Military Review

Battle of technology: Stealth + AWACS vs Super-maneuverability + EW

208
Battle of technology: Stealth + AWACS vs Super-maneuverability + EW



Introduction

The military doctrines of Russia and the NATO countries as a mandatory stage of hostilities provide for the achievement of superiority of their aviation in airspace over enemy territory - the so-called air supremacy. A typical example is the largest military conflict since World War II - the Iraq war of 1990-1991, in which 1,5 million troops and 3000 aircraft and helicopters were involved on both sides.

As a prerequisite for the start of the ground phase of the operation, the coalition forces were tasked with winning air superiority, including neutralizing Iraq’s air defense system. To accomplish this task, the latest at that time F-117 Nighthawk aircraft, created using the Stealth technology, were used together with the E-3 Sentry long-range radar detection and control aircraft using AWACS technology. F-117 in the dark participated in the decommissioning of command posts, communications centers and radar air defense systems.



A similar scenario of the outbreak of hostilities was repeated by NATO aircraft eight years later during the war in Yugoslavia. Using its technological advantage in the form of a Stealth + AWACS bundle once again helped the coalition forces suppress the enemy’s air defense system and gain air superiority. However, this time the F-117 aircraft, which are no longer a novelty, suffered losses - one of them was shot down, and the second after being hit by a ground-to-air missile was able to return to the base, but was written off due to injuries.



The military-technical policy of the NATO countries provides for the rearmament of tactical aviation with Stealth aircraft type F-35 Lightning II and airplanes with Stealth elements such as Dassault Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon, as well as an increase in the AWACS aircraft fleet such as E-3 Sentry and E-737-700 Peace Eagle. In addition to these, the F-22 Raptor fighters designed to gain air supremacy are limited in number in the United States Air Force.

The experience of the participation of the Military Space Forces of Russia in local military conflicts in Georgia and Syria suggests a different approach to the choice of technologies to ensure air supremacy. Despite the adoption of the DRLOU A-50 domestic aircraft and the continued development of the promising unobtrusive T-50 fighter, the main emphasis is on the development of aviation electronic warfare equipment and the production of Su-35 fighter jets built according to the technology that ensures super-maneuverability in air combat.

Stealth technology

The first aircraft in the design of which the technology of stealth in the radio range was implemented is the American subsonic aircraft F-117, put into service in the 1983 year. Despite the presence of the letter F (fighter) in the title, by its flight capabilities and actual use it is a typical strike aircraft. Therefore, the F-117 could fight for air superiority only at long and medium distances using air-to-air missiles or by suppressing air defense systems, which he did.



The implementation of Stealth technology in its design is based on the following solutions:
- the airframe consists of a set of faceted surfaces reflecting the probing radio signal in the direction opposite to the direction of the radar;
- airframe elements are interconnected without the formation of angles in 90 degrees (the so-called corner reflectors), the vertical tail is V-shaped, there is no horizontal tail;
- connectors on the airframe surface are made with jagged edges, scattering the radio signal in different directions;
- the airframe trim includes cellular radio absorbing panels with a thickness of approximately 10 centimeters;
- a radar absorbing coating is additionally applied to the surface of the airframe;
- in order to exclude radio signal re-reflection from the internal equipment of the pilot's cabin and pilot's helmet, a metallized coating is applied to the cabin's glazing;
- the blades of the low-pressure compressors of the turbofan engines are shielded by grids installed on the air inlet;
- the propulsion system consists of two relatively low-power turbofan engines with reduced thermal emission;
- the blades of low-pressure turbine turbofan engines are shielded by the narrowing of the nozzle, the flat shape of which ensures a reduction in the thermal visibility of the jet due to its intensive mixing with the ambient air;
- aviation weapons (bombs and missiles) are placed on the inner suspension;
- radar, radio altimeter and “friend-foe” radio responder were excluded from on-board electronic equipment;
- the radio station in a combat situation only works at the reception.



Piloting the F-117 at night is done using thermal imagers and laser rangefinders / altimeters, which are part of two optical radar systems located above and below the fuselage.

Features of the implementation of Stealth technology imposes significant restrictions on the flight-tactical characteristics of the F-117. The faceted shape of the airframe reduces the aerodynamic quality of the aircraft to 4 units, making it impossible to conduct close combat with fighters. Due to the pressure loss in the air path of the engines (air intake grilles and flat nozzles), the F-117 has a lower thrust-to-weight ratio and range. The work of the radio station only at the reception determines the strictly individual nature of the combat missions. The exclusion of the “friend or foe” radio response from the avionics of the airborne unit makes it necessary to use the plane only if there are no miles in the air of friendly planes within the 100 radius. The abandonment of the airborne radar leads to the limitation of piloting weather conditions at the level of aircraft of the Second World War.

However, the reduction in F-117 radio objectivity was not ensured from all directions, the need to ensure a given level of lift caused the use of flat bottom surfaces of the wing and fuselage, with EPR from the lower hemisphere was sufficient to detect an aircraft with more than 30 km with meter radars and 15 km with centimeters. Attempts at piloting the F-117 at low altitudes led to its discovery by thermal imaging systems of the air defense system and MANPADS almost immediately after the exit due to radio horizon.
The aircraft was decommissioned after one vehicle was shot down and another was damaged in Yugoslavia using the Soviet Pechora S-125M air defense missile system, as well as taking into account the mass equipment of fighters with optical-location stations with a detection range of up to 50 kilometers in the forward hemisphere and 100 kilometers rear hemisphere.

The accumulated experience in the production and combat use of the F-117 allowed the US Air Force to formulate requirements for the development of a different type of aircraft, originally intended to achieve superiority in the air and at the same time carried out using Stealth technology. Designed in accordance with these requirements, the F-22 fighter (adopted in 2001 year) is a compromise between the excellent flight performance of the F-15 aerodynamic prototype and the level of stealthiness of its technological F-117 prototype.

The aerodynamic quality of the F-22 at the level of 10 units is ensured by the rejection of faceted glider forms. Supersonic speed is achieved by the use of engines that ensure the thrust-weight of the aircraft at the level of its weight. Increased maneuverability obtained by controlling the thrust vector of the engines in the vertical plane.

Stealth technology in F-22 is implemented by eliminating the articulation of airframe elements at right angles, using radar absorbing airframe surface and radar absorbing honeycomb in the toe of the wing, jagged edges of connectors, metallizing the cockpit canopy, using radar-blockers installed in front of the compressors and after the turbine turbine engines, as well as by placing all aircraft armament on the internal suspension. In contrast to the F-117, the F-22 avionics included a radar, radio altimeter and a “friend-foe” radio transponder. The radio station in a combat situation works both on reception and on data transmission.



The F-22 radio-visibility is reduced due to the special operating mode of the on-board radar - the so-called LPI (low probability of intercept), low probability of interception - noise-like radiation of reduced power with a floating frequency, frequency and polarization of the radio signal (the so-called complex discrete-coded signal).



Radio communication in a group of aircraft is carried out using directional antennas.

An additional on-board radio-electronic equipment is the radar radiation warning system AN / ALR-94, which includes several receivers distributed over the airframe.

As part of the BREM is no OLS, instead it uses the system AN / AAR-56 of several infrared sensors distributed over the surface of the airframe. Due to the absence of a laser rangefinder, this system is able to determine only the direction to the source of thermal radiation.

The attempt to combine the properties of a maneuverable fighter with the Stealth technology in F-22 led to an increase in its cost to 411 million US dollars (including R & D), which caused the refusal to build F-22 after the production of 187 production machines. Because of its high cost, the aircraft was not used in local conflicts as a means of suppressing air defense or to gain air superiority.

