Military Review

Su-35: five facts about the fighter

135
Su-35: five facts about the fighter



On February 19, 2008, the Su-35 multi-functional fighter first flew into the air. Today, "thirty-fifth" becomes the face of battle aviation Russia: Until 2020, about 100 vehicles will be delivered to the Russian Aerospace Forces. Recall five interesting facts about the Su-35 - the most powerful fourth-generation fighter in the world.

1. Su-35's aircraft stories aviation was two


The first under this code at the beginning of 1990-s at international exhibitions demonstrated the so-called Su-27М - the modernization of the base Su-27. It was actually the first attempt to make a multi-purpose fighter out of the interceptor. For several reasons, the plane did not go, and returned to the index «35» only in 2005 year.

Already 19 February 2008 of the year from Ramenskoye airfield LII them. Gromov took to the air a new "thirty-fifth". The plane was piloted by honored test pilot of Russia Sergey Bogdan.



At first, the fighter was designated as Su-35BM (major upgrade), then it was simply called Su-35 with an export target. After the appearance of interest from the Russian Air Force, the Su-35С variant appeared, with the traditional letter “C” denoting the variants of equipment for the supplies of the Russian Defense Ministry.

2. How "thirty-fifth" compared with UFO


Abroad, the Su-35 (by NATO code designation: Flanker-E +) was first presented at the 2013 year at the international air show in Le Bourget. The demonstration flights of the Russian fighter have become the highlight of the program at the air show.

Piloted the plane again Sergei Bogdan. When he made the so-called "pancakes" in the sky, Le Bourget literally froze. This aerobatic maneuver - turning in the horizontal plane by 360 degrees in flight without losing speed and height - cannot be performed by any other fighter.



“Our airplanes flew over the airfield like this — no other aircraft in the world does this. And the integrated control system on these planes is the Kratovo, the engine management system is also ours, ”the CRET general director Nikolay Kolesov commented later on the flight of our“ thirty fifths ”.

And foreign experts for this "unearthly" show Su-35 immediately compared with the UFO. “I’ve seen 22 for years in this industry, but this flight is something incredible,” said French engineer Christian Kunovski. - This is not a fighter, it's just a UFO! Frankly, for the first time in my life I cried with delight! ”

3. Su-35 can "see" the target for 400 km


Despite the absence of AFAR, the thirty-five radar system can detect targets at a distance of up to 400 km, and also accompany airborne targets to 30 and conduct simultaneous shelling of eight of them.

Such capabilities provide the fighter radar control system (radar) with a passive phased antenna array "Irbis". The system was developed at the Institute of Instrument Engineering them. Tikhomirov, and its production is engaged in Ryazan State Instrument Plant, a member of KRET.



In terms of its performance, the Su-35 fighter radar system is at the level of the most advanced foreign developments in this field, surpassing most of the American and European radars with passive and active phased arrays.

4. In the cockpit of the Su-35 there are no analog devices with arrows


The cockpit on the Su-35 resembles the fifth-generation fighter cockpit. Unlike the Su-27, it does not have analog devices with familiar arrows. Instead, they have two large color LCD screens on which in the picture-in-picture mode all the necessary information is displayed to the pilot. In the "glass cabin" Su-35 also installed a collimator indicator on the windshield. Thus, the pilot sees the corresponding symbols and signs against the sky, they seem to hover in the air in front of the plane.



Hydrodynamic actuator control power plant replaced by electric. This not only saves space and weight, but also allows parallel control to be introduced into machine control. In practice, this means that the role of the pilot becomes less noticeable: the computer decides how fast the car will hit the target and at what point allow the pilot to use weapon.

In this case, the machine takes on some of the difficult flight regimes, for example, flying at extremely low altitudes with a rounding of the terrain.



5. Su-35 raises 8000 kg bombs

One of the main advantages of the Su-35 is that it can carry a huge load in the form of air-to-air missiles - a whole ton of such missiles.

All in all, Su-35 on 12 suspension units can lift 8000 kg of high-precision missiles and bombs. The “thirty-fifth” armament includes a whole set of air-to-surface guided missiles, including new items such as five X-58USHE extended-range anti-radar missiles, three long-range Caliber A missiles and one large anti-ship missile. range type "Yakhont".



The Su-35 fighter also raises 11 adjustable bombs with television, satellite or laser guidance systems. In the future, it will be able to use advanced and new models of 500 and 250 kg aerial bombs and 80, 122 and 266 / 420 mm missiles, including laser-corrected ones.

At the same time, Su-35 is able to use its weapon at supersonic speeds with a Mach number equal to about 1,5 and at an altitude of more than 13700 meters. For example, the American F-35 fighter operates at an altitude in the 9100 area of ​​meters and at a speed of Mach number around 0,9.
Originator:
http://rostec.ru/research/tecnology/4517772
135 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Evgesh91
    Evgesh91 28 February 2016 05: 42 New
    89
    fact number 6, he is simply beautiful good
    1. vodolaz
      vodolaz 28 February 2016 11: 28 New
      +8
      Quote: Evgesh91
      fact number 6, he is simply beautiful good

      Yeah, I completely agree, I wanted to see him live)
      1. Bongo
        Bongo 28 February 2016 14: 14 New
        25
        Quote: vodolaz
        Yeah, I completely agree, I wanted to see him live)

        Come to Komsomolsk-on-Amur, and you can enjoy them every day, only the climate we have ... wassat
        1. The point
          The point 28 February 2016 15: 49 New
          +8
          Everyone is not everyone, but quite regularly. And as they come to life in the summer, it seems that they are now flying into the window.
          1. Bongo
            Bongo 28 February 2016 16: 21 New
            +6
            Quote: Maksud
            Everyone is not everyone, but quite regularly. And as they come to life in the summer, it seems that they are now flying into the window.

            Hello, Countryman! From the windows of some residential buildings they are clearly visible at the airfield parking.
            1. vell.65
              vell.65 1 March 2016 16: 53 New
              +1
              Quote: Bongo
              Hello, Countryman! From the windows of some residential buildings they are clearly visible at the airfield parking.

              Does fast and furious not interfere with sleep, or is it already a matter of habit? hi
              1. Bongo
                Bongo 2 March 2016 05: 29 New
                +1
                Quote: vell.65
                Does fast and furious not interfere with sleep, or is it already a matter of habit?

