for example, instead of the missing dagger they recently stuck a bend). Sam SAM "Dagger" was adopted 8 years after the inclusion in the fleet of the head 1155.
                And the “cherry on the cake” is an epic from the R-39, when the lead SSBN pr.941 first went into operation without SLBMs adopted for service, and then received the “temporary” SLBMs (R-39 and R-39U), which were adopted just because they were already built under the SSBN. In reality, they did not correspond to the military technical requirements for the new SLBM - only the “bark” corresponded to them.
            3. kil 31
              kil 31 15 January 2016 19: 49 New
              +3
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Quote: Kil 31
              I will say this. We constantly write about the problems f 35. But they do not write about the problems of PAK FA. You don’t understand the certainty of propaganda. I think so; let's first declare ourselves to the whole world PAK FA and then we will compare the shortcomings of ours and their aircraft.

              You see what the matter is ... The T-50 has not yet been put into service, is not commercially available and is at the stage of testing prototypes. Which are just designed to identify jambs and bugs.

              A F-35 in a small series since 2007. And then suddenly problems in the fuel tanks come to light.

              In short, the American military-industrial complex is confidently following the path of the Soviet military-industrial complex: "Well, yes, the product is a little damp. But you sign the acceptance certificate, put the product into service - and we will definitely finalize it in a series ... then ... on selected topics". smile

              I completely agree with you on the latter about the Soviet military-industrial complex. But until I have a universal 5th generation aircraft that works on the ground in the air and not a front-line fighter, but an interceptor. Then I will laugh and evaluate such enemy vehicles. If there is nothing to compare with us. I’m not going to laugh at the enemy’s plane.
              1. Aqela
                Aqela 17 January 2016 14: 19 New
                0
                I’m wondering all the time, why the F-35 belongs to the 5th generation, if all its real technical data belong to the "4+" generation, at the maximum (even the second "plus" somehow does not stick). Because the motor is similar to the F-22? Or based on the same notorious advertisements? request
                Arguments to the studio, please.
                1. Pajamas
                  Pajamas 17 January 2016 18: 05 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Aqela
                  I’m wondering all the time, why the F-35 belongs to the 5th generation, if all its real technical data belong to the "4+" generation, at the maximum (even the second "plus" somehow does not stick). Because the motor is similar to the F-22? Or based on the same notorious advertisements? request
                  Arguments to the studio, please.




                  I asked Uncle Fedi:
                  "Why is the car driving?"
                  Uncle Fedya rubbed his nose
                  and said: "At her MOTOR».
                  I corrected Uncle Fedya:
                  "Not with her, but with her."
                  Uncle Fedya was indignant;
                  “Oh you, s.ka, my mine!”
                  Just in case, I’m in the hand
                  took a splinter of brick
                  and answered: “I am not a s.ka.
                  I’m Eaglet Ilyich! ”

                  All the same, the engine in a piston aircraft or do you doubt about the F-35? )))
          3. Tersky
            Tersky 15 January 2016 16: 01 New
            10
            Quote: Kil 31
            I think so; let's first declare ourselves to the whole world PAK FA and then we will compare the shortcomings of ours and their aircraft.

            These are two completely different aircraft, if we compare it with the Raptor. And FU-35 with the declared generation 5, with SU-35 generation 4 ++. Monitor their comparison on the web, you will learn a lot of interesting things, for one do not forget about the comparison in price. hi !
            1. your1970
              your1970 15 January 2016 17: 05 New
              +6
              I am confused by the price -
              "on the creation of F-35 already spent (attention!) more 100 billion dollars. This suggests that the cost one aircraft F-35 reaches a value of 110 million dollars "
              Or price не 110 lyam, or there are already about 1000 pieces built (figase-small series)
              Doesn't fit ...........
              1. sniper
                sniper 15 January 2016 18: 14 New
                +6
                Quote: your1970
                "More than $ 35 billion has already been spent on creating the F-100 (attention!).

                I would not be so optimistic ... Yes, the money was spent, R&D was carried out, experience was gained that will be used in the future ... Well, F-35, yes God be with him ... Sooner or later they’ll finish where they to go away ... It is good, of course, that not everything goes smoothly with them, because for the time being. It’s hard for us to compete with them, the times of the USSR have passed ... So we need to prepare for the lingering difficulties in the economy, in life ... Otherwise, we will not survive.
                1. Garris199
                  Garris199 15 January 2016 21: 09 New
                  0
                  Quote: sniper
                  It's hard for us to compete with them

                  But is it even necessary to do this? It is necessary to develop and strengthen in accordance with the possibilities.
                2. VP
                  VP 16 January 2016 17: 29 New
                  +2
                  And where, excuse me, did the experience with F-22 go if it took 35 watermelons to develop experience on the 100th and so far this is not the limit?
              2. Pimply
                Pimply 15 January 2016 23: 00 New
                0
                Quote: your1970
                Either the price is not 110 lyam, or they have already been built around 1000 pieces (fig. - small series

                About a hundred and a little.
            2. Oleg14774
              Oleg14774 15 January 2016 18: 32 New
              +1
              Quote: Tersky
              And the FU-35 with the declared generation 5, with the SU-35 generation 4 ++.

              In fact, these are also completely different Su-35 F-22 aircraft.
          4. gergi
            gergi 15 January 2016 16: 05 New
            10
            Read about the problems of the T-50 in the American press.
            1. Aaron Zawi
              Aaron Zawi 15 January 2016 17: 54 New
              -2
              Quote: gergi
              Read about the problems of the T-50 in the American press.

              Well why. If desired, information can be found in Russia. For example, you can find out:
              T-50 long-term plan until 2020
              2016 - T-50-9, T-50-10, T-50-11.
              2017 - T-50-12 (repeated statics), T-50S-1,2.
              2018 - T-50S-3,4
              2019 - T-50S-5,6,7,8, PMI-1,2.
              2020 - T-50S-9,10,11,12, PMI-3,4.
              The design documentation for the plant has not yet arrived at T-50S and PMI products.
              1. shans2
                shans2 15 January 2016 18: 23 New
                +2
                Is Israel still yelling with joy at the upcoming purchases of these miracle planes instead of f 16?
                1. Aaron Zawi
                  Aaron Zawi 15 January 2016 18: 35 New
                  +4
                  Quote: shans2
                  Is Israel still yelling with joy at the upcoming purchases of these miracle planes instead of f 16?

                  No. Representatives of the Air Force command (anonymous to the media) demand not to pull the tires and bring the number of cars to 75 by 2025.
                  1. VP
                    VP 16 January 2016 17: 34 New
                    0
                    And you take Canadian)
            2. Oleg14774
              Oleg14774 15 January 2016 18: 32 New
              +1
              Quote: gergi
              Read about the problems of the T-50 in the American press.

              And rightly so!
          5. Corsair
            Corsair 15 January 2016 17: 03 New
            13
            Quote: Kil 31
            I will say this. We constantly write about the problems f 35. But they do not write about the problems of PAK FA. You don’t understand the certainty of propaganda. I think so; let's first declare ourselves to the whole world PAK FA and then we will compare the shortcomings of ours and their aircraft.

            laughing don’t bother, probably in Amers special sites and magazines they write that PAK FA Russian is a 4 ++ class ram that flies on coal fuel and the pilot has to look out for his telescope with 500x optics, and the second pilot throws coal into the furnace, which if the plane somehow takes off, it will kick in almost immediately, since the Russian savages are 50 years behind technology in technology ...
            The usual practice is to water each other with a ram, we them, they us, and the experts - read that way - let out gases of different consistencies on this occasion.
          6. zenion
            zenion 15 January 2016 18: 24 New
            -4
            Read about PAK issues on American sites.
            1. quote
              quote 15 January 2016 19: 57 New
              +1
              Quote: zenion
              Read about PAK issues on American sites.

              You can provide a "link", if not difficult. Thank you for the earlier.
        2. 79807420129
          79807420129 15 January 2016 15: 27 New
          11
          Quote: Haettenschweiler
          - To hell with it, with the F-35. Where is our T-50?

          Let there be a T-50 for you.
        3. gergi
          gergi 15 January 2016 16: 04 New
          +1
          In Zhukovsky, but what?
        4. rpek32
          rpek32 16 January 2016 01: 50 New
          +1
          Quote: Haettenschweiler
          - To hell with it, with the F-35. Where is our T-50?

          on trials. the difference is that in the usa there is a crude airplane in production, we still have at the stands
        5. VP
          VP 16 January 2016 17: 23 New
          +1
          Finished the ICG. Do you have any other information or just asked?
      2. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets 15 January 2016 15: 44 New
        +4
        Quote: NIKNN
        increase government funding for aircraft development

        This is probably the main reason. After all, it was not considered on the accounts ...

