Military Review

F-35 as America's sunset marker

137



The amount of information on this new American combat aircraft is simply off scale. They write about it constantly, listing numerous problems that have arisen during its creation. Problems, as it turned out, he literally with everything: with a glider, with an engine, with software, a bailout system, a helmet. There are many articles on this topic, they appear fairly regularly, so write on this The topic is not so interesting. It is difficult to say something fundamentally new.

Another thing is surprising: practically the question remains behind the scenes of what it means for the US military and in general for the United States of America. In any case, they talk about this much less. And the topic is very important. In fact, how did American domination begin? It, if anyone does not remember, was achieved at the end of WWII. World War I was not enough, but after 1945, the world became American in many ways. And it was during the Second World War that the star of the United States armed forces rose. But why did she come up? What was the root cause?

The American land army was, is and will remain best case scenario middling. The American fleet was very good, but the Japanese fleet was not much inferior to it in quality. Aviation. That's where you need to look for the key to the success of the Americans. American fighters won air superiority (there were a lot of them, and they were among the best), and American bombers wiped entire cities from the air. So remove this component of the American armed forces, and what remains? So they always fought: against Japan, Germany, North Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Yugoslavia. Only in this way, and nothing else.

They do not have a strong ground army capable of crushing the enemy. Therefore, their bomber aircraft rained down an endless stream of bombs on Dresden and Tokyo, Hanoi and Baghdad, Tripoli and Belgrade. Such is the "conveyor". I know that you will immediately remember a lot of articles and photos about American Tanks, infantry, special forces, etc. All this is true, but all this plays a supporting role. The main blow was almost always delivered from the air. Just as the British Empire was unthinkable without Royal Navy, the United States was unthinkable without the USAF. A kind of key element. The USA without major fighters is all that the British Empire has forgotten how to build modern battleships and cruisers.

This is not a failure - it is a full-blown catastrophe. And this is not an exaggeration: the strength of the United States is that from their numerous air bases they control most of the airspace over this planet. And their fighters, starting with the Second World War, were among the best, if not the best. Is always. And this period is over. Why do I speak with such confidence, because by this time it has finally become clear: the F-35 "will not fly." That is, it will not be the workhorse of the Air Force. And the more they have nothing and is not expected. They put everything on this card, and they were not lucky. Their allies were unlucky: they were counting on the “magical” F-35.

No, of course, there is something and they, or rather it was. Eurofighter Typhoon, Gripen NG, Rafale, for example. But somehow these fighters did not go to the world market. I am not an expert, of course, but the fact is indicative. Japan is doing something there ... But mostly the “free world” was counting on an American toy. England, Norway, Canada, Turkey, Israel, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Holland ... It did not work out. And what they arm now? Fighter - the basis of modern armed forces. F-22 Americans categorically refuse to sell. And in general, everything is dull with him and it is not clear how good he is. Production discontinued.

And there are those in modern America who are fighting for F-35, and there are those who are fighting for the revival of F-22 and the lifting of export restrictions. Such is the struggle of the "blunt-tips" with the "pointed-points." The thing is that both aircraft are insanely expensive, complex and with a lot of technical problems. No, of course, the time of the PRC with a huge number of inexpensive and primitive shelves have passed forever. Airplanes are less in number, they are more expensive ... But not to the same extent! Can not combat aircraft cost a lot. It can not be literally "worth its weight in gold." In the war somehow knock. And here we have an ordinary fighter turns into a kind of analogue dreadnought - the cost of loss.

The problem is that for most small and medium-sized countries, aircraft such as the F-35 and F-22 are simply not available at cost. There was a period in the sea storieswhen, in principle, even a small state could acquire a sailing battleship. Expensive, but tolerable. With the emergence of metal monsters at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries, it is a thing of the past. Only a great power could afford a normal fleet. Here is something like that. The figures for cost are very conditional, but give up to 400 million dollars for the 1 (one) fighter (According to the United States Central Control Office (GAO), at the end of 2010, the total price of one F-22 aircraft reached 411,7 million dollars) ... It is somehow cruel. And very heavy for most countries. F-35 turned out not much cheaper. And who can afford them? In addition to the armies of the United States and Japan, there are dozens of much poorer armies. What should they rearm?



And now there are plans to extend the production of F-16. By the way - a great plane! Sorry, outdated a bit. After all, he made his first flight more than forty years ago. And again in battle! Or not, not so: “Only old men go to battle ...” And there is nothing more to offer the Americans. They have no other development. You see, the epic file F-35 is a terrible political catastrophe. It can not cover up. Americans formally claim a leading role on this planet, and quite frankly and without embarrassment to anyone. Last but not least, this confidence is based on the "superiority of Western technologies." And where is it, this superiority?

What planes can they offer to the leader of a poor third world country? For example? And as recent wars have shown, such a fighter or a fighter-bomber is the basis of the armed forces (except for the case of Donbass). They gain air supremacy, they inflict the lion's share of strikes on the enemy. The main combat unit. No, of course, by themselves, they do not win the war, only in conjunction, but without them - no way. And what can Americans offer their friends? The mockery is that just Russia can offer a lot of modifications of the MiG-29 and Su-27. All these years in Russia have been developing something within the framework of the 4 generation. And there are very, very good cars. For a reasonable price. The Americans put everything on one "super mega fighter". And he did not shoot. And now what i can do?

Why do I say with such confidence that he did not shoot? The thing is that if the technical project is stretched endlessly and requires more and more money and improvements, then there is a suspicion that the original project itself is a dead end. So it happens - everywhere and always, in order to invent prototypes: painted, assembled in metal, checked, spat and disassembled. And they forgot. The thing is that any constructor (group of designers) may be mistaken. All this turns out to be experienced models. Most projects stop to the stage of mass production. Tried - did not work. There is nothing terrible in it - NTP assumes such situations, we after all learn to build NEW planes, on new principles.

As you know, for F-35, instead of prototypes, they focused on computer modeling. A model - they are such models, they have badly twisted nuts do not fall out. And here we have almost two hundred unsuccessful prototypes. What had to be eliminated at the design stage went into series. And now - “late to drink Borjomi”. It is difficult for a person, far from the technology (financier or congressman), to understand that the project of a new product can be initially dead-end. And then that it can not be “finalized”, for any money, it is easier to start anew. If the project at the stage of incarnation in the metal is detected a the number of "holes" and inconsistencies - the project must be thrown into the basket. Then, prototypes are needed, then tests are needed, in which experienced pilots often die. No other way.

But in the US in 1991, the “end of the Fukuyama story” came. USSR disappeared, the Warsaw Pact, too. America won all. Well, or so it seemed to someone from Washington politicians. Therefore, the main in the design of the new fighter steel internal disassembly in high offices. Opponent brilliantly absent. Just remember the 90-s: Russia has fallen into complete nonentity, its former allies trooped rushed into NATO. It was then that the requirements for the new fighter of the “new era of American supremacy” were developed ... It is not surprising that administrative and political inquiries won over purely military interests: the fighter should have been super powerful, super modern and super versatile. Kinda Absolute weapon. At least on paper.

The whole trouble with F-35 was that at the time of the start of the development of the new project “Hannibal was not at the gate.” "Hannibal" was absent altogether. And American officials engaged in "technical creativity." The new aircraft was not to reflect the hordes of Red Star invaders, but to solve completely different problems. Financial, political, foreign policy. Political fighter. His problem is that he was designed in the era before the “revisionist Russia” and the “red dragon”. To learn money, to introduce technology, to release colorful advertising booklets, to make videos.

In the absence of modern competitors and in conditions of complete political and military dominance of the United States, the F-35 could be the “king of the air”, regardless of its characteristics. However, times have changed. Absolutely all of a sudden (for me, by the way, too) new, modern, inexpensive and “buggy” 4 generation aircraft appeared in Russia. It is not so important how many advantages they have after the four, the other thing is important - they have nothing to oppose to the USA. I'm not going to say that Su-35 is something extraordinary and unsurpassed. But there is one, and our Western partners have nothing analogous and are not expected in the near future. Too they relied on "American leadership in the 21 century" and on the technological superiority of the "free world."

They somehow prepared to live in some magical new reality, where the dominance of the “golden billion” is guaranteed for ever and ever, and no one is questioned. It looks most amusing in the Baltics: suddenly the Americans are immersed in their own problems (this is noticeably more and more), Europe does not have its own army, and the Russians have a new “toothed” army. The very Russians whom they officially recognized were second-rate at the legislative level. New magical reality did not take place. It so happened that the "second-rate" Russians have Su-35, but in Europe there are no analogues, in the US all the more.

It seems to me that the operation of the VKS in Syria has become an icy shower for even the most "reckless" European politicians. They lived in their own small, cozy little world, no one took Russia seriously there, and here you are! It is rightly said that with the 1986 in the world a new generation of politicians has grown up in the world, which knows only one center of real power, around which it builds all its schemes. They are simply not familiar with any other situation on the planet. So the conflict in Ukraine, and the war in Syria, and Russia, which did not collapse under the weight of sanctions, is a kind of new reality. That is, there are not just local victories, but something more.