In this regard, the United States and other NATO countries (with the exception of Germany and France) chose a different, budget version of the Stealth-powered single-engine American aircraft, F-35, as a promising aircraft for gaining air supremacy. The machine is available in three versions at once: ground-based (basic version), deck-based (with an increased wingspan and a reinforced chassis) and vertical take-off and landing (with an additional fan and a rotatable engine nozzle). F-35 is planned to replace most NATO tactical aircraft: the F-15 Eagle, the F-16 Fighting Falcon, the F / A-18 Hornet and the AV-8 Harrier II.



As of the beginning of 2016, the 174 F-35 has been produced. The total number of aircraft planned for construction is estimated at 3000 units at a cost of one from 256 million dollars in the 2014 year to 120 million US dollars in the 2020 year. To date, all released F-35 are in trial operation, the combat readiness of the first of them is planned to be provided starting from the current year.

F-35, despite the letter F in the title, is a strike aircraft: its maximum take-off weight reaches 31 tonne after the engine afterburner 19,5 tons, which causes its thrust-to-weight ratio 0,65 and speed of 1700 km / h against 0,83 and 2410 km / h in fighter F-22. The engine of the new machine is made without a thrust vector control mechanism. Regarding the set of Stealth elements and the composition of the BREM, the F-35 does not differ from the F-22, except for the additional presence of the RL, intended for viewing the lower hemisphere and laser operation in the altimeter, rangefinder and target designation modes, including ground targets.



In conclusion of the description of the Stealth technology, it is necessary to dwell on its effectiveness in terms of reducing the visibility of aircraft in the radio range, as measured by the effective dispersion area. As a rule, in open descriptions of airplanes, minimum ESR values ​​are given, achieved only in a static position when observed in the front sphere strictly in the frontal plane, therefore it is useful to remember that the ESR value differs by more than an order from other directions.
In flight, in general, due to the misalignment of the observed aircraft and the direction of its irradiation with radar, even in the front sphere, the EPR value increases severalfold. Similarly, the value of the EPR is influenced by aircraft armament, placed on the external sling. However, when placing weapons in conformal containers, ESR increases slightly.

If an external probing radio signal hits the surface of the aircraft’s radar antenna, its EPR value increases by an order of magnitude. Therefore, in the framework of the Stealth technology, a constant rotation of the antenna plane into the upper hemisphere is provided, thereby reducing the range and accuracy of target detection in the lower hemisphere.



EPR F-117 on the basis of combat use in Yugoslavia can be estimated at 0,025 sq.m. Promotional materials for F-22 and F-35 contain ESR values ​​up to 0,0015 sq. M, which cannot correspond to the actual state of things, because the design of F-22 and F-35 does not have faceted airframe surfaces and thick cellular radio absorbing panels used. in the design of the F-117. Therefore, the most realistic value of the EPR F-22 and F-35 can be estimated in 0,1 square meters in a static position and 0,3 square meters in flight. For comparison, the EPR of airplanes that partially use the Stealth technology - Dassault Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon in a static position without arms on the external sling is estimated at 1 sq. M, the EPR of new versions of the F-15E and Su-35C fighters - in 3 sq. M. The indicated EPR values ​​are given for centimeter-range radar exposure conditions. In the decimeter range, the ESR increases by about 25 percent, in meter - by about 100 percent.

AWACS technology

In the area of ​​radar detection of aircraft, radars of meter, decimeter, centimeter and millimeter ranges are currently used.

The meter range radars have antennas measuring several tens of meters, which limits their use to ground-based. In connection with this, the radar has a small radio horizon for detecting airborne targets, with an altitude of 100 meters, its magnitude is of the order of 40 km, which is less than the flying distance of anti-radar missiles such as AGM-88E and X-58E. At altitudes of more than 5 km, the meter radar, for example, the Russian radar "Nebo-ME" detects a target with an EPR 0,1 sq. M at a distance of 287 km.

UHF radars have a few meters in size, which allows them to be placed on air carriers, primarily on board AWACS aircraft supporting AWACS technology. At the altitude of the carrier 12 km, the radio horizon is on the order of 450 km, the instrumental range for detecting air targets over the radio horizon reaches 650 km. The AN / APY-2 Radar of the E-3 Sentry detects an air target with an 1 square meter EPR at the 425 km distance, and an 0,1 square meter EPR - at the 200 km distance.



Centimeter-range radars have an antenna with a diameter of 800-900 mm, which fits into the cross section of the fuselage of fighter aircraft and attack aircraft. The antenna is implemented in the form of a phased array of 1,8-2 thousands of transceiver modules. The radar beam is formed in a mixed electron-mechanical manner with a scan angle of + -150 degrees (AN / APG-77 F-22 fighter) and + -120 degrees (H035 Irbis of the Su-35C fighter). The detection range of air targets with an EPR 1 sq. M reaches 225 km, with an EPR 0,1 sq. M - 148 km. In LPI mode, the detection range is reduced approximately 2 times due to the lower signal power.



The millimeter-range radars have an antenna with a diameter of 150-300 mm, which is installed in the head part of air-to-air missiles with an active radar guidance system. The detection range of air targets ranges from 10 to 20 km, depending on the EPR. When performing a millimeter antenna in the form of an AFAR at a distance of one to two kilometers, resolution to the level of the silhouette of the aircraft can be provided.



DRLOU airplanes are equipped with RTR systems, communications and control of fighter and attack aircraft, which allows them to find radio sources, determine their coordinates and direct aircraft to air targets that fly without having to turn on-board radars. The latter, in turn, with the help of a radio command line induce a medium-to-long-range air-to-air missile at the target. When approaching the target, active RGSN missiles are included in the work.

Super maneuverability technology

Currently, the maximum range of launching air-to-air missiles on a non-maneuvering target at an altitude of 10 km is from 180 km (AIM-120D) to 300 km (RVV-BD). If the target performs an anti-missile maneuver, the launch range is reduced to 90-150 km due to the rocket’s fuel costs for counter-maneuvering.

After a missile targeting a medium / long range missile due to an antimissile maneuver of an aircraft or electronic countermeasures to capture a target, the struggle for air superiority is forced to enter the stage of close combat of enemy planes that use short range missiles with passive thermal seeker and gun armament. The close range air combat with the use of OLS begins with 40 / 20 km (the maximum range of the launch of short-range missiles RVV-MD / AIM-9X), without the use of OLS from the line of sight of the target.



The ability of an airplane to be the first to reach the target-engagement zone of a thermal seeker of a rocket (scan angle + -120 degrees) or the target-capture zone with a gun sight comes to the forefront in close combat. To this end, the aircraft carry out maneuvers in the air, seeking to enter the capture zone. The smaller the radius of the curves described by the aircraft in the air, and the smaller the loss of speed in the process of turns, the greater the chances of defeating melee air combat.

The maneuverability of the aircraft is ensured by its aerodynamics, strength due to withstand overload, thrust-to-weight ratio, the specific load on the wing, the degree of wing mechanization, and tail tail area. In the process of maneuvering, the angle of attack of the wings increases to supercritical with a drop in the carrying capacity of the wings and shading of the tail unit, up to the loss of aerodynamic controllability. After that, the aircraft can only be controlled by controlling the thrust vector of the engine.