        Well, 29 Lyamov is not such great money for such a monster as LM. request
      3. akmalinin
        akmalinin 15 January 2016 16: 39 New
        0
        This is a business.
    3. NDR-791
      NDR-791 15 January 2016 18: 33 New
      +3
      Another technological flaw was discovered
      2000 thousands of such “fig leaflets” were ordered and everyone else should increase the military budget by order to 2% and “recommended” F-35 to buy as the most advanced device for the war against wild Asians. UUU !!! It’s already absolutely scary - just like F-117 - they shook angular iron for ten years (even two films were shot as with the main character), however ... C-125 with a meter-high guidance station works wonders ...
    4. Misha Honest
      Misha Honest 15 January 2016 22: 26 New
      +4
      - Barak Huseynovich, we couldn’t fill the fuel tanks, please give us two billion so that our hands would not shake ...
      - Eh, I'll go and print it again.
    5. Uran
      Uran 15 January 2016 22: 57 New
      +5
      it turns out that its frame was adopted, and only then, during the operation, a non-flying miracle began to finish building that heavy air? there is one video clip called Hot engines from a cold country. The United States could not do what the USSR could. and it says at the end of the video how difficult it is to create a product and put it into operation!
    6. dauria
      dauria 17 January 2016 01: 01 New
      +3
      F-35 has a hundred thousand faults


      Silaev supported us. He only asked me: “Are you sure that there is no other way?” “Of course, I’m sure, although there is another way: to mass-produce hundreds and thousands of mediocre
      fighters, and if there is no war, no one will know about their mediocrity. But we are working on that rainy day, when our weapons should be at the highest level. and therefore there is no other way! "

      Do you know when and who said this and why? Simonov in 1979, after 10 years of work on the su-27, when the plane was ready and mass production was ready. He crossed out a huge part of the work, just broke his stone flower like Danila the master. And they made a new plane. Changed such fundamental elements of the layout of the aircraft as the shape and area of ​​the wing, the configuration of the cross sections of the head of the fuselage, center section and engine nacelles, the placement of plumage. The engine refinement cycle from the first test to the act of passing the state tests on August 6, 1985 took a long 11 years. Proud of "drying"? And we are doing it right, we just need to remember how this very pride is given.
      Bad, then F-35? Yes, only to create their technology, we have to push our horn to the fullest. At one time, we created the welding of a titanium center section for the very same
      "rejected" first option. Is she wasted for nothing? I envy the Americans in this - they can afford the luxury of building such airplanes, but we don’t have any money, and they lost people.
  2. vitvdv75
    vitvdv75 15 January 2016 15: 14 New
    +6
    He eats money normally, issues a problem on the mountain and this cannot but rejoice. On the other hand, they will work out new technologies and technical solutions on it.
    1. Rader
      Rader 15 January 2016 17: 11 New
      +4
      He eats money normally, issues a problem on the mountain and this cannot but rejoice ...
      Lockheed Martin! That's who really benefits from this Santo Barbara with the F35. I am more than sure that 75 percent of all the “misadventures” were planned by Lockheed managers (undeniably talented people who bring a penny to their corporation).
      But hats should not be thrown. All shortcomings will be eliminated, otherwise they (Lokhid) ​​will not see more contracts, and these people will not miss the profit. And last, but perhaps most important: more than 170 pieces have already stamped them, and this is called “small-scale production” in the Yankees. So if even a third of these machines cannot use their weapons because of problems with the “firmware” and a third directly in the air turns into a torch due to fuel tanks, then the remaining amount will be enough to nightmare, even the same Syria.
      P.S. The question arose: when will the T-50 be renamed the Su-50? When adopting, or earlier?
      1. Baikal
        Baikal 15 January 2016 17: 29 New
        +4
        As history shows, yes. And it is not necessary that the output will be "50" wink
        1. iliitchitch
          iliitchitch 15 January 2016 18: 04 New
          +5
          Quote: Baikal
          As history shows, yes. And it is not necessary that the output will be "50"


          Fighters received a historically odd number.
      2. adept666
        adept666 15 January 2016 18: 20 New
        +1
        P.S. The question arose: when will the T-50 be renamed the Su-50? When adopting, or earlier?
        Probably never. This is the factory code, for example, the Su-27 has - T-10S, Su-34 - T-10V. Logically, this is either Su-37 (as one of the OKB machines was already called) or Su-39.
        1. iliitchitch
          iliitchitch 15 January 2016 19: 05 New
          +1
          Quote: adept666
          Probably never. This is the factory code, for example, the Su-27 has - T-10S, Su-34 - T-10V. Logically, this is either Su-37 (as one of the OKB machines was already called) or Su-39.


          Correction - "Golden Eagle" was called S-37. And the T-50 stands apart in the lineup, the ancestor after all, and the name should correspond, so I think.
          1. adept666
            adept666 15 January 2016 19: 21 New
            +3
            Correction - "Golden Eagle" was called S-37
            And who told you that I'm talking about the S-37? I'm talking about the T10M-11, built on the basis of the Su-27M. The experimental board also known as the Terminator (it was also shown in the Discovery program). And here on this portal as a background was quite a long time.
            1. iliitchitch
              iliitchitch 15 January 2016 22: 41 New
              0
              Do not get excited you like that. Name the SU-41 "Kirdyk." And let the enemies with the translation bother.
              1. adept666
                adept666 16 January 2016 07: 20 New
                0
                Do not get excited you are so
                And there was no thought smile , just explained that he meant another car.
                Name the SU-41 "Kirdyk." And let the enemies with the translation bother.
                The main thing is that at the same time he fully reflects this name in terms of its performance characteristics and performance characteristics.
        2. SIvan
          SIvan 16 January 2016 20: 15 New
          0
          Su-39 is Su-25TM (T8TM). So, I think they will call it Su-57 (there is already Su-47 - Golden Eagle)
      3. shuhartred
        shuhartred 15 January 2016 19: 33 New
        0
        Quote: Rader
        then the remaining amount is enough to nightmare, even the same Syria.

        Syria nightmare and F-16 is enough. Why then fence the garden?
        1. Kaiten
          Kaiten 15 January 2016 21: 30 New
          0
          Quote: shuhartred
          Syria nightmare and F-16 is enough. Why then fence the garden?

          What about Turkey?
          1. shuhartred
            shuhartred 16 January 2016 00: 10 New
            +1
            Quote: Kaiten
            What about Turkey?

            And us for sho ?????
            1. dustycat
              dustycat 16 January 2016 11: 33 New
              +2
              Quote: shuhartred

              And us for sho ?????

              There is no SGA oil under Turkey ?!
              And if they find it?
            2. dustycat
              dustycat 16 January 2016 11: 33 New
              0
              Quote: shuhartred

              And us for sho ?????

              There is no SGA oil under Turkey ?!
              And if they find it?
  3. Primus pilus
    Primus pilus 15 January 2016 15: 14 New
    +4
    The most notorious plane.
  4. GELEZNII_KAPUT
    GELEZNII_KAPUT 15 January 2016 15: 14 New
    +6
    and now a banana !!! laughing
  5. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 15 January 2016 15: 14 New
    +9
    Production of the F-35 is an excellent business ... and you can’t refuse (how much money has been spent) ... and you still need to finalize it ...
    1. Dryuya2
      Dryuya2 15 January 2016 16: 04 New
      +4
      Quote: silberwolf88
      ... and you can’t refuse already (how much money has been spent) ... and you still need to finalize it ...

      and then we are all yellowstone, yellowstone - but it turns out he's the killer. tongue
      1. iliitchitch
        iliitchitch 15 January 2016 23: 27 New
        +3
        Quote: Dryuya2
        and then we are all yellowstone, yellowstone - but it turns out he's the killer.


        Today's world froze in anticipation of something ... They expect from us that with the logic, according to their logic, we must give up, like we’ve walled up, you won’t breathe. Oh well, scared. They are kind of funny.
  6. WUA 518
    WUA 518 15 January 2016 15: 17 New
    +5
    Something stir up again. Is the problem in tanks or in range?
  7. Vladimir 1964
    Vladimir 1964 15 January 2016 15: 18 New
    +4
    Among American experts, rumors spread that representatives of the developer company are doing everything to increase government funding for the development of the aircraft. It is known that all the work on the creation of the F-35 has already spent (attention!) More than $ 100 billion. This suggests that the cost of one F-35 aircraft reaches a value of $ 110 million, while the car is still “raw”.


    Well, what's new? It is a normal situation for a private company. I really have a question, why does this situation sometimes arise in our country, where the state seems to be the main shareholder of the UAC (United Aircraft Corporation)?
    1. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 15 January 2016 15: 23 New
      0
      Quote: Vladimir 1964
      Well, what's new

      Volodya hi, what's wrong with you? reset to zero, or what ??
      1. Vladimir 1964
        Vladimir 1964 15 January 2016 15: 56 New
        +1
        Quote: afdjhbn67
        Volodya hi, what's wrong with you? reset to zero, or what ??

        Yeah, colleague. laughing
      2. Vladimir 1964
        Vladimir 1964 15 January 2016 16: 16 New
        0
        Quote: afdjhbn67
        Volodya hi, what's wrong with you? reset to zero, or what ??

        And you, Dear colleague, from which you noticed this. soldier
        1. afdjhbn67
          afdjhbn67 15 January 2016 16: 29 New
          +1
          Quote: Vladimir 1964
          And you, Dear colleague, from which you noticed this.