                The engines are usually not driven at the afterburner at the airport, although it is quite noisy. But it’s easier for me to live in another area of ​​Komsomolsk. Not so long ago I was visiting a classmate. He serves in 23-IAP, from his window on the eighth floor you can see the military unit, shops and runways. But they are used to it, especially behind the double-glazed windows is not so noisy.
        2. Simon
          Simon 28 February 2016 16: 31 New
          +3
          Yes, it’s not only beautiful, but beauty is also what it performs. It is inconceivable to the mind, it is the only thing that such a new aerobatics can do that more than one airplane in the world can do! good
          1. The comment was deleted.
        3. goose
          goose 29 February 2016 12: 35 New
          +3
          Quote: Bongo
          Come to Komsomolsk-on-Amur, and you can enjoy them every day, only the climate we have.

          Thank you, you have already been to Mars. The earth is red, the sky is the same.
        4. Brake
          Brake 29 February 2016 18: 19 New
          0
          Sorry, but I would also like to see him))) And about the climate, not even worse, my own, Murmansk ??
          1. Bongo
            Bongo 1 March 2016 02: 00 New
            +3
            Quote: Brake
            Sorry, but I would also like to see him))) And about the climate, not even worse, my own, Murmansk ??
            I can’t say for Murmansk requestBut the temperature differences in Komsomolsk are very serious. In summer, up to + 40, in winter it drops below -45. High humidity and strong winds. However, this year, compared to last winter, it is quite mild and not snowy.
          2. Azitral
            Azitral 1 March 2016 10: 16 New
            +2
            Well, in winter we have little where paradise. But in the summer - paradise. and only. Visited Egypt, - appreciated the native land. After the desert to the horizon, the snowy suburbs seemed so ... Fundamental, or something. We have a good country.
    2. tsvetkov1274
      tsvetkov1274 28 February 2016 12: 36 New
      +9
      In the words of S.P. Korolev: ,, An ugly plane will not fly .. ,,
      1. Tibidokh
        Tibidokh 28 February 2016 13: 38 New
        +9
        Quote: tsvetkov1274
        As S.P. Korolev said: ,, An ugly plane will not fly.

        I met that these words were attributed either to Tupolev or to Yakovlev.
        But for Korolyov to say this ... Maybe he said: "An ugly rocket will not fly ...". Although Korolev had any missiles flying, be it beautiful or ugly.
        With respect! hi
        1. Azitral
          Azitral 1 March 2016 10: 18 New
          0
          S.P. He began as a designer of gliders and aircraft. I did not do a single serial, yes.
      2. SMikhalych
        SMikhalych 28 February 2016 15: 13 New
        12
        Quote: tsvetkov1274
        In the words of S.P. Korolev: ,, An ugly plane will not fly .. ,,

        To be absolutely precise, this phrase belongs to A.N. Tupolev and it sounds like this: "Only beautiful planes fly well!" hi
        1. mirag2
          mirag2 28 February 2016 22: 02 New
          +4
          About Aviation and EW Systems:
          1. silver_roman
            silver_roman 29 February 2016 16: 02 New
            +5
            F-15X - Undetected Needle modification?

            And again:
            "Shocked Israel", "Terrified the West" etc ..... what kind of nonsense? no one was there in horror. All our enemies are perfectly aware of our capabilities.
            To compare the Su-30cm, Su-35s with its Western counterparts on the basis of some training fights there is complete nonsense.
            also let's not forget that often the same Pentagon makes a rustle at the Congress with the "Russian threat" in order to knock out the dough!

            The Su-30MKI is not inferior in all respects to the Su-30cm.
            In the first one there are many magnificent foreign electronics, which we still cannot reproduce.
            If they considered us weak, the war was not in the media, but on the sea, land and in the air with space.
            The only right advice among 10 minutes is not to overestimate yourself, but to work competently, increasing your skills and armament.

            In short, minus mine.
            You can blame me, but these stupid cheap videos with complete nonsense have already gotten. Once VO was an objective site with a fairly high level of analysis, let's try to somehow rehabilitate it.
      3. Bayonet
        Bayonet 29 February 2016 05: 10 New
        +2
        Quote: tsvetkov1274
        In the words of S.P. Korolev: ,, An ugly plane will not fly .. ,,

        Tupolev! hi
    3. pine tree
      pine tree 1 March 2016 00: 32 New
      0
      in ancient times, people went to the circus to look at wonders. Imagine how to surprise modern ones. And to tears, we will be delighted! star wars nervously smoke
    4. demchuk.ig
      demchuk.ig 1 March 2016 05: 59 New
      0
      Quote: Evgesh91
      fact number 6, he is simply beautiful good

      As Tupolev said, "A beautiful plane and it will fly beautifully."
  2. Igor39
    Igor39 28 February 2016 05: 57 New
    +3
    About PAK FA they didn’t talk much, Su 35 is certainly good.
    1. Just BB
      Just BB 28 February 2016 06: 53 New
      22
      Igor39
      About PAK FA they didn’t talk much, Su 35 is certainly good.

      Why shake the "ether" in vain ?!
      35 for 4 years, only 3 regiments (according to the Soviet state), or ONE division, are going to make.
      Is it a lot or a little -?
      So, "an outfit in mind": 100 cars and 8 missiles (each carries) = 800 "adversaries".
      And if from different angles?
      For 10000 km, 100 units will somehow be "not enough", as for me ka-a-tsza "
      1. Just BB
        Just BB 28 February 2016 07: 18 New
        +3
        Just BB (1)
        For 10000 km, 100 units will somehow be "not enough", as for me ka-a-tsza "


        Someone does not agree that this is not enough for our Air Force?
        Or is someone more pleased with the talk "about a bright future"?
        Than getting the troops of a real machine, which will still have to treat "childhood diseases" after real operation
        1. NIKNN
          NIKNN 28 February 2016 10: 20 New
          +2
          Just BB (1)
          For 10000 km, 100 units will somehow be "not enough", as for me ka-a-tsza "


          And what is the point of equipping all VKS with one aircraft? Aircraft tend to become obsolete ... request
          As new developments arrive, it will be replaced sometime ...
      2. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 28 February 2016 07: 47 New
        10
        Quote: Just BB
        For 10000 km, 100 units will somehow be "not enough", as for me ka-a-tsza "

        So there is also the SU-30, there is also the Su-34 (bomber, and if with missiles, then a fighter). In short, if you count, then the percentage of vehicles of other types, yes with air defense, then a specific rebuff can be given. And given the fact that our "partners" are very sensitive to losses (especially if they are hit clearly and consistently, without options), then success can be guaranteed.
        The main thing is to skillfully use what we have soldier
        1. Azitral
          Azitral 1 March 2016 10: 30 New
          +1
          The peculiarity of the modern air force: they cannot be quickly restored. Especially if you attack someone else's territory. This is not World War II, where a pilot could be trained in a few months from a great misfortune. If the pilots are beaten, there is nowhere to take new ones. Not a single country. In the West, they understand this reality, they talk about "completely unacceptable losses" in a direct attack by the Russian Federation. That is, a terrible, paralyzing blow, but only one. If we survive somehow, the war will be won. It is, of course, about a non-nuclear conflict.
      3. Cap.Morgan
        Cap.Morgan 28 February 2016 10: 33 New
        -5
        Quote: Just VV
        Igor39
        About PAK FA they didn’t talk much, Su 35 is certainly good.