The technology of super-maneuverability of aircraft is based on thrust-to-weight ratio exceeding 1 (after producing half the fuel reserve) and thrust vector control of engines, the number of which must be at least two to provide control in the roll channel. At the moment, only two cars meet these criteria: F-22 and Su-35С. All other types of aircraft after the transition into combat air combat inevitably lose to super-maneuverable machines, which was confirmed when modeling fights in computer simulators.

The super-maneuverable Su-35С aircraft has a thrust-to-weight ratio of 1,1 when producing half the fuel reserve, which exceeds the similar indicators of the F-22. The Su-35S engines contain deflectable nozzles, and their top-end modification (unlike the F-22 engines) has full-thrust thrust vector control, which allows the aircraft to rotate around the vertical axis 180 degrees, taking aim at the pursuing enemy without turning in the air. The design of the aircraft used elements of the Stealth technology in the form of a radio reflecting coating for the cockpit canopy and a radio absorbing airframe edge coating. Su-35С has the potential of modernization in terms of reducing the EPR to 1 sq. M due to the installation of radar-blockers, the collapse of the tail fin carcasses and the placement of outboard weapons in a conformal container between the air intakes.

EW technology

The airborne electronic equipment of the aircraft includes passive radar radiation warning systems and active systems to counteract this radiation. In accordance with the ideology of Stealth, only the first type of system is included in the F-22 and F-35 avionics. In contrast, the Su-35С avionics additionally contains active REB L-175В systems in the form of small-sized containers installed on the wingtips. The active system does not mask the aircraft in the radio band, but sends echo signals with a time delay to the side of the probing radar. Active systems are designed for individual protection of an aircraft by disrupting target acquisition by radar GOS of the millimeter-wave range of ground-to-air and air-to-air missiles.



In terms of confrontation with the AWACS technology, of interest are group active means of radioelectronic suppression of the operation of the DRLOU aircraft of the UHF type, the Russian “Tarantula” type, placed in a container on the external suspension of EW airplanes. In the direction of the probing radar, the transmitter emits a directional noise interference of high power, the magnitude of which obviously exceeds the power received by the probe radar, since the direct signal from the transmitter of interference is orders of magnitude more powerful than the signal reflected from the target.



Active means of electronic suppression work in conjunction with passive means of electronic reconnaissance, placed on the same EW carrier and determining the direction to the source of radio emission. When two or more EW carriers work together by triangulation, the distance to the radio source is also determined. Computing facilities, which are also included in the EW complex, make it possible to determine the ranges and coordinates of radio emission sources operating in continuous, pulsed or LPI modes.

In the development, there are interference transmitters with an AFAR antenna, which forms several beams of a radiation pattern in order to simultaneously suppress the corresponding number of radars (like the promising American NGJ complex). To supply equipment with electricity in containers are installed generators with turbines, driven in rotation by the oncoming air flow. As a rule, EW carrier planes are used in pairs, which allows more than doubled the area of ​​electronic cover and at the same time "smears" in space the location of the carriers themselves (when synchronous operation of interference transmitters in the so-called blinking mode), thereby protecting them from rocket attacks.

Tactic of winning air superiority

You can evaluate the advantage of a technology to achieve superiority in the air by simulating an air battle in certain conditions:
- pre-suppressed air defense system from one side and the other;
- the numerical equality of fighter aircraft on both sides with a difference in the number of support aircraft (respectively, AWACS and EW) in proportion to the cost of the latter;
- conducting oncoming air combat in order to gain superiority in the air by destroying enemy aircraft (without attacking ground targets);
- the presence of adverse weather conditions, forcing to abandon the use of OLS up to the line of melee.

The number of aircraft involved in the oncoming airborne combat will be determined by its largest participant, the AWACS aircraft, whose radar has an instrumental range of about 500 km, while surveying the area sufficient for operational use of a maximum of an aviation fighter wing consisting of three squadrons with three links each the number of aircraft in 36 units. On the basis of the equality of the number of fighter aircraft, the opposite side can employ an aviation fighter regiment. To cover the actions of the air regiment, it is possible to attract 10 EW planes, based on the comparability of their total cost with the cost of one DRLOU aircraft.

The party using a bunch of Stealth + AWACS technologies can use the E-3 Sentry as an AWARD aircraft, and the F-22 (at best), which has six weapons with AIM-120D radar missiles ventral compartments, one rocket with a thermal seeker AIM-9X in the side compartments and a Vulcan 20-mm cannon.

The party using the Super-maneuverability + EW technology bundle can use the Su-34 with the Tarantula containers on an external hanger as an EW plane, and the Su-35С, which has six weapons with radar GOS RVV, as an aircraft to achieve air superiority -BD and six rockets with a thermal homing RVV-MD on an external sling, 30-mm gun GSH-30-1.

The E-3 Sentry barrage area is located at least 300 km away from the side separation line - the maximum range of the RVV-BD missiles when firing at a non-manoeuvrable target. The initial position of the F-22 before the battle was removed from the demarcation line by no less than 90 km - the effective range of the AIM-120D missiles when firing at a maneuverable target.



The tactical construction of the second-party aircraft grouping includes three 12 Su-35С and 2 Su-34 groups each and two distracting 2 groups Su-34 each. Distracting groups, using the fact of shielding their airspace by the probe beam of the AWAC radar, imitate aggressive actions towards the enemy. The initial position of the shock and distraction groups is not less than 250 km from the side separation line, based on the E-2 Sentry radar instrumental range.

The air combat initiative belongs to the second side, which is not tied to the area of ​​the hawking of the AWACS plane. The flight of shock and distracting groups is carried out in the radar field E-2 Sentry. The convergence of the groups with the E-2 Sentry will be accompanied by maneuvering in altitude and azimuth in order to force the F-22 to launch AIM-120D using radio command guidance in the middle flight segment of the rocket and thereby reveal the number and location of the “invisible” aircraft. Naturally, F-22 in such a situation will refuse to attack the shock and distracting groups until they reach the start-up distance of the RVV-DB using the E-2 Sentry (300 km).



Under the shielding radar signal of the U-band E-3 Sentry radar, the F-22 fighters will be forced to use their centimeter-range radars when approaching the drums and distractions to the distance of effective use of AIM-120D in order to identify the aircraft composition of each of the shock and distraction groups and the corresponding distribution missiles out of stock. In case of approaching at a distance of 300 km, the AWACS plane will be forced to withdraw from the battlefield due to attacks using RVV-BD missiles, which will also force F-22 to switch on its radar.

However, using radar, F-22 will exit Stealth mode and will be detected by PTP Su-34 and Su-35С. Su-34, having completed their work, turned back, avoiding encounters with medium-range missiles, and F-22 and Su-35C will continue to come together, exchange missile salvoes, radio-command follower of medium-range missiles in flight until they receive radar GPS signals missiles on the capture of enemy targets.

Considering the opposition of onboard EW equipment of fighters, especially active EW Su-35С, some of the medium-range missiles will not reach their goals and the fight will inevitably enter the close combat airborne phase (the combat mission of both sides remains unchanged — air superiority). In this phase, the advantage of the Su-35C becomes undeniable: the best super-maneuverability speaks for itself, plus three times the number of missiles with thermal seeker on board.

As a result, it can be stated that the bundle of technologies Super-maneuverability + EW dominates over the bundle of AWACS + Stealth technologies.

