Media about the new mountain of American F-35

The work on the F-35 fighter information systems is behind the scheduled schedule on 11 months, RIA News message portal Business Insider.

“It is expected that the developers of the fifth-generation fighter-bomber of the fifth generation Lockheed Martin F-35" Lightning "II will miss the key deadline for the release of the sixth software block of the Block 3F aircraft," the portal said, explaining that "this part of the code is responsible for combat and training capabilities of the machine. "

“Without the F-35 code, there simply will not be,” says the publication.

According to the head of the US Department of Defense Testing and Evaluation Department, Michael Gilmore, “the plane will not be fully operational by the planned date - July 2017 of the year”.

At the same time, he noted that “the main problems of the vessel have long been known - the incompleteness of the IT skeleton of the fighter — autonomous information management system, instability of avionics in the Block 3F phase, insufficient reliability and maintainability of the engine.”

Comments

[Wiruz]

In short, you can wrote on the grave "Born dead!"

[St Petrov]

Well this is that. Where's the support group for this miracle waffle. Israel only recently increased the order

[Mikhail Krapivin]

Judging by your photo - in the synagogue :)

[St Petrov]

apparently in the software and glider development team there was too much% of the inhabitants of the great country of diggers

[cniza]

All the more valuable - the device will be more expensive.

[avdkrd]

Quote: c-Petrov

apparently in the software and glider development team there was too much% of the inhabitants of the great country of diggers

In general, among IT specialists in Sash, a very large percentage of Russians. Apparently help than they can)))

[NIKNN]

But Russian experts say that a good plane. And it is clearly visible on radars, and often breaks, and gets off easily. In a word, for us it is a good plane.

[poacher]

and again Putin's long arm is visible, "Vladimir is omnipresent."

[Oleneboy_]

Isn't America vetoing the sale of 5th generation fighter jets?

[Knight Rider]

Quote: Oleneboy_

Isn't America vetoing the sale of 5th generation fighter jets?

On the F-22. The F-35 was built "by the whole world" and was initially offered to the "allies"

[shans2]

here you have a flying brick, do not skimp, fly on.

[Alf]

Quote: Oleneboy_

Isn't America vetoing the sale of 5th generation fighter jets?

So then fighters, not budget eaters.

[papas-57]

'' eh what is that. Where is the support group for this miracle waffle. Israel has only recently increased the order. '' Old Jew - We cried our money!

[shans2]

the mice injected but ate a cactus

[Marconi41]

Quote: s-t Petrov

Israel only recently increased the order

Here, mark my word. It is the Israelis who will bring this would-be plane to mind. By the way, they and all these amerovsky inconsistencies on hand. After all, now the Jews are prohibited from changing its avionics when buying the F-35. In this situation, the Americans can lift the ban. Maybe then "Lightning" will fly as planned.

[Pimply]

Quote: Marconi41

After all, now the Jews are prohibited from changing its avionics when buying the F-35. In this situation, the Americans can lift the ban. Maybe then "Lightning" will fly as planned.

In fact, we have already agreed on the possibility of replacement. The Israeli version is called f35i. The only thing that the first 19 aircraft will go in the basic international version. And the rest are already sharpened under Israeli requirements

[Sober]

Quote: Wiruz

"Born dead!"

I think it's too early to bury. As the saying goes: We will see. But that he was born prematurely, no doubt.

[tol100v]

Quote: Wiruz

In short, on the grave you can write "Born dead!"

Rather CONCEPT DEAD!

[Diana Ilyina]

Quote: Tol100v

Rather CONCEPT DEAD!

I am not sure of the correctness of my conclusions, but what I read here on the site and what I read, for the sake of interest in other sources, led me to think that the Americans were trying to create a universal plane. As far as I know, such attempts were earlier, including those of our designers, but ours refused to attempt universalization and were right! An attempt to combine in one hammer both a chisel and a sledgehammer, and what else can be combined there, in my opinion, is doomed to failure initially! Correct me if I am wrong.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

You are both right and wrong at the same time. In principle, a certain versatility is possible and needed - for example, such a class of aircraft as a fighter-bomber. For example, the Su-35 is a very formidable fighter, one of the first in the world. But he also "knows how" to work on the ground, although here his capabilities will be inferior to a specialized bomber / missile carrier. But here's how the Su-35 attack aircraft is completely unusable, and of course, it would never occur to anyone to try to make a vertical takeoff and landing aircraft out of it.
Again - technicians, brave guys, in principle, can make a good multi-purpose aircraft, but genetics, these messy clever men, still have not bothered to breed universal pilots. You can prepare an ace of air combat, which is also capable of striking at ground targets, but he can’t achieve mastery in the high art of a bomber - completely different art, other training and all that. And vice versa, a bomber pilot is quite possible, able to fend for himself in an air battle - but put him in a fighter and send him into battle against the master of air battle - nothing can be done.
Therefore, some reasonable universality makes sense. It is not always possible to use the required number of bombers - why then not bring fighters to business, entrusting them with relatively simple hired targets?
But the Americans managed to try to link such fundamentally different machines as VTOL, fighter and bomber in one design. Instead of trying to make some modern analogue of the F-16 and F-18, which could change the workhorses of the fleet and the Air Force (and this task was for American filmmakers on the shoulder), they began to wise with a vertical take-off ... well, they ruined the program , of course.

[Pete mitchell]

Think right. The idea was good, but initially it went wrong. In addition to the possibilities in the technical specifications, the limitation of the final price was proposed - ~ 80 million per piece, depending on the version. More than 3000 vehicles are planned to be built. It did not work out, they are already fighting so as not to "take off" for 150 million, but problems are like a snowball: the cannon of the Marines will not fire until 2019, the ship is out of tune with the deck, the IT specialists need to rewrite millions of lines. There is a lot of advanced stuff, but stuffing it all under the skin and making it work will take a sweat.
Already they say that he will not be able to fully replace the fleet of airplanes: against the A-10 it is too fast and not protected, against -16 it is not so agile, -15 will not raise as much, -18 on the deck will replace ... The T-50 has time get on the wing, let's see what will be offered to replace the Su-25. In general, the Russian concept looks more mundane, but it will work more confidently, and trample on the market ...

[Marconi41]

Quote: Pete Mitchell

now they say that he will not be able to fully replace the fleet of airplanes: against the A-10 it is too fast and not protected, against -16 it is not so agile, -15 will not raise the same, -18 will replace on the deck ..

Something you all poured into one bottle. Americans are not at all, as many people think. They know how to build aircraft and F-15 and F-16 confirmation of this. But even the same F-15 has a lot of modifications for different purposes. Do not forget about the Raptor - not a very weak car. Lightning is an attempt to replace the F-16 with some additional features, and the Americans do not fill everything in the world in the same plane as we do. There will be an F-35 for both the Air Force and the Navy, but it will still be different planes.

[Marconi41]

Quote: Diana Ilyina

An attempt to combine in one hammer both a chisel and a sledgehammer, and what else can be combined there, in my opinion, is doomed to failure initially!

Not quite right. The Americans were replacing the already obsolete F-16. In principle, they got their way. The characteristics of the F-35, whatever we say, is better than that of the F-16. So everything has grown together. Well, Lightning disease from the category of children. Our T-50 is also not yet in the army. Will finish yet. Money will be printed and finished.

[VP]

Quote: Marconi41

Well, Lightning disease from the category of children.