        Why shake the "ether" in vain ?!
        35 for 4 years, only 3 regiments (according to the Soviet state), or ONE division, are going to make.
        Is it a lot or a little -?
        So, "an outfit in mind": 100 cars and 8 missiles (each carries) = 800 "adversaries".
        And if from different angles?
        For 10000 km, 100 units will somehow be "not enough", as for me ka-a-tsza "

        In terms of the number of ultra-modern aircraft, we are on a par with the United States.
        A small number of aircraft is probably due to the high complexity of manufacturing.
        As for the 800 adversaries, this is, firstly, in one salvo, that is, "bang" and there are no 800 targets, and secondly, this is the level of a nuclear missile war.
        1. clidon
          clidon 28 February 2016 19: 15 New
          +9
          In terms of the number of ultra-modern aircraft, we are on a par with the United States.

          Level?
          5th generation fighter-bombers:
          USA: - F-22 - 180 cars
          F-35 - 30 cars
          Russia: - 0 cars
          4 ++ generation fighters
          USA - F-18E / F / G - about 550 cars
          F-15C (with AFAR) - 30 cars
          Russia:
          Su-30SM - 60 cars
          Su-35C - 48 cars
          Mi-29K - 24 cars.
          Shock machines:
          USA - F-15E - 220 cars
          Russia:
          Su-34 - 80 cars
          1. Felix
            Felix 28 February 2016 20: 37 New
            +1
            Quote: clidon
            In terms of the number of ultra-modern aircraft, we are on a par with the United States.

            Level?
            5th generation fighter-bombers:
            USA: - F-22 - 180 cars
            F-35 - 30 cars
            Russia: - 0 cars
            4 ++ generation fighters
            USA - F-18E / F / G - about 550 cars
            F-15C (with AFAR) - 30 cars
            Russia:
            Su-30SM - 60 cars
            Su-35C - 48 cars
            Mi-29K - 24 cars.
            Shock machines:
            USA - F-15E - 220 cars
            Russia:
            Su-34 - 80 cars


            Well ... All the same, I believe that we will act on the defensive. So from the whole list, in the first weeks of the war, it will be possible to delete everything except F-22, F-35 and F-15E ... And they, I hope, in the first days the air defense will be quite strong enough .. And there - let's see.
          2. Wolka
            Wolka 29 February 2016 06: 12 New
            +1
            if we take into account the factor of dispersion along our borders, there is relative parity, excluding other NATO "nippers"
      4. alexmach
        alexmach 28 February 2016 17: 08 New
        +3
        For 10000 km, 100 units will somehow be "not enough", as for me ka-a-tsza "


        Nevertheless, it is as much as 100 (96 in my opinion after all) better than not at all.
      5. papik09
        papik09 29 February 2016 00: 37 New
        0
        Quote: Just BB
        how am I

        When "ka-a-tsza" - to be baptized NUNA. Gryat - helps ...)))
    2. Valera999
      Valera999 28 February 2016 16: 20 New
      +3
      Pak Fa is more like an innovation lab
  3. Lumumba
    Lumumba 28 February 2016 06: 21 New
    +4
    The most important thing is that this combat vehicle has a huge reserve for modernization, like its predecessor. For example, one of the future upgrades suggests itself: the installation of an active headlamp. I will also mention that the new digest for the PAK FA being developed now can be installed on this bird.
  4. rumor_today
    rumor_today 28 February 2016 06: 46 New
    -36 qualifying.
    Quote: Igor39
    About PAK FA they didn’t talk much, Su 35 is certainly good.

    Everything, played enough of patriotism and rising from knees. Grandmas ended gentlemen.
    1. Russian jacket
      Russian jacket 28 February 2016 06: 56 New
      +4
      Have you played enough? Well Well ... Wait ...
    2. Just BB
      Just BB 28 February 2016 07: 03 New
      +7
      rumor_today
      Everything, played enough of patriotism and rising from knees. Grandmas ended gentlemen.


      I was always "touched" by this phrase: Grandmas are over
      Do we have a colony country? Which "White Master" authorizes to print money?
      What X (bitter vegetable) are there financial authorities in the country?
      Or their only task is to count the "oil dollars"? - (they came up with the currency !!!)
      "The sho market will adjust!" -
      Well, go to this very market to sell vegetables to the "babayks"
      1. guzik007
        guzik007 28 February 2016 08: 06 New
        24
        Is it a colony country? Which "White Master" authorizes to print money?
        -------------------------------------------------- -----
        Unfortunately you, oddly enough, hit the mark. This is exactly how it is. As much as we sell oil in dollars. At the rate and will "allow" the Central Bank to print rubles. And the Central Bank is directly subordinate to the IMF. Being in fact one of its many branches. What Putin has been trying to fight lately. example? Yes, please, Gref's answer to Putin's question: why Sberbank does not work in Crimea, they will devour everything with assets and not choke.
        1. tracker
          tracker 28 February 2016 09: 04 New
          +3
          Sber is as much as possible dependent on Western money.
        2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Yarr_Arr
      Yarr_Arr 28 February 2016 08: 18 New
      +4
      About the games - speak for yourself. Patriotism is not a game.
  5. tchoni
    tchoni 28 February 2016 06: 47 New
    -3
    A wikipedia article with a patriotic bias is similar.
  6. Russian jacket
    Russian jacket 28 February 2016 06: 57 New
    +1
    A beautiful, modified aircraft ... good
  7. red rocket
    red rocket 28 February 2016 07: 01 New
    +1
    We could always build good warplanes!
    1. Just BB
      Just BB 28 February 2016 07: 07 New
      +2
      red rocket
      We could always build good warplanes!