Information sources:
1. Travin G.A., Goryunov V.V., Surovtsev V.I., Perepelkin I.N. Direction finding and recognition of complex discrete-coded (noise-like) signals of subtle radars based on the use of computer technologies. "Computer Modeling", 2012, 13 (132), issue 23/1 // https://www.google.ru/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi&jqyNw7vKAhWK_HIKHQL3 http% 3A% 2F% 2Fcyberleninka.ru% 2Farticle% 2Fn% 2Fpelengovanie-i-raspoznavanie-slozhnyh-diskretno-kodirovannyh-shumopodobnyh-signalov-malozametnyh-rls-na-osnove-primenjeng1 & 1.pdfSa. d.bGQ.
2. Stealing in the air. 5 generation fighters // http://judgesuhov.livejournal.com/144148.html.
3. V. Kirillov. Combat orders of tactical aviation (from the experience of local wars) // http://military-az.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20391.
4. Lectures on TVWS. Air Force tactics. Full course // http://vamvzlet.blogspot.ru/2014/03/blog-post.html.
Author:
208 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Foofighter
    Foofighter April 15 2016 07: 14
    +11
    As a result, the combination of Super Maneuverability + EW + AWACS + Steath will beat both the combination of Super Maneuverability + EW and AWACS + Steath.
    1. Wild_grey_wolf
      Wild_grey_wolf April 15 2016 07: 56
      +7
      Time will show of course what and how. . . but the main thing is better not to bring to a military clash. . . and conduct exercises and competitions. . . and conflicts should be resolved diplomatically. True, lately it has become harder and harder to do this.
      1. Error
        Error April 15 2016 08: 57
        +1
        But I don’t really believe that f35 will be brought to mind! Even so will return to the old f16 and f15 for on their side maneuverability and price! And as the new story shows, all the battles are slipping one way or another into the near
        1. Foofighter
          Foofighter April 15 2016 09: 29
          +3
          They will not bring it, it is impossible. But they will be used, though only in the F-35A version, and in much smaller quantities. Nevertheless, significantly larger than the US F-22 in service.
          For Iran, with their F-14 it is a very dangerous aircraft, and for no one else.
        2. Foofighter
          Foofighter April 15 2016 09: 29
          0
          They will not bring it, it is impossible. But they will be used, though only in the F-35A version, and in much smaller quantities. Nevertheless, significantly larger than the US F-22 in service.
          For Iran, with their F-14 it is a very dangerous aircraft, and for no one else.
        3. Sultan
          Sultan April 15 2016 12: 46
          +1
          They won’t have time ... Time is already gone ... autumn ...
          1. Foofighter
            Foofighter April 15 2016 13: 22
            0
            It depends on which hemisphere

            In Antarctica where the penguins are found so generally winter.
      2. Foofighter
        Foofighter April 15 2016 09: 24
        +1
        This is clear simply from logic.
      3. Foofighter
        Foofighter April 15 2016 09: 24
        0
        This is clear simply from logic.
    2. papik09
      papik09 April 16 2016 13: 53
      +1
      The main thing - DO NOT NEED TO CHECK ALL THIS ON REALLY !!! fool
      The rest is antlers ... hi
    3. Falcon
      Falcon April 18 2016 14: 17
      +3
      To be honest, it’s hard to find a living place in the article. Bloopers in every line ...
      Quote: Author
      The aircraft was withdrawn from service after the downing of one car and damage to the second in Yugoslavia using the Soviet Pechora S-125M air defense system

      After more than a thousand successful flights, not only in this conflict, and one shot down - they decided to take off - everything was gone
      Quote: Author
      during EPR from the lower hemisphere it turned out to be sufficient to detect an aircraft with more than 30 km meter radars and 15 km centimeter.

      Where the hell is it from? What radars? Any choli?
      Quote: Author
      The aerodynamic quality of the F-22 at the level of 10 units is ensured by the rejection of faceted forms of the airframe

      Where the hell is it from? did the author purge the F-22 at TsAGI? What are the notions? And then the verge?
      Quote: Author
      Supersonic speed is achieved by the use of engines providing thrust-weight ratio of the aircraft at the level of its weight.

      Where the hell is it from? What weight? Empty, full of normal?
      Quote: Author
      Increased maneuverability is obtained by controlling the thrust vector of the engines in the vertical plane.

      Where the hell is it from? What nonsense is this? Over-maneuverability and control at supercritical angles of attack are not the same thing.
      Quote: Author
      F-22's Stealth technology is implemented by eliminating right-angle glider articulation

      Eco wrapped! And all the fourth-generation aircraft with the same right angles with us. The cube in the air is straight.
      Quote: Author
      using radar blockers installed in front of the compressors

      Where from the F-22 radar blockers? What next fantasy? Why are they in the S-shaped channel?
      Quote: Author
      to an increase in its value to 411 million US dollars (including R&D), which caused the abandonment of the construction of the F-22 after the production of 187 serial machines.

      Cost, taking into account the development, in contrast to all price tags. And they abandoned it, because there were no rivals.
      Quote: Author
      . The total number of aircraft planned for construction is estimated at 3000 units at a cost of one from 256 million dollars in 2014 year to 120 million dollars in 2020 year

      Where from? What next fantasy? From 256 to 120? Why not from 700 to 3's? What is difficult not to invent?
      Quote: Author
      and the composition of the F-35 ARVs does not differ from the F-22, except for the additional presence of an OLS designed for viewing the lower hemisphere and laser operation in the altimeter, rangefinder and target designator mode, including on ground objects.

      Fantasy again. What an OLS of the lower hemisphere. the author does not see the difference between the OLS and the aiming system, and does not know about the rest of the F-35 systems ...
    4. Falcon
      Falcon April 18 2016 14: 17
      +2
      Quote: Author
      The indicated EPR values ​​are given for centimeter-wave radar conditions. In the decimeter range, the EPR increases by about 25 percent, in the meter - by about 100 percent.

      Complete nonsense! The author does not even know the basics of radar. What are 25 / 100 percent. Well, open the most primitive textbook for high schools, and look at the formulas. Fantasy again!
      Quote: Author
      If the target performs an anti-ballistic maneuver, the launch range is reduced to 90-150 km due to the rocket’s fuel consumption for counter-maneuvering.

      What? What kind of fuel? Is the author familiar with how BB missiles work? And how much does the engine work there? Fantasy again.
      Quote: Author
      The ability of an aircraft to enter the target capture zone of a thermal missile seeker first comes to the fore in close combat

      Shield? Do we now need to bring melee missiles to the capture zone of their GOS? Why, then, the OLS and helmet-mounted central control system?
      Quote: Author
      The smaller the radius of the curves described by the aircraft in the air, and the smaller the loss of speed during the turns, the more chances to win in close air combat.

      FAQ ??? What is the smaller radius? the author look at what is the speed of steady and unsteady reversal. Otherwise, this is complete nonsense ...
      Quote: Author
      In the process of maneuvering, the angle of attack of the wings increases to supercritical with a drop in the bearing capacity of the wings and the shading of the tail unit up to the loss of aerodynamic controllability.

      Damn, this is a song! If only at an air show - it is. What kind of combat maneuvering is this?
      Quote: Author
      and controlling the thrust vector of the engines, the number of which must be at least two to ensure control in the roll channel.

      Tresh. author what is the most speedy with BVB? Do not bother - you do not know. And without roll control, huh? Fantasy again!
      Quote: Author
      All other types of aircraft after the transition to a close air battle inevitably lose to super-maneuverable machines, which was confirmed when simulating battles in computer simulations.

      Delirium again! In computer games simulated? Again, the concept of super-maneuverability!
      Quote: Author
      The super-maneuverable Su-35С aircraft has a thrust-weight ratio of 1,1 while running out of half the fuel supply, which exceeds the similar indicators of the F-22.