Both the invasion of refugees and the entry of Russia into the Syrian conflict became a painful shock for European politicians. It suddenly turned out that, apart from USAF, there is another powerful force on the planet. The power that can erase ISIS into powder. The presence of Putin and Su-35 and the absence of Obama and F-35 in the Syrian conflict are in fact much more significant than many people think: it completely mixed the cards to all European politicians. Just a big see in the distance. Obama has really withdrawn himself - from Ukraine, and from Syria. For various reasons, let's say, for several years, the Russian Aerospace Forces have done much more than coalition aviation in a year. That is, literally next to the European Union, a certain new force has declared itself, which cannot be ignored and which possesses the most modern combat aircraft, and the F-35 continue to painfully long to bring to mind and solve numerous technical problems. And in the United States is actively preparing for the presidential campaign ...

Oddly enough, it turned out that the Middle East is much closer to Europe than to Russia, and even more so to the United States. And now, European politicians urgently need to do something, but Obama, with whom Merkel proudly announced the sanctions of Russia, withdrew from the problem of Syria. But it is impossible to talk seriously about something with a sub-sanctioned Russia before lifting the sanctions (this, I hope, is understandable). And the sanctions are already living their own lives and are not going to leave (there is a consensus in the "European anaptikum" that Russia should be "pressed to the bottom"). Just imagine how Mr. Hollande feels in this situation (and he is much more attractive than Merkel).

By the way, after the last meeting with Erdogan, it was Hollande who looked extremely preoccupied and no joy on his face could be read: unlike Merkel, he just understands that this is a dead end. Having completely quarreled with Putin and declaring an economic war to the Russians “to the bitter end,” Merkel completely deprived herself of a political maneuver. She simply can’t come to Moscow and start discussing something - it will look like surrender. Obama is indifferent to the problems of the Old World ... And there remains to be a very suspicious bargaining with Erdogan, who himself is teetering on the edge (like all of Turkey). In Turkey, terrorist attacks are rattling with frightening constancy and the “ATO” is expanding in the Kurdish southeast, and then suddenly there is a visa-free regime with Europe! And billions for the "rotation of the refugees."

Going further, Merkel could enter into negotiations with the leaders of ISIS ... And what to do? Promise them money in return for stopping the flow of refugees. So go around the Middle East, offering billions of euros to everyone who wants to "stop the refugees." You can, of course, ask: "why it all started with the problems of F-35, and then suddenly Syria, Merkel and the refugees?". The thing is that a fighter is a very complicated, expensive and политическая. That is why the presence of Su-35 in the sky of Syria and the absence of the F-35 “covered with legends” there drastically changes the situation in world politics. But in theory, he just had to show himself in the destruction of ground targets in large quantities and with great accuracy, such goals as the technique of ISIS, for example. And orders for the "miracle plane" would have poured just like a river. But did not grow together.

"Main reptiles" bombed the aircraft VKS, and the F-35 continues to "surf the Internet." Unfortunately, not all world politics is done on the expanses of this very Internet. The application of high-precision strikes using GLONASS, Caliber and other "goodies" came as a complete surprise to European politicians. In general, the policy is done, not on the basis of the principle of likes / dislikes, but on the basis of interests and the balance of power. In other words, Russia in this case should not be “loved with all my heart”, but simply taken into account in the geopolitical scenario, negotiations should be held (behind tightly closed doors), positions should be coordinated. But Merkel completely quarreled with Putin and lobbied for the introduction of sanctions against Russia. At that time, it seemed quite a reasonable move.

But the appearance of the Su-35 in the skies of Syria and the high-precision strikes against the militants under its cover turned the entire political situation upside down (or, rather, vice versa). And the F-35 didn’t show themselves in any way (they are still “doped with a file”). Previously, this was never in the era of aviation. America has always made the most modern aircraft (at least after WWI) and here you are: there is a war, but there are no new American planes. And in general, US policy in the Middle East has stalled. That is, assess the situation: in a key region, the Russian Aerospace Forces conduct a sudden massive operation, and the United States and its coalition go to the background. But Merkel just put all the money on Obama. But he could not. Well, or did not want.

And a truly paradoxical situation has developed: there is a politician who is able to “provide leadership”, and the politician is quite European, and he has the “airplanes” necessary for this. And this politician has clearly proved in practice that he is able to provide this very “leadership” in the Middle East, and these airplanes in the past six months have shown that hi-tech is in Russian. But for Europe, Russia's leadership is categorically unacceptable. Unacceptable on principle (ideological) considerations. The actions of the videoconferencing system in Syria are perceived by Europe as very hostile. The thing is that the Europeans in general “do not see” Russia in big politics, from their point of view, it does not concern Russians. And here such embarrassment.

So, both in Ukraine and in Syria, Europe tightly closed the doors for collaboration with Russia. They have imposed sanctions and are waiting for them to act. Just like a black mamba. But it is already clear that the crisis in the Middle East (Syria and Yemen), as well as the crisis in Ukraine (with its collapsed economy) cannot wait. Obama does not offer solutions, F-35 continues to “fail” ... where should the poor parliamentarian go?

In principle, for an outsider, an unbiased observer, it is already completely clear that the best times of the United States are long gone, they are actively exploiting "past glory" and will not help anyone. Today’s US is a “blown away” superpower, and they are finally actively using all sorts of Latvia and Germany there to solve my personal problems. And the whole European policy is sharpened by the fact that at a critical moment the “good American uncle” will come with a bag of dollars and a collar of the 45 caliber and “solve” all (or almost all) of the problems. By the way, the Ukrainians also counted on this: both for dollars and for the Colt. Not grown together.

America is no longer a cake, and it has less and less chance of regaining its global leadership. I am not writing this because I am a “turbopriot” and I get heartburn from the colors of the American flag, no, I just state the facts. The financial and domestic political problems of the USA will not disappear anywhere and will not “resolve”, as many expect. Therefore, today the United States is not up to Syria and not to Ukraine (by and large). They can no longer, as in the years of the Cold War, “play on long” and invest billions in regimes that they are interested in. Today, the United States has neither free billions nor calm decades ahead. The economy is "collapsing."

Therefore, the same Ukraine / Georgia fell not the role of South Korea (as they expected), but the role of kamikazes. Russia wins, the US loses on the global map ... and what to do? Run the kamikaze! We admit that the war in Ossetia really hurt us, the war in Ukraine hurt us even more. So it was the goal of the United States! The victory of Tbilisi / Kiev was theoretically possible ... but absolutely unprincipled! Their task was to smash their country about the "deck of the aircraft carrier Russia," and not to win. In principle, the United States deceived everyone here: Georgians, Ukrainians, and Europeans. So Yatsenyuk, calling his government - the kamikaze government, said the absolute truth. Kamikaze divine wind of democracy ... Such are the cases. Yatsenyuk told the truth, but they did not understand him. And in vain. They laughed at him - they say, not one kamikaze lives for as long as his government. But he, of course, did not mean himself personally (his future is quite cloudless).

Yatsenyuk (I respect him for this) told the truth - his task is to use the whole of Ukraine in the so-called “banzai attack” on the Russian Federation. What he did. And why? Because the F-35 never “took off” (in a broad sense). America has already lost leadership. Therefore, the “kamikaze era” has come. But they (kamikaze), of course, better not to know about it: the appetite will be spoiled and sleep will be gone. So the words of the legendary Ukrainian anthem "Scho did not die .." contains the tragic truth. Ukraine had to die heroically in the fight against the "eastern aggressor." She died. "Bobo is dead, but the hats do not down ...". I can offer the Ukrainians the lines of the new hymn: “If you go to Donetsk, the bones turn white, The watered poppies bloom with blood, the Sun shines, we are advancing, And the mountains of corpses are growing ...”. Or (in another translation): "If I go out to the mountains of Rostov - I become a corpse in the grass, if I go out to the Sea of ​​Azov - I become a corpse in the waves, but if I die for the chocolate emperor - my life did not go in vain ...". Music can not be changed.

Here we argue that the United States did not seize the Crimea and lost. Basically so, but it tactical defeat. Yes, the seizure of the Crimea allowed them to block Sevastopol (by the hands of the Pravoseks) and sharply complicate the aid to Syria. All this is true, but the strategic task — the creation of Russia's global problems at the cost of “annihilating” Ukraine was solved. Cruel, but effective. You just need to learn to think of them in categories: donate the 40-million European country to create serious problems for a competitor? It's worth it.

America rose as a superpower during the two world wars (primarily in Europe). Were it not for these two bloody and protracted wars (which is quite possible!), America would never have become what it has become. So it’s ridiculous to expect sentiments from Americans about the suffering of citizens of a particular European country. For them, this is the "problem of the Indians." So America could not lose in Ukraine. You just need to understand what their true goals are. So, they reached them. At a very difficult time for the USA, Russia had very serious problems. And not by chance. This will not save the USA, but it will give a certain respite.

US friends only to themselves. So that they are Europe, Ukraine, Russia. And if at a difficult (really deadly) moment for America, Europe and Russia can be set off at the cost of the annihilation of Ukraine: it's worth it. And now the naive continental Europeans ask themselves: “What are we to do with this very Ukraine?” Finally, they woke up. And do nothing. Sit and wait for F-35 shipments. They will surely follow, and it is these wonderful airplanes that will save European democracy from the "Eastern aggressor." Saw, Shura ... they are really worth their weight in gold.

F-35 as America's sunset marker
Author:
Photos used:
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/
137 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. tiredwithall
    tiredwithall April 6 2016 12: 29
    +29
    "the task is to use all of Ukraine in the so-called" banzai attack "on the Russian Federation."