      А best in the museum in Monino are ...
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 28 February 2016 07: 56 New
        +3
        Quote: Just BB
        And the best in the museum in Monino stand ...

        The Monino Museum has a story. And this is today's day, and perhaps the future, if the PAK FA does not have time to distribute.
        So, "call": "You won't go far in the carriage of the past!"
  8. engineer
    engineer 28 February 2016 07: 31 New
    +1
    instantly in the pen. and Mig-31 is a long-range heavy interceptor and now surpasses in defeating air targets.
    1. Yarr_Arr
      Yarr_Arr 28 February 2016 08: 19 New
      +1
      So after all, for completely different tasks, the birds.
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 28 February 2016 17: 36 New
      +2
      Quote: engineer
      instantly in the pen. and Mig-31 is a long-range heavy interceptor and now surpasses in defeating air targets.

      I wouldn’t say what’s in the pen ... Already, they are loudly declaring not only because of the hillock about the development of a new hyper-speed interceptor (MIG-41), but ours have begun to talk about it. Well, the development of the 5th generation LFI is also in Mikoyanovtsy. There’s nothing to talk about yet, until these products are ready for the ICG. And therefore they only talk about the MIG-35, as a finished product.
      Well, all design bureaus are heavily involved in UAVs in order to reduce the backward gap from the adversary. I will assume that in addition to the Sukhovites and some other design bureaus, the MIG design bureau is also developing a heavy shock UAV.
  9. aszzz888
    aszzz888 28 February 2016 07: 54 New
    0
    This is not a fighter, it's just a UFO! Frankly, for the first time in my life I cried with delight! ”

    And who falls under his "work" are written out of fear, if they have time before retiring to the next world! laughing
  10. Siberia M 54
    Siberia M 54 28 February 2016 08: 05 New
    0
    PAK FA is still being finalized. And the info on it is classified. Why should the adversaries know? Let them condone themselves with speculation.
  11. Mera joota
    Mera joota 28 February 2016 08: 16 New
    -7
    Personally, I did not immediately like the idea with PAK-FA. Of course, they chose the right direction, that's just not a bit of a hat, they are too dependent on the West in the field of new technologies. As a result, they can and will bring it to mind, only the amount that they produce will not make any weather, and the costs are simply huge. A tit in the hands would be a variation of the Silent Eagle or Silent Hornet type based on the Su-35.
    It was possible even then to agree with the French on AFAR, EMDS and avionics + a new glider with a high percentage of composites. As a result, we would get a plane that really would stand in line ...
    1. Cap.Morgan
      Cap.Morgan 28 February 2016 10: 39 New
      +1
      Quote: Mera Joota
      Personally, I did not immediately like the idea with PAK-FA. Of course, they chose the right direction, that's just not a bit of a hat, they are too dependent on the West in the field of new technologies ...

      Well, what did you not like?
      Apparently, nobody is going to work on the PAK for scrapping ...
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 28 February 2016 12: 47 New
      +3
      for Mera Joota:
      "A tit in hand would be a variation like the Silent Eagle or Silent Hornet based on the Su-35." ////

      I don’t think so. Silent Eagle was shown to Israeli specialists when there was a choice:
      "what to take". The ESR reduction was insufficient, and the costs of stealth coatings and replacement
      materials - large. The price jumped wildly. No comparison in terms of the result with real stealth, "illuminated" for invisibility in front of different radars from the very beginning.
      1. Mera joota
        Mera joota 28 February 2016 16: 16 New
        +3
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Price jumped wildly.

        Given the scale of production of the F-35, the cost of the Silent Needle certainly looks great. But with us, PAK-FA will produce only one KnAAZ with such a small series that one machine will cost two times (if not three) more expensive than Lightning2.
        And they also plan to produce the MiG-35, there, too, production needs to be established, as a result we get the following:
        We produce Su-34, Su-30SM, Su-35, then T-50 and MiG-35.
        All in all, little by little, and wild pickle "to the delight" of logistics and aviation universities.
        Well, oil would have been 150 ...
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 28 February 2016 18: 59 New
          +6
          "We produce Su-34, Su-30SM, Su-35, then T-50 and MiG-35" ////

          Too many types, I agree.
          I would leave the T-50, Su-34, Su-35. Su-xnumx would gradually come down,
          as the T-50 fleet grows.
          And the T-50 must be produced in conjunction with India, for two
          armies, in two factories - in India and Russia.
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 28 February 2016 19: 26 New
            +1
            Quote: voyaka uh
            "We produce Su-34, Su-30SM, Su-35, then T-50 and MiG-35" ////

            MIG-35 does not buy our MO. It is in a single copy and everything is not as smooth as we would like. With regards to the SU-30/34/35, for the production of a sufficient number of these machines, assembly shops are needed and specialists and workers.
            Today 5th generation LFI (new) falls out of this series.
            I think in the coming years, two more topics for debate will appear: a new long-range interceptor (MIG-41) and a heavy strike UAV.
            According to PAK FA, the conversation is still very slippery in the issue of engines of the second stage (although with AL-31F, speed indicators are maintained).
  12. Ivan Ivanovich
    Ivan Ivanovich 28 February 2016 08: 25 New
    0
    Great car, more of these in the Russian troops in the hands of competent pilots Assam
  13. Mera joota
    Mera joota 28 February 2016 08: 31 New
    -3
    1. There were two Su-35 aircraft in the history of aviation

    Do not boast of failures, two because the first did not work and the tyagomotin with the modernization of the Su-27 dragged on for more than ten years. And so the work on the T-10M began back in the 80s, how late was the Su-35S?
    2. How "thirty-fifth" compared with UFO

    With modern means of detection and air-to-air TSA, it’s an absolutely useless thing, only to amaze the audience at air shows.
    3. Su-35 can "see" the target for 400 km

    EPR forgot to mention such a goal. Many can see the B-52 at such a distance ...
    4. In the cockpit of the Su-35 there are no analog devices with arrows

    Great ... in the courtyard of the 21st century, it’s so, now it’s not measured by the number of LCD indicators (one is not news anymore on the entire panel), but by software.
    5. Su-35 raises 8000 kg bombs

    Nobody carries so many "bombs", and it won't fit so many, 8 tons. This is the maximum combat load including PTB. Again, not a record, but very good.