      And again fantasy. Everything is exactly the opposite. The calculation that no one will check?
      1. Falcon
        Falcon April 18 2016 14: 18
        +3
        Quote: Author
        which allows the aircraft to rotate around the vertical axis by 180 degrees, taking into the sight of the pursuing enemy without performing turns in the air.

        Ha ha ha Funny to colic! What is rotation around a vertical axis? And how does it affect target capture? And how to apply it in the BVB? Horror!
        Quote: Author
        The aircraft avionics include passive radar warning systems and active anti-radiation systems. In accordance with Stealth ideology, only the first type of systems are included in the F-22 and F-35 avionics.

        Yah? Fantasy again? Or maybe not a desire to understand the F-22 / 35 systems?
        And I'm already tired, to be honest. Then again fantasies about electronic warfare, I also advise you to read the textbook on it, as well as on radar. Next photoshop non-existent containers Su-34. Then Bomber became an electronic warfare aircraft, suddenly like that.
        Even the F-22 humbly did not turn on the radar for half an hour, while the dryers approached from all sides. Then opa - suddenly turned on and then they all chided. In short, another fantasy ...

        I also liked this picture.


        So Opa Odir turned around, the other behind him at 120 degrees. He also led and captured and how he plopped - beauty wassat

        And what's that? Beetles pollinate sunflowers over different landscapes? wassat
        1. silver_roman
          silver_roman April 19 2016 09: 04
          +3
          5 points. Laughed in the morning! I compensate for my cons +.
          In general, I agree: I read an article with a facial expression like belay .

          Even laziness began to comment.
          I got the impression that the article is a kind of term paper by a university student who, to identify errors, laid out the main theses on VO. By the way, a great idea for students.
    5. yehat
      yehat April 18 2016 14: 26
      0
      somehow it turns out too simple: "used countermeasures" and all the missiles hit
      why then carry long-range missiles?
      Finally, why did they decide that they could drive AWAC away with a heavy long-range missile, because it has protection and EW (moreover, EW is more powerful than on a fighter), and an escort?
  2. Leto
    Leto April 15 2016 07: 35
    +1
    The next issue "The joy of the amateur"?
    1. AUL
      AUL April 15 2016 09: 54
      +3
      Why does the author insert in the text diagrams and pictures with inscriptions in English? For solidity, or does he think that most readers are fluent in English technical?
      1. Leto
        Leto April 15 2016 10: 28
        0
        Quote: AUL
        Why does the author insert in the text diagrams and pictures with inscriptions in English? For solidity, or does he think that most readers are fluent in English technical?

        I was more embarrassed by the last picture, I tried to connect it with the battle plan that the author brought in at this place, but I realized that it was generally out of place and stuck for beauty. The author of the pictures gives a serious look to his frivolous opus.
  3. sevtrash
    sevtrash April 15 2016 07: 43
    0
    The article seems to be even nothing, indicating the characteristics of the aircraft / radar. However, the final part looks unconvincing. Avax and Stealth, network-centricity provide earlier detection / firing of targets, therefore give the initiative / advantage of the first strike. EW will reduce efficiency, but do not exclude this first hit. The Americans conducted exercises in which the qualities of cruising supersonic speed / stealth removed f22 from the possibility of a retaliatory strike.
  4. igordok
    igordok April 15 2016 07: 56
    0
    The title of the article is old, not fashionable. smile Should be up-to-date: "Battle of technologies: Stealth + AWACS против VS Supermaneuverability + electronic warfare " angry
    For those who do not understand, this is irony. laughing
    1. megafair
      megafair April 16 2016 13: 17
      0
      It was easier to name - why not a single NATO pilot agreed to the proposal of the Su-35S pilot;);
  5. Leto
    Leto April 15 2016 07: 58
    +7
    Millimeter-wave radars have an antenna with a diameter of 150-300 mm, which is installed in the head of the air-to-air missiles with an active radar guidance system.

    Author, please list the missiles in-in which the ARLGSN have exactly mm ranges?
    For example, the RVV-BD given in the "analytics" does not have such a seeker, the 9B-1103M-350 seeker operates in the cm range and the probability of capturing the F-22 from it is negligible (according to the declared characteristics, at a distance of 40 km. accordingly, the target detection range, even with an EPPR of 5m2, will be calculated in units of kilometers)
    The ability of an aircraft to reach the target capture zone of a thermal missile seeker (scanning angle + -120 degrees) or the target capture zone with a gun’s sight comes to the fore in close air combat. For this purpose, aircraft carry out maneuvers in the air, trying to enter the capture zone.

    Maneuvering implies a loss of speed and, accordingly, initiative, at a distance of 20 km from the enemy it will not give any advantages, even more so it will not allow you to approach the "cannon shot"
    1. CC-18c
      CC-18c April 19 2016 17: 15
      -1
      Quote: Leto

      Author, please list the missiles in-in which the ARLGSN have exactly mm ranges?
      For example, the RVV-BD given in the "analytics" does not have such a seeker, the 9B-1103M-350 seeker operates in the cm range and the probability of capturing the F-22 from it is negligible (according to the declared characteristics, at a distance of 40 km. accordingly, the target detection range, even with an EPPR of 5m2, will be calculated in units of kilometers)

      Maneuvering implies a loss of speed and, accordingly, initiative, at a distance of 20 km from the enemy it will not give any advantages, even more so it will not allow you to approach the "cannon shot"

      ignoramus do you know anything about military aviation and missiles? Or only on murzilka with pictures?

      1.
      GOS 9B-1103M-350 will detect f22 at a distance of 10-15km. Up to this point, the Su-35C aircraft will highlight f22. Further to the rapotor kerdyk, he is not so super-maneuverable to get away from the rocket in general there is little chance.

      GOS AIM he sees a target of 3 sq m at a distance of 16 km, Su35s with 0,5 km of a seeker from AIM sees at a distance of 5-10 km. Further, the Su-35s, due to its super-maneuverability, leaves the missile, + AIM, due to the shorter detection range, has less time to react to the target’s maneuver.

      The bummer about lovers of f22 is that an EPR of 0,1 is strictly in the forehead, a little from a different angle, then immediately the EPR sharply increases, which does not happen with the EPR of the Su-35S. The point is a different approach to stealth technologies, we rely more on coverage and the United States relies on ironing. As a rule, an in-in rocket flies in from the upper hemisphere, the first thing the rocket does is climb, and from this angle the f22 glows even better than the su-35s.


      2.
      Loss of speed in close combat means better maneuverability and controllability, while the raptor makes its turn without losing speed, it will have time to dry it 3 times before knocking down once it unfolds towards it. Therefore, in fact, even a pin in a melee system learns to extinguish speed to the lowest possible speed so as to make a bend faster, in f22 this is limited by ironing and weak characteristics, and in su35s there are practically no restrictions.
      so that you write complete nonsense about maneuvering and landability and loss of speed and apparently not even writing what you're writing.
  6. inkass_98
    inkass_98 April 15 2016 08: 04
    +2
    The meaning of the article? Explain to others that it is better to be healthy and wealthy, and a plane with an AFAR, Stealth elements and a rejected thrust vector is better than without them? It’s as if understandable.
    And regarding the completeness of the review, such aircraft as the MiG-29SMT and MiG-35 have been forgotten. OVT and, accordingly, super-maneuverability are present there, but they are cheaper than "older brothers".
    1. Fofan
      Fofan April 15 2016 08: 38
      +3
      Quote: inkass_98
      The meaning of the article? Explain to others that it is better to be healthy and wealthy, and a plane with an AFAR, Stealth elements and a rejected thrust vector is better than without them? It’s as if understandable.
      And regarding the completeness of the review, such aircraft as the MiG-29SMT and MiG-35 have been forgotten. OVT and, accordingly, super-maneuverability are present there, but they are cheaper than "older brothers".

      you have been deceived.
      Mig-35 is not in the army.
      and instant-29cmt cost the same as the su-35.
      1. megafair
        megafair April 16 2016 13: 46
        0
        MIG-35 is not in the troops, this is at the moment, at the end of the year there will already be the delivery of the first series, I'm not talking about 2017 ...
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS April 15 2016 14: 19
      +2
      Quote: inkass_98
      And about the completeness of the review - such aircraft as the MiG-29SMT and MiG-35 have been forgotten.