    Today it is our biggest defeat. They managed to pit us.
    1. cniza
      cniza April 6 2016 12: 36
      +8
      This is so, but it seems to me that the peoples will sort it out, I do not mean law-abductors and others like them, there are a small number of them, and the bulk begins to understand something.
      1. tiredwithall
        tiredwithall April 6 2016 12: 43
        +6
        True, they understand, but they are still silent. Basically, the level of suffering has not yet exceeded the limit of patience. So far, only the Donbass has revolted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Sergey Polt
        Sergey Polt April 6 2016 16: 55
        +4
        And in my opinion, this is how the Russians started to understand everything. Who is worth something ...
    2. Corsair
      Corsair April 6 2016 13: 56
      +2
      Quote: tiredwithall
      Today it is our biggest defeat. They managed to pit us.

      what Well, I would put it differently, not to pit us, but to pit our neighbors on us. He visited Odessa many times as a child (pioneer camp), in Kherson - Novaya Kakhovka (Old xs) with local boys and girls in the late 80s roaming around the basements, what happened to them now, how they live and how they live - that's how strange everything is life turned upside down. There was one big country, but there were many small ones, envying the big one, that it was richer and better off living them.
      1. tiredwithall
        tiredwithall April 6 2016 14: 31
        +2
        You are right - "incite". Intolerance is their trait.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  2. Berg berg
    Berg berg April 6 2016 12: 30
    +6
    Born to hang on the arrow of a crane, cannot fly!
    1. Mercenary
      Mercenary April 6 2016 17: 57
      0
      I'm looking at this photo ... It looks like a hot girl of easy virtue, after hard anal caresses, with the remaining "something" in "something".

      If the garlic, The author is right ... stupidly got this f 35 already, just worse than savchenki and parashenki with Nemtsov

      The plane flies, but has a status of "conditionally combat" ... With such a budget ??? With it (f 35) at the output, TTX and jambs? Hmm ... Who is to blame?

      Of course:

      Ahhh !!! A threat!!! Everything is lost! Putin! Russians are coming!!!

      An old topic about a bad dancer is not otherwise ...

      Oh, at an interesting time we live)))

      ps I forgot to write about the time swollen into this product - it did not appear yesterday ...
  3. Kronos07
    Kronos07 April 6 2016 12: 30
    +1
    F-35 Fighter Operations at McEntire Joint National Guard Base
    1. Altona
      Altona April 6 2016 12: 54
      +15
      Quote: Kronos07
      Operations at the McEntire Joint National Guard Base

      ----------------------
      And sho? Where are the wonders of aerobatics? They showed that the woman pilot flies. And that’s it. One miracle took off, another landed, taxied out under a canopy. Looks like the rain is afraid, so that the radar absorbing paint does not spoil. Does he even need to carry this polycarbonate umbrella with him? In general, I will say a cynically - flying pregnant penguin. Full reflection of the USA, fast food overfed.
      1. Igor39
        Igor39 April 6 2016 13: 44
        +3
        By the way, I also have an association penguin, when I see the FE-35, it looks like it.
      2. screw cutter
        screw cutter April 6 2016 15: 12
        +1
        The canopy, it’s not from the rain (well, it’s also a little from it), but from the sun they see whether the fuel is overheating and they fly badly. Refuellers are also stored under canopies.
  4. Kronos07
    Kronos07 April 6 2016 12: 33
    +6
    I like the sunset of America
    1. Stabilization
      Stabilization April 6 2016 12: 50
      +6
      It looks very controversial by the way) ... "a bit fat" like that)
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. lis-ik
        lis-ik April 6 2016 13: 51
        +2
        And I like it, he is beautiful from all angles, but what can I say there is a whole machine, by design. Do not add do not add.
      3. Kronos07
        Kronos07 April 6 2016 14: 03
        +2
        Time will tell
    2. St Petrov
      St Petrov April 6 2016 13: 01
      0
      Quote: Kronos07
      I like the sunset of America



      I do not blame you. Fetish do not choose (s)

      You, let’s say, are not yet the saddest case
      1. Kronos07
        Kronos07 April 6 2016 13: 07
        -6
        your brothers
        1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Kronos07
        Kronos07 April 6 2016 13: 29
        +1
        Cosmonauts Mikhail Kornienko and Sergey Volkov told how politics affects the relationship between ISS crew members.
  5. Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich April 6 2016 12: 34
    +9
    F-35 as America's sunset marker
    God .... again the "penguin" is buried together with America ...
    Here we argue that the United States did not capture Crimea and lost. In principle, it is, but it is a tactical defeat. Yes, the capture of the Crimea allowed them to block Sevastopol (with the help of the right-wingers) and dramatically complicate the assistance to Syria.
    fundamentally disagree! this is strategic move! thanks to him, Our sea, under our control.
    In principle, the United States deceived everyone: Georgians, Ukrainians, and Europeans.
    you can’t argue here ...
  6. Spartanez300
    Spartanez300 April 6 2016 12: 35
    +3
    From the beginning advertised, and now lowered.
  7. alekc75
    alekc75 April 6 2016 12: 40
    +3
    slowly but surely, this goes
  8. pavelty
    pavelty April 6 2016 12: 46
    +4
    "Political exterminator."

    Liked))
    But in general, I do not get tired of repeating, the hat-takers are a little annoying, well, that's why the author decided that he would not fly? That does not fly and the point? There, too, the designers work and some of the best, improvements are being made, the technique is complicated, but the price is of course difficult ... In general, we will see how it ends
    1. your1970
      your1970 April 6 2016 13: 27
      +2
      Any improvements make the product more expensive .. again, the price if you look at it taking into account the opposition to air defense is not real for poor countries ..
  9. Havoc
    Havoc April 6 2016 12: 46
    +12
    F-35 is a refinement of the Soviet Yak-141, the development of the American began after we got all the documentation on the Yak, but it is one thing to get the drawings, and the other is to make a really working version. This is their problem.
    1. irbis0373
      irbis0373 April 6 2016 14: 08
      +4
      F-35 is a revision of the Soviet Yak-141

      Well, not quite right. In addition to the possible similarities of the top view, these are completely different cars. But the fact that at the heart of the power plant are Soviet developments from the last vertical line of the Yakovlev Design Bureau is a fact.
      1. Havoc
        Havoc April 6 2016 21: 07
        0
        Quote: irbis0373
        F-35 is a revision of the Soviet Yak-141

        Well, not quite right. In addition to the possible similarities of the top view, these are completely different cars. But the fact that at the heart of the power plant are Soviet developments from the last vertical line of the Yakovlev Design Bureau is a fact.


        Moreover, the appearance is similar, the Shuttle and the Buran are also similar, the rotation of the turbine is for vertical take-off, here is the innovation that no one is arguing about the Soviet development, compare with the Englishman, everything will be clear.
    2. Voha_krim
      Voha_krim April 6 2016 18: 37
      +1
      Quote: Havoc
      but it’s one thing to get the blueprints, another to make a really working option. This is their problem.

      I think that the drawings sold were not specially accurate repeat soldier am
      1. Awaz
        Awaz April 6 2016 20: 07
        0
        here two points must be taken into account: we have a metric system of their inch. Some points are very difficult to reduce, especially in thin and precise systems. The second topic is the presence of really experienced understanding and well-educated specialists. The Americans themselves admit that they have problems with this.
        if I’m not mistaken, but I read that it’s really possible to repeat something while preserving all the incorporated characteristics and nuances, it is almost impossible. Only really technologically advanced firms or states can do this. What to say about airplanes, but not everyone can repeat AKM ..
  10. Altona
    Altona April 6 2016 12: 47
    +6
    Having created at one time the powerful Mustangs and Airacobras, the heavy bombers Liberators and Airacobras of the United States are currently not showing anything super interesting as before. But the German aircraft industry was also launched by the United States through massive industrial, financial and patent infusions. Messerschmitt factories worked on American machine tools, and German designers actively used the drawings of the firms "Pratt and Withney" and "Rolls-Royce" for aircraft engines. Yes, don't be surprised. And Daimler-Benz was half American, and its Austrian subsidiary was fully American. And also such a moment that the Bank of England had an agreement with the Reichsbank according to which it could veto various types of operations. Such is the parsley, you know. In this light, the secret flight of Hess and his mysterious death in Spandau becomes clear.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich April 6 2016 12: 58
      +4
      Quote: Altona
      Having created the powerful Mustangs and Airacobra fighters in their time, the heavy bombers Liberators and Airacobras of the United States at the moment do not demonstrate anything super interesting as before.

      Well, I don't know Zheka, fu-15 and 16, very decent ... and the "hornets" do not "suck". request
      1. Altona
        Altona April 6 2016 13: 26
        +3
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        Well, I don't know Zheka, fu-15 and 16, very decent ... and the "hornets" do not "suck".

        -------------------
        I'm not talking about the 4th generation, it's still cheerful, the avionics are changed and on the road again. It's just that they "shove in the unpickable". There is such a thing as "the percentage of new technologies used". And if their percentage is too large, then the machine may not work as intended or be capricious with refusals.
        PS And about the 4th generation they shot films. TOP GUN, for example. True, there is a deck-based aircraft already withdrawn from service.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS April 6 2016 14: 46
          +3
          Quote: Altona
          ... There is such a thing as "the percentage of new technologies used". And if their percentage is too large, then the machine may not work as intended or be capricious with refusals.