Lightning disease is from the category of conceptual rather than children's ones.
What, damn it, children’s if he had his first flight in 2000 and since 2006 sawed small series, while seemingly already having experience working on the fifth generation?
Initially, it was conceived as an addition to the 22nd. Moreover, a much cheaper addition than the 22nd.
Type a pair of the 15th and 16th.
Among the number of shortcomings of the 22nd there is a significant for the Pentagon - the lack of the ability to work on the ground. Therefore, the 35th was to, including, receive enhanced shock capabilities.
Sorry, it’s invented, yeah, the heavy one flutters without looking down, and the light one must be laced upside down with any baida in order to flop around different sheds.
Then the thought came to clever figures - and what for we are generally a variety sort in different forms, let's generally make one letach for all. Well, like, we’ll introduce him only modifications and shit, that’s happiness.
No sooner said than paid.
And the 35th began to do one in three faces - both for the army and for the navy and for the marine corps.
It turned out that this is complete fun. For example, the Marines are now hysterical, they can't finish finishing the 35th for their needs. Now they, poor things, are finishing off their harriers by extending their service life and buying in addition seven dozen decommissioned aircraft from the Britons purely for spare parts. Since squeezing everything into a "universal strike for all" aircraft, which was initially planned as just a budgetary supplement to the 22nd, it does not work sensibly. Already in 35B they abandoned the use of 900-kg bombs, having cut the sturgeon down to 450-kg and still the stone flower does not come out.
The next zrada - having made a light fighter a "universal strike" suddenly discovered that it stupidly began to lack traction and maneuverability, that it was never "like the 16th only of the fifth generation", it turns out that it has ceased to fit into some of the requirements for the fifth generation , for example, to the possibility of a long flight at supersonic without afterburner.
Then they made a feint, like why did the fifth generation need all kinds of speed, maneuverability? His type of business flew up, hit from afar and ran away.
Oha. Only here are other diseases. For such tactics, you need to have appropriate weapons, and the 36th does not have missiles that can be hit without entering the affected area, it has the longest-range AIM-120, which has been spanked for thirty years and which flies up to a hundred, despite the fact that at a hundred it is fig at whom it hits, the probability of hitting at such a distance is not so impressive. And for normal air defense systems, seeing the 35th is not a special problem - all "stealth" is sharpened for the centimeter range (while optimized in the frontal projection), while the air defense radars are multi-range. And it is not particularly difficult to dump the 35th yourself or throw a tip at it for fighters.
Despite the fact that the declared detection range by 35 meters is 150 km. Moreover, it is for the purpose with an EPR of 3 square meters. And with a probability of detection of 0,5 rather than guaranteed detection. And at the same time for scanning in a narrow sector and irradiating the target for 2 seconds. Those. in fully polygon conditions.
Those. the elaborated application concept is doubtful.
In general, there you can sing odes to geniuses who, having conceived one thing, managed to make from an initially normal airplane it is not clear what. And the prospect of adopting the F-35 for arms has not yet been seen.

[Lord of the Sith]

I am in the comments for each such article, I write about the same thing: - It is necessary to allocate funds and increase production volumes of the F-35. Replace all F-15s and F-16s that are in service with NATO. The EU needs to reduce the allocation of funds for nuclear submarines and frigates, and vice versa to invest in the entire F-35 defense budget.

[Diana Ilyina]

Quote: Lord of the Sith

I am in the comments for each such article, I write about the same thing: - It is necessary to allocate funds and increase production volumes of the F-35. Replace all F-15s and F-16s that are in service with NATO. The EU needs to reduce the allocation of funds for nuclear submarines and frigates, and vice versa to invest in the entire F-35 defense budget.

Write correctly! I, a person far from the intricacies of military technology, have already read so many "flattering" reviews about this "miracle" of the American aircraft industry that even I have a strong opinion that this plane will be made of platinum, fly on palladium fuel and shoot golden rockets!

We wish good luck to Lockheed-Martin employees in mastering the next dohreniliard of the ever-dead presidents!

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: Diana Ilyina

Write correctly! I, a person far from the intricacies of military technology, have already read so many "flattering" reviews about this "miracle" of the American aircraft industry that even I have a strong opinion that this plane will be made of platinum, fly on palladium fuel and shoot golden rockets!
We wish good luck to Lockheed-Martin employees in mastering the next dohreniliard of the ever-dead presidents!

And you had no desire to find the source from where the American portal compromised the information? The fact is that several Internet sites have been reprinting an article from Blomberg for a week already. Well, so as not to seem like a complete copist, they are sucking sensations out of a finger. And it was written about this.

The United States intends to build 500 F-35 fighters of all three versions before the completion of 3F software development, Bloomberg News reports.
Tests of the aircraft will continue until at least August 2018, when Block 3F will be integrated into all manufactured aircraft. In 2015, 45 aircraft were produced, by 2018 it is planned to reach level 100, and by 2020 the production rate will increase to 120 aircraft in year. This year, 2016 aircraft should be produced for all customers.
The main reason for the delays is the development of Block 3F software. Its creation can only be completed at the end of 2017, whereas the end of 2016 was previously planned. The F-35 is called a “flying computer,” whose software consists of 8 million lines.

[corporal]

Quote: Aron Zaavi

8 million lines.

Interestingly, but on a regular computer how much?

[Wheel]

Quote: Corporal

Quote: Aron Zaavi

8 million lines.

Interestingly, but on a regular computer how much?

Linux has exceeded 10 million
Windows is estimated at least 30 million with a strapping.

[Diana Ilyina]

Quote: Aaron Zawi

And you had no desire to find the source from where the American portal compromised the information? The fact is that several Internet sites have been reprinting an article from Blomberg for a week already. Well, so as not to seem like a complete copist, they are sucking sensations out of a finger. And it was written about this.

You see, I am an economist, by education and profession, and that's why I'm used to counting! Let's take a look at the calculations. You say the Americans are planning to build 500 F-35s. I was not too lazy to see its cost, the figures are different, but on average, somewhere around $ 100 million. Multiply 100 * 000 = $ 000. Next, we look at the cost of the contract for two Mistrals, which is 500 euros. Converting $ 50 yards to euros, that's about 000 yards. Divide this amount by the cost of one Mistral, we get 000 ships. I understand that the Mistral is not the best ship in the world, but 000 ships and 1 planes !!! What is more profitable ?!

I understand that the comparison is not correct, there are different functions and goals, but all the same, the effect of 76 ships will be higher than that of 500 aircraft! Especially considering that the ships may not be Mistrals, but some kind of nuclear submarine or something else! In addition, 100 million, this is far from the final cost, how much it will cost to fine-tune the software and other nodes to a sane state, God and the Pentagon alone knows!

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: Diana Ilyina

I understand that the comparison is not correct, there are different functions and goals, but all the same, the effect of 76 ships will be higher than that of 500 aircraft! Especially considering that the ships may not be Mistrals, but some kind of nuclear submarine or something else! In addition, 100 million, this is far from the final cost, how much it will cost to fine-tune the software and other nodes to a sane state, God and the Pentagon alone knows!

You are absolutely right. The functions are completely different. Moreover, you calculated the cost of the box without its filling, weapons, crew, and so on. By the way, the majority of specialists also estimate the cost of the T-50 at $ 100 million, and what is more preferable to leave the Air Force without modern aircraft, and to buy another submarine? In aviation, as life shows, the demand is higher.

[Diana Ilyina]

Quote: Aaron Zawi

You are absolutely right. The functions are completely different. Moreover, you calculated the cost of the box without its filling, weapons, crew, and so on. By the way, the majority of specialists also estimate the cost of the T-50 at $ 100 million, and what is more preferable to leave the Air Force without modern aircraft, and to buy another submarine? In aviation, as life shows, the demand is higher.

I understand that Wikipedia is a brehun, but still: "At the same time, according to Putin, the plane will be 2,5-3 times cheaper than foreign counterparts. India planned to purchase the PAK FA at a price of $ 100 million per plane."

Do not confuse the cost of the aircraft for yourself and the cost of export! In addition, the characteristics of our aircraft are much higher than those of the US. Anticipating your valid objection, how do I know, I’ll say. I don’t know, nobody knows, but experience shows that when the launch in the series is delayed, our planes turn out better, an example is the American F-15 versus our Su-27! You do not think that I am a sucker! I work in a serious enterprise related to the military-industrial complex and I am required to understand many things by job. I did not say that aviation should be left without new cars, God forbid, on the contrary, aviation is one of the main priorities! The question is different, the ratio of costs to the final result, and here it is, the Americans have big problems! As far as I understand it, the aircraft is raw and its refinement is postponed further and further and no one can say the final cost, that's what it is about!

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: Diana Ilyina

[. Anticipating your valid objection, how do I know, I’ll say. I don’t know, nobody knows, but experience shows that when the launch in the series is delayed, our planes turn out better, an example is the American F-15 versus our Su-27! You do not think that I am a sucker!

I never think badly of a person without good reason. As for your promise of the superiority of the Su-27 over the F-15, this is an unsubstantiated assumption. F-15 participated in a much larger number of conflicts and perfectly established itself.

[opus]

Quote: Diana Ilyina

Do not confuse the cost of the aircraft for yourself and the cost of export!