          Are you my friend suspiciously polite .. didn’t hesitate? lol
  8. Hello
    Hello 15 January 2016 15: 18 New
    -3
    Directly the whole campaign for dousing with F 35 slops. A newspaper with a link to the portal with reference to rumors. Chef is all gone. And this despite the fact that the plane has not yet been in field operation for a day, it’s the same as to fault Armat. There will be no answer wassat
    1. St Petrov
      St Petrov 15 January 2016 15: 28 New
      15
      Hello, you just write, because your country itself buys these pepelats)

      So you would make fun of mattresses no less than we)

      Tell me honestly, would it be your will - the Su-35 (can you put any plane, ours or not) or did you buy the F-35 for your country?

      Do not you think that Israel could more successfully spend the money allocated for this project?

      PS Armata has just begun operation. And the operation of the f-35 in my opinion began in 2006

      1. St Petrov
        St Petrov 15 January 2016 15: 37 New
        +7
        Judging by the balance, minus and plus - they showed you a beautiful advertisement laughing

        Omerika beautifully makes advertising - this is a fact. They are in this matter, I would say the best in the world)

        And nobody drives here on f-22, mind you)

      2. Ami du peuple
        Ami du peuple 15 January 2016 15: 50 New
        +5
        Quote: c-Petrov
        Do not you think that Israel could more successfully spend the money allocated for this project?

        The Israelis very successfully mastered the money.
        Israel ordered 33 such aircraft, on very "specific" conditions:
        The first batch of 19 cars cost the Jews $ 2,7 billion, but Lockheed Martin pledged to purchase parts and components in Israel for the entire program for $ 4 billion, without Israel’s investment in the aircraft development program! I must say that these conditions shocked other US partners in the program, in particular, Norway, Denmark and Italy.
        The next order included 14 aircraft for already 2,8 billion (+ option for 17 cars) - in response, it seems, the program of return purchases was expanded to 9 billion dollars.
        In particular, Israeli companies supply for the F-35 (I repeat - not only for their own - for everyone!) Wings, helmet displays and composite elements for the fuselage ...
        The Israeli modification I aircraft themselves will have differences in on-board electronics, in particular in electronic warfare systems. In addition, Israel plans to participate in the development of a 2-seater version of the aircraft.
        In total, the Israeli Air Force is going to buy 95 F-35.
        1. Lepila
          Lepila 15 January 2016 18: 01 New
          +3
          Apparently, an F-35B squadron will be purchased in case of a runway defeat.
          1. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi 15 January 2016 18: 06 New
            +1
            Quote: Lepila
            Apparently, an F-35B squadron will be purchased in case of a runway defeat.

            It will not.
            1. saturn.mmm
              saturn.mmm 15 January 2016 21: 25 New
              +1
              Quote: Aaron Zawi
              It will not.

              As I understand it, this is the first Israeli.
              1. Lepila
                Lepila 15 January 2016 22: 36 New
                +1
                Correctly understood
            2. Lepila
              Lepila 15 January 2016 22: 33 New
              -2
              Arosha, read the Hebrew press, they have been actively writing about this in the last month. Just in case, I’ll give a Russian-language link.


              http://newsru.co.il/israel/13dec2015/f35b_103.html
              1. Hello
                Hello 15 January 2016 22: 37 New
                -2
                Quote: Lepila
                Apparently F-35B squadron will be purchased in case of runway defeat

                Yeah, and another 2-3 aircraft carriers in the event of the defeat of everything, for Israel vertical take-off is a complete whim hi
                Quote: Lepila
                Arosha, read the Hebrew press, they are actively writing about this in the last month

                Show where they write wink
                1. Lepila
                  Lepila 16 January 2016 00: 47 New
                  0
                  http://news.walla.co.il/item/2914547
              2. Aaron Zawi
                Aaron Zawi 15 January 2016 23: 04 New
                0
                Quote: Lepila
                Arosha, read the Hebrew press, they have been actively writing about this in the last month. Just in case, I’ll give a Russian-language link.
                http://newsru.co.il/israel/13dec2015/f35b_103.html

                firstly, I don’t give you “Arosh”, but Aron. Secondly, no one will buy the F-35B because one squadron does not change anything, and no one will complicate the logistics. Israeli airfields have long worked out a system with work with a partially damaged runway and for its quick restoration.
                1. Lepila
                  Lepila 16 January 2016 00: 36 New
                  -1
                  Arosha, rudeness doesn’t color you, and you and I didn’t drink on the Brudershaft, poking
                  1. Aaron Zawi
                    Aaron Zawi 16 January 2016 01: 05 New
                    -2
                    Quote: Lepila
                    Arosha, rudeness doesn’t color you, and you and I didn’t drink on the Brudershaft, poking

                    In Israel there is no appeal to you, but I personally would ask you not to comment on my comments and not to contact me. Thanks in advance.
            3. Pimply
              Pimply 15 January 2016 23: 04 New
              +1
              Quote: Aaron Zawi
              It will not.

              That's the way it goes
      3. Hello
        Hello 15 January 2016 16: 36 New
        -4
        Quote: c-Petrov
        Tell me honestly, would it be your will - the Su-35 (can you put any plane, ours or not) or did you buy the F-35 for your country?

        It would be my will, I would buy more hats and throw you wassat
        Quote: c-Petrov
        Do not you think that Israel could more successfully spend the money allocated for this project?

        I see a sinner got a special in aviation and everything related to it, well, tell me for goodness sake why is the F 35 still not so bad? Just give so not muddy publications with a link to muddy publications and your authoritative and informed opinion.
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 15 January 2016 17: 20 New
          +2
          Quote: Hello
          Just let’s not so muddy publications with a link to muddy publications and your authoritative and informed opinion.

          It is difficult to judge while the project is still not accepted into service, but as far as I know, the problem with lightning protection has not been solved and there are restrictions on the flight altitude.
          According to some indirect signs, it can be assumed that the United States will reduce the number of purchased F-35s for itself, the question is how much. For Israel, the experience of operating a very high-tech aircraft will only benefit and money will not be wasted.
        2. Lt. Air Force stock
          Lt. Air Force stock 15 January 2016 18: 02 New
          +1
          Quote: Hello
          I see a sinner got a special in aviation and everything related to it, well, tell me for goodness sake why is the F 35 still not so bad? Just give so not muddy publications with a link to muddy publications and your authoritative and informed opinion.

          By the fact that it’s like a Swiss knife, they try to sharpen 1 plane for 3 goals, hence a huge amount of money and problems. That’s why it’s bad that they are trying to make him universal.
        3. Kasym
          Kasym 16 January 2016 02: 51 New
          +1
          Ilya (Hello), in my opinion, the F-35 class. Problems:
          1. Universalization (Istr., Assault., Bomber). Specialized aircraft are always better.
          2. Stealth technology. On October 7 (or November), the Americans were surprised that the Russians saw and intercepted their UAVs in Syria. But UAVs are also made using stealth technologies and composite materials. In addition, they are at times !!! smaller in size. Are they so invisible as Americans praise them? Their ESR is 0,001 sq.m. somehow hard to believe. Moreover, if in front of the AFAR stands pl. min 1 sq.m.?. As you know, for each element of the AFAR (and there are hundreds, if not a thousand) of 3 failures. And this thick wire bundle turns out, it also does not display radio waves?
          3. Super-maneuverability of 5 generations and does not smell. Do not engage in close combat, rely only on electronics.
          4. Aerodynamics. Because of the vertical "suffered" and other versions. The aircraft is too "bloated" to show excellent performance characteristics in aerodynamics.
          5. The engine is really good, unless of course they lie Amer., But he is one. Therefore, the issue of accident rate and speed is open - only explo. it will show.
          6. Electronics amer. No wonder they are boasting. But against it there are electronic warfare. And without it, the plane, going to bl. the battle is simply no with the Su or MiG-29.
          7. In operation, will it be affordable?
          8. Once the Americans have put so many of them (already for a hundred), why won't they try it in Syria? They just have a place there. Bomb secretly from the Russians, and experience.
          9. Internal niches for weapons are small. Will have to go outside - no stealth.
          These are the thoughts. I do not want to say that he is bad. The Pentagon has invested too much in it, and we must understand that they have nowhere to go - they will refine it to an acceptable option. hi
          1. iwind
            iwind 16 January 2016 11: 46 New
            +1
            Quote: Kasym
            Stealth technology. On October 7 (or November), the Americans were surprised that the Russians saw and intercepted their UAVs in Syria. But UAVs are also made using stealth technologies and composite materials. In addition, they are at times !!! smaller in size.

            about another laziness.
            But something that the MQ-9 Reaper is a stealth ?????? belay Yes, he has one straight wingspan of 20 meters in size, he is probably one of the largest UAVs, with a complete absence of measures to reduce visibility, except that there is a percentage of composites in the hull, but without RPM, it does little.
            He (RQ-9) doesn’t need other tasks.
            Here is an inconspicuous UAV x-47B or rq-170