          This is called the "50% rule", in which, if there are more than 50% of new technologies in a new aircraft, there is a high probability that it will not fly, or there will be a lot of problems to teach it to fly. That is why our designers do so to speak transitional machines with pluses , in order to work out a new one in stages. Example-SU-35S and PAK FA.

          Quote: Altona
          I'm not talking about the 4th generation, it’s still crisp, avionics change and again on the road

          While we are behind the mattresses in electronics and this is a fact. Therefore, I would not write off the F-15/16/18 upgraded from the accounts.
          As for Lightning, the attempt to create a single unified platform for various tasks is still premature, as I believe that technology has not grown to the level of a universal fighter platform that can equally well perform the functions of a fighter, bomber, attack aircraft and deck.
          1. Olezhek
            April 6 2016 15: 01
            0
            There is such a thing as "the percentage of new technologies used". And if their percentage is too large, then the machine may not work as intended or be capricious with refusals.
            This is called the "50% rule", in which if there are more than 50% of new technologies in a new aircraft, there is a high probability that it will not fly, or there will be a lot of problems to teach it to fly


            It is the most ...
            F-35 - It's like a prototype ... And they let him into the series ... belay
            1. iwind
              iwind April 6 2016 16: 34
              +2
              Quote: Olezhek
              It is the most ...
              F-35 - It's like a prototype ... And they let him into the series ...

              and why is it a prototype? The number of combat bases is growing. Next year, there will be a deployment in Japan and in Israel. F-35B adopted, in June this code will be adopted by another F-35B squadron in the summer (in August) the adoption of the first F-35A squadron. Then towards the end of the code is another F-35B. Values ​​per unit will fall. Contracts for the first hundred in annual production were signed, 91 of them are driven by 80 F-35A (28 US Air Force, 10 Israel, 10 South Korea, 8 Australia, 8 Netherlands, 6 Norway, 6 Japan 4 Turkey)
              - 7 F-35B (6 ILC US, 1 UK)
              - 4 F-35C (all in the U.S. Navy)
              + ordered in March this year another 15 F-35A for the US Air Force and 10 F-35B for the ILC
              The average combat readiness is 51% for all aircraft since 2007, for new 70%, which is already a very good result for new equipment.
              PS Well, it's purely interesting, but where did the author find the price of 400 million for the F-22? when is the last contract worth the F-22 Flyaway Unit Cost ($ M) 150.389 at FY 2009 (fiscal year?
              1. Olezhek
                April 6 2016 20: 36
                +1
                and why is it a prototype? The number of military bases is growing. Next year it will be deployed to Japan and to Israel. F-35B adopted for use


                That is, all technical problems solved? Is everything all right and can they be mass-produced and put on combat duty?

                Flyaway Unit Cost ($ M) 150.389 at FY 2009 (fiscal year?


                And the prices for research and development are included there?
                I wonder how much it will be sold to an EXTERNAL buyer?
                1. iwind
                  iwind April 6 2016 20: 56
                  +1
                  Quote: Olezhek
                  That is, all technical problems solved? Is everything all right and can they be mass-produced and put on combat duty?

                  Yes it is possible and F-35B from July 2015 adopted

                  . All technical problems have not been resolved, but those problems that would have prevented the adoption of weapons have been resolved. Technical problems even now sometimes crawl onto the F-16, their average combat readiness is 67%, and aircraft are studied from a to z.
                  Quote: Olezhek
                  And the prices for research and development are included there?
                  I wonder how much it will be sold to an EXTERNAL buyer?

                  And why should it be sold to anyone?
                  Quote: Olezhek
                  And the prices for research and development are included there?

                  And where does NICOR- money for niocro, they will always return stricot. Money cannot be spared for science. And therefore, it is not logical to include the price of a particular aircraft. These practices have been used for decades in different areas ..
                  and valuable production F-22 150mln $
                  1. Olezhek
                    April 6 2016 21: 06
                    0
                    and valuable production F-22 150mln $


                    Data stolen from the depths of the Pentagon?

                    150 Lyamov - inexpensive. The plane - just megasver .. what was removed from production?

                    why don't we sell to allies?

                    Answer: an expensive file ...
                    1. iwind
                      iwind April 6 2016 21: 27
                      +1
                      Quote: Olezhek
                      and valuable production F-22 150mln $

                      And your 400?
                      Quote: Olezhek
                      why don't we sell to allies?

                      And why should they suddenly? The most modern aircraft, it is better not to sell allied superiority in the sky. I would not.
                      Quote: Olezhek
                      The plane is just a mega beast .. what was discontinued?

                      There are 187 of them ... Even this amount is another 20-30 years to grab. When will the nearest competitors have at least 100 airplanes gaining superiority in the sky?
                      Quote: Olezhek
                      Data stolen from the depths of the Pentagon?

                      yes from the bowels of the Air Force budget
                      Flyaway Unit Cost ($ M) 150.389
                  2. nikon7717
                    nikon7717 9 January 2017 18: 07
                    0
                    Fresh value for the Jews.
                    However, I will convert $ 135 mln ... into gold at the current exchange rate for 09.01.2017 - 1190 $ per ounce, this is 113445 ounces (Troy ounce is a unit of mass equal to 31,1034768 grams), this is 3528,492 kg. 3,5 tons !!! gold flying.
                    According to CNN, the F-35 is named the most expensive military aircraft in history. The cost of one fighter is $ 135 million, the cost of the entire line is estimated at $ 400 billion. The Pentagon has signed a $ 1,3 billion contract with Lockheed Martin to supply 13 F-35 fighters, Defense News reported 4 in May. Six F-35B fighters will be delivered for the Marine Corps, three F-35A for the Air Force, and four F-35C for the Navy. The contract must be completed by December 2019 of the year.
                    According to media estimates, SU-Z5 costs about 2 times cheaper, i.e. order 50-80 million greens.
                    Read more at RBC:
                    http://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/584ec33b9a7947323f8
                    51e79
          2. Altona
            Altona April 6 2016 15: 44
            +1
            Quote: NEXUS
            This is called the "50% rule", in which, if there are more than 50% of new technologies in a new aircraft, there is a high probability that it will not fly, or there will be a lot of problems to teach it to fly. That is why our designers do so to speak transitional machines with pluses , in order to work out a new one in stages. Example-SU-35S and PAK FA.

            ----------------------
            I don’t paint the obvious things, there are many with higher technical. And so they will understand. Everyone went through the theory. In Lightning, it is 70% to 30% for sure.

            Quote: NEXUS
            While we are behind the mattresses in electronics and this is a fact. Therefore, I would not write off the F-15/16/18 upgraded from the accounts.

            ----------------------
            Nobody writes them off, on the contrary, the American generals are still betting on them. And Boeing has long been ready to massively modernize them. As for the "lag in electronics" - we "lag behind" in the manufacture of electronics. For the manufacture it is necessary to have a huge sale of this business. They could at least transfer state and school computers to their element base for self-sufficiency.
    2. Altona
      Altona April 6 2016 15: 45
      0
      Quote: Altona
      Having created in due time powerful fighters "Mustangs" and "Airacobras", heavy bombers "Liberators" and "Airacobras"

      -------------------
      DU-Ren is old, he mentioned Airacobra twice, although he thought of Superfortress as a bomber. laughing
  11. Stabilization
    Stabilization April 6 2016 12: 48
    +2
    Well, by the way, sha, there are very excellent 4th generation modernization projects. They put AFARs, new avionics. Guided weapons, again, they have better. Europeans also do not lag behind, upgrade their 4-ki, AFARs and other flavors. Another thing is that it takes time and it is also not cheap.
  12. TұrKBөrӨ
    TұrKBөrӨ April 6 2016 12: 50
    -2
    Tired of "noodles" ....
    1. Stabilization
      Stabilization April 6 2016 12: 52
      +3
      Tired, don’t eat ...
      1. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich April 6 2016 13: 02
        +2
        Quote: Stabilization
        ТұрКБөрӨ Today, 12:50 New
        Tired of "noodles" ....


        Stabilization Today, 12:52 ↑ New
        Tired, don’t eat ...

        sergeants, are you brothers? laughing
        1. Stabilization
          Stabilization April 6 2016 13: 06
          0
          Colleagues)...
  13. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA April 6 2016 12: 55
    +7
    The problem is that for most small and medium-sized countries, aircraft such as the F-35 and F-22 are simply not affordable. There was a period in maritime history when, in principle, even a small state could acquire a sailing battleship. Expensive, but bearable. With the advent of metal monsters at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries, this is a thing of the past. Only a great power could afford a normal fleet. Here is something similar.