    The plane is wonderful, but could be done better without increasing the mass of the glider.
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 28 February 2016 10: 29 New
      -11 qualifying.
      Quote: Mera Joota
      2. How "thirty-fifth" compared with UFO
      With modern means of detection and air-to-air TSA, it’s an absolutely useless thing, only to amaze the audience at air shows.

      At 1,25 clearly
      1. Mera joota
        Mera joota 28 February 2016 15: 40 New
        +5
        Quote: saturn.mmm
        At 1,25 clearly

        Are you seriously? Can you show a cartoon?
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 29 February 2016 08: 17 New
          0
          Quote: Mera Joota
          Are you seriously? Can you show a cartoon?

          Quite seriously. The video essentially has a cartoon, or rather a computer simulation of air combat, which shows the advantage of over-maneuverability.
          By the way, the Americans for the 6th generation fighter, in the application, set a prerequisite for over-maneuverability.
      2. aleksey980
        aleksey980 28 February 2016 17: 20 New
        +6
        You would have attached something else with dragons, and then there will be more credibility. And this is about from this series:
      3. aws4
        aws4 29 February 2016 00: 05 New
        +4
        what a wonderful video for the kids))))))) please do not post more similar vomit)))))))))))))))))
      4. gavrosh.ru
        gavrosh.ru 29 February 2016 02: 43 New
        0
        damn, And how the movie is called, I can’t remember, it was a long time ago ...
      5. glasha3032
        glasha3032 1 March 2016 12: 06 New
        0
        What a horror! And how to deal with them is when they do this!
      6. nemec55
        nemec55 6 March 2016 17: 12 New
        0
        saturn.mmm

        So that for you this video the old man tore off angry
    2. aws4
      aws4 28 February 2016 23: 53 New
      +2
      far from always agree with you but here you are right to the point
  14. Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 28 February 2016 08: 38 New
    +3
    Quote: Mera Joota
    1. There were two Su-35 aircraft in the history of aviation

    Do not boast of failures, two because the first did not work and the tyagomotin with the modernization of the Su-27 dragged on for more than ten years. And so the work on the T-10M began back in the 80s, how late was the Su-35S?
    2. How "thirty-fifth" compared with UFO

    With modern means of detection and air-to-air TSA, it’s an absolutely useless thing, only to amaze the audience at air shows.
    3. Su-35 can "see" the target for 400 km

    EPR forgot to mention such a goal. Many can see the B-52 at such a distance ...
    4. In the cockpit of the Su-35 there are no analog devices with arrows

    Great ... in the courtyard of the 21st century, it’s so, now it’s not measured by the number of LCD indicators (one is not news anymore on the entire panel), but by software.
    5. Su-35 raises 8000 kg bombs

    Nobody carries so many "bombs", and it won't fit so many, 8 tons. This is the maximum combat load including PTB. Again, not a record, but very good.

    The plane is wonderful, but could be done better without increasing the mass of the glider.

    About the Doppler effect Have not heard ??? Not?
    This is so, to think about super-maneuverability, and why it is needed. If it is not clear why I asked this, then in vain you are clever here.
    1. Mera joota
      Mera joota 28 February 2016 09: 52 New
      -5
      Quote: Dimon19661
      Have you heard about the Doppler effect?

      I heard, but did not see.
      Quote: Dimon19661
      in vain you are smart here.

      Well, it's not up to you.

      I have a question on the topic of Mr. Christian Doppler ...
      How does the effect named after him affect air-to-air missiles with a thermal homing head? For example, on the AIM-9X Sidewinder?
      1. Dimon19661
        Dimon19661 28 February 2016 10: 38 New
        +4
        A rocket itself gives out targeting ???
        And what is a breakdown of auto tracking, also not heard?
        1. Mera joota
          Mera joota 28 February 2016 16: 05 New
          +2
          Quote: Dimon19661
          A rocket itself gives out targeting ???

          AIM-9X missile target capture range of 14 km. AIM-XNUMXX, i.e. out of line of sight.
          Quote: Dimon19661
          And what is a breakdown of auto tracking, also not heard?

          You answer a question with a question. Well, okay, on your conscience ...
          In the distant years, when melee missiles were really an element of melee at distances of 0,2 - 1 km, one of the options for salvation was the disruption of auto-tracking by an intensive maneuver. TGSN target designation angles were small, for example, the P-60 had only 24 degrees. Therefore, in the late 80s, in addition to infrared traps, one of the options for saving from brisk short-range missiles was super-maneuverability.
          BUT! Progress does not stand still and the old TGSN with mirrors replaced the matrix TGSN with wide targeting angles, for example with the same AIM-9X it is 180 degrees, like our RVV-MD. At such angles you at least dodge, but you will not leave the field of view of the TGSN.
          Moreover, if you, being under the attack of RVV-MD, begin to perform tricks like "pancake", then you will have to greatly reduce the speed, thereby making it easier for the enemy missile to do its job.
          1. Dimon19661
            Dimon19661 29 February 2016 01: 41 New
            +5
            Right now, it’s exactly solid Wikipedia, you know, I’ve been engaged in shooting stations for more than 20 years, and I know very well the principles of detecting, aiming and destroying air targets. And believe me, the rocket itself, regardless of the type of GOS, does not leave the pylon or launch pad. In any case, it should receive primary target designation. And it is precisely super-maneuverability that can play a cruel joke with a guidance (detection) station. This is a failure of auto tracking with loss of a target, and incorrect operation of an inertial guidance system ....
            1. aleksey980
              aleksey980 29 February 2016 02: 39 New
              +4
              And some "experts", having seen enough of Hollywood "masterpieces", believe that a rocket can chase an airplane for hours. lol
              1. to persuade
                to persuade 29 February 2016 16: 52 New
                0
                Those that Mashkov started up?))
                1. aleksey980
                  aleksey980 29 February 2016 23: 15 New
                  +1
                  Ага. laughing
                  There they have a lot of filmmakers with such fun.
                  Hollywood is such a Hollywood laughing
            2. Mera joota
              Mera joota 29 February 2016 07: 00 New
              +1
              Quote: Dimon19661
              And believe me, the rocket by itself, regardless of the type of GOS, does not come off the pylon or the launch pad. In any case, it must receive primary target designations.