            Here is the RQ-9
            1. Kasym
              Kasym 17 January 2016 05: 34 New
              +1
              Iwind. So it’s neither me, but the Americans are surprised that the Russians are tracking their UAVs. You can even find articles on this subject these days (7.10 (11?). 15). And I don’t think that the Americans use for the intelligence purposes those whoppers about whom you write. Somehow I did not read reports about the bombing from UAVs in Syria.
              In my opinion, these stealth against the "weak" countries still somehow, but against the Russian Federation does not crawl through. Here and powerful ground-based radars, and space, and electronic warfare. It’s enough to track the airfields based. In extreme cases, an observer within a radius of 3 km. from the airfield to land with the phone.
              And what is the "laziness" to argue on the remaining points? Universalization, one engine (albeit powerful and no analogues), no over-maneuverability - does not honor this aircraft. hi
              1. iwind
                iwind 17 January 2016 12: 54 New
                +1
                Quote: Kasym
                Iwind. So it’s neither me, but the Americans are surprised that the Russians are tracking their UAVs. You can even find articles on this subject these days (7.10 (11?). 15). And I don’t think that the Americans use for the intelligence purposes those whoppers about whom you write. Somehow I did not read reports about the bombing from UAVs in Syria.

                it is they (there are almost no others there) flying from Av Incirlik. The attacks were and are being applied regularly both in Syria and in Iraq, since there are fewer risks when using UAVs. Except for journalists, no one was surprised.
                Vidio from Min. defense of the Russian Federation, that would not be a question about falsification


                Quote: Kasym
                In my opinion, these stealth against the "weak" countries still somehow, but against the Russian Federation does not crawl through. Here and powerful ground-based radars, and space, and electronic warfare. It’s enough to track the airfields based. In extreme cases, an observer within a radius of 3 km. from the airfield to land with the phone.

                Yeah, the whole world is developing more and more new stealth aircraft, including the Russian Federation (PAK-FA PAK-DA). They then know better.
                Quote: Kasym
                Universalization, one engine (albeit powerful and no analogues), no over-maneuverability - does not honor this aircraft.

                It is no more versatile than the F-16. No one ever asked him for super-maneuverability - this is to destroy a bomber.
                The number of bombs is similar to the actual combat load of the F-16.
                Why drags them to Siru - now we need airplanes and mechanics to train and complete the tests. In 2016, 68 aircraft will be commissioned; they need to have time to prepare personnel and pilots. In Syria, UAVs and F-16s will do just fine.
                Quote: Kasym
                4. Aerodynamics. Because of the vertical "suffered" and other versions. The plane is too "bloated" to show excellent performance characteristics in aerodynamics

                not really, they (F-35A F-35B and F-35C) have different profiles. The main reason for the large volumes is 8278 kg of fuel in sizes F-16

                F-16 and F-35B (Vertical)
                1. Kasym
                  Kasym 18 January 2016 11: 05 New
                  0
                  So where is the suspension on the UAV? This is intelligence. Please note: the UAV is licked, probably from the composite, the dimensions and weight are in no way comparable to the UAV. I sat on the P-12 (Yenisei), and then on the P-18. Helicopters ate something visible - asked to fly higher. And this composite "sausage" - I don’t even know - electronics, engine and fuel tank - all that can display a radio wave.
                  So for UAV reconnaissance is a sweet deal. And let's wait with the stealth to draw conclusions (I have in the form of technology using a composite, not a paintwork). In fact, nothing is clear. The only one from composite F-22 is discontinued. You can argue to hoarseness, but it makes no sense.
                  But the fighter must be able to lead a maneuverable neighbor. the fight. Or how? Bomber. The internal volume holds 2 thousand-pound bombs and a pair of missiles. ALL!!! Is that a stealth technology bomber? And with the attack aircraft I’m generally silent. Therefore, I have a question about universalization. Like all others, let’s wait than argue pointlessly. But all my questions make sense.
                  The central part, where the mechanics for the vertical line should be, is the same for everyone - according to your scheme.
                  The last picture was discussed - the scale is not saved. hi
                  1. iwind
                    iwind 18 January 2016 22: 21 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Kasym
                    So where is the suspension on the UAV? This is intelligence. Please note: the UAV is licked, probably from the composite, the dimensions and weight are in no way comparable to the UAV. I sat on the P-12 (Yenisei), and then on the P-18. Helicopters ate something visible - asked to fly higher. And this composite "sausage" - I don’t even know - electronics, engine and fuel tank - all that can display a radio wave.

                    The pendant is visible on the first vidio. But what difference does it make with the MQ-9 ripper - even in the code you can see that it’s a shock drone — intelligence is RQ. It simply has no traces of stealth technology from the word at all. I don’t even understand what doubts might be. More anti-stealth object presto can not be found in the air (well, except for the B-52). Length: 11 meters wingspan 20 meteors. To claim that it is inconspicuous is still a brad. Look at all aircraft with stealth technologies.
                    Quote: Kasym
                    Helicopters ate visible - asked to fly higher

                    Well, that’s the concept of the horizon. Immediately clear sky.
                    Quote: Kasym
                    But the fighter must be able to lead a maneuverable neighbor. the fight. Or how? Bomber. The internal volume holds 2 thousand-pound bombs and a pair of missiles. ALL!!! Is that a stealth technology bomber?

                    If you believe that a fighter should conduct a maneuverable battle, this is good. But others don’t think so (United States Air Force). There are all-angle rockets for this.

                    And by the way 2 bombs 2500 pound or 8 SDB and 2 rockets. This is enough for stele configurations (tasks of the first day) the maximum number of missiles for BLOCKA 3F-12 from 2017 will go into operation. . F-16 extremely rarely takes more as the most 3 lifting pylons occupy the PTB, another 2 occupy the navigation pod and targeting pod. Without this kit, the F-16 will not fly far for good; it needs to add EW containers, since the F-35s are built-in.
                    And then the attack aircraft? His goal in the near firing hold is to drop bombs from a height of 5 km.
                    Quote: Kasym
                    Last picture was discussed - scale not saved

                    Yes? Length F-16 15.06 m F-35 15.67 m
                    wings 9.96 m F-35 10.7 m. a difference in size of less than 10 percent.
                    Then no.
                  2. iwind
                    iwind 18 January 2016 22: 31 New
                    0
                    just in case bombs on UAVs are highlighted in red
        4. Wheel
          Wheel 16 January 2016 03: 44 New
          +1
          Quote: Hello
          Well, tell me, for God's sake, why is the F 35 still not so bad?

          What are you, what are you!
          A fairy tale, not a plane!
          Take more! laughing
      4. Lepila
        Lepila 15 January 2016 17: 58 New
        -4
        I swear to all the dearest to me: I prefer the F-35 not only the SU-35, but also the future T-50. Similarly, I will read F-22 to the thirty-fifth. But alas, the F-22 was not sold to us ... And now the urapatriots are invited to minus me
        1. gladysheff2010
          gladysheff2010 15 January 2016 18: 17 New
          +4
          Do not wait, you are our masochist!
        2. sounddoc
          sounddoc 15 January 2016 18: 43 New
          +3
          And so, dear Lepila? Non-kosher drying? So the rabbi will be invited to the plant, let him read עֲמִידָה
          1. Lepila
            Lepila 15 January 2016 22: 31 New
            -2
            I will tell you this: Egyptian and Saudi efok fear much more than Sushka
            1. Lt. Air Force stock
              Lt. Air Force stock 15 January 2016 23: 39 New
              0
              Quote: Lepila
              I will tell you this: Egyptian and Saudi efok fear much more than Sushka

              If Egypt and Saudi Arabia attack all that they have, you will get 30 F-35 or how much you are going to buy there, the weather will not. They just sell defense by number. Then Israel will only hope for nuclear retaliation from submarines.
              1. alexej123
                alexej123 16 January 2016 13: 48 New
                +4
                Well it is clear. The last Dryings are only for countries that have a minimum of problems with Israel and are far away. I’m interested in the reaction of your establishment if Russia supplies Sushi Iran. Here will be a performance with wringing hands, crying, tears, etc. The story with the supply of C-300 to Iran and SAR is still fresh. Here at VO, your compatriots claimed that C-300 is not scary. But, for some reason, your Prime Minister PERSONALLY flew to Moscow to clarify the situation. Less respected bravado.
        3. andj61
          andj61 15 January 2016 19: 50 New
          +7
          Quote: Lepila
          I swear to all the dearest to me: I prefer the F-35 not only the SU-35, but also the future T-50. Similarly, I will read F-22 to the thirty-fifth. But alas, the F-22 was not sold to us ..

          Of course you prefer. fellow Israel buys Amerikosovskoy equipment for almost their own money, that is, for free ... request Moreover, mandatory counter purchases. Why not choose? what
        4. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 15 January 2016 20: 53 New
          +3
          Quote: Lepila
          I swear to all the dearest to me: I prefer the F-35 not only the SU-35, but also the future T-50. Similarly, I will read F-22 to the thirty-fifth. But alas, the F-22 was not sold to us ... And now the urapatriots are invited to minus me

          There is nothing to minus you, choosing your preference is your right.
        5. Lt. Air Force stock
          Lt. Air Force stock 15 January 2016 21: 00 New
          0
          Quote: Lepila
          Likewise, I will read F-22 to the thirty-fifth. But alas, the F-22 was not sold to us ...