Required. Export will be MINIMUM is 18% cheaper
How are you

Quote: Diana Ilyina

economist, by education and by profession, and therefore used to count

should know that6
1.When exporting (exporting abroad of the Russian Federation / CU), 18% VAT is refunded (and ours are paid where to go)
TN FEA EAEU 8802300007 (ATTENTION !!! Due to the lack of an officially approved list of military product codes, this note can be used EXCLUSIVELY for reference and informational purposes.)
- Export Duty No
- Export Licensing No (Basic)
18% refundable
2. All imported components that are supplied to fulfill the export contract ..
Well, for example, the EAEU TN FEA 8526912000 5% TP + 18%. Our pay in full (23,7% in total).
And for export contracts TP is conditionally charged, VAT is reimbursed.
3. Competition. We do not. There is also some:
Russia lost the "contract of the century" for the supply of MiGs to India: the state armaments program is under threat
From items 1,2,3, 20, 30 for export, the cost will be CHEAPER by XNUMX-XNUMX% than for the RF Ministry of Defense.

Quote: Diana Ilyina

I work in a serious enterprise related to the military-industrial complex and I am required to understand many things by job.

Seriously?

[opus]

Quote: Diana Ilyina

I was not too lazy to see its value, the numbers are different, but on average somewhere around $ 100 million.

1. They have a cost, this is the cost of an LCI (you as a serious "economist" should know.)
We have, as it were, not quite. Under the USSR, for sure, now partially.
The cost of the SU-35 is not included in the sale price of the Su-27S.
Yes, and junk .. in the decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 26, 2013 N 1291 on the LAN "gu-gu"
2. Costs at the low level of the initial serial production No. 6-7 (not including the engine) - (Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP) lots 6 and 7) for 71 units:
F-35A: $ 98 million
F-35B: $ 104 million
F-35C: $ 116 million
MORE
An F-35A purchased in 2018 and delivered in 2020 will be $ 85 million, which is the equivalent of $ 75 million in today's dollars.

August 11 2015
Amount of new supply contract 48 Su-35 fighters for the Russian Air Force will be 100 billion rubles: 2 083 333 333 r / piece
64,9363 r / USD

 Show / Hide text

http://www.cbr.ru/currency_base/daily.aspx?date_req=15.08.2015

$ 32 is almost the basic configuration, and up to $ 082 (if stuffed). Comparably?
(contract of 2009: 48 combat aircraft of this type, the cost of which amounted to 66 billion rubles, was signed in 2009.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

still have not bothered to breed universal pilots.

general misconception about Joint Strike Fighter (single strike fighter)
F-35B Lightning II STOVL for Royal Navy KPM
F-35A - aircraft for the US Air Force
F-35C - aircraft for the US Navy.
English pilots will not fly on the F-35A, and USAIF pilots will not sit at the helm of the F-35B Lightning II STOVL, then the same thing about the F-35I

Yes, the model is a unified fighter-bomber for NATO countries based on land and at sea.
But this does not mean that pilots are "universal" or all 2 in 1 as head shoulders!
It's the same as Volkswagen's MQB modular platform: cheap and fast, but at the output of Audi, Seat, Skoda and Volkswagen (from Polo to Passat)
in a simplified version of course (MQB is their future), such as VAG concern PL71 platforms / the following cars are built on it:
Volkswagen Touareg (7L) 2003 -
Audi Q7 (4L) 2005 -
Porsche Cayenne 2002-

Quote: Diana Ilyina

I understand the comparison is not correct,

For an "economist" of a large "serious" defense industry enterprise IT SHAME

Quote: CERHJ

This is very softly said !!

Well, very soft. Maybe harder: stupidity

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: opus

The sum of a new contract for the supply of 48 Su-35 fighters for the Russian Air Force will amount to 100 billion rubles: 2 083 333 333 r / piece
64,9363 r / USD

Aghas :))) But this is bad luck - the cost of a contract usually indicates the cost of not only the plane, but also the cost of its maintenance, which is carried out by the manufacturer and which makes the contract extremely expensive (there are tens of percent). And in the case of the F-35, the price is ONLY the board itself (and that without the engine :)))

Quote: opus

general misconception about Joint Strike Fighter (single strike fighter)

I actually wrote about the pilots :)))

Quote: opus

Yes, the model is a unified fighter-bomber for NATO countries based on land and at sea.
But this does not mean that pilots are "universal" or all 2 in 1 as head shoulders!

Yeah. Read which aircraft the F-35 was supposed to replace in the same Air Force. A-10, F-16 ... Quite the same aircraft, right? :))

[opus]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

And in the case of the F-35, the price is ONLY the board itself (and that without the engine :)))

repeat, well written

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

at the level of initial serial production No. 6-7 (not including the engine) - (Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP) lots 6 and 7) for 71 units:

And so:
Tories Hit Reset Button On F-35 As Report Finds Program's Cost Will Be $ 45.8 Billion
true auditors disagree: But the accounting firm KPMG noted that National Defense has not built in enough contingency funds to account for the wild swings in sticker price of the radar-evading plane.
In the report for the Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives and the Rideau Institute, he said the full bill for buying, operating and maintaining the planes is at least $ 56-billion and not the $ 45.8-billion the government has already acknowledged because its bleeding-edge technology is still under development.
56 billion and 45,8. in how
So take it.
While all this is "the seventh water on jelly"

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

I actually wrote about the pilots :)))

Not only

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

But the Americans managed to try to link such fundamentally different machines as VTOL, fighter and bomber in one design.

Well, I added the same thing about the pilots.

Quote: opus

English pilots will not fly on the F-35A, and USAIF pilots will not sit at the helm of the F-35B Lightning II STOVL, then the same thing about the F-35I

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Quite the same planes, right? :))

repeat:

Quote: opus

Volkswagen's MQB modular platform: cheap and fast, but at the exit of Audi, Seat, Skoda and Volkswagen (from Polo to Passat)

Polo and Passat are exactly the same cars?

Times are changing, the goals and objectives of the sun are the same:
"new" A-10 is not needed, and the F-16 is highly specialized (it was sharpened for something else)

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: opus

Required. Export will be MINIMUM 18% cheaper

Yes you! Well, who would have thought?
For orders to the War Ministry, there are pricing rules, a dreary system of coordinating cost standards, and so on and so forth. There is none of this for export contracts - the prices are dictated by the market. You can sell at three times the cost price - use it for you, well done. This is the first thing. And secondly, supplies to the military go through Rosoboronexport, and there are soooo cheating, that ...
So it’s not worth it, right, to write about VAT, it is decisively lost amid margins on export contracts.

[opus]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Yes you! Well, who would have thought?

What about me"? It seems to me that no one thought ... about VAT, and even more, especially

Quote: Diana Ilyina

economist, by education and by profession

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

There are rules on orders for the Ministry of War

No one has canceled VAT, we read contracts and tenders
There is no VAT in the USA (for export or not for export, drum. Shipping and That are more expensive yes).
Only sales tax ("land" and various), but the Pentagon does not pay it.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

You can sell at three times the cost price - use it for you, well done. This is the first thing. And secondly, supplies to the military go through Rosoboronexport, and there are soooo wrap up that ...

repeat:

Quote: opus

There is another one:
Russia lost the "contract of the century" for the supply of MiGs to India: the state armaments program is under threat

and examples like India are a bunch
I know those "cheats": the return of Migs from Algeria riveted from counterfeit goods and the second part is worth something.
4UD and NOT ONE landing, fines of 200tr

We are waiting for the privatization of state enterprises in 2016 for a trillion rubles ... (budget, nem money, forced) and

$ 20 billion x80 p / $ =?

material here:

 Show / Hide text

http://www.saipem.com/en_IT/static/documents/Information%20Document.pdf

Schaub all were business like our state capitalists.
----------
Rosoboronexport is certainly not Rusnano ...... but hello

[Serg65]

Greetings Andrew! Ignore the Kaptsovsky opus Zamvoltu, but switched to aviation!

[Marconi41]

Quote: Diana Ilyina

An example of an American F-15 vs our Su-27!

Not a fact ma'am. Firstly, in order to determine this, real combat operations are needed. Secondly, the SU-27 was created in response to the F-15, and at first, by its characteristics, these first F-15s did not catch up. And even now, the F-15 and Su-27 are quite comparable opponents.