      The Mig-35 is not brought to mind. The Zhuk-A radar is also being finalized. And the 35th in a single copy at all. Presumably it is being finalized for export, as our MO rejected it. And the MIG-29 SMT is not so much in the troops. and he’s not at all smooth.
  7. Leto
    Leto April 15 2016 08: 16
    +4
    However, using radars, the F-22 will exit the Steath mode and will be detected by means of the RTR Su-34 and Su-35S

    And what will this give the Su-34 and Su-35S except for the bearing? But the fact that it is not necessary for all attacking F-22s to include radars, the author does not know? So one machine is enough to open the situation in the air by targeting other machines remaining in the shade.
    1. Lincoln
      Lincoln April 15 2016 09: 29
      -1
      You ask uncomfortable questions, you are not a patriot fu on you laughing
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS April 15 2016 14: 23
      +1
      Quote: Leto
      So one machine is enough to open the situation in the air by targeting other machines remaining in the shade.

      All this is good, if there are no missiles on the external pendants of the dinosaurs, then we can talk about the stealth theme. Well, if the pangolins will carry missiles on the external pendant, how will they differ from simple fighters without stealth technology? Then one or all of them will turn on the radar it doesn’t really matter, since missiles have their own EPR.
      1. Come on
        Come on April 17 2016 05: 10
        0
        Quote: NEXUS
        All this is good, if there are no missiles on the external pendants of the dinosaurs, then we can talk about the stealth theme. Well, if the pangolins will carry missiles on the external pendant, how will they differ from simple fighters without stealth technology? Then one or all of them will turn on the radar it doesn’t really matter, since missiles have their own EPR.


        And why should they carry rockets on external suspensions, especially if they are occupied precisely with gaining air supremacy? Then naturally the whole flock will be without external pendants and weapons on them. But the second echelon can go completely hung with F-15, 18 or whatever it will be. But there is another topic about the development of external containers that do not increase the EPR of the aircraft in Stealth mode. When it will be ready, it is not known and how far have already advanced, but if anyone is on the topic, then the F-22 block 50 is Intersen for the electronic warfare option and to it containers that maintain low EPR for JDAMs and SDBs.
    3. Operator
      April 15 2016 14: 53
      +1
      Each Su-35С strike group includes two Su-34 EW / RTR aircraft (to illuminate the airspace sector), which determine not only the bearing, but also the distance to the radio emission source by the triangulation method.

      When launching medium-range missiles, all F-22 will be forced to turn on their multi-function radars for radio command guidance of missiles on the marching flight section. This is a prerequisite when shooting at maneuvering targets until the moment of capturing the targets of the GOS missiles at a distance from 10 to 20 km.
      1. opus
        opus April 15 2016 17: 56
        +2
        Quote: Operator
        Two Su-35 EW / RTR aircraft are included in each Su-34S strike group (to illuminate the airspace sector

        fool
        The SU-35S radar N035 Irbis (imprisoned under the CC), its own EPR 1-3kv.m, EP 9g

        USU-34 radar station (ON) universal dohlyachek Sh-141 (analogue of AN / APS-137) is designed for attacks of ground and air targets, there is no OLS, its own EPR is 5-7 sq.m (I think even up to 9: the radar capsule software AND ZO, midsection, APU, front control elements, etc.), EP he has up to 7g (he will not "dodge" American AIM-120 missile launchers knock down maneuvering targets with EPs up to 10g)

        Quote: Operator
        two EW / RTR aircraft


        SU-34 is not an electronic warfare aircraft / and especially radio intelligence.
        all of his electronic warfare modules (L-175V, L-265) are against: ground-based airborne electronic warfare systems (such as the Kolchuga electronic warfare module), airborne missiles with radar guidance by attacking fighters

        RER based on "propane" for opening the GROUND sources of radio emission.
        Now the question is: which cretin will obey the "operator" and
        Quote: Operator
        Each Su-35С strike group includes two Su-34 EW / RTR aircraft (to illuminate the airspace sector), which determine not only the bearing, but also the distance to the radio emission source by the triangulation method.

        ?
        What would lose and 2 SU-24 and the rest of the Su-35S?
        1. sivuch
          sivuch April 15 2016 18: 19
          0
          short-term overload is always much higher than the official 7-9. Still Phantom pilots, when I really wanted to live, went on overloads 10-11. Even if the plane was then decommissioned due to irreversible changes. About EPR is generally a pitchfork
          1. opus
            opus April 15 2016 18: 36
            +1
            Quote: sivuch
            short-term overload is always much higher than the official 7-9. Another Phantom pilots, when I really wanted to live, went to overloads 10-11

            This does not change anything (for reference 120, 10g hawala only on the last 1/4 of the trajectory, and so she is a "chicken")

            The bottom line is this:
            send "fffpereot" (or "zzzbokOV") SU-34 as an RTR aircraft, in front of the SU-35s flight ...


            IT'S Nonsense OF THE CRAZY
            Quote: Operator
            Each Su-35S strike group includes two EW / RTR Su-34 aircraft

            my diagnosis (no doubt it will confirm, any "flyer", psychiatrist is probably the same)
            Quote: sivuch
            About EPR is generally a pitchfork on water

            1.Well, write "manure shovel", who is in the way?
            2. Than EPR is MORE, the earlier the aircraft producing jammers or RTR aircraft will detect the enemy
            3. The SU-34 has an EPR (almost 2 times) than the SU-35s. This fact does not even require discussion
            1 + 2 + 3, let's get your shovel in manure, I'll study
            1. sivuch
              sivuch April 15 2016 20: 37
              +2
              to intercept, a missile must have an available overload 4 times greater than the target, and for a 120 it has just 40 units, which is why it is preferable in the BVB Pythons, Sidewinders R-73.
              Do you know the exact EPR and Su-34 and Su-35 (assuming that they are in the same sector and wavelength range)? How do I envy you. I’m only from open sources
              1. opus
                opus April 15 2016 21: 35
                +1
                Quote: sivuch
                , and the 120s have just 40 units.

                and what did I write?
                Quote: opus
                American RVV AIM-120 shoot down maneuvering targets with EP up to 10g

                Shot down targets with operational overload (EP targets) up to 10g
                10g x4 = 40g
                Which fully complies
                Quote: sivuch
                to intercept, the rocket must have an available overload 4 times greater than the target,

                Quote: sivuch
                This is precisely why in BVB Pythons, Sidewind R-73 is preferable.

                it is preferable to shoot down the RTR (or Avax) aircraft as FAR as possible from yourself.

                and a python, a boa constrictor or an adder is all the same.

                Quote: sivuch
                Do you know the exact EPR and the Su-34 and Su-35 (which are in the same sector and wavelength range)? How I envy you.