          And with whom to fight with fighters of the 5th generation? Does Palestine have a 5th generation fighter and Israel needs to keep up?
          1. Lepila
            Lepila 15 January 2016 22: 29 New
            -6
            At least with the same T-50s that our Russian partners will certainly sell to Iranian Islamic fascists
            1. Lt. Air Force stock
              Lt. Air Force stock 15 January 2016 23: 49 New
              +1
              Quote: Lepila
              At least with the same T-50s that our Russian partners will certainly sell to Iranian Islamic fascists

              So he is not the 5th generation according to American articles, and you believe them 100%, so you have nothing to fear. In any case, when the Arab countries realize that it is necessary to spend money on defense in a balanced way, not only mindlessly throw money into fighter jets (as it was before), but also buy EW suspended containers, AWACS aircraft, ground-based air defense systems (like C -400, S-350, etc., etc.), ground-based electronic warfare systems, cruise and ballistic missiles (Iskander-E and Caliber) diesel submarines, then their armies will rise to a whole new level.
              1. alexej123
                alexej123 16 January 2016 13: 50 New
                +1
                True, "Drying is not scary." So why be afraid then?
              2. The comment was deleted.
            2. BaLaLaykin
              BaLaLaykin 16 January 2016 16: 51 New
              +5
              so you and amers sell weapons to Saudi islamofascists, what are your questions for Russia?
        6. shans2
          shans2 15 January 2016 22: 07 New
          0
          Israeli urapatrioty right now minus you laughing
        7. alexej123
          alexej123 16 January 2016 13: 12 New
          +6
          I’m a patriot, not a bang, but put a minus. Do you know what for? Su, MiG, in your opinion with the "mightyX35ph22" did not stand next. I would not promise. Turkish modernized F-16 shy away like "devil from incense" with the Su-30СМ, mattresses of the F-15 were removed from sin because of C-400 and the same dryers. By the way, the inhabitants of the promised land spoke in favor of the "one left" type for the air defense systems of Russia. And the second - Sushki, MiG they are ours, Russian. And you guys have what? And you only have drones. So when you yourself develop a plane, launch it in a series and try it on Arabs with Kalash without air defense means - then we ask you to compare your work and Sushki and MiG. By the way, mattress experts in such a way as you, when comparing these devices do not speak out, so they know something that you should not know.
      5. iwind
        iwind 16 January 2016 00: 09 New
        -1
        Quote: c-Petrov

        PS Armata has just begun operation. And the operation of the f-35 in my opinion began in 2006

        And tell me, when will the su-35 be adopted?
        At the moment, he still hasn’t passed the GSI on it (GSI) there are boards 02517-02620 - they are participating in the GSI in Akhtubinsk, because were the only ones in November with equipment and software "GSI level"
        the first flight of the su-35 February 19, 2008
        1. alexej123
          alexej123 16 January 2016 13: 39 New
          +1
          Do you really know so much, or just pretend? Read the press - Su-35 is already being delivered to the troops, in particular to the Eastern Military District
          1. iwind
            iwind 16 January 2016 18: 41 New
            -4
            Quote: alexej123
            ? Read the press - Su-35 is already being delivered to the troops, in particular to the Eastern Military District

            read the press negative in 95% of cases, journalism write such nonsense (. So I prefer to read the source
            Quote: alexej123
            Su-35 is already being delivered to the troops, in particular to the Eastern Military District

            AND? For example, the F-35 has already been deployed in combat units for 2-3 years. they undergo training and various tests, etc.
            Just bring either a report or a report that the Su-35 passed the GSI and the question will be closed.
            1. alexej123
              alexej123 17 January 2016 12: 40 New
              0
              You know, for some reason they don’t report about passing the state tests of Su-35. It is necessary to arrange a thrashing, I will shoot the guilty. I don’t know how in Europe and the USA, in Russia, if some machinery and equipment is supplied to combat units, I repeat to combat units, and not educational and test ones, it means she has already passed state tests. The equipment undergoing trial operation cannot be delivered to combat units. As for the media - you pay attention to what nonsense they carry. I don’t have to laugh anymore - I want to cry out of pity for you, what kind of bastard is being sent to you by “your most honest people.” And the link about Su-35 http://warfiles.ru/show-105772-krasota-i-mosch-na-dalnem-vostoke.html
              1. iwind
                iwind 17 January 2016 14: 12 New
                0
                Quote: alexej123
                You know, for some reason they don’t report about passing the Su-35 state tests.

                This is usually reported.
                for example, "weapons of the Su-27 adopted by government August 23, 1990 "
                Quote: alexej123
                Russia, if some kind of machinery and equipment is supplied to combat units, I repeat to combat units, and not educational and test ones, it means that it has already passed state tests. Testing equipment cannot be delivered to combat units

                Exactly the same news was a couple of years ago when the Su-35 entered the 23rd Fighter Aviation Regiment. Now he entered 22 and that's it.
                about the su-27. as an analogue to the fact that in "Technically tested equipment cannot be delivered to combat units"
                “At this time, the Su-27 was in operation for 5 years. Of the combat units, the first in June 1985, the pilots of the 27th IAP of the Far Eastern Military District (Dzemgi) received the Su-60. By 1989. Su-27 aircraft were in service in 16 combat units of the Air Force and Air Defense Forces of the USSR. "
                http://www.sukhoi.org/planes/military/su27sk/history/
                Quote: alexej123
                As for the media - you pay attention to what nonsense they carry. I don’t have to laugh anymore - I want to cry out of pity for you, what kind of bastard is being sent to you by “your most honest people.” And the link about the Su-35 http://warfiles.ru/show-105772-krasota-i-mosch-na-dalnem-vostoke.html

                And at the same time, you give a link to the media where every 5 seconds they say about "unparalleled" and the word "super", etc. The story of the pilot about the usual autopilot that is now on all aircraft is ....
                what pity? hmm no need to cry I'm fine, but thanks for the experience.
                1. alexej123
                  alexej123 17 January 2016 15: 08 New
                  0
                  So did he enter the second aviation regiment? Like this? Not having passed the state test?
                  And for analogues - well, give an example? F-22? May be. And the rest?
                  1. iwind
                    iwind 17 January 2016 19: 54 New
                    0
                    Quote: alexej123
                    So did he enter the second aviation regiment? Like this? Not having passed the state test?
                    And for analogues - well, give an example? F-22? May be. And the rest?

                    So once again, the presence of an aircraft in combat units or avia regiments is not an indicator of the passage of gci and adoption of weapons. Read carefully
                    The Su-27 was adopted by a government decree from August 23 1990 years, only after all the main shortcomings identified in the tests were eliminated. By this time, the Su-27 was in operation for 5 years. Of the combat units, the first in June 1985, Su-27 pilots received 60 IAPs of the Far Eastern Military District (Dzemgi). It was 1989 Su-27 aircraft were in service in 16 combat units of the Air Force and Air Defense Forces of the USSR. "
                    Yes And f-22 had a similar procedure, at the time of adoption was in service on several drill air bases. This is standard practice in aviation.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 17 January 2016 20: 09 New
                      0
                      Quote: iwind
                      The Su-27 was adopted by a government decree of August 23, 1990, only after all the main shortcomings identified in the tests were eliminated.
                      Quite a normal practice. Worse, when a model of weapons was taken into service even before the end of testing and putting on stream ...
                    2. alexej123
                      alexej123 17 January 2016 21: 59 New
                      0
                      That is, the delivery of the aircraft, already in several air regiments - is this not the adoption? And the contracts for the supply of several dozen cars - this is not adoption?
                      1. iwind
                        iwind 17 January 2016 22: 44 New
                        0
                        Quote: alexej123
                        That is, the delivery of the aircraft, already in several air regiments - is this not the adoption? And the contracts for the supply of several dozen cars - this is not adoption?

                        No, the same f-35s have had such conditions for already about 3 years. I have already written more than once that adoption is a specific document and passage of the GSI. But I’ll repeat it again (I hope for the last time).
                        “The Su-27 was adopted by a government decree of August 23, 1990, only after all the main shortcomings identified in the tests were eliminated.” - This means the aircraft was adopted. Prior to this trial operation.
                        Quote: svp67
                        Quite a normal practice. Worse, when a model of weapons was taken into service even before the end of testing and putting on stream ...