[mav1971]

Quote: Diana Ilyina

I understand that Mistral is not the best ship in the world, but 76 ships and 500 aircraft !!! What is more profitable ?!

D more "protect" parrots and baby elephants :)

[opus]

Quote: mav1971

D more "protect" parrots and baby elephants :)

Thank you for reminding me
I forgot the classics


Likewise, the "economist" with experience Diana Ilyina considers the F-35 in the "Mistrals"

[VP]

Quote: Diana Ilyina

You say that the Americans plan to produce 500 F-35s. I was not too lazy to see its value, the numbers are different, but on average somewhere around $ 100 million. Multiply $ 100 * 000 = $ 000.

This is not true. They have already taken 54 billion in only one development at the moment. In development!
And about a batch of 500 aircraft this is not at all a fact. The 22nd was generally going to release several thousand but in the end ..

[mihasik]

Quote: Wiruz

In short, you can wrote on the grave "Born dead!"

I would say this: We wanted to make an airplane, but it turned out to be “push-pull”, because they themselves did not understand what they wanted from it. So it turned out not the SU-35, but just the F-35. F * whipped "EFka" his own?)

[Maksus]

Block 3 - isn't this the third episode? That is, the 2 of the first quite fly themselves. Well, the third one is delayed, and the first one still does not smell with us. Why rejoice?

[lotar]

I do not exclude the possibility that these constant imperfections are just a legitimate way to launder money. And if so, then America is clearly among the leaders in corruption.

[horoh]

Come on, cool plane, there is a topic for cutting

[Mikhail Krapivin]

In vain swear colleagues. Thanks to this truly legendary plane, you and I always have something to make fun of :)

[Bkmz]

Come on, how a military aircraft may not be very good, but as a vehicle, it’s quite a supercar.

[dyksi]

By the way, American military experts are increasingly raising the topic of recreating the specialization of combat aircraft of the type, F-15, F-16, A-10, or our MiG-31, Su-27, MiG-29, Su-25, etc. because, in fact, it is more efficient and cheaper. They believe that the seizure of the entire combat aircraft market by one company led to this "wonder of the world." In addition to all this, they believe that after all these projects, their pilots will still need to be returned to a normal psychological state of a fighter pilot, or an attack aircraft (and this problem is just beginning to emerge, its effect is yet to come), they are not happy with the dominance of software , and the F-35 suffers from it no less than from other bells and whistles. everything should be in moderation. In short, there are proposals to remove the F-16 from storage, "Superhornets" and simply "Hornets" will reign on aircraft carriers, and so they constantly write about the A-10. So, food for thought.

[Altona]

How will it take off that? With such jambs ...

[Gorjelin]

How will it take off that? With such jambs ...

What difference does not make for this))
Guys loot cut, straight from the machine, crisp fresh

[Vasya_Piterskiy]

Let them give it to us, our craftsmen will process it with a file and fly, no matter where!)

[Mikhail Krapivin]

Quote: Vasya_Piterskiy

Let them give it to us, our craftsmen will process it with a file and fly, no matter where!)

Yeah, and drill holes in the wings, so as not to fall off;)

[zennon]

Quote: Altona

How will it take off that? With such jambs ...

Drozite! Since 2006 produced. Already 174 pieces have bred ...

[Alf]

Quote: zennon

Drozite! Since 2006 produced. Already 174 pieces have bred ...

And how many of them FLY NORMALLY?

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: Alf

Quote: zennon

Drozite! Since 2006 produced. Already 174 pieces have bred ...

And how many of them FLY NORMALLY?

Все.

[Shark Lover]

The AN-2 also flies normally so far. I think only flying for that kind of money and ambition is not enough.

[ALEA IACTA EST]

How much more money will be cut on this project?

[Pravdarm]

At that pace, it will soon be like a shuttle!
Supermaster level cunning! First, they will suck and saw the loot from their budget => the price will rise, and then from the budgets of suckers, who will vparyat this "golden ovno" (already vparili).

[St Petrov]

Jews are certainly not suckers, but then they performed)

[jjj]

Today they talked about the Challenger, about its last flight. Most of all struck by the conclusion: "The ship was ruined by the cold snap that happened on the night before the start in the sunniest state of America." They designed the shuttles without taking into account all possible weather factors. So you think the principles of American design have changed?

[Alf]

Quote: jjj

They designed shuttles without taking into account all possible weather factors. So you think American design principles have changed

It will urgently redo the weather at the flight sites. For this, HAARP and created.

[Aleksey_K]

Quote: jjj

They designed shuttles without taking into account all possible weather factors.

It was not the shuttle itself that exploded, but one of the engines of the first stage of the launch vehicle.

[lysyj bob]

"Without the F-35 code, there simply will not be

Well, we got to the most important thing! Bucky, saddles - all garbage, the most important thing is not! And how many lards will it take now for the F-35 to be?

[asbond]

Based on all that has been said, the only conclusion suggests itself: "the car is raw"! And if we take into account its cost, then the wording "customer's divorce" suggests itself. This, naturally, from the point of view of a layman. What will the professionals say?

[APASUS]

Quote: asbond

Based on all that has been said, the only conclusion suggests itself: "the car is raw"! And if we take into account its cost, then the wording "customer's divorce" suggests itself.

The car is not a problem - the car is damp, you can’t formulate it better.
But Americans can’t recognize this, because they are the most and kickbacks are everywhere charged, the first places in the ratings, expert analysis and advertising time are paid. So how do they behave?
They just stupidly put pressure on their vassals, and they are happy to pay for remaking and fixing problems, ordering themselves new lots ..........
I think that the fate of the F-117 awaits him, quietly without giving any pomp, they closed the program and slowly wrote off the remaining cars

[engineer74]

Well, if so, and maybe the F-104 will work out, with "combat" operation ...
Given the cost of the program, you can’t close it quietly, the noise will be scary.

[APASUS]

Quote: engineer74

Given the cost of the program, you can’t close it quietly, the noise will be scary.

As it was rare to meet information that the F-35 stump from the F-22 and inferior in some performance characteristics. And if tomorrow a new one appears high tech (this word is an American trend) is a super plane that will eclipse all the planes in the world ............ Americans will forget the F-35 as well as the F-117, in which the Pentagon invested almost as much money as in his R&D is Lockheed Martin.

[Alf]

Quote: APASUS

I think that the fate of the F-117 awaits him, quietly without giving any pomp, they closed the program and slowly wrote off the remaining cars

For example, so.

[Aleksey_K]

Quote: asbond

Based on all that has been said, the only conclusion suggests itself: "the car is raw"! And if we take into account its cost, then the wording "customer's divorce" suggests itself. This, naturally, from the point of view of a layman. What will the professionals say?

And professionals are who makes a divorce. They do not read our Military Review in Russian. Question into the void.

[Same lech]

Very expensive plane ...
in a large-scale war, of course, an inexpensive and technologically advanced weapon wins, and all these expensive military toys are good for the Papuans and natives who have no means of struggle against them.
Therefore, I believe that in an armed clash with an advanced adversary, the United States will nevertheless rely more on the time-tested F-16 F-15, F-18 HORNET.

[Mikhail Krapivin]

What about the F-22? In their ranking, the Americans rated one of their 22nd in ten of our fighters. Optimists and dreamers.

[Aleksey_K]

Quote: The same LYOKHA

in a large-scale war, of course, inexpensive and high-tech weapons prevail

I wonder who the Americans want to start a large-scale war with. With Russia or what? These are their dreams and they know that they cannot do this purely physically. You will recall how many millions of soldiers were prepared at the border for an attack on the USSR, how many military equipment and aircraft.
Neither America nor NATO will be able, like Hitler, to concentrate such an army at present at the borders of Russia.
Therefore, we have to fear a "global non-nuclear strike" with high-precision, high-tech and not at all cheap weapons - 15000 cruise and ballistic missiles. Our air defense and missile defense are not able to shoot down all these missiles launched within one hour.
But again, the concentration of carriers of these weapons around the land and sea borders of Russia is not possible. This is the default preparation for an attack and also will not go unnoticed.
Conclusion - we will not have, as you say, a "large-scale" war with NATO and America. Any "large-scale" use of non-nuclear weapons will have a thermonuclear response.
But with individual countries, Ukraine or Turkey, we can fight without the use of nuclear weapons.