    I remember Stanislav Lem and his "Weapon Systems of the Twenty-First Century, or Upside Down Evolution" (written back in 1983):
    The morale of the population, especially in the "welfare states", evaporated like camphor. Such respectable ancient slogans as "dulce et decorum est pro patria mori" (sweet and honorable to die for the fatherland), the young conscripts considered complete idiocy. At the same time, new generations of weapons went up exponentially. The plane of the times of the First World War, consisting mainly of canvas, wooden slats, piano wire and several machine guns, cost, along with landing wheels, no more than a good car. A plane of the Second World War era was already worth thirty cars, and by the end of the century, the cost of a Stealth missile fighter-interceptor or a stealth bomber that was invisible to the radar reached hundreds of millions of dollars. Projected for 2000, rocket fighters were supposed to cost a billion dollars each. If this continued on, then eighty years later, each of the superpowers could afford no more than 20-25 aircraft. Tanks were a little cheaper. A nuclear carrier, defenseless against a single FiF type super-rocket (over the target, it fell into a whole fan of warheads, each of which hit one of the nerve nodes of this sea community), although it was, in fact, a kind of brontosaurus under artillery fire, worth billions.
    1. SklochPensioner
      SklochPensioner April 6 2016 16: 01
      +1
      + for Stanislav Lem. Well, after all - a Pole, but - not ... a lie! smile
      1. Altona
        Altona April 6 2016 20: 19
        +1
        Quote: SklochPensioner
        + for Stanislav Lem. Well, after all - a Pole, but - not ... a lie!

        ------------------
        Konstantin Rokossovsky is the main Pole!
  14. red joni
    red joni April 6 2016 12: 56
    -1
    there are two options, either these are regular star wars specially for Russia to ruin us and ruin our entire country so that Russia gets overboard with a 6th generation fighter. Either America, like Russia, will export fighter jets for many billions of very dubious quality, and it will leave especially cool aircraft to the envy of enemies like Russia and China.
  15. gridasov
    gridasov April 6 2016 12: 59
    -5
    An airplane is a shell around an engine. As for amers, that for Russians, engines operate on the same principles. Well, someone will do the tone blades on the turbines. A quality factor as it was not and is not. Turbines are complex, which is why they are expensive and, as were devices with a boundary level of capabilities, they remain so. Call at least the twentieth generation, and the essence of this does not change. Engines running on existing algorithms of processes organized in it will not be able to fly and maneuver better than they can already do.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich April 6 2016 13: 27
      +4
      Quote: gridasov
      An airplane is a shell around an engine. As for amers, that for Russians, engines operate on the same principles. Well, someone will do the tone blades on the turbines. A quality factor as it was not and is not. Turbines are complex, which is why they are expensive and, as were devices with a boundary level of capabilities, they remain so. Call at least the twentieth generation, and the essence of this does not change. Engines running on existing algorithms of processes organized in it will not be able to fly and maneuver better than they can already do.
      you carry rare nonsense ... laughing
    2. irbis0373
      irbis0373 April 6 2016 14: 18
      +1
      A plane is not only a shell around the engine! The engine is only one of the important components. Do not forget the aerodynamics, avionics, weapons. But how successful it was to successfully coordinate and combine everything together, and to ensure that all this worked effectively in combat use, only real combat use will show.
      1. gridasov
        gridasov April 6 2016 14: 56
        +2
        I'm shocked! It is useless to talk further. The correct engine is - and optimally simple forms of aero dynamics. This is a positive payload balance. This is fly-level maneuverability. This is the flight range out of proportion to the fuel reserve. It all depends on the engine - this is the basis.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA April 6 2016 19: 06
          0
          Quote: gridasov
          I'm shocked! It is useless to talk further. The correct engine is - and optimally simple forms of aero dynamics. This is a positive payload balance. This is fly-level maneuverability. This is the flight range out of proportion to the fuel reserve. It all depends on the engine - this is the basis.

          Hehehehe ... the best carrier-based fighter of the first half of WWII was built around a frankly mediocre engine, inferior to its rivals from other countries in almost everything. smile

          And on the other side of the ocean it was believed that those who do not know how to build really powerful motors think about aerodynamics... And they not only considered, but also embodied this proverb into practice: on the same "Hellket", the tail sheathing sheets were overlapped by "scales". smile
  16. X Y Z
    X Y Z April 6 2016 13: 04
    +2
    And all Europolitics is imprisoned for the fact that at a critical moment a "good American uncle" comes with a bag of dollars and a 45-gauge Colt and "solves" all (or almost all) problems.


    And what for does he need it? After all, he, unlike the Germans, French and other Dutch, understands perfectly well that they are not included in the mythical "golden billion". And they are just a consumable in the geopolitical game with Russia and China. And their desire to sort things out on their own and often make economic competition with the United States, only increases American heartburn. So the numerous merkels and ollands look funny and strange in their own role as arbiters of the world's destinies, but in fact they are vulgar sixes.
  17. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh April 6 2016 13: 07
    +4
    "The problem is that for most small and medium-sized countries, aircraft such as the F-35 and F-22 are simply not affordable" ////

    For developed countries, such as EU countries, Japan, South Korea, Australia - prices
    quite accessible. The price of F-35 is only 10-15% higher than the price
    generation 4 ++ aircraft. And with the transition to large series, the price will decrease
    up to 95-100 million. F-16 of the last modification costs 85 million, "Silent Eagle" F-15 -
    105 million
    The assembly of the F-35 is in 3 factories: in the USA, Japan, Italy.
    And components are produced by more than 10 plants in different countries.
    For example, in Israel they produce wings. Their value is deducted from
    the total cost of the aircraft received. Everything is very financially thought out.
    1. Foresterer
      Foresterer April 6 2016 13: 47
      +3
      Read the American press carefully. There will be no major episodes anymore, now a multiple reduction in orders from the participating countries, a multiple and this will continue. And no one guarantees that he will generally pass the stage of testing in which he is now. The author a little emotionally, but very correctly summarized in the article some conclusions made by the Americans themselves and slightly embellished, but in fact the F-35 is a disaster in which the US military industry is very afraid to admit, because recognition of this will mean that hundreds of billions someone was thrown into the wind, and there are many of them, he will have to answer for this. But the United States cannot allow this, because financial and reputation losses of this caliber can easily shock the whole of America, and not just the military-industrial complex. So they will be sawing and sawing their golden weight.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 6 2016 14: 03
        -2
        Let's wait and see, the F 35 has only one problem - it turned out to be too tricked out.
      2. retardu
        retardu April 6 2016 14: 34
        0
        Give links about a multiple reduction. Just do not ravings about Canada and Australia who supposedly refuse there.
        And yes, I advise you to read carefully, but not the jaundice of the Hindu Dave, but the normal forums like f16 or defenstolka. All answered and chewed 100 times. And about "unsolvable problems" (how much snot about the gun and the chair was laughing ) and about the application and features
        1. Foresterer
          Foresterer April 6 2016 15: 30
          0
          Read how much Italy should have ordered, and how much will be in the end. This is the facts, not your dreams of the superiority of the F-35.
      3. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh April 6 2016 15: 23
        0
        I read the American press in English.
        Here is a fresh order for 55 pieces of F-35:
        The order is for 26 F-35As for the US Air Force; six F-35As for Norway;
        seven F-35As for Israel; two F-35As for Japan; six F-35Bs for the US Marine Corps;
        six F-35Bs for the British Royal Navy; and two F-35Cs for the US Navy

        Lockheed Martin and its partners will do the work on this contract in Fort Worth, Texas;
        El Segundo, Calif .; Warton, England; Orlando, Fla .; Nashua, NH; Nagoya, Japan;
        and Baltimore, and is expected to be finished by December 2017

        Assembly is not only in the States, but also in Japan and in England.

        Israel produces wings (one of the manufacturers). Order for the near future: 40 sets.
        Order a few years in advance: 800 kits.

        If you look at the press of the 70-80s about the F-16, you will see that
        it was the same: "a disaster, a complete failure, money thrown away ...." smile
        1. Olezhek
          April 6 2016 15: 31
          -1
          Order for the near future: 40 kits.
          Order a few years in advance: 800 kits.


          Colleague: for Russia this is very positive news.
          People will strenuously flop with this "miracle of technology" pouring a cloud of money into it ...
          It's good...

          Why didn’t he fly to Syria? The answer is incapable.
          Why do? The project is political. As with shale gas, Europe is ready to lose billions by refusing Russian gas (bad and dangerous!). Politics and that's it.
          The United States can push it (F-35) production and purchases.
          Canada refused something ... strange.
          1. retardu
            retardu April 6 2016 15: 37
            0
            Strange, yes. Given that in the end he was left, as the defense industry clearly spoke to the Prime Minister
            1. iwind
              iwind April 6 2016 16: 46
              +1
              Quote: retardu
              Strange, yes. Given that in the end he was left, as the defense industry clearly spoke to the Prime Minister

              Quote: Olezhek
              Canada refused something ... strange.

              Yeah. So they refused ....., only now they make all payments as a member of the JSF program, without delays .... The liberal politician simply crowed that the army was not needed. Only real life dictates a completely different thing. So this failure is nothing more than another myth about the F-35.
              http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-to-stay-in-program-of-f-35-j

              et-buyers-despite-pledge-to-withdraw / article28897002 /
              1. Olezhek
                April 6 2016 19: 43
                0
                only now make all payments as a member of the JSF program, without delay.
                The liberal politician simply cried out that the army was not needed.


                The politician categorically did not want to get involved with the "mummy", about the fact that the army is not needed, he did not say.
                1. iwind
                  iwind April 6 2016 20: 39
                  0
                  Quote: Olezhek
                  only now make all payments as a member of the JSF program, without delay.
                  The liberal politician simply cried out that the army was not needed.


                  The politician categorically did not want to get involved with the "mummy", about the fact that the army is not needed, he did not say.