                        And I said the same thing at the time of the adoption of weapons was built about 100 su-27 And located at 16 air bases.
                        But for some reason, for f-35, the same situation is presented as something unique And terrible.
            2. The comment was deleted.
    2. lysyj bob
      lysyj bob 15 January 2016 15: 54 New
      +7
      The hype around this project is directly proportional to the announced amounts for revision. It is clear that all planes are born hard, but when the DEVELOPMENT of some mechanisms is evaluated by dozens of lard - questions begin. Moreover, the plane is already publicized as a perfect technical thought and sold to allies.
    3. gergi
      gergi 15 January 2016 16: 09 New
      +4
      Where in obese America to get 61 kilogram pilots? It's not a problem?
      1. lysyj bob
        lysyj bob 15 January 2016 18: 05 New
        0
        Well, yes, a carcass without equipment should weigh 55 kilograms no more.
        1. kolyhalovs
          kolyhalovs 15 January 2016 20: 16 New
          0
          Female pilot
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 15 January 2016 20: 54 New
            0
            Quote: kolyhalovs
            Female pilot

            Carried.
        2. kolyhalovs
          kolyhalovs 15 January 2016 20: 16 New
          0
          Female pilot
  9. Primus pilus
    Primus pilus 15 January 2016 15: 18 New
    +6
    How can you do this after the excellent F-22 Raptor?
    1. Great-grandfather of Zeus
      Great-grandfather of Zeus 15 January 2016 15: 58 New
      +2
      Primus Pilus, why are you flying on the raptor, claiming it is “excellent”? And what is your raid?
  10. SAM 5
    SAM 5 15 January 2016 15: 21 New
    10
    I'm still in a post about catap. the chair wrote that all the troubles of the F-35 are due to the fact that they did not install a machine with cola in it.
    1. lysyj bob
      lysyj bob 15 January 2016 17: 46 New
      +4
      Then it’s better with beer. The problem with the weight of the pilots will be solved immediately.
  11. Woodman
    Woodman 15 January 2016 15: 24 New
    +3
    I look at them at the development of military equipment, the babosy sawing so that ours did not even dream ...
  12. Wedmak
    Wedmak 15 January 2016 15: 24 New
    -3
    Guys, launch the Raptor again, it turned out better for you. Otherwise fly by ...
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 15 January 2016 16: 08 New
      +4
      Quote: Wedmak
      Guys, launch the Raptor again, it turned out better for you. Otherwise fly by ...

      They and the F-35 are not bad at it. Lockheed leads an uninterruptedly open program to create this machine. Of course, technologies are not disclosed, but problems are not hidden. By the way, the problem that is being discussed here is literally cheap for Lockheed-29 million $. In general, the F-35 project reached the final segment.
      The F-35 international fighter pilot training center based on the US Air Force Hatch (Arizona) already has 34 aircraft of this type, flightglobal.com reports January 13. The first fighter arrived at the base in March 2014.
      Currently, in addition to the American base, there are F-35s with identification marks of the Australian and Norwegian air forces, training for the Australian, Norwegian and Italian flight and technical personnel is under way, instructor pilots and technicians from Japan, Israel, the Netherlands, and Turkey will appear here soon. possibly Denmark and Canada. Ultimately, six F-35 squadrons of 144 aircraft and 14 full-flight simulators will be formed in Luke. F-16 squadrons also operate at the base, where Singapore and Taiwan pilots and technicians are trained.
      The first F-35 flight at this base took place on March 15, 2015. Lockheed, together with assembly facilities in Italy and Japan, plans to build 2322 fighter version F-35A
      .
      1. afdjhbn67
        afdjhbn67 15 January 2016 16: 17 New
        +1
        Quote: Aaron Zawi
        They and the F-35 are not bad at it.

        Aron - do not spoil the holiday for people .. laughing
      2. d.antonov
        d.antonov 15 January 2016 16: 17 New
        0
        Well, evaluate the submission text.
        Looks like LM is getting a $ 28M concurrency mod contract to correct a fuel tank overpressure issue for the -A
        They say that LM received a contract and react calmly.
        right there, LM DEMANDS MONEY, right out. And there is a feeling that here, for the money of taxpayers, the United States is worried more than they themselves
      3. Kathernik
        Kathernik 15 January 2016 16: 31 New
        +2
        It seems to me a colleague You are led to Western propaganda!
      4. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 15 January 2016 20: 56 New
        -1
        Quote: Aaron Zawi
        In general, the F-35 project reached the final segment.

        When is it being adopted?
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 15 January 2016 22: 01 New
          +2
          Quote: saturn.mmm

          When is it being adopted?

          Already.
          By order of the Marine Corps Commandant General Joseph Dunford dated 1.08.2015/121/XNUMX, the VMFA-XNUMX Green Knights squadron was declared ready for foreign deployment and participation in hostilities.
          According to the results of the July inspection, it was recognized that the squadron meets the requirements made a year ago, namely it has a 10 ° F-35B version of Block 2B capable of performing the following missions at a basic level - direct support of troops, delivering air strikes in the enemy’s near and far rear ensuring air supremacy over the theater of war and armed intelligence. Support is provided for the following types of weapons: medium-range air-to-air missiles AIM-120 ° C, adjustable bombs GBU-12 (227 kg, with laser guidance) and GBU-32 (454 kg, with satellite guidance); all on the internal suspension.
          It is stated that the abilities were confirmed during a series of recent exercises in conjunction with the ground forces of the ILC, as well as during operational tests on the Wasp universal landing ship. In particular, information has recently been received that the F-35B unit won the battle with 9 fighters of the past generation during the tests.
          The first overseas deployment of VMFA-121, now deployed in Yuma, pc. Arizona, scheduled for 2017, in Iwakuni, Japan. In the same year, the first full-time deployment of aircraft on the universal landing ship of the Marine Corps is planned.
          It is stated that at the moment the Corps has trained more than 50 pilots and 500 technicians. The next KMP squadrons planning to upgrade to the F-35B are VMA-211 (FY2016) and VMFA-122 (2018).
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 16 January 2016 08: 58 New
            0
            Quote: Aaron Zawi
            By Order of the Marine Corps Commandant General Joseph Dunford

            Saving your presence.
            F-35A is going to be adopted in August 2016 and the F-35C in 2018, Lockheed says.
            And the ILC has nowhere to go, forever it’s impossible to exploit the Harriers.
      5. shans2
        shans2 15 January 2016 22: 11 New
        +1
        they got a brick of the 4 ++ generation, not the 5th, nor normal supersonic without afterburner, nor the maneuverability of our su 35s and even less so 50.
        Yes, and the radar is shit, it’s corny not to shove normal ....
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 15 January 2016 23: 06 New
          0
          Quote: shans2
          they got a brick of the 4 ++ generation, not the 5th, nor normal supersonic without afterburner, nor the maneuverability of our su 35s and even less so 50.
          Yes, and the radar is shit, it’s corny not to shove normal ....

          Are you an aircraft engineer? Why so much aplomb?
      6. iwind
        iwind 15 January 2016 23: 45 New
        +2
        Quote: Aaron Zawi
        They and the F-35 are not bad at it. Lockheed leads an uninterruptedly open program to create this machine. Of course, technologies are not disclosed, but problems are not hidden. By the way, the problem that is being discussed here is literally cheap for Lockheed-29 million $. In general, the F-35 project reached the final segment.

        Israel has already received the first simulators for training pilots F-35. Your pilots will be the first to start studying at their bases already in the 17th year. We did not succeed that the first combat use would be in the Israeli Air Force.
        About the "great" problem with fuel tanks.
        This is just a contract for solving problems, and by the way, not with a fuel tank, but with a high pressure valve. During the tests, it was found that with certain flight conditions There is a low possibility of tank damage due to high pressure. In December, we conducted tests with a new valve that successfully passed the tests, here is its installation and contract. Which will eliminate these restrictions.
        "Last December, the program successfully flight-tested new pressure relief valves that would remove those flight restrictions"
        https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/fleet-wide-f-35-fix-targets-fuel-tank

        -over-pressuris-420812 /
        At the request of people about chairs.
        The same situation. The risk of bailouts has been and will always be. Even the K-36 chair at low speeds (up to 900km / h), the probability of a fracture of the spine is 6,6% - this is one of the best chairs.
        http://www.dissercat.com/content/metodika-opredeleniya-bezopasnosti-vozdeistviya

        -peregruzok-golova-taz-pri-katapultirovanii-n
        With Martin-Baker's US16E seats, the situation is similar to the risk of injury with a weight below 61.7kg and low speed, higher than the accepted US Air Force standard of 5%. Interestingly, the same limitations have long existed in other F-15, F-16 and 12 other aircraft that use the ACES II seat. and
        for the US Navy, the NACES SJU-17 seat is designed for pilots weighing from 61.7kg to 96.6kg. These seats are installed in the Boeing F / A-18E / F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler.
        But for some reason this does not bother anyone, but when they wrote about the same restriction about the F-35, the release began about nothing.
        http://www.dodig.mil/pubs/documents/DODIG-2015-090.pdf
        If a correction is not even planned for ACES II, then for Martin-Baker's US16E it is planned to decide before 2017 (summer), to remove the delimitation until 2018. Moreover, only one possible pilot who theoretically could participate in the F-35 program fell under the flight restriction.
  13. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 15 January 2016 15: 25 New
    +2
    It is unclear where the line between the costs of eliminating truly dangerous problems and the desire to scratch out additional funding for solving imaginary problems.

    As you know, the goal of the bourgeois is profit; however, nothing is said about the ways to obtain it, that is, they can be any. If you do not stoop to crime, you can declare any dangerous imperfection improvement and so working system.
  14. Algetxnumx
    Algetxnumx 15 January 2016 15: 25 New
    +2
    Quote: Primus Pilus
    Directly the whole campaign for drenching the slop F 35.

    And what a great sadness you have about this, so cry, it may feel better, yes, you can go to the censor, there you will quickly be uplifted, but here, excuse me, as it is.
    1. Hello
      Hello 15 January 2016 16: 38 New
      0
      Quote: Alget87
      And what a great sadness you have about this, so cry, it may feel better, yes, you can go to the censor, there you will quickly be uplifted, but here, excuse me, as it is.