[forester]

Born defective. Amen.

[Mavrikiy]

Come to us to be treated hippos and she-wolf ...

[ANANATOLY PAULOV]

I doubt that F35s will ever become combat vehicles. After all, they have not yet created missiles for conformal deployment with a sufficient range, and they themselves do not know when they will be. When there are such missiles, there will be an airplane. In the meantime, this is a very expensive toy. And no matter what "codes" they blundered, the plane will not be.

[newcomer]

I misunderstand something. F22 on reviews of Amer’s specialists, on avionics and comp. systems remained at the level of 90gg. now we see almost the same (almost!) problems with f35. the question arises, even a few, have the Yankees forgotten how to do avionics and electronics? or do these two gliders have no upgrade resource? I would like to know the opinion of the nexus, if present.

[DMoroz]

“This is the incompleteness of the IT skeleton of a fighter - an autonomous information management system, the instability of avionics in the Block 3F phase, and the insufficient reliability and maintainability of the engine.”

And how many units have already steamed the allies? They are not designers and technicians, they are damn effective sales managers of what nobody needs because of unsuitability

[gas113]

Chot for a plane flying codes? I always thought that the engine consumes kerosene produces traction, the pilot controls, the wings create lift. And in this freak, what do codes create lift?

[mav1971]

Quote: gas113

Chot for a plane flying codes? I always thought that the engine consumes kerosene produces traction, the pilot controls, the wings create lift. And in this freak, what do codes create lift?

But does Su, starting with 27, know how to fly at all? No code?
Think a little ... At least a little ...

[viktor561]

Well, in FIG they do it - they cut the loot of the huge military budget or for the Pontus greatness of America - against the natives
fight - they won’t climb on us - definitely!

[ANANATOLY PAULOV]

You yourself answered your own question. BABLO SAWING.

[gas113]

Yes, if the valiant hacker Vasya inserts an unreadable Russian word in three letters into the code, then all these planes will be covered with another Russian unprintable word

[voyaka uh]

Block 3F is 100% software ready.
Those planes that fly now have Block 2A,
Block 2B (for F-35C marine aircraft)
or Block 3i - approximately 97-98% of software availability.

[your1970]

Block 3F, insufficient reliability и maintainability engine. "
Blocks can be at least foundation concrete, but if the enginesunreliable - then the rest is all in principle unimportant ...

[voyaka uh]

More than 180 aircraft are already in the air. Pilots are trained
4 countries, and not a single plane crashed. This is a record for
new models. Where is the unreliable engine?
This is an engine similar to the F-16 engine, only enlarged
power, while much more economical.

[Wellych]

More than 180 aircraft are already in the air. Pilots are trained
4 countries, and not a single plane crashed. This is a record for
new models. Where is the unreliable engine?

With such raids, there must probably be positive feedback from the direct operators? Well, with the exception of advertising maxims by marketers and people involved in the gesheft? ...

[your1970]

According to US Department of Defense Testing and Evaluation Michael Gilmore ...
All claims against him

[Aleksey_K]

Quote: voyaka uh

More than 180 aircraft are already in the air. Pilots are trained
4 countries, and not a single plane crashed. This is a record for
new models. Where is the unreliable engine?
This is an engine similar to the F-16 engine, only enlarged
power, while much more economical.

In June 2014, the fifth-generation F-35 Lighting II fighter engine caught fire when preparing the aircraft for takeoff. Flights of this type of aircraft were temporarily stopped, the incident prevented the premiere of the aircraft at the air show in Farnborough.

If he managed to take off, he would surely have crashed.

[Skifotavr]

Quote: voyaka uh

This is an engine similar to the F-16 engine, only enlarged
power, while much more economical.

The engine for the F-35 was created as a further more powerful development of the F-22 engine. In this regard, I wonder why it looks like an engine from the F-16? Also cylindrical?

[APASUS]

Quote: voyaka uh

More than 180 aircraft are already in the air. Pilots are trained
4 countries, and not a single plane crashed. This is a record for
new models. Where is the unreliable engine?
This is an engine similar to the F-16 engine, only enlarged
power, while much more economical.

Take the time to read an article on conceptual issues with the American F-35. Due to the shortened take-off and vertical landing capabilities adopted at the request of the US Marine Corps, the aircraft is bad in almost everything else: speed, maneuverability, and survivability. Moreover, he must replace a large fleet of several types of aircraft. https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fd-how-the-us-and-its-allies-got-stuck-with-th
e-worlds-worst-new-warplane-5c95d45f86a5 - See more at: http://russianinterest.ru/F-35-problemy#sthash.ML6wuYcj.dpuf

[Pimply]

Quote: APASUS

Take the time to read an article on conceptual issues with the American F-35. Due to the shortened take-off and vertical landing capabilities adopted at the request of the US Marine Corps, the aircraft is bad in almost everything else: speed, maneuverability, and survivability.

Which of the F-35 are you talking about? There are three of them. You do not compare SVD and AK, although they also have more 60 percent of the total details

[APASUS]

Quote: Pimply

Which of the F-35 are you talking about? There are three of them. You do not compare SVD and AK, although they also have more 60 percent of the total details

Try following the specified link

[Pajamas]

Quote: voyaka uh

Block 3F is 100% software ready.
Those planes that fly now have Block 2A,
Block 2B (for F-35C marine aircraft)
or Block 3i - approximately 97-98% of software availability.

I also think that they’ll finish it, there is a lag, but to doubt that the country with the largest number of qualified programmers will not cope with the task of software is children's naivety, everything else is steps to unmanned aerial vehicles. We must carefully monitor and squeeze, rather than throwing caps into the air, otherwise it very much resembles Svidomo’s resources, any delay we have there is YOUR enthusiasm. You need to be calmer.

[VP]

Quote: Pajama

the country with the largest number of qualified programmers

Are you talking about India or something?
In American software companies, the majority of developers are not predominantly American. There are Indians, there are Chinese, there are ours, and in general, whoever is not there. Plus, they give a lot of things for development to the side, ordering from other companies and for freelance.
Yes, why go far - the well-known Windows is a development product of hundreds of companies around the world, including in Moscow. MS there by and large the customer, coordinator and seller. Of course, they also write in themselves, but they themselves would not have pulled it out.
Or, if smaller, some DivX. Make in Tomsk, coordinator and customer in the States.
I don’t think that until the development of software for the 35th, foreign citizens and companies and employees who are US citizens but whose nationality can raise questions about loyalty will be allowed.

[Pajamas]

Quote: VP

Are you talking about India or something?
In American software companies, the majority of developers are not predominantly American. There are Indians, there are Chinese, there are ours, and in general, whoever is not there. Plus, they give a lot of things for development to the side, ordering from other companies and for freelance.

Whip, Prat, Morisson, A Birdman for Your Hindus? And giving it to non-US citizens is quite possible, they will set the universal task of managing and controlling the process, but I assure you that in the USA a lot of strong programming schools will cope on their own, and the fact that many tasks for writing code are given to Russia and India is quite understandable, the software consumption market in the USA the largest in the world, and we and the Indians are much cheaper. of their own.

[Wheel]

Quote: voyaka uh

Block 3F is 100% software ready.

Software is never 100% ready
The law is like that.
Patches are constantly molded to it, then patches for patches, then updates, again patches and when the number of patches exceeds a certain limit, a new release appears with which everything repeats in the same way.

[opus]

Quote: voyaka uh

Block 3F is 100% software ready.

If or May 2015, 97.5% percent of the required F-35 software is currently flying and 99.9% percent of the required software has been coded. This equals to about 10,000 lines of code that remain to be written.
More specifically about the blocks, then like this:

[cap]

“At the same time, he noted that“ the main problems of the vessel have long been known - it is the incompleteness of the fighter's IT skeleton - an autonomous information control system, the instability of avionics in the Block 3F phase, and insufficient reliability and maintainability of the engine ”.

Did I miss something? How does he even fly?
Constructors on stage.
Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II (eng. Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, Russian Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II) is a family of promising, inconspicuous fifth-generation fighter-bombers developed by the American company Lockheed Martin (Tactical Aircraft Systems) in three versions: an option for the needs of the US Air Force (ground fighter - CTOL), for the US Marine Corps and the British Navy (fighter with a short take-off and vertical landing - STOVL), and for the needs of the US Navy (carrier-based fighter - CV).