                1.no need to envy me
                2. "exactly" not where was
                Quote: opus
                own EPR 5-7sq.m

                Quote: opus
                EPR 1-3sq.m

                nichrenas "exactly" 140% -300% spread.
                3. EPR data from open technical sources.
                Do you have others- SHARE
                Quote: sivuch
                I’m only from open sources

                Otherwise, it’s very difficult for me to understand you.
                4.
                Quote: sivuch
                that in one sector and one wave range

                Let’s, let’s, it’s also necessary about the angle of attack, in which hemisphere, azimuthal elevation relative to the point of sight (the radar axis is the target), speed, weather conditions (dozhzhzhzhd has the same effect, magnetic storms are the same), the movement of the radar web relative to the received antenna of the enemy radar etc.
                What did you want to say something?
            2. Operator
              April 15 2016 20: 49
              +1
              1. A madman is one who firmly believes that a soccer ball and a cannonball fly in near-Earth space along different paths, being launched into space at the same speed and at the same pitch angle.

              2. Aviation electronic countermeasures complex "Khibiny" provides protection against anti-aircraft and aviation means of destruction. The L-175В version in the format of the ventral large container is installed on the Su-34 and provides group protection
              http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-802.html

              3. A pair of Su-34 electronic warfare aircraft are not sent "ffperёd", but are located exactly on the flanks of the Su-35S strike group.

              4. Tie with mushrooms bully
              1. KKND
                KKND April 15 2016 21: 05
                +2
                Operator, I certainly understand that you are a stubborn patriot, but tell me how the f-22 with the included radar will be shot down?
                Of course, when the radar is turned on, the radio emission will be detected by means of RTR Dryers.
                And now a question for the "expert"!
                How Sushki will launch their missiles at it, if in order to launch air-to-air missiles not with a thermal guidance head, it is necessary to take the target for escort by RADAR.
                And the EPR Khryapa is much smaller than that of the SU-35 and the radar with AFAR, and not PFAR.
                1. NEXUS
                  NEXUS April 15 2016 21: 12
                  +1
                  Quote: KKND
                  And the EPR Khryapa is much smaller than that of the SU-35 and the radar with AFAR, and not PFAR.

                  We are already developing ROFAR (a radio-optical phased antenna array), which is more abrupt than any AFAR. I believe that in the next 5 years this technology will be on most of our fighters and bombers.
                  What about the EPR of the pangolin ... where are the numbers from? The mattresses were told and drawn on the wiki? So sorry, this is from the category of "grandmothers at the entrance said."
                  Best regards hi
                  1. KKND
                    KKND April 15 2016 21: 25
                    +2
                    Quote: NEXUS
                    We are already developing our ROFAR (radio-optical phased antenna array), and this is abruptly any AFAR.

                    Yes, yes, as well as MIG-41, "LPI", "Death Star" and all in 5 years.
                    Quote: NEXUS
                    So sorry, this is from the category of "grandmothers said at the entrance."
                    1. NEXUS
                      NEXUS April 15 2016 21: 29
                      +1
                      Quote: KKND
                      Yes, yes, as well as MIG-41, "LPI", "Death Star" and all in 5 years.

                      I don’t know about the "death star", I don’t eat raw tomatoes for the night ... but about the MIG-41, I think it may well be, since work has been going on for a long time on this PAK DP. As for the LFI, the MIG KB officially announced that on its own initiative began the development of the 5th generation LPI. This is in open sources. So if the officials of the MiG Design Bureau are "grandmothers at the entrance said," then you probably know better.
                      1. KKND
                        KKND April 15 2016 21: 42
                        +1
                        Quote: NEXUS
                        I don’t know about the death star, I don’t eat raw tomatoes at night

                        How do you not know? smile

                        Quote: NEXUS
                        So if the officials of the MIG Design Bureau are "the grandmothers said at the entrance," then you probably know better.

                        A EPR "Raptor" 0,0000001 sq.m. it was said by representatives of "Lockheed" wassat
                      2. NEXUS
                        NEXUS April 15 2016 21: 49
                        +2
                        Quote: KKND
                        A EPR "Raptor" 0,0000001 sq.m. it was said by representatives of "Lockheed"

                        Long before our faces, mattresses spoke about the PAK DP test. And they also called some performance characteristics of this interceptor, in particular, speed parameters - 4,5-5 max.
                        With regards to the statements of Lockheed, so forgive me, why are there so few zeros after the decimal point, or did you think the world community was so shocked by the numbers?
                      3. KKND
                        KKND April 15 2016 22: 12
                        0
                        Quote: NEXUS
                        With regards to the statements of Lockheed, so forgive me, why are there so few zeros after the decimal point, or did you think the world community was so shocked by the numbers?

                        Statements can be any. When we see all your Wishlist or Amer’s prodigies in iron, then we’ll talk.
            3. Operator
              April 15 2016 21: 47
              0
              And you, as a stoned idolater of stealth, of course, do not understand what the Russian word "pending" means?
              The Su-34 determines the direction and distance (by triangulation method) to each of the operating F-22 radars, the coordinates are transmitted to the Su-35С via the communication channel, after which the fighter launches the RVV-BD missiles, the missiles broadcast all changes in the coordinates of the targets through the radio command channel.

              What does the RCS of "Khryapa" and the type of antenna have to do with it, if the coordinates of each F-22 are determined by the operation of its own radar?
              1. KKND
                KKND April 15 2016 22: 00
                +1
                Quote: Operator
                The Su-34 determines the direction and distance (by triangulation method) to each of the operating F-22 radars, the coordinates are transmitted to the Su-35С via the communication channel, after which the fighter launches the RVV-BD missiles, the missiles broadcast all changes in the coordinates of the targets through the radio command channel.

                So you are pierced. But they created the impression of a very knowledgeable "sofa expert"
                missiles on the radio command channel broadcast all changes in the coordinates of targets.

                The radio command channel broadcasts changes in the coordinates of targets measured using RADAR
                enlighten though a little out of date

                1. Operator
                  April 15 2016 23: 32
                  -1
                  The radio command channel is deeply purple, from where are the coordinates of the target, which are transmitted through it.
                  1. KKND
                    KKND April 15 2016 23: 53
                    +1
                    Then the question for the "million"!
                    Why airplanes and air defense and other radar equipment, when the operation of these radars is easy to detect with high accuracy.
                    It is especially funny when it comes to anti-radar missiles which, when the stationary target radar is switched off, immediately go to inertia and lose exactly very much. But the coordinates of the air defense radar do not change (until you turn ...)
                    And another proof on the capabilities of the Su-35x to launch missiles on fighter radar in coordinates from direction finding. Preferably in a video or at least a serious source (where there are many bukff) wink
                  2. Operator
                    April 16 2016 00: 59
                    0
                    Radar is the only means of monitoring airspace in difficult weather conditions. Anti-radar ammunition must be fought - these are the costs of using this active weapon.
                    The simplest solution is to block the radar in pairs and synchronize their work, then all anti-radar ammunition will fly into the "milk" - the middle point between the radar.

                    Probably, you mean the presence on the Su-35С of a channel for receiving data (target coordinates) from an external source of target designation in the image and likeness of Mig-31. Because the further transfer of coordinates along the radio command line to the rocket occurs in a regular manner.
                    Here is a link to the annual report of the joint-stock company "NPP Polet" on the titles of the development of communication systems for the Su-35S. Which one supports a data transmission channel similar to the MiG-31 - HZ
                    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1383587.html

                    I’ll add on my own - a similar channel was worked out as far back as 30 years ago.
              2. CC-18c
                CC-18c April 16 2016 16: 04
                0
                well you proved that su27 differs from su34 in particular with its avionics.
                So what?