              So it's understandable. Let's touch on these systems. We will not consider the "enemy" EOS, take OLS-35. "Continuous wikipedia" govortt that the OLS-35 detects targets the size of the Su-35 at a distance of 35 km. in the front hemisphere. Let's take a distance of 10 km. I hope at this distance the OLS-35 will see an enemy fighter, regardless of its stealth and IR channel and television. The range of the RVV-MD missile according to the "continuous wikipedia" is 40 km. distance 10 km. it will fly by guaranteed. Accordingly, at a distance of 10 km. The Su-35 is guaranteed to be able to detect the VC, point the RVV-MD missile at it and launch it. The VTS began to maneuver making unimaginable pirouettes while losing speed. Will it matter for a Su-35 pilot whose OLS has a 180 degree viewing angle? What pirouettes does the enemy perform at a distance of 10 km? In any case, he will not leave the line of sight. How will the "pancake" help in this case?
              1. Dimon19661
                Dimon19661 29 February 2016 07: 39 New
                +4
                Have you ever thought that any weapon also has certain performance characteristics? Which include parameters such as maximum overload, angle of rotation, etc. By the way, I do not say that over-maneuverability is a panacea, but I'm just trying to convey to you - in certain conditions, this can be a big plus.
              2. aleks 62 next
                aleks 62 next 29 February 2016 13: 35 New
                +5
                ..... How can "pancake" help in this case? ...

                .... An anti-missile maneuver is performed (pancake, barrel) not when the missile is at a distance of 10 km, but when the missile approaches at a distance of 1-2 km ... Due to the fact that the missile has its own turning radii ( and it cannot have super-maneuverability due to its high speed), then there is a high probability that it will not "fit" into the radius and will pass by the aircraft at a certain distance, more than the radius of operation of the proximity fuse (for Melee missiles, this is 10m on average) .... Not a panacea, but sometimes it helps .... hi
  15. Diviz
    Diviz 28 February 2016 08: 56 New
    +1
    What kind of article is Wikipedia solid? On warfiles, topics are cool but not interesting to comment on. Combine the efforts of sites somehow.
  16. engineer
    engineer 28 February 2016 09: 10 New
    +2
    But the meaning of these pancakes? Now air combat is being conducted at other distances. this is not the Second World War where pilots at 100 meters for shooting came close. hypersonic from s-300 will fly for 400 kilometers and make a pancake.
    1. Alex Nick
      Alex Nick 28 February 2016 09: 35 New
      0
      There will already be bricks instead of pancakes.
    2. Dimon19661
      Dimon19661 28 February 2016 09: 51 New
      +1
      It’s just that you guys have absolutely no idea how the control and guidance of modern weapons
  17. Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 28 February 2016 09: 51 New
    0
    Will anyone in the world dare to duel with this aircraft? Or, knowing only those characteristics that are made public in the open press, will he try to avoid the fight? Then we will know the true value of this "UFO".
  18. Hecate
    Hecate 28 February 2016 10: 19 New
    0
    The aerobatic team `` Russian Knights '' is equipped with Su-27M aircraft, and the plane did not go due to the devastation of the 90s and the lack of orders from the Ministry of Defense. It's clear that now science has stepped forward and the Su-27M are no longer modern, but for their at the time they were quite decent fighters.
  19. Avantageur
    Avantageur 28 February 2016 10: 31 New
    +6
    The plane was piloted again by Sergey Bogdan. When he made the so-called “pancakes” in the sky, Le Bourget literally froze.

  20. fa2998
    fa2998 28 February 2016 11: 21 New
    12
    You know, many, even those who are keen on aviation, already have a head on one side. So many new aircraft that people are already confused. Or is the work of designers appreciated for creating an allegedly "new" aircraft? After all, F-15s, B-52s are flying, they will substitute a new letter fly on! After all, most of our "new" aircraft are a deep modernization of the Su-27. In the Russian alphabet of letters-st. 30-put the next letter-he, which will fly worse? The aircraft is magnificent! Yes, the latest modifications in terms of capabilities are new aircraft-but also the latest F-15-compared to the F-15A as land and sky. hi
    1. Odysseus
      Odysseus 28 February 2016 16: 41 New
      +3
      Quote: fa2998
      You know that many who are even keen on aviation already have a head on their heels. There are so many new planes that people are already confused.

      In general, you are right, but now PR is more important than reality.
  21. Cat man null
    Cat man null 28 February 2016 11: 34 New
    -2
    Quote: guzik007
    How much we sell oil in dollars. For so much at the exchange rate and the Central Bank will "allow" rubles to be printed

    Oh how belay

    Quote: guzik007
    Exactly and Yes

    "Exactly so" and ... no request

    Quote: guzik007
    The Central Bank reports directly to the IMF. Being essentially one of its many branches

    Why did you decide this? Justify, with links to the laws of the Russian Federation, if not difficult ..

    Quote: guzik007
    Gref’s answer to Putin’s question: why doesn’t Sberbank work in Crimea, they will devour it along with assets and will not choke

    So what?? After all, it’s true - they will devour them and they won’t choke ..

    And Sber - Russia needs it, and, preferably, alive .. Where you get the money that you earned? I’m here in Sberbank, for example yes

    Quote: guzik007
    What Putin has been trying to fight lately

    Well, if the last 10 years is "the last time", then yes laughing

    In short, IMHO you are slurred in your argument. Explain if possible hi

    PS: And yes, just in case: the CBR and Sberbank are two very different organizations yes

    --- >>>

    Quote: solo1601
    Russia has long been put on the "Oil Needle", we trade our resources for American candy wrappers

    - for these candy wrappers in the world you can buy ALL
    - "on the needle" was already the USSR since the 70s

    About how

    Quote: solo1601
    At least to say "buy gas for rubles" the economy would immediately go up. We cannot even set our own price for our own Gas

    Such attempts have been made for 10 years. Not working yet. Precisely because no one except the Russian Federation needs "we set a price" request
  22. Andrey VOV
    Andrey VOV 28 February 2016 11: 35 New
    +7
    How did all these couch specialists in all areas go off at once !!!! howl howl howl .. it's not like that, we are behind, we are suckers, and here is Western technology, and here it is, but here you are .... bedridden your mother .. sores sores heal, get up and do something at least once in your life do it yourself, with your hands, head, legs, it does not matter, but YOURSELF .. and then talk about labor, about its results made by others ...
  23. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 28 February 2016 12: 12 New
    +1
    "the thirty-fifth radar system can detect targets at a distance of up to 400 km" ////

    Only large targets over 5 m2 (like F-15, F-16). For detecting "small" targets ("stealth")
    , like F-22, F-35 need AFAR.
    1. user1212
      user1212 28 February 2016 14: 33 New
      +4
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Only large targets over 5 m2 (like F-15, F-16). For detecting "small" targets ("stealth")
      , like F-22, F-35 need AFAR

      Why on earth? Could you elaborate on the need for AFAR for detection?
    2. edeligor
      edeligor 28 February 2016 15: 04 New
      +2
      Quote: voyaka uh
      For detecting "small" targets ("stealth")

      How do you believe in "your" hardware!
      Quote: voyaka uh
      "shone" on invisibility in front of different radars from the very beginning.