                  He said he suggested reducing spending on the army. Mummy .... then it’s already 50000 flight hours.
          2. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh April 6 2016 16: 18
            +1
            "Why didn't he come to Syria? The answer is that he is not capable of fighting" ////

            Have patience, wait until December ... smile Israel will get the first
            2 pieces F-35.
            And we have a tradition: immediately test new equipment in combat conditions. fellow
            1. Kronos07
              Kronos07 April 6 2016 17: 14
              +1
              ...........
            2. Kronos07
              Kronos07 April 6 2016 17: 15
              0
              First F-35A “Adir” for Israel Taking Shape in Fort Worth
        2. Foresterer
          Foresterer April 6 2016 15: 44
          0
          When asked when the aircraft would be brought to mind, Lieutenant General Mark Ramsey, director of the HASC military resources department, replied that not earlier than in fifteen years. In fact, he admitted that the F-35 did not become a full-fledged fifth-generation aircraft, and, most likely, is the prototype of the new fighter. According to him, that is why today the United States does not have technological superiority in aviation over Russia and China. At the same time, the advent of “smart skins” will allow America to create the prerequisites for the sixth generation fighter. “Now we need to think about a future war, we can’t win the current one,” summed up Mark Ramsey.

          The same postulate in the report on the development of the F-35 was also noted by the US Under Secretary of Defense for Military Procurement Frank Kendall. “China and Russia have modern weapons designed to overcome our projection of power,” said the Pentagon’s main buyer. “Even if an unintended regional war happens, the US has no guarantee that it will be possible to win.”

          This is from Congressional hearings about the high cost of the F-35, and this is their opinion.
          1. iwind
            iwind April 6 2016 16: 24
            +2
            Quote: Foresterer
            This is from Congressional hearings about the high cost of the F-35, and this is their opinion.

            Hmm, can I translate their quotes into the source?
            And then in the meantime, the F-35 made a transatlantic flight to a distance of 7167 km. There are already more than 50000 flight hours from the bottom of 25000 this year.
            We signed a contract for LRIP-11 in December 2015 for 91 units + in March 20 for another 15.
            About participating in exercises, etc. already do not even write them too much, fly every day see flight hours.
            1. Olezhek
              April 6 2016 19: 40
              -2
              And then in the meantime, the F-35 made a transatlantic flight over a distance of 7167 km


              Record plane "Vimi-Transatlantic" (1919)

              But he was much cheaper ...
              1. iwind
                iwind April 6 2016 20: 48
                +1
                Quote: Olezhek
                And then in the meantime, the F-35 made a transatlantic flight over a distance of 7167 km


                Record plane "Vimi-Transatlantic" (1919)

                But he was much cheaper ...

                And what's this for? And how much did it cost? These are different eras.
                F-35 cost the level of other planes - Eurofighter Typhoon and rafale dassault.
                1. Olezhek
                  April 6 2016 20: 57
                  0
                  F-35 cost the level of other planes - Eurofighter Typhoon and rafale dassault.


                  It costs - it is possible that at the level - it costs - just to fig (taking into account R&D)

                  And yes - Rafal for example, quite a reliable machine without glitches
                  1. iwind
                    iwind April 6 2016 21: 16
                    0
                    Quote: Olezhek
                    F-35 cost the level of other planes - Eurofighter Typhoon and rafale dassault.


                    It costs - it is possible that at the level - it costs - just to fig (taking into account R&D)

                    And yes - Rafal for example, quite a reliable machine without glitches

                    attached to these R&D. It’s too early to talk about them before the series ends.
                    and the price of flyaway cost $ 110 million is quite good.
          2. Vadim237
            Vadim237 April 6 2016 17: 53
            +1
            F 35 flies and flies perfectly not a single accident - I must admit that the plane took place, and the fact that there are technical problems - and which new planes do not have them, all this can be solved.
    2. Vik66
      Vik66 April 6 2016 14: 02
      +1
      The price of F-35 is only 10-15% higher than the price
      generation 4 ++ aircraft.

      C'mon, the SU-35 with all the meat for export costs $ 50 million
    3. Alexez
      Alexez April 6 2016 14: 04
      -1
      According to the US Accounts Chamber, if the F-35 procurement program continues, 459 aircraft will require more than the planned $ 83,4 billion. 83,4 billion / 459 = 181 million US dollars for 1 (one) F-35. OK - 181 million is the minimum.
      1. Muvka
        Muvka April 6 2016 15: 07
        0
        Quote: Alexez
        According to the US Accounts Chamber, if the F-35 procurement program continues, 459 aircraft will require more than the planned $ 83,4 billion. 83,4 billion / 459 = 181 million US dollars for 1 (one) F-35. OK - 181 million is the minimum.

        Well, people just think that planes are given at cost, especially abroad. Well, what to do.
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 6 2016 17: 55
        0
        This is on what F 35 - there are three modifications and a different cost.
    4. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 6 2016 19: 15
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      For developed countries, such as EU countries, Japan, South Korea, Australia - prices
      quite accessible. The price of F-35 is only 10-15% higher than the price
      generation 4 ++ aircraft. And with the transition to large series, the price will decrease
      up to 95-100 million. F-16 of the last modification costs 85 million, "Silent Eagle" F-15 -
      105 million

      The trouble is that the F-35 was not supposed to replace the heavy Eagle, but just the light and relatively cheap Falcon.
      As a result, there is now a constant game with statistics, when, for example, the cost of an aircraft without an engine (35-98 million evergreens) is called the "cost of the F-116".
    5. Winnie76
      Winnie76 April 6 2016 23: 57
      +1
      If I am not mistaken in the price of F 35 do not take into account the cost of the engine. And how much it costs is a secret. Plus a helmet for 600 kilobax. What they still do not take into account in price - God knows.

      It’s like in a car dealership. The car is kind of cheap, but without a radio, with meat grinders, on a stick and without kondeya wink. You can fly, but without pleasure wink . And in the normal configuration f 35 will be pulled only by the lucky owners of oil rigs or money machines ...
  18. Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov April 6 2016 13: 19
    +6
    Yes, the EF-35 looks somehow not ugly, "Spirit" is much more beautiful. As for the tactics of the United States to rely on air strikes, I would say it looks very good and in the final woe to the country on which the US air power will fall, but one "but" against a country with an advanced air defense system, the US Air Force will break their neck, and without preliminary powerful airstrikes, they are They CANNOT fight, and the Soviet strategists figured out this tactic by betting on a powerful air defense (my applause!), according to US analysts, in the event of an attempt to air strike on Russia, they will lose up to 80% of their aviation, which is a disaster.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich April 6 2016 13: 30
      +2
      Quote: Dmitry Potapov
      according to the estimates of US analysts, in the event of an attempt to launch an air strike against Russia, they will lose up to 80% of their aircraft, which is a disaster.

      they modestly call it "unacceptable harm" ...
    2. Kronos07
      Kronos07 April 6 2016 13: 35
      0
      Spirit
      This is a strategic bomber.
      1. St Petrov
        St Petrov April 6 2016 14: 04
        +2
        Quote: Altona
        Having created at one time the powerful Mustangs and Airacobras, the heavy bombers Liberators and Airacobras of the United States are currently not showing anything super interesting as before. But the German aircraft industry was also launched by the United States through massive industrial, financial and patent infusions. Messerschmitt factories worked on American machine tools, and German designers actively used the drawings of the firms "Pratt and Withney" and "Rolls-Royce" for aircraft engines. Yes, don't be surprised. And Daimler-Benz was half American, and its Austrian subsidiary was fully American. And also such a moment that the Bank of England had an agreement with the Reichsbank according to which it could veto various types of operations. Such is the parsley, you know. In this light, the secret flight of Hess and his mysterious death in Spandau becomes clear.


        I am not a fan of Omerika and despise her foreign policy, but


        The famous Dneproges was built by the American company Cooper Engineering Company and the German company Siemens

        Gorky Automobile Plant (GAZ) was built by the American company Austin.

        AZLK - built by Ford engineers

        Magnitogorsk is an exact copy of a metallurgical plant in the city of Gary, Indiana.

        Albert Kahn Inc alone designed and built 500 Soviet enterprises

        Thanks to Albert Kahn Inc, their engineers began to appear in the USSR.