The Lockheed Martin consortium also includes Northrop Grumman Corporation, Pratt & Whitney, Rolls-Royce, Allison and British Aerospace. Skunk Works in Palmdale, California and Aeronautical Systems are participating in the development of individual sites.

As the famous character said, "Klava, I'm lying!".

[LÄRZ]

Quote: cap

The Lockheed Martin consortium also includes Northrop Grumman Corporation, Pratt & Whitney, Rolls-Royce, Allison and British Aerospace. Skunk Works in Palmdale, California and Aeronautical Systems are participating in the development of individual nodes.

"Seven nannies have a child without supervision"

[TiRex]

Do you think our planes without KB cooperation create? The genius Sukhoi sat in his office and piled a new plane ...

[LÄRZ]

Quote: TiRex

Do you think our planes without KB cooperation create? The genius Sukhoi sat in his office and piled a new plane ...

God have mercy! But here you need the closest mutual understanding and common work on a specific end result. And here it turns out: "Here we made the engine (or something else), and then you figure it out yourself, without us." And if the product is still "raw", then there is nothing to announce it, let alone sell it.

[bikeev1234]

Another American bucket with bolts wants to fly.

[Great-grandfather of Zeus]

In this plane there is only one cant, the fact of its creation.

[BOB044]

Money is not a success, but brains are needed to make it fly.

[Great-grandfather of Zeus]

"Fedorino grief" -American version.

[1774]

But what do you want a universal plane, and a reconnaissance plane, and a fighter, and a bomber and God knows what else. At one time, flying tanks and submarines experimented. I’d like to glue them together so that you can hold on to take universal glue, you want as they say for centuries, let's say wood, take wood glue.

[Prisoner]

They would shoot the poor, so as not to torment. Or is not all the money cut yet?

[ramzes1776]

But the idea itself is certainly good. But it’s not the fate of the mattresses to bring it to perfection. It’s something like F-117. The toy is expensive, but the output is zero.

[triglav]

Exactly, a toy. They are too smart with the equipment.

[Nix1986]

The result of the states is to some extent logical. The limit in LTH has been reached at the current level of technology. The situation is reminiscent of the development of piston aviation at 45, you can increase stealth, avionics, and over-the-air overheating by some level, but this will be an increase that is not offset by an increase in the price level of the aircraft. Compare in current prices F16 and its replacement F35, yes F35 is better, but as much as the price? Not very far.

[Garis]

The trouble is what. Ai-ai-ayay. Surely the Russians are to blame and Putin in particular ...

[pogranicnik]

Yes, they did not create (and I think they will not create such an aircraft) which the Russians did not shoot down, would !!!!

[LÄRZ]

Yes, you fucking bogey! Will we finally wait or not, when IT fully flies ?! Without "jambs" and "..small improvements". Otherwise, really, let's come to us (there are sanctions on the side). And, as there V. Vysotsky: "... we will instantly show up to you, with shovels and pitchforks, think about it for a day and correct the defect."

[Flat5160]

We are waiting for, apparently the next stillborn child of the US Air Force. This will be clear after the SU35S has established itself in Syria. After all, the United States considers money and the balance will not be in their favor, especially since our aircraft is 4 ++ generation, and not the 5th. And on the way our T50 aircraft complex, which will probably be cheaper and not inferior to the American F35. To whom they will be breathing in their rolling technique.

[TiRex]

Allies, they will not be able to gain ours in any case.

[bastard]

pie:

they take it all boldly
everything turns into rude
but if you are embarrassed
then just spend less effort

[tracker]

The F-35 is a 5th generation real aircraft, but today it is expensive, but the Americans plan to produce this universal aircraft in an amount of about 2.5 thousand, then the price will be normal. Quietly and calmly pass tests and acceptance in the army and navy. At the same time, hypersonic missiles are being developed for them, if adopted, all of our air defense systems will be like clubs against bows. He will hope that the decisions on the S-500 will be brought to the time in time to develop the Americans

[VP]

Did you joke so subtly right now?
The 35th, firstly, is not a real first-generation aircraft at once for several requirements that are put forward for fifth-generation aircraft. Secondly, it is not real in the sense that it is real as a combat unit and it is not even known to the developers when it appears in that capacity. Rather, the terms are called, but judging by the number of times it was all postponed and postponed, the called dates are not certain but an excuse.
About a series of 2,5 thousand is also a subtle mockery.
The F-22 was originally planned as a series of multiple larger than what was actually released. Most likely, the 35th orders will be reduced even more than the 22nd. It is not yet in fact (it was announced that it will be fully armed in 2019, which also causes skepticism) and many countries are already beginning to doubt it and reduce future orders.

[Pimply]

Quote: VP

35, firstly, is not a real first-generation aircraft for several requirements that are put forward for fifth-generation aircraft.

Actually is. The requirements for the fifth generation are extremely arbitrary, and the Americans, as having washed down the first fifth generation plane and riveting the second with an eye on the experience of the first, can vary these requirements as it suits them.

[VP]

They can. They can generally include only the requirement of stealth for centimeter range radars in the frontal projection.
But there are already universally recognized, for example, the requirement of afterburner supersonic.
And F-22 they do not pass to the fifth in other respects. put forward by them. 22 has no circular information system. And the requirement of all-angle shelling is not fulfilled.

[Pimply]

Quote: VP

But there are already universally recognized, for example, the requirement of afterburner supersonic.

Nope. Firstly, afterburning super-sound has long been achieved on aircraft of the previous generation. You are talking about cruising afterburner. So he has a lot of problem moments. In particular, the engine resource is killed. Significance is doubled. And other lovely moments. In maneuvering, afterburner afterburning is more important. And you still can’t get away from a rocket even on a cruising afterburner, it cannot be compared with speed - there is no limiter in the person of a person who is experiencing overload. In addition, cruising afterburning on the F-35 is still there, and has been declared for a long time. There were times when he was absent, but long ago sank into oblivion.

Quote: VP

And F-22 they do not pass to the fifth in other respects. put forward by them. 22 has no circular information system. And the requirement of all-angle shelling is not fulfilled.

You stubbornly do not understand that the requirements for the fifth generation are just a set of characteristics that does not limit, but sets goals. Americans do not need over-maneuverability, for example. It’s just that they solved her tasks through an all-angle review and advanced electronics.

In fact, the fifth generation differs from the fourth by a multiple increase in the capabilities of the fighter compared to the previous generation. And not theoretical thoughts 25 summer ago

[VP]

Quote: Pimply

You are talking about cruising afterburner.

About him, of course.

Quote: Pimply

So he has a lot of problem points

Well, this would not have been put forward in due time by the requirement for the new generation if it had been achieved easily and naturally on previous planes.
If I'm not mistaken, then the Yankees themselves included it in the set of mandatory parameters for the fifth generation, at least I read it from them.

Quote: Pimply

Americans do not need over-maneuverability, for example. It’s just that they solved her tasks through an all-angle review and advanced electronics.

They simply "proudly refused" it when they began to understand what kind of miracle Yudo turns out. Initially, they tried to make the 35th as a kind of functional analogue of the 16th but the next generation, their ambitions for maneuverability ended later.
As well as the combat radius.
According to an all-round review - yes, this is a requirement of a new generation and it was put forward by the Yankees. The 22nd is deprived of this. But an all-round review does not reject maneuverability, actually. Like electronics.

Quote: Pimply

In fact, the fifth generation differs from the fourth by a multiple increase in the capabilities of the fighter compared to the previous generation.

What is the multiple increase? Here we take the F-15. What exactly is unattainable for him if you upgrade over the tag?
In fact, only stealth wins multiple times. But now more and more discussions are going on, but is it so necessary? Indeed, for decimeter radars, these stealth are quite well visible, as for centimeter from many projections that differ from the frontal. And for the sake of stealth, you have to make big sacrifices such as lower combat load, refusals from external suspension and other things, confused structures, difficulties with maintenance, etc. Those. skepticism began to appear.
But you are right that the requirements for generations are changing. Moreover, in the direction of lowering these requirements

[Pimply]

Quote: VP

Well, this would not have been put forward in due time by the requirement for the new generation if it had been achieved easily and naturally on previous planes.
If I'm not mistaken, then the Yankees themselves included it in the set of mandatory parameters for the fifth generation, at least I read it from them.