      And the jet stream from "your" stealth is chilled ?!
    3. Odysseus
      Odysseus 28 February 2016 16: 40 New
      +3
      Quote: voyaka uh
      , like F-22, F-35 need AFAR.

      Not needed, the difference between AFAR and PFAR lies in a different plane.
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Large targets only over 5 m2 (like F-15, F-16)

      And here you are too optimistic. At this range, only targets like the B-52 and in a rather narrow field.
    4. opus
      opus 28 February 2016 19: 26 New
      +8
      Quote: voyaka uh
      , like F-22, F-35 need AFAR.

      Misconception


      Active phased array antenna (AFAR) is a type of phased array antenna (PAR).





      the energy characteristics and efficiency of H035 Irbis are better, the scanning speed of space is worse (due to the mechanical extension of the antenna sheet by a two-stage electrohydraulic drive to increase the beam deflection angle)

      Quote: voyaka uh
      For detecting "small" targets ("stealth")
      need radars on a long wave (not feasible for aircraft) or spaced.

      AFAR 2 a minus:
      -cost (MMIC, although it has become cheaper than $ 2000, but their number is 1000-1800)
      - power dissipation (PPM efficiency - typically less than 45%).
      55% in heat. Americans carry a good supply of polyalphaolefin (PAO) refrigerant on board, similar to a synthetic hydraulic fluid). A typical liquid cooling system uses pumps that introduce refrigerant through the channels in the antenna and then bring it to the heat exchanger - it can be either an air cooler (radiator) or a heat exchanger in the fuel tank - with a second liquid cooling the heat transfer loop to remove heat from fuel tank.
      -----------------------------------
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Large targets only over 5 m2

      wrong data.
      "VVTikhomirov Scientific Research Institute of Instrument Engineering" gives OPEN DATA
      Air-to-Air Mode:
      - target detection range with EPR = 3m2 - 350-400 km



      in reality ("for us"), I think even less (about 2 square meters, judging by the mapping mode: by the resolution of the SAR and DOL)


  24. engineer
    engineer 28 February 2016 13: 21 New
    0
    Yes, and afar in conditions of powerful use of funds. Reb. Does not help much. here the complex is already needed from various means. airborne and ground-based radars in different ranges. optical and space surveillance equipment. and most importantly: a real-time processing system. previously it was called a single targeting field. I don’t know now. already in stock.
  25. Aandrewsir
    Aandrewsir 28 February 2016 14: 12 New
    0
    Serious car! Another reason to "get nervous and indulge in Russophobic hysteria" for our overseas "con ... partner houses"!
  26. Psaking systems
    Psaking systems 28 February 2016 14: 16 New
    0
    Wasn't the Su-37 the forerunner of the serial Su-35?
  27. rubin6286
    rubin6286 28 February 2016 14: 19 New
    +1
    I am always with some caution about the term “multifunctional”, especially when it comes to a fighter - an air combat vehicle and gaining air superiority. Indeed, modern air combat, while remaining highly maneuverable, nevertheless, has undergone significant changes. Modern instruments make it possible to detect a target at a much greater distance than before and it’s good that the Su-35 has a domestic radar control system (RLSU) with the Irbis PFAR, one of the best in the world capable of detecting targets at ranges up to 400 km, accompany up to 30 of them in the air and conduct simultaneous shelling of eight. But this is a system, and man? The possibility of hitting a detected target depends on his ability to occupy a favorable position for shooting. Everything needs to be done quickly enough, because not only you “work”, but “work” also for you. It is very important to use the capabilities of the machine control system. It’s one thing to “twist” figures at an air show, and it’s quite another thing to apply them in real combat. It seems to me that the EMDS with electric drives for controlling the power plant helps the pilot in many ways, but makes the plane difficult. Su-35 is not yet available to a pilot of average skill, but the machine is being improved, however, as is the training of pilots.
    The versatility of the machine and its combat capabilities are associated with the mass of the combat load and the nomenclature of the weapons used, but the specific set of weapons is determined by the specifics of a particular combat mission and combat radius of action. Since this is a fighter, modern air-to-air missiles R-73, R-77, electronic warfare systems, and the rest as intended, are always used in the arsenal of the machine. The ability of the weapon control system to operate at supersonic speeds and high altitudes, out of the line of sight of the target, also significantly increases the potential of the machine.
    I don’t understand the authors of some comments writing about the country's dependence on foreign technologies and its backlog, the numerous “cuts” and “kickbacks” in the defense industry, the absence of “dibs” who argue that it is expensive or cheap for the army and the country. It is possible that they do not know the actual state of affairs.
    As they say in "places not so distant" - "cormorant" everything.
  28. former
    former 28 February 2016 15: 14 New
    +2
    By the way ... explain plz what AFAR is fundamentally better than PFAR. The previous arguments are extremely unconvincing:
    If the radiator is damaged, the whole system becomes unworkable ... and in afar, if some of the cells are damaged, the rest work. How do you imagine damage to the part on the plane! antennas without damaging the aircraft.
    Different AFAR segments operate in different bands and directions at the same time. So what? In PFAR, everything is the same just at different times with time ranges in ms (if not μs). The feed station worked in this mode 30 years ago (well, there are more time intervals)
    The emitter rotation mechanisms are too heavy. Well, the emitter is more powerful (the size matters) The moving part of the emitter is an old mammoth MP 302 station the size of ... well, with a human head. So this is a ship station. So it will not be too crowded in an airplane.
    There are probably convincing arguments, I just haven’t read them yet ... In general, the advantages of the phased array on reception are obvious, I still don’t understand what it is better for radiation ...
    1. clidon
      clidon 28 February 2016 21: 11 New
      0
      If the emitter is damaged, the entire system becomes unworkable ...