        In just 10 years, Americans built almost 1500 factories in the USSR

        Although I understand why they did it. And far from good intentions, but does not cancel the fact that they did it

  19. shadow
    shadow April 6 2016 13: 25
    0
    The idea is clear and correct. Here are just a bunch of blinded. And the fact that the Americans did the best airplanes is not so. And the Su-35 did not immediately fly to Syria. And so the article is fully entitled to comprehension.
  20. Ramzes33
    Ramzes33 April 6 2016 13: 25
    +2
    The plus-article on the example of F-35 simply and intelligibly draws a geopolitical picture and the place of the United States in it.
  21. victorrychkov
    victorrychkov April 6 2016 13: 27
    0
    Right in the bullseye!
  22. a-cola
    a-cola April 6 2016 13: 31
    +1
    Somewhat chaotic and many repetitions of what has already been said. It is too early to bury this pack. Their task now is to crush as many vassals as they can. And if everyone sells at least 10 aircraft each, then for the whole gang it will still be much more than Russia alone, for which no one will stand up. And if necessary, they will do without planes at all. In Ukraine, for example ...
  23. Dormidont2
    Dormidont2 April 6 2016 13: 35
    +3
    Air defense with ROFAR will finally bury the stealth, so it’s not worth rushing with the T-50, it’s better to do more Su-35 with a complex of airborne defense, which will hide it from missiles
  24. Ru_N
    Ru_N April 6 2016 13: 35
    +2
    Quote "The Russian Aerospace Forces for various reasons, so to speak, in just a couple of months have done much more than the coalition aviation in a year." In fact, since 2011, coalition forces have been painstakingly ironing the desert.
  25. solovey
    solovey April 6 2016 14: 04
    0
    In the trailer everything is right F-35 and F-22 are unsuccessful. But F-15, F-14, F-16, F-18 are very successful !!!! It’s too early to write them off!
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 April 6 2016 18: 00
      +1
      And what is F 35, and 22 unsuccessful planes fly and they are already in the series - in that they are expensive, so our T 50 costs under 4 billion rubles apiece.
      1. Olezhek
        April 6 2016 19: 33
        0
        And what is F 35, and 22 unsuccessful planes fly and they are already in the series


        Series production of the F 22 aircraft began in the 2001 year. 14 January 2003, the first F-22 entered the military base "Nellis", located in the Nevada desert.


        But we didn’t see them in Iraq or in Libya ...

        Why?
  26. sogdianec
    sogdianec April 6 2016 14: 09
    +1
    Who can enlighten me on this question: how will the fifth generation differ from the fourth, with the appearance of new air defense systems capable of detecting and destroying all these "invisible things"? Progress is not worth it, and certainly work in this direction is being carried out in different countries.
    1. Muvka
      Muvka April 6 2016 15: 09
      0
      Supersound without afterburner, AFAR also seems to relate to this ...
  27. iliya87
    iliya87 April 6 2016 14: 09
    +1
    "the task is to use the whole of Ukraine in the so-called" banzai attack "on the Russian Federation." - fire phrase and liked about kamikaze)) Well, if it's the case, then the author is not quite right. US EU promised a treat after the collapse of Russia and other countries. Economic recovery, etc. they are doing this in many countries, and it’s our turn. Therefore, the EU and Germany in particular, like a dog, runs on a leash for a bone in the hands of the United States. Nooo, a sobering up of some politicians in the EU is slowly beginning to come, as if "something is going wrong."
  28. silver_roman
    silver_roman April 6 2016 14: 38
    +2
    What kind of aircraft can they offer to the leader of a poor third world country?

    All the same F-35 in the amount of 1 pieces for example.
    Take the Saudis as an example: they are ready to buy even scrap metal at the "right" price. Just under the guise of purchasing weapons, there is a banal payment of tribute + more buns. Against this background, the volume of the military budget, which exceeds ours, is touching. There is probably a cartridge one bucks 100 worth wassat . And in Yemen, dull Arabs grab from the Hussites in full.
    I'm not going to say that the Su-35 is something extraordinary and unsurpassed. But he is

    The Su-35 also has problems. Believe me. The fact that they fly in Syria does not mean that it is completely combat-ready aircraft without sores. There are simply restrictions on flight modes.

    And I'm sorry again, but the word "Obama" is just sitting in the liver. even more than "Putin's offshores". Obama decides exactly NOTHING. This is a stupid-speaking manikin, if in his place were put, say ... a piano, the sense would not have changed. Merkel did not stake on Obama, Obama did not bring in / withdraw troops, did not bomb anyone, did not develop anything. Why mislead people with this phrase. At least generalize to the USA or the Saxons. I just use the last varik.

    And at the expense of what awaits America. They correctly noted that Putin will leave sooner or later, and then they will begin to act. In this regard, time is on their side, because we always had a problem of continuity. As the time of one ruler was leaving, some kind of revolution began. The United States, in order not to completely rot under the weight of its debt, will try to devour Europe with the help of a transatlantic economic partnership. Europeans understand this very well and are trying to resist. We are sorting out our problems, arranged for us by the same states. So I would not be so categorical in judgments about the fate of syshya. There are many forms of empire existence in "sleeping" forms.
    Wait and see
  29. demiurg
    demiurg April 6 2016 15: 03
    +2
    Quote: c-Petrov
    Quote: Altona
    Having created at one time the powerful Mustangs and Airacobras, the heavy bombers Liberators and Airacobras of the United States are currently not showing anything super interesting as before. But the German aircraft industry was also launched by the United States through massive industrial, financial and patent infusions. Messerschmitt factories worked on American machine tools, and German designers actively used the drawings of the firms "Pratt and Withney" and "Rolls-Royce" for aircraft engines. Yes, don't be surprised. And Daimler-Benz was half American, and its Austrian subsidiary was fully American. And also such a moment that the Bank of England had an agreement with the Reichsbank according to which it could veto various types of operations. Such is the parsley, you know. In this light, the secret flight of Hess and his mysterious death in Spandau becomes clear.


    I am not a fan of Omerika and despise her foreign policy, but


    The famous Dneproges was built by the American company Cooper Engineering Company and the German company Siemens

    Gorky Automobile Plant (GAZ) was built by the American company Austin.

    AZLK - built by Ford engineers

    Magnitogorsk is an exact copy of a metallurgical plant in the city of Gary, Indiana.

    Albert Kahn Inc alone designed and built 500 Soviet enterprises

    Thanks to Albert Kahn Inc, their engineers began to appear in the USSR.

    In just 10 years, Americans built almost 1500 factories in the USSR

    Although I understand why they did it. And far from good intentions, but does not cancel the fact that they did it


    In the year 29, the Americans would have built concentration camps for Hitler. They had a crisis. And the USSR paid in gold. This is the second time we saved them. Their people fired from hunger and unemployment. Vagrants were driven to build roads for feeding.
    1. Foofighter
      Foofighter April 7 2016 05: 35
      0
      Are Americans the ones that are Sikorsky, Yablochkov?

      Trotsky, who wanted to let Russia go on concessions, he - yes, until 1917 he was an American.
  30. alexej123
    alexej123 April 6 2016 15: 17
    +1
    Good political and economic analysis. True or not, this is the opinion of the author.
  31. SklochPensioner
    SklochPensioner April 6 2016 15: 18
    +1
    The author clearly suffered the article.
    Good journalistic work! hi
  32. demiurg
    demiurg April 6 2016 15: 30
    +3
    Contra
    Lightning will fly, cannot but fly. Starfighter flew. Let us recall the peacekeeper, there was also a "revolutionary" machine. All of you have convinced me, there will be no bend fight, it will hit enemies from inviz without missing. I believe. And what about this iron with maneuverability? He seems to have to work on the ground. Or do they plan to drop JDAM for each pillbox? After how many days of war, but what kind of war, raids did guided weapons end in Europe? Nobody canceled cast iron in the global war as the main load. So, in the absence of VTOL-24, you will have to climb near the ground. And at the ground, all sorts of BMPs and armored personnel carriers with 14.5 and 30mm crawl. Show the video of this "handsome" anti-aircraft maneuvering near the ground. And then pour fuel into it for another hour of flight, hang two tons of bombs, and shoot the video again. Targeting optics don't know the word stealth. If you do not want to spin like in a frying pan, then you need to be either armored or you will be shot down.
    For
    For a war with an army armed with mirages and instant 21, this will be the very thing. Plus, traditional for the United States DRLO and EW. There will be a bunch of victorious videos about downed planes, about burned tanks. In Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Somalia. So the plane you need is done.
    Therefore, Israel praises him. For single shots, this is a very good plane, and invisibility is only in favor. To bring down intruders on the Su-17, too. On it with f-16 block 60 on equal terms, they do not plan to fight with electronic warfare and early warning aircraft on both sides, and with the su-35, (as in all battles on equal terms, 1/1 is already a good account). And taking into account how much it will go to Israel and how much they do in it, creating high-tech jobs, naturally they will not stop praising it. It absolutely matches their needs.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 6 2016 19: 18
      0
      Quote: demiurg
      Lightning will fly, cannot but fly. Starfighter flew. Let us recall the peacekeeper, there was also a "revolutionary" machine.

      He-he-he ... You still remember the B-58 Hustler. smile
      Also, it was adopted and flew. True, bad and not for long.
  33. bk316
    bk316 April 6 2016 15: 41
    +3
    In fact, the author voiced one hypothesis:
    The United States made a strategic fatal error, deciding after the collapse of the USSR that they also figured out with Russia and will now be rulers of the world forever. After that, they rebuilt themselves under this idea and now when it turned out that everything is not right, they sacrifice their partners, delaying the inevitable end.
    F-35 is an illustration.

    I read the entire article, I didn’t minus it, but I’m nowhere anywhere did not see the evidence this strong statement. An illustration is not proof. Moreover, the F-35 is a bad illustration, I would choose a position in the ground part of the US strategic triad. There it is more and more obvious and if they do not stir, then they have every chance of falling behind 2 (two) generations.
    But this is still an illustration and not a proof.
    Because the main weapon of US dominance is not aviation, not nuclear weapons, and not even AUGs, but
    printing press. And something I did not notice to put it mildly, no particular progress in the rejection of dollars. That's when the dollar ceases to be a reserve currency (well, at least the main reserve currency), then, yes - the collapse of the United States will become inevitable. Can not wait.
    1. Olezhek
      April 6 2016 15: 51
      +1
      Moreover F-35 is a bad illustration


      US without air supremacy - not the US
      Like Britain without domination of the sea ...