25 years ago. Reached on the F-22. Reached on the F-35. But removed from the dominant requirements.
And the demand was the opportunity to overcome dozens of kilometers on overburning supersonic sound.

Quote: VP

They simply "proudly refused" it when they began to understand what kind of miracle Yudo turns out. Initially, they tried to make the 35th as a kind of functional analogue of the 16th but the next generation, their ambitions for maneuverability ended later.

They achieved super-maneuverability on the F-22. Thrust vector controlled engine. But then, realizing that it was problematic to compete with any new all-angle missiles, F-35 refused this requirement. But they have the so-called transparent cockpit, which allows the pilot to look through the body of the aircraft.
And about maneuverability ...
F-35 fully maintains control at an angle of attack of 50 °.

It is able to fly tail-to-tail, maintaining control even at supercritical angles of attack (110 °) and, at the request of the pilot, confidently return to horizontal flight. Watch the first minute. Anyway, look at all three parts of the video, maybe most of the stupid questions will go away.

Quote: VP

What is the multiple increase? Here we take the F-15. What exactly is unattainable for him if you upgrade over the tag?

For starters - compared to which of the F-35x? Secondly, a lot.
The level of visibility and integration, thrust, avionics with open architecture.
Read at least something on the subject besides cheers-patriotic articles and that warms your soul. May you see clearly

[VP]

Quote: Pimply

Read at least something on the subject besides cheers-patriotic articles and that warms your soul. May you see clearly

Sorry, but after this rudeness, discuss with yourself. Arguments like that "you are a jingoistic patriot", that "you are a state department" are the lot of people whose point of view is always unshakable, limited, and a priori does not allow its change. A discussion with such an opponent makes no sense whatsoever - as a result, the exchange of points of view and arguments comes down to the banal dragging of the opponent into srach through the transition to personalities and attempts to insult. You have already started it. I come out of the discussion - where I will find it with all my heart on other resources.

[Pimply]

Quote: VP

Sorry, but after this rudeness, discuss with yourself. Arguments like that "you are a jingoistic patriot", that "you are a state department" are the lot of people whose point of view is always unshakable, limited, and a priori does not allow its change. A discussion with such an opponent makes no sense whatsoever - as a result, the exchange of points of view and arguments comes down to the banal dragging of the opponent into srach through the transition to personalities and attempts to insult. You have already started it. I come out of the discussion - where I will find it with all my heart on other resources.

Respected. The discussion assumes that the person at least slightly updates his information on the topic, looks at what is happening. Forgive me if you somehow hurt, but damn it, take at least 10-15 minutes to review materials on the topic on which you are going to discuss. You heard something patriotic, and immediately decided to defend your point of view. Read at least once again the requirements for the fifth generation, and when they were put forward, the arguments and counterarguments on the topic, and not the joyful chants of "F-35 g_no!" Then the discussion may be

[d.antonov]

Hi, is there an article about f-22? Interesting to read.
Well, in general it is not clear, the f-22 has a good all-angle launch detection system
http://www.lockheedmartin. com/content/dam/lockheed/data/mfc/pc/missile-launch-detector-mld/mfc-mld-pc.pdf
whose capabilities will be expanded to OLS: "Lockheed Martin continues to advance the modular design of MLD with thedevelopment of both high resolution and multi-spectral sensors and an expandedalgorithm that incorporates situational awareness and defensive Infrared Search andTrack (IRST)"
all-angle shelling is implemented in aim-9x, which they have been staffing with recently

And as for the f-35, its Americans are not so low in level compared to the f-22

http://www.f-16. net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=27875&sid=810f009bcbbf1a4e6823f05ba009080e

[VP]

Not at all quiet and not at all calm. With tantrums and scandals.
To date, they have indicated the date of acceptance into service in 2019. This is not the first, and most likely not the last, transfer. Let me remind you that the first flight of the F-35 was in 2000.
Hypersonic missiles against air defense systems ... The declared range of target detection in firing conditions at F-35 is 150 km.
The detection range of both the S-300 and the S-400 Malekho is greater. And the question is - why do you need an F-35 for those missiles?
Will this rocket fit into the plane or will it have a range of 50 kilometers? I remind you that the F-35 has an internal suspension, i.e. severe restrictions on the dimensions of weapons.
And something tells me that a rocket that will work at an acceptable range and have a speed greater than 5 km / s (the target speed at which four hundred can no longer work, it has a slightly lower target maximum) will not even be shallow.

[Sergey333]

Quote: LÄRZ

LÄRZ

Born to crawl cannot fly

[Cobra77]

Quote: Mikhail Krapivin

What about the F-22? In their ranking, the Americans rated one of their 22nd in ten of our fighters. Optimists and dreamers.

For the price I think even 1 to 30-50. All this resembles the German military-industrial complex of the end of the war, when the prodigies went completely for money.

[Pimply]

Quote: cobra77

For the price I think even 1 to 30-50. All this resembles the German military-industrial complex of the end of the war, when the prodigies went completely for money.

Only with those prodigies did all jet aircraft go.

[arckan33]

Is there a similar technique in Russia? Or at least projects of operating time? So what are you jesting? When your provitelstvo money allocates for novye then we will see that your design bureau will be able to develop and bring to metal

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: arckan33

Is there a similar technique in Russia? Or at least projects of operating time?

PAK FA, Su-35 ... doesn’t say anything? Sorry:)

Quote: arckan33

So what are you jesting?

From the height of our developments, the fuss around the F-35 looks extremely funny

Quote: arckan33

When your provisional money allocates for novye

Which year marks out.

Quote: arckan33

then we'll see

And look, and look ...

[VP]

Is.
In general, check out one interesting article, an overview of the fifth generation aircraft manufacturing industry in the world, not only in the Russian Federation or the States
http://judgesuhov.livejournal.com/144148.html

[arckan33]

Or Putin on Kalina until 2030 will ride

[arckan33]

Sorry Putin

[VP]

It is clear - for the sake of "Putin" and wrote, for the sake of this and pumped.

[tchoni]

how zadolbali bury fy-35y. And his seat is bad, and the engine is not reliable, and the software is not softistiny ... But he, the scoundrel, everything flies. in quantity as much as two hundred .. and the conveyor belt is getting little by little, and combat duty is already carrying out little by little ... no way, the cattle will not die ...

[Pimply]

Quote: tchoni

how zadolbali bury fy-35y. And his seat is bad, and the engine is not reliable, and the software is not softistiny ... But he, the scoundrel, everything flies. in quantity as much as two hundred .. and the conveyor belt is getting little by little, and combat duty is already carrying out little by little ... no way, the cattle will not die ...

And most importantly - not a single serious accident at the moment

[VP]

It doesn't fly. It is not accepted for service because it cannot reach the degree of combat readiness required for adoption. Those. so far it has failed as a combat aircraft. And 180 issued are used only for "pilot training". and reassuring the customer
So about "Armata" we can say that we are already producing them with might and main, as many as 18 have already been made. But in fact, Armata is not yet in service, while there are only parties for testing and preparation, so there is nothing to talk about.

[Pimply]

Quote: VP

It doesn't fly. It is not accepted for service because it cannot reach the degree of combat readiness required for adoption. Those. so far it has failed as a combat aircraft. And 180 issued are used only for "pilot training". and reassuring the customer

As of April 2015, the total flying time of the F-35 fleet reached more than 30000 hours. Doesn't fly, yeah.

[VP]

The glider also flies.
F-35 does not fly like a combat aircraft. He is not in service anywhere and he is not included in the combat schedule anywhere. He's stupidly not a combatant.

[Pimply]

Quote: VP

F-35 does not fly like a combat aircraft. He is not in service anywhere and he is not included in the combat schedule anywhere. He's stupidly not a combatant.

The ILC announced that the first unit of the F-35B, the VMFA-121 squadron, had reached the initial state of alert in July 2015.