                Quote: Operator
                The radio command channel is deeply purple, from where are the coordinates of the target, which are transmitted through it.

                It's true whether you like it or not, it's just pure mathematics and physics.
            4. KKND
              KKND April 15 2016 22: 09
              0
              Quote: Operator
              The Su-34 determines the direction and distance (by triangulation method) to each of the operating F-22 radars, the coordinates are transmitted to the Su-35С via the communication channel, after which the fighter launches the RVV-BD missiles, the missiles broadcast all changes in the coordinates of the targets through the radio command channel.

              Using this method, it would be impossible to determine the coordinates of a highly maneuverable air target that are sufficiently accurate for missile destruction.
              If there are any objections, pliz a detailed description (preferably with a video) of the pilot’s actions algorithm and physical principles that allow HARMo-like missiles to be aimed at the radar of an enemy aircraft without an attacking radar.
              1. Operator
                April 15 2016 23: 42
                +1
                We are talking about aiming the most simple medium / long-range air-to-air missile on the cruise leg of the flight, using for this the most complete radio command line of the carrier aircraft with the transmission of the most primitive coordinates along it targets received from a source of external target designation - a pair of RTR aircraft.

                At the same time, the accuracy of determining the coordinates of the target from its radar radiation is not critical (in other words, it is quite sufficient), since when approaching the target location area, an active radar seeker of the missile comes into play, which captures the target itself (not radar radiation) and independently induces on target.

                More advanced missile models, probably, can independently direct themselves to the radiation of the target radar. IMHO
                1. KKND
                  KKND April 16 2016 00: 02
                  0
                  Quote: Operator
                  We are talking about aiming the most simple medium / long-range air-to-air missile on the cruise leg of the flight, using for this the most complete radio command line of the carrier aircraft with the transmission of the most primitive coordinates along it targets received from a source of external target designation - a pair of RTR aircraft.

                  A link to a description of a similar algorithm for guiding missiles at a target. Seriously desirable.
                  It is not very clear where the radio command line from the RTR aircraft or from the Su-35 will come from? Here Avax is not needed.
                2. Operator
                  April 16 2016 01: 07
                  +1
                  I will not give a reference to the distribution of targets in the MiG-31 group with external target designation from the leader aircraft, since the technology has been heard for a quarter of a century.

                  In the situation under discussion, Su-35C vs F-22, the coordinates of the Raptors "are determined by the RTR Su-34 aircraft, and the transfer of coordinates to the missiles is carried out as it should be from the Su-35S carrier aircraft.

                  AWACS is really not needed here, it is required to force the F-22 to turn onboard radars (using the AWACS radar shielding method).
                3. KKND
                  KKND April 16 2016 01: 37
                  +2
                  Quote: Operator
                  I will not give a reference to the distribution of targets in the MiG-31 group with external target designation from the leader aircraft, since the technology has been heard for a quarter of a century.

                  In the case of the MiG-31 there external target designation is carried out using the leader radar
                  Please provide a link to the description of the work: "Direction finding with the help of RTR-radio correction by coordinates from the Radio bearing RTR-capture using the Active head of the rocket"
                  Then I will apologize.
                  Something tells me that not everything is so simple otherwise the f-22 could fly with the radar off and use the radio direction finding to bring down Sushki, who are vainly trying to find it with their radar (because of its "stealth") at long distances.
                  You just opened a new word in the Air War request
                4. Operator
                  April 16 2016 01: 54
                  -1
                  Since you like to use the words "patriot" and National Interest out of place, try to understand yourself, without proofs, the absence of differences in all types of external target designation at the data transfer stage.

                  Returning to our rams:

                  Why would Sushki try to detect stealth with its own radars. It is enough that Sushi under the guise of electronic warfare aircraft attacked a radio-contrast target - AWACS, forcing the stealth to turn on its radars. Otherwise, the stealth, in the absence of external target designation from the side of AWAX, will destroy Sushki and lose AWAKS, and then still rake it to the fullest from Sushki, which are close to them at the detection distance of the OLS.
                  Note, all this without the inclusion of Sushki radars - stealth technology with 0,0000000000 EPR ... 000001 sq.m smokes bamboo.

                  The struggle for supremacy in the air cannot be abandoned - who merged, he lost the war.
                5. KKND
                  KKND April 16 2016 02: 07
                  +2
                  Clearly, the link will not be ... Sorry request
                  A new word in the air war. No one turns on the radar. All attack targets in OLS and in visual visibility. Here, of course, the raptor has nothing to do with it; there is no OLS; here there are planes with suspended OLS and F-35s on one side and ours with built-in OLS on the other.
                  Turn on the radar and here you will immediately, according to the results of direction finding, a rocket with an active seeker arrives.
                  Powerfully.
                  And fools engineers are developing radars with PFAR, AFAR for billions.
                  But Radars are only needed for difficult weather conditions, so that the planes would not collide in the air.
                  The operator yourself is not funny?
          2. CC-18c
            CC-18c April 16 2016 16: 12
            +1
            We urgently link to the top-secret documents of the State Department and the Pentagon! immediately! laughing and also with explanations of how best to fight against the plans of the State Department and the Pentagon! wassat in particular, let's have more links to the algorithms of operation of the f22 radars, what and how at what frequencies and principles of f22 exchange information and how to drown them
        2. KKND
          KKND April 16 2016 00: 04
          -1
          Quote: Operator
          At the same time, the accuracy of determining the coordinates of the target from its radar radiation is not critical (in other words, it is quite sufficient), since when approaching the target location area, an active radar seeker of the missile comes into play, which captures the target itself (not radar radiation) and independently induces on target.

          Why then rockets with a passive head?
        3. Operator
          April 16 2016 01: 13
          0
          In this case, missiles with passive radar seeker are not in demand.

          Such missiles are in demand in other cases: in the absence of RTR aircraft, noise on the radio command line, use of the "fire-and-forget" method, firing aeroballistic missiles at a long distance of 400+ km at radio-emitting targets, etc.
    4. CC-18c
      CC-18c April 16 2016 16: 11
      0
      Quote: KKND

      Using this method, it would be impossible to determine the coordinates of a highly maneuverable air target that are sufficiently accurate for missile destruction.


      But the GOS has enough accuracy and it will induce in the final section.

      Then the question arises how f22 can direct missiles to a target if it does not include a stealth radar. Although it seems like it is stated that in the group one f22 turns on the radar, the rest in the passive mode exchange information and it seems like in the passive mode the missiles are launched. Or it turns out on your Lockheed also lied about the exchange and guidance of missiles "in-in" ???
      I just would like to know from your point of view the same thing for amers that you think it works, but for rusty councils / Russians, everything does not work, although we had done such things long before the appearance of f22, well, the operator generally wrote to you and gave the links .
  • opus
    opus April 15 2016 21: 21
    0
    Quote: Operator
    A madman is one who firmly believes

    Crazy is the one who brings pictures for 1 space and higher(there balls and poop "fly" the same way).
    The madman’s misfortune is that he DOES NOT UNDERSTAND that the BG (warhead) no matter what trajectory according to apogee is chosen:
    -DO NOT FLY WITH 1st space and above fool .


    Although the stoned "operator" always fuss with everyone (balls / cannonball) the trajectories of spacecraft with V from 7,92 km / s


    (For reference, their speed is BELOW, the fastest one is from Miniteman3 to 7,3km / S)
    It will be able to drive it into an empty head or not.
    - The influence of the atmosphere at altitudes up to 300 km is very significant (ISS 640 x450), which was proved by the "Legend" at 270 km - the solar batteries could not