      Let me give you advice do not tell people what to do and they will not send you in a known direction hi
      1. Baikal
        Baikal 15 January 2016 17: 35 New
        +5
        Hehe, a rare situation where both are right laughing
      2. BaLaLaykin
        BaLaLaykin 16 January 2016 16: 58 New
        0
        what are you advising such an Egyptian king that then, already forty years in the desert, shied away in search? hi
  15. gloomy fox
    gloomy fox 15 January 2016 15: 25 New
    +5
    CSO this is the scope of corruption !!!!! yes our officials are just angels compared to the Yankees.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. alexej123
      alexej123 16 January 2016 13: 54 New
      0
      They have it is not corruption - it is BUSINESS.
  16. communication
    communication 15 January 2016 15: 26 New
    +6
    They have enough dough. The machine prints. There is electricity.
  17. LÄRZ
    LÄRZ 15 January 2016 15: 29 New
    +5
    "It wasn’t about the woman ..." They, probably, show our cutting master-class to ours. It is quite elegantly done.
  18. Belousov
    Belousov 15 January 2016 15: 31 New
    +3
    "Saw, Shura, saw! They are golden!" - I can’t say anything except a quote from a great work.
    And the grief of the comrades from the promised land is quite understandable - they still have to buy this "technique". And the more improvements, the higher the final price of the car, the more expensive its maintenance. But you can’t buy, the owner ordered to buy.
  19. Algetxnumx
    Algetxnumx 15 January 2016 15: 32 New
    +2
    Damn, some garbage on the site, I quote one, and stick to the other, put a minus, zero effect and most importantly, mainly for some reason this mainly applies to those who have the flag of Israel, well, there’s some kind of conspiracy belay request
    1. St Petrov
      St Petrov 15 January 2016 22: 04 New
      0
      Masons reached belay
  20. GSVG 86-88
    GSVG 86-88 15 January 2016 15: 33 New
    +2
    61 kg, taking into account chips, cola, toilet paper and other ova ammunition?
  21. Oznob
    Oznob 15 January 2016 15: 45 New
    +6
    What an alarming killer whale they get. But we are ready, air defense is growing up)
  22. Hypocrite
    Hypocrite 15 January 2016 15: 46 New
    +9
    Locker Martin Lockheed at a Christmas corporate party:
    - Sir, we have a lot of money. We will have even more money if we continue to refine this x..n f35.
    -God with us, gentlemen, it was he who gave us f35.
    -Pray on f35, and even the cleaning lady Lockheed Martin will have a camarro.
    - For the bazaar I answer ...
  23. AlNikolaich
    AlNikolaich 15 January 2016 15: 49 New
    +4
    Damn, well, as much as you can already! Got this penguin! The project is more than 20 years old, more than 100 machines have been built that will never learn to fly ... About the dead, either good or nothing.
  24. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 15 January 2016 15: 53 New
    14
    Judging by the fact that they requested only 29mln pieces of paper, the problem is a spelling error on the tank cap laughing
    1. SAM 5
      SAM 5 15 January 2016 16: 02 New
      +6
      Judging by the fact that they requested only 29mln pieces of paper, the problem is a spelling error on the tank cap

      That is, they did not write that there is a left-hand thread on the lid, therefore they cannot unscrew the lid and refuel the plane. belay laughing
  25. Primus pilus
    Primus pilus 15 January 2016 15: 57 New
    +1
    F-22 Raptor is Harley and F-35 is a Riga-11 moped. This is an indisputable fact.
    1. WUA 518
      WUA 518 15 January 2016 16: 07 New
      15
      Quote: Primus Pilus
      moped "Riga-11". This is an indisputable fact.

      Sergey, do not talk about Riga-11, an excellent piece of equipment. I had this in my childhood laughing
      1. Oznob
        Oznob 15 January 2016 16: 24 New
        12
        Divine pepelats. Then still the eye did not twitch from the word Riga.
  26. vladimir1958
    vladimir1958 15 January 2016 15: 57 New
    +2
    Why steaming with seats, it is better to feed the pilot a hamburger to a weight of more than 65 kg. The performance of this aircraft is already average (speed in different sources from 1200 to 2065 km per hour, only one engine, maneuverability, like 3-generation aircraft). One big plus is a short take-off, vertical landing.
  27. bastard
    bastard 15 January 2016 16: 02 New
    +2
    leg hit the wheel (joke)
    1. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 15 January 2016 16: 10 New
      -1
      Quote: villain
      leg hit

      Zdarovo, villain drinks hi How many Len, how many Zin ... laughing
  28. Great-grandfather of Zeus
    Great-grandfather of Zeus 15 January 2016 16: 03 New
    -1
    If only they hinted at what problems the fuel tanks have, they are bottomless, miraculously turn fuel into gold, but don’t give it to anyone, they pluck fuel from themselves directly into the VIP cabin, sorry, the cockpit ...?
  29. driver
    driver 15 January 2016 16: 07 New
    0
    Amerikosy beautifully sawing the budget. Serdyukov nervously smokes aside and envies "on black" ...
  30. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 15 January 2016 16: 08 New
    -1
    There were hardly reports that Washington was going to spend another 2 billion dollars to bring to mind the pilot's seat, which is now capable of injuring a pilot weighing less than 61 kg,

    Not otherwise, platinum weighting compounds will be ordered to small pilots. laughing
    1. 15ghost10
      15ghost10 15 January 2016 16: 40 New
      0
      they will be forbidden to walk on a large one before the flight. Seriously, but what are such lightweight pilots? Or will there be teenagers flying with experience flying 1000 hours on PLAYSTATION?
    2. faridg7
      faridg7 15 January 2016 16: 46 New
      +1
      Do not trifle, I think for such purposes, platinum is too cheap metal, rather some of the rare earths. In general, from the very beginning, when they voted about the problems with the catapult, I was perplexed in what the problem was. well, the pilots - the guys are not large for the most part, is it really difficult to drop an appendage corresponding to the current weight of the pilot before flying into the seat in the backside? why bother reconstruction of the catapult. Well, it’s clear that here you need to squeeze out the loot, but these guys should be controlled by someone. Is it really that way.
      1. faridg7
        faridg7 15 January 2016 16: 57 New
        +1
        Quote: 15ghost10
        they will be forbidden to walk on a large one before the flight. Seriously, but what are such lightweight pilots? Or will there be teenagers flying with experience flying 1000 hours on PLAYSTATION?

        Well, about a year and a half ago, I watched how applicants went to Khabarovsk in flight schools, so small ones like my first-born were mainly recommended to fighters and attack aircraft. My example now weighs about 57-58 kg. Of course he is trying to gain weight, but in the Krasnodar School cadets are fed disgustingly, albeit abundantly.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. ty60
      ty60 15 January 2016 23: 42 New
      0
      Well you! Be sure from palladium!
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 18 January 2016 11: 40 New
        0
        Quote: ty60
        Well you! Be sure from palladium!

        From depleted uranium. laughing
  31. Velizariy
    Velizariy 15 January 2016 16: 18 New
    13
    The Israelis very successfully mastered the money.
    Israel ordered 33 such aircraft, on very "specific" conditions:
    The first batch of 19 cars cost the Jews $ 2,7 billion, but Lockheed Martin pledged to purchase parts and components in Israel for the entire program for $ 4 billion, without Israel’s investment in the aircraft development program! I must say that these conditions shocked other US partners in the program, in particular, Norway, Denmark and Italy.
    The next order included 14 aircraft for already 2,8 billion (+ option for 17 cars) - in response, it seems, the program of return purchases was expanded to 9 billion dollars.
    In particular, Israeli companies supply for the F-35 (I repeat - not only for their own - for everyone!) Wings, helmet displays and composite elements for the fuselage ...
    The Israeli modification I aircraft themselves will have differences in on-board electronics, in particular in electronic warfare systems. In addition, Israel plans to participate in the development of a 2-seater version of the aircraft.
    In total, the Israeli Air Force is going to buy 95 F-35.