      Yes, everything is much simpler - the emitter has a parameter - MTBF, and at high energy levels, it has a very, very limited number of hours of operation (I don’t remember offhand switching to failure therefore I won’t lie). Replacement is not a five-minute matter, and spare parts must be available and tuning-calibration should be done. New emitters are also not cheap - they are often repaired with a limited warranty period. Remember the MiG-29 of Yugoslavia - almost all in fact flew with inoperative radar.
      There are a lot of emitters in the AFAR with proper cooling (and such a system heats up more), the load is distributed, plus the failure of the cell does not affect the overall performance of the system.
    2. Dimon19661
      Dimon19661 29 February 2016 14: 36 New
      +1
      The headlamp performs electronic scanning of the space. Accordingly, the system has significantly fewer mechanical drives, which favorably affects reliability. The performance of the system increases significantly (there is no need to scan on separate layers). The noise immunity of the system also increases, with AFAR it is much easier and more efficient to implement a change in the algorithm of the system .
  29. lkom11
    lkom11 28 February 2016 16: 10 New
    +1
    Credit to our designers, and indeed to all of Russia. Current is not liberals.
  30. Siberian1965
    Siberian1965 28 February 2016 16: 27 New
    0
    Quote: Evgesh91
    fact number 6, he is simply beautiful good

    I always noted that our planes are more beautiful. Of course, all this is subjective, but the US air assassins are like machines of alien ghouls who decided to seize the earth. Always appreciated their flying boxes.
  31. rosomaha
    rosomaha 28 February 2016 17: 47 New
    0
    Amendment, not 11 UAB / KAB ... but 8 (500kg) OR 3 (1500kg). And "Caliber-A" exists only in prototypes (the Air Force hasn’t decided whether they need it), so from a long arm it has only the Kh-59M.
  32. Starina_hank
    Starina_hank 28 February 2016 19: 30 New
    0
    I was always "touched" by this phrase: Grandmas are over
    Do we have a colony country? Which "White Master" authorizes to print money?
    What X (bitter vegetable) are there financial authorities in the country?

    Not! We are not slaves! Just money for ALL fellow lacks! And then we would ..... !!!
    1. Just BB
      Just BB 29 February 2016 06: 35 New
      +1
      Starina_hank
      I was always "touched" by this phrase: Grandmas are over
      Is it a colony country? Which "White Master" authorizes to print money?
      What X (bitter vegetable) are there financial authorities in the country?

      Not! We are not slaves! Just money for ALL fellow is not enough! And then we would ..... !!!


      When I do not have enough money - I seek work rather than selling furniture or clothes.
  33. Caramba
    Caramba 28 February 2016 20: 18 New
    -2
    I sincerely do not understand how our enemies are going to fight with us. They simply have no chance against our spirit and our technology.
  34. Reklastik
    Reklastik 28 February 2016 20: 35 New
    0
    What is beautiful - it works well!
  35. complete zero
    complete zero 28 February 2016 21: 24 New
    0
    a beautiful bird is perhaps the most beautiful of all world aviation .... but MIG 31 ... is not handsome ... but in the class of heavy interceptors it is really OUTSIDE COMPETITION IN THE WORLD ... and here ... at the very least one of the best
  36. Foresterer
    Foresterer 28 February 2016 22: 29 New
    +1
    A normally written article, what prompted two readers to put a minus? Fear? Hatred of Russia?
  37. Papapg
    Papapg 28 February 2016 23: 07 New
    0
    Quote: Felix
    Well ... All the same, I believe that we will act on the defensive. So from the whole list, in the first weeks of the war, it will be possible to delete everything except F-22, F-35 and F-15E ... And they, I hope, in the first days the air defense will be quite strong enough .. And there - let's see.

    But where else is there still air defense like the Soviet one, the focal one may be yes, but the main thing is to bring down the target to the turn of the task. There is no great hope in air defense.
  38. CRASH
    CRASH 29 February 2016 00: 31 New
    -1
    And what happened to Su37? Which the USA was so afraid of, that we will deliver it to China.
  39. konetit
    konetit 29 February 2016 10: 37 New
    +1
    And you noticed that we have EVERYTHING! military equipment is not just beautiful, but stunningly beautiful. This is probably because we are creating technology not to kill people, but to protect our homeland.
  40. Denis Skiff
    Denis Skiff 29 February 2016 16: 59 New
    +1
    Quote: voyaka uh
    "We produce Su-34, Su-30SM, Su-35, then T-50 and MiG-35" ////

    Too many types, I agree.
    I would leave the T-50, Su-34, Su-35. Su-xnumx would gradually come down,
    as the T-50 fleet grows.
    And the T-50 must be produced in conjunction with India, for two
    armies, in two factories - in India and Russia.

    persuaded. I will give an order according to your wishes. will do.
  41. dogens
    dogens 29 February 2016 18: 43 New
    0
    Quote: Andy
    we cannot because the government when selling energy resources is based on the principle of "buyer-king" on ITS terms. sorry, but this is not a supermarket for you! when the Kiev hohlos.ran shot the Donbas and burned People in Odessa supplied the same gas to the geeks because "people are suffering there" according to the GDP. disorientation in "allies"


    We cannot, therefore, but because any Bank / Budget must have a certain amount of currency for settlement with foreign partners.
    For those who do not understand how it works at all, you have a product (or service) that you sell for your money in the domestic market, while you must buy another product for the currency of another country. It is with the exporter / importer ratio that determines the ability to dictate your market conditions.
    If we only exported goods, and the same Gazprom would not have to buy equipment abroad, we could at once take and abandon foreign currencies.
    That is why such noise is brought by reports that with some countries we pay in national currencies. Please note that in some.

    I would also gladly give up all these eureka and dollars, set a hard course, and regulate it exactly at the level of state necessity. But this is unfortunately not possible. If, again, a simple example is Investors. you imagine Russia refused to make payments in foreign currency and makes payments only in rubles. Most investors who have large capital and possibly had enough ideas for implementation in the Russian Federation will immediately scratch their turnips and then say we do not need such a haemorrhage.
  42. polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 29 February 2016 20: 00 New
    0
    With the supply of new aircraft for the needs of the Air Force (VKS), the situation is as in the saying: "Everything would be good if it were not so bad!"
  43. Denis Skiff
    Denis Skiff 29 February 2016 22: 03 New
    0
    Quote: CRASH.
    And what happened to Su37? Which the USA was so afraid of, that we will deliver it to China.

    this plane is a UFO Su-37, it has gone so far in front of it that there is simply no need for it. not yet. He was postponed for later. Su-35 is more than enough.