      For Americans, planes are the main thing ... it was always like this in the "American era"
      It's over. With what I also congratulate everyone: a buffet table at the expense of Sukhoi Design Bureau - they are birthday people! drinks
      1. Olezhek
        April 6 2016 15: 52
        +2
        а
        printing press.


        Who needs a printing press without the world hegemony of the machine owner?
        1. Corsair5912
          Corsair5912 April 6 2016 17: 49
          0
          Quote: Olezhek
          а
          printing press.


          Who needs a printing press without the world hegemony of the machine owner?

          Exactly, without dominance in the air, dollars are just pictures with portraits of slave traders, thieves and scammers, standing 10 cents 1 picture.
        2. bk316
          bk316 April 6 2016 23: 37
          +2
          Quote: Olezhek
          Who needs a printing press without the world hegemony of the machine owner?

          Theoretically - yes you are right.
          Only then should the second reserve currency be not the euro, but the yuan.
          Or even the ruble, given our nuclear potential.

          Therefore, everything is not so obvious. Although I repeat, I'm waiting for this (when their printing press will be needed by no one except them)
      2. bk316
        bk316 April 6 2016 23: 23
        +2
        Quote: Olezhek
        It is over.

        That
        > 200 F15
        > 1100 F16
        > 150 F-22
        already shot down?

        Maybe if their superiority is over then you don’t need to do the T-50?
        Think what you write.
      3. The comment was deleted.
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh April 6 2016 16: 12
      0
      "This is when the dollar will cease to be a reserve currency" ///

      The dollar became the main reserve currency only in 1976. And before
      Of this event, the United States was no less dominant in the world.
      And if the dollar becomes the number-2 currency again (before that, the pound was number-1),
      and if the yuan, for example, becomes the number-1 currency, then absolutely nothing will happen to the United States.
      1. Olezhek
        April 6 2016 16: 20
        0
        The dollar became the main reserve currency only in 1976.
        \

        Years since 1945 - the dollar is "our everything" - - the rest of the industrialized countries lay in ruins

        The pound has ceased to be the basis of international settlements - and where is Britain now?
        With the USA, nothing will happen, they will simply return to the level of a regional power - hold your hat - it will swing a lot
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh April 6 2016 16: 43
          +2
          "The pound has ceased to be the basis of international settlements - and where is Britain now?" ///

          You are absolutely right.
          In its place, in accordance with the real volume of its economy.
          It is not the currency that determines the economy of a country, but the economy - the strength of the currency.
          (Although London is still the number one financial center in the world).

          America gives 17 trillion - first place, China -15 - second, and so on ...
          Japan tore, and then lagged behind. Yu. Korea vomits like crazy.
          The world is changing, but nothing dramatic will happen to the States,
          be the dollar major or reserve.
          1. Olezhek
            April 6 2016 19: 30
            -2
            America gives 17 trillion - first place, China -15 -


            Sorry - China is real goods
            The USA is mostly air already ...
          2. bk316
            bk316 April 6 2016 23: 28
            +2
            Quote: voyaka uh
            America gives 17 trillion - first place, China -15 - second

            And excluding the financial sector, which is determined by the presence of a printing press?
          3. The comment was deleted.
  34. demiurg
    demiurg April 6 2016 16: 00
    0
    Quote: Olezhek

    Who needs a printing press without the world hegemony of the machine owner?

    Golden words, Yuri Venediktovich. good
  35. srha
    srha April 6 2016 16: 39
    0
    To the F-35, you can add manned space flights. By the way, it’s simpler there: Bush placed a school friend, a comrade’s, at the head of NASA. And he was offered a single-stage (not to be confused with a one-time) rocket. And he ate. Having swollen some billions, we figured it out, but ... time was lost, and even a bunch of projects managed to get in, after a single-stage one. How many of them were then closed ...
  36. demiurg
    demiurg April 6 2016 16: 58
    -1
    [quote = voyaka uh] "The pound is no longer the basis for international settlements - and where is Britain now?" ///

    You are absolutely right.
    In its place, in accordance with the real volume of its economy.
    It is not the currency that determines the economy of a country, but the economy - the strength of the currency.
    (Although London is still the number one financial center in the world).

    Of course, nothing happened. In 1982, Argentina was barely able to defeat, and even then the victory went with someone else's help. There are 400 tanks in the country (and what kind of tanks are these? Anti-tank self-propelled guns with a rotating turret. I consider a tank to calmly rush into the black soil in late spring through mud) and 200 like fighters. Referendums on the independence of parts of the state are being prepared. And so, in principle, nothing happened. Empire, push it into a swing, well then it will be something.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh April 6 2016 17: 29
      +1
      "Empire, play it in a swing, well it will be that" ///

      Exactly!
      The British Empire ended and well ...
      And the Ottoman ended, and the Austro-Hungarian and Soviet ...
      The time of empires has passed: what a real economy, such a currency, such a force.
      1. Olezhek
        April 6 2016 19: 29
        0
        The British Empire ended and well ...
        And the Ottoman ended, and the Austro-Hungarian and Soviet ...
        The time of empires has passed:


        I agree!
        The American empire is also in the dustbin of history! laughing
  37. demiurg
    demiurg April 6 2016 17: 27
    -1
    Quote: Kronos07
    First F-35A “Adir” for Israel Taking Shape in Fort Worth


    Did they check it for kosher? lol
    Here Israel will arrange this plane. The advantage is that its fair share on the promised land is produced. There’s no one to fight for the serious ones now and in the foreseeable future. And to arrange a sudden raid where the thread is the most. Stealth really helps here.
  38. Corsair5912
    Corsair5912 April 6 2016 17: 44
    +1
    But the F-35 did not show themselves in any way (they are still “being drank with a file”). This has never happened before in the era of aviation. America has always made the most modern aircraft (at least after the WWII) and here you are: there is war, but there are no new American aircraft.

    In fact, this is not so in the 1983 year that the KGB carried out a brilliant operation to leak secret information from the KB and emigrate the offended scientist Peter Ufimtsev.
    "... the technological breakthrough of the Americans in the production of stealths was associated with the emigration to the United States of Ufimtsev, who was involved in the creation of invisible people.
    For many years Ufimtsev did the same in the USSR. And not only him.
    In at least two Soviet design bureaus, various types of invisible aircraft were built and tested. The conclusion of the authoritative commissions was as follows:
    1) an invisible aircraft made according to the ideas of Ufimtsev, due to its shape, has low speed and maneuverability - in fact it is a hang glider, poorly adapted to combat maneuver and incapable of aerobatics;
    2) the aircraft can be detected visually and with special high-frequency radars; in addition, when bombs are opened and in some flight modes, it is visible with ordinary radars and can be easily shot down after a "notch";
    3) the cost of the aircraft is prohibitive.
    Conclusion: the construction of such aircraft is impractical; moreover, this type of aircraft is a “dead end branch of the development of military aviation.
    In Russia, and even the air defense forces of other countries today have meter-range locators for which it is not important to stealth this or a regular airplane.
    The news of the invisibility of "stealth" for only one type of locator caused a real scandal in the US government. Indeed, billions were spent on the development of stealth aircraft, but it turned out that the effectiveness of new aircraft in battle can be inferior even to old machines. "
    1. Olezhek
      April 6 2016 19: 18
      0
      Thanks for the comment - it’s interesting, but what’s wrong in my lines?
      Does the USA have a modern aircraft?
      The reasons why this situation arose, I did not dig so deep.
    2. Winnie76
      Winnie76 April 7 2016 00: 14
      0
      Quote: Corsair5912
      special high-frequency radars;

      Rather low-frequency. The stealth optimized EPR (effective scattering surface) at a wavelength of about 3 cm. In the decimeter and meter range, they are visible no worse than conventional aircraft. Until recently, the problem was to minimize the size of decimeter radars and their accuracy, insufficient for target designation.
      Accordingly, at T 50 installed PAR L (dm) range.
  39. demiurg
    demiurg April 6 2016 17: 47
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh



    The time of empires has passed: what a real economy, such a currency, such a force.

    I got uncle :)) Vlip, nerd :))
    But how then did Israel overcome in 1972? But besides jokes, did he have that the economy was more powerful then than did Egypt, Syria and Jordan at once? In theory, these three Arab countries had an overwhelming advantage in all areas, the army is more powerful, mobilization resources can not be compared, the economy, too. But we already know the result.
  40. Awaz
    Awaz April 6 2016 20: 22
    0
    as one good guy said: you can teach to fly a refrigerator if you attach a jet engine to it. I don’t know much about the F35 or F22, just as I don’t know much about the Su 35, for example, but I don’t understand why the Americans didn’t try to compete with Russian Dryers on them. You can even by their rules. It would be much more interesting to read any weird generally nonsense and advertising.
    1. Olezhek
      April 6 2016 20: 42
      0
      but I don’t understand why the Americans didn’t try to compete with Russian Dryers on them.

      Legend of technology leadership will collapse
  41. 76SSSR
    76SSSR April 7 2016 12: 52
    0
    And their fighters, starting with the Second World War, were some of the best, if not the best. Is always.

    Some of the best yes, but the phrase "if not the best" is inappropriate.