[VP]

If I'm not mistaken, the state of initial combat readiness of the Americans is considered if the combat readiness of the aircraft is above 50%.
Those. limited fit. Very limited. Almost unsuitable for conducting full-fledged hostilities and cannot be involved in operations. They determined the calculated combat readiness by the 19th year.
And you can understand why this was done (from the initial battle). Just look at the belonging of this squadron.
VMFA-121 belongs to the Marine Corps. It is the KMP that has the most difficult situation with the 35th. They extend the life of their harriers by disassembling old ones for parts due to the fact that the replacement of "vertical units" does not work out yet.
Having made a bet on the F-35, they were left without an airplane that had the possibility of a short take-off, the horn does not replace them.

[Pimply]

Quote: VP

Those. limited fit. Very limited. Virtually unsuitable for conducting full-fledged hostilities and cannot be involved in operations. They determined the calculated combat readiness for the 19 year

Well, actually now you are diligently adjusting reality to your own opinion. Do you know what the initial alert state is? What does it specifically consist of?

[DMM2006]

Quote: Sith Lord

I am in the comments for each such article, I write about the same thing: - It is necessary to allocate funds and increase production volumes of the F-35. Replace all F-15s and F-16s that are in service with NATO. The EU needs to reduce the allocation of funds for nuclear submarines and frigates, and vice versa to invest in the entire F-35 defense budget.

Absolutely agree. God give them more of these wonderful machines. And so that they do not stop there. Let a couple of hundred billion tanks swell into such a promising machine. And they praise it to their partners more, even if they are small invested.
You look, and we have a little more time for rearmament on the backward, one might even say finished Su-35 (I read some Pindo comments on the review of our Su-30 MKI) ... And in ten years or so you look and their "wunderwaffle" will meet "and our" ferrous metal "in the sky of some Yemen. That's when we will evaluate who is the boss and who just went out for a walk.

[oxotnuk86]

I’m interested in this, This super waffle is controlled by a computer. pilot application enlighten EW comp can not cut down ?. Drones seem to be cut down. Maybe it’s easier not to knock it down and jam it like a fish, put it in a zone or where you can provide a zone. As in an anecdote, the fried eggs and eggs are in the pan and the eyes themselves pop up.

[afrikanez]

Canadians famously passed the moment with the F-35. Meaningful however.

[opus]

Quote: afrikanez

Canadians famously passed the moment with the F-35. Intelligent however

What Canada?

With CF-18, it's still "time to tie up", its days are numbered
Will buy

A favorite of F-35 lobbyists and marketers, the URF for the F-35 aircraft is $ 65.9 million. Want an engine? Make it $ 76.8 million; that's in base year dollars; the SAR doesn't do the calculation in the slightly higher then-year dollars. Moreover, that ridiculously understated $ 76.8 million is only for the Air Force's A version; the pricier C model for the Navy has a URF (with engine) of $ 88.7 million, and the Marines' B model (with engine and lift fan) is $ 103.6 million.

[VP]

The Norgi are also trying to refuse to refuse, the Australians are also in full swing about "well, you nafik with this 35"

[Pimply]

Quote: VP

The Norgi are also trying to refuse to refuse, the Australians are also in full swing about "well, you nafik with this 35"

Do not try.
http://ria.ru/world/20150922/1271917813.html
In addition, they are one of the holders of a controlling stake in the so-called (first-stage participating countries that have invested in development and receive various preferences for this).

[VP]

Maybe. I read that the norgs were about to announce a tender and this was regarded by the Americans as a veiled attempt to evade procurement.
We need to look where the article is here, perhaps it is earlier and later the Pentagon still finished them.

[Pimply]

Quote: VP

Maybe. I read that the norgs were about to announce a tender and this was regarded by the Americans as a veiled attempt to evade procurement.
We need to look where the article is here, perhaps it is earlier and later the Pentagon still finished them.

Norwegians thought to cut the military budget. After ours began to actively brighten up, they revised the military budget, taking into account the threat to them from Russia.

[opus]

Quote: VP

Norgi, too, in denial trying to leave

Our PRESS gives wishful thinking
On sept. 22, 2015, ceremonies were held at the Lockheed Martin F-35 production facility in Fort Worth, Texas, to celebrate the rollout of the first F-35A Lightning II for the Norwegian Armed Forces. Officials from Norway, the United States, and Lockheed Martin attended the ceremony and gave their remarks on this momentous occasion.


Royal Norwegian Air Force Col. Odd-Steinar Haugen, the Norwegian national deputy in the F-35 joint program office, signs the AM-1 center fuselage as part of the ceremonial delivery ceremony hosted Dec. 4 by Northrop Grumman.

Quote: VP

the Australians are also in full swing

Australia's F-35A Lightning II pilot, Squadron Leader Andrew Jackson, has flown a Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) F-35A for the first time at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona on May 15.

[Olegi1]

That's interesting: how many lines of code are in the F-35?

In F-22, as far as I know, 22 million lines (for all systems). For comparison - the entire Boeing 787 Dreamliner - 9 million.

Autopilot of the 787th - 2 million. So, they have been doing it for 5 years. At the peak of only TESTING the code (which lasted 2 years), ~ 500 engineers were involved. Labor and money are easy to imagine ...

[opus]

Quote: Olegi1

That's interesting: how many lines of code are in the F-35?

over 8 million
Developing, integrating and testing more than 8 million lines of code on a supersonic stealth fighter is no small task
F-35 software enables:

Flight controls
Radar functionality
Communications, navigation and identification
Electronic attack
sensor fusion
weapons deployment

all this is "worth the lines"

Quote: Olegi1

In F-22, as far as I know, 22 million lines (for all systems

you are mistaken: 1,7 million rows.

The software that provides the avionics system's full functionality is composed of approximately 1.7 million lines of code. Ninety percent of the software is written in Ada, the Department of Defense's common computer language. Exceptions to the Ada requirement are granted only for special processing or maintenance requirements.
For fun on the Xbox HD MLOC DVD player?
Not the whole system (!), Only the game part - 4.7 MLOC
4,7 million rows.
Xbox HD DVD player can control THREE F-22

Quote: Olegi1

For comparison - the entire Boeing 787 Dreamliner - 9 million.

7 million
For comparison

The US Army's Future Combat System is estimated at 60 million lines of code (MLOC)
The software that runs the Boeing 787 is almost 7 MLOC, triple that of the 777
GM says future cars will have> 100 MLOC (that sounds high, but hey, )
So, yes there's a lot of code out there, it's growing, and it's getting more complex. It's tough to put these numbers into perspective ...

A million lines of code printed out would be 18,000 pages (a million lines is 18000 typewritten pages)
A million lines of code will typically have 100,000 bugs pre-test (for a million lines, 100 errors occur during tests)
A million lines of code costs $ 20m to $ 40m (1MLOS costs from 20 to 40 million US dollars)

[Olegi1]

Thanks for the information!

Somehow he himself doubted about F22. According to B-787 according to your schedule - for 10m, not 7 and not 9

For fun on the Xbox HD MLOC DVD player?
Not the whole system (!), Only the game part - 4.7 MLOC
4,7 million rows.
Xbox HD DVD player can control THREE F-22

This is all about the cost of one line of code. In aviation, for obvious reasons, it is checked much more seriously. As an example, according to statistics, verification of the code of the system with the highest level of criticality A (there are 5 of them: A, B, C, D, E) is on average 70% of the cost of developing the code as a whole.

[opus]

Quote: Olegi1

According to B-787 according to your schedule - for 10m, not 7 and not 9

Pozh.
The schedule is not mine.

 Show / Hide text

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/million-lines-of-code/

text from the report, and someone drew a graph for presentation
On the one hand they write: 6.5 MLOC for the Boeing 787
with another:
About 1k processors; 10+ MLOCs, RTCA DO-178B software AFDX: Avionics Full- Duplex Switched Ethernet Legacy to most contemporary NAV / COM / SUR / MX RF Dept. of Electrical, Computer, Software & Systems

Quote: Olegi1

This is all about the cost of one line of code. In aviation, he, for obvious reasons

It is clear.

[ikrut]

Quote: Diana Ilyina

Trying to combine in one hammer, and a chisel, and a sledgehammer, and what else can be combined, in my opinion is doomed to failure initially! Correct me if I am wrong.

You are not wrong (IMHO). No one has yet been able to refute the golden law of mechanics, which says that "commonality is inversely proportional to power." Apparently the Americans so believed in their "exceptionalism" that they decided that they were subject to the laws of nature and common sense.