    He is a Jew and a Jew in Lockhead ... Ato Serdyukov, Serdyukov ...)) He still needs to grow to a similar level))) Buy these pepelats from the USA for the money of the USA themselves !!! Yes, on the condition that the United States will buy from Jews something for three times the amount !!! It is a masterpiece...! ordinary Americans should at least be embarrassed.
    PS Therefore, it’s not the fault of the forum users from Israel this device, a free device ...) F 35 for them as a bonus.
    1. AlNikolaich
      AlNikolaich 15 January 2016 17: 26 New
      0
      Something I suppose that airplanes with the letter I will have an order of magnitude less problems.
      In addition, the gesheftik is not bad. The production of composite elements of large size, the technology is not simple, and very promising.
  32. Support
    Support 15 January 2016 16: 34 New
    0
    Sawing saw .....
  33. bmv04636
    bmv04636 15 January 2016 16: 34 New
    0
    well, not a cool penguin for the "bright elves" and their friends, the professor will not let you lie
  34. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 15 January 2016 16: 42 New
    +1
    Well, the pilot's seat is really, rightly. Only it was necessary to force the manufacturer at his own expense to fix, and even fined. And what's wrong with tanks? small or what?
  35. Cananecat
    Cananecat 15 January 2016 16: 44 New
    0
    Is it we who have learned to cut the budget from them, or are they with us? laughing
  36. Foresterer
    Foresterer 15 January 2016 16: 45 New
    +5
    It is very interesting to read the opinions of the pilots who are preparing for the F-35. There are many negative reviews, but these are not ordinary pilots, but they have already flown a lot and on many things. I’m constantly minus that I criticize this plane, and I will criticize it, but on the other hand I’m even glad that in the sky our VKS will oppose this product, and not some perfect aircraft, as foreign tourists praise it here. In the end, Google can help everyone, well, there aren’t many breakthrough technologies there, but there is an obvious dead end, which led to a great desire to make an all-in-one airplane and not a desire to recognize this strategic mistake in time. Although who admits a mistake when hundreds of billions of dollars are at stake. Let them finish off both the plane and the grandmothers, and the news of the failures cause me joy. This is our enemy, after all, and I am not going to rejoice at his successes. And I don’t understand those people who praise other people's weapons and are directly touched by what a high-tech means of murder the Americans have released. For me, it’s better not to take off at all.
    1. d.antonov
      d.antonov 15 January 2016 17: 22 New
      0
      Yes? and please kindly refer to a foreign source about these pilots. Neither Hindu Dave nor David Axa who are the magazine ... namely pilots
      Norwegian pilots gave only positive reviews, Amer naturally too.
      1. Foresterer
        Foresterer 15 January 2016 17: 40 New
        0
        Read about Italian and your native American. National Interest Magazine.
    2. Lepila
      Lepila 15 January 2016 18: 07 New
      +2
      I will upset you. The son of friends is an Air Force pilot, now in the States he is giving a course on F-35, before that he flew on F-15 and F-16. He is completely delighted with the thirty-fifth.
      1. chebman
        chebman 15 January 2016 18: 50 New
        +5
        My friend mastered F35 after a hang glider. So they cannot pull him out of the cabin for the second month - he is so happy!
      2. Terner38
        Terner38 15 January 2016 19: 09 New
        0
        When ordinary Soviet or Russian carriers take a Lada for Daewoo Nexia, it seems to them. what can not be cooler than a car!
      3. Pajamas
        Pajamas 15 January 2016 20: 23 New
        +3
        Quote: Lepila
        I will upset you. The son of friends is an Air Force pilot, now in the States he is giving a course on F-35, before that he flew on F-15 and F-16. He is completely delighted with the thirty-fifth.

        "
        Believe me !!! I myself am a Muscovite, I have been living here for 50 years. The daughter of the governor. Just believe me - everything is not so simple with us ... Nobody wants separation !!!

        - back in the 1480s
      4. Foresterer
        Foresterer 16 January 2016 08: 33 New
        +1
        I look, you are spoiling everyone who f-35 hay. In vain are you this, here is the Russian spirit, here Russia smells. And you need a Mako portal, a foreign tourist.
    3. ty60
      ty60 15 January 2016 23: 47 New
      0
      You need to rejoice at SUCCESS! hi
  37. ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 15 January 2016 16: 50 New
    +1
    Such a plane for SUCH money ... what Do you need it, comrades star-striped? request
  38. Velizariy
    Velizariy 15 January 2016 16: 55 New
    +2
    Quote: ALEA IACTA EST
    Such a plane for SUCH money ... what Do you need it, comrades star-striped? request

    It is necessary !!! It is necessary))) And the other is not necessary ... Let them all have this!
  39. Friends
    Friends 15 January 2016 16: 58 New
    0
    There were hardly reports that Washington was going to spend another 2 billion dollars to bring to mind the pilot's seat.


    I also remembered this when I saw the title of the article ...

    Among American experts, rumors spread that representatives of the developer company are doing everything to increase government funding for the development of the aircraft.


    "experts" just now see the light? Daban state budget for most "private offices", which is Lockheed Martin, a holy cause ...

    Nobody canceled or defeated corruption in the West, it was simply renamed ...

    Apparently, considering the Latin designations (lat. Corrumpere - to corrupt, lat. Corruptio - bribery, spoilage) "not tolerant."
  40. Signaller
    Signaller 15 January 2016 17: 15 New
    0
    SECURITY. Our planes are the best, and these SUGGEST,
  41. Zomanus
    Zomanus 15 January 2016 17: 24 New
    +1
    It's okay, let everyone do it properly.
    I believe that it is worth checking carefully the entire plane again.
    And that would be a direct ideal, I do not care for what money.
  42. pvv113
    pvv113 15 January 2016 18: 05 New
    +1
    all work on the creation of the F-35 has already spent (attention!) more than $ 100 billion.

    Let them go broke wink
  43. Maksus
    Maksus 15 January 2016 18: 26 New
    -2
    Really, let’s rejoice at the failures of which all the time the technology is brought. And how many F-35 are already in service? And how many really new fighters have we received, and not modernization in the last ten years? How many PAK-FAs are flying now and how many are they planned? Let's face it - yes, Penguin - raw, but he is and he flies, and with us?
  44. Flat5160
    Flat5160 15 January 2016 18: 33 New
    +2
    Normal move, how much have they already spent on the creation and further development? The figure is fond of hearing! And in my opinion this is not the last expense for bringing the found flaws of the car. Soon the amount will be such that the launch of the machine in normal operation will be economically disadvantageous, and the launch of our machine and the subsequent comparison in Economics and performance characteristics will play a role. The Americans in their repertoire, I mean their best tanks in the world, which "pass" any swamps and deserts, and do not "burn" from decommissioned RPG-7s.
  45. corporal
    corporal 15 January 2016 18: 46 New
    +2
    It never occurred to anyone that all this noise about the unfinished and unsuitable F-35 is just a disinformation?

    1- lobbyists from Boeing in the Senate do not make noise, the Senate hearings on budget overruns are not required.
    2- any Norwegians with Italians and other Danes buy a plane (and do not tell tales that the government of these countries supposedly bought bad bullshit Uncle Sam, then these rulers would simply tear their own taxpayer voters like a hot-water bottle, turning them into political corpses) .

    As if we, accustomed to consider the F-35 as a complete guan, then we would not have to bite our elbows and swear with envy.
  46. Pate
    Pate 15 January 2016 18: 51 New
    +1
    That for them twenty-nine million bucks for fuel tanks is just the work of a printing press. They will print and allocate, so that the machine will fly and fight, unlike us, which our fifth-generation fighter is in no way put into series.
  47. tchoni
    tchoni 15 January 2016 20: 40 New
    +4
    How embarrassing! And fy the 35th problem !!! Yes, it is mass-produced, about a hundred are made. Flies from the deck, flies from ground airfields, flies like a helicopter, flies like a plane. Carries combat duty at least as part of one squadron ...
    And they have all the problems ...
    Gentlemen, the authors .. Yes, this is your problem ... With self-esteem ..
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 15 January 2016 21: 27 New
      +6
      Like it or not, the F 35 aircraft was successful, beautiful, high-tech, and with a combat load of more than 9000 kilograms - powerful enough, and the helmet-mounted control system - breakthrough, albeit expensive, but this attribute will become the basis for other new fighters around the world.
      1. Lepila
        Lepila 15 January 2016 22: 59 New
        +1
        Guess whose helmet-mounted control system is in the 35th?
        1. corporal
          corporal 16 January 2016 16: 54 New
          +2
          Quote: Lepila
          Guess

          Made in Cina? wassat
  48. Senior manager
    Senior manager 15 January 2016 22: 46 New
    +1
    What a talk. The lack of reliable information gives rise to almost grabbing for breasts in comments. Meet - better in a training battle, then you can count. Practice she will tell everyone and prove to everyone. And let's not forget about SDI. Cool investment of money.
  49. Gerhard
    Gerhard 16 January 2016 01: 09 New
    +2
    what close attention to the children's illnesses of the project, what zeal in discussing poor Americans, how much concern for "embezzlers" laughing
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 16 January 2016 21: 37 New
      -1
      Quote: Gerhard
      what close attention to the children's diseases of the project,

      Why are the French and Germans not in business?
      1. Gerhard
        Gerhard 17 January 2016 05: 50 New
        +1
        Quote: saturn.mmm
        Why are the French and Germans not in business?

        still there are simpletons who think that these icons mean something good
        1. Gerhard
          Gerhard 17 January 2016 05: 53 New
          0
          is such a flag better? laughing
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 17 January 2016 21: 17 New
            0
            Quote: Gerhard
            still there are simpletons who think that these icons mean something

            Quote: Gerhard
            is such a flag better?

            It can be attached to any, but let’s say the Israelis have almost everything with their own, I’m also with my own, well, you can live in Russia and love France or Bulgaria, it’s not forbidden, it’s not convenient when you’re talking to someone, there’s a French flag a man and I’m going to a French restaurant tomorrow with a girl, but I don’t know how to take a frog with a fork or hands, you think I’ll consult now, ask the man and the answer is “You’re a simple guy, I’m actually from Guatemala.”
  50. Green1976
    Green1976 16 January 2016 01: 48 New
    0
    And, I thought that only we can cut the budget, but it turns out that we still have to study, and study again!
    1. Man1
      Man1 16 January 2016 06: 50 New
      0
      Alas, comrade, you can’t catch ours. And I set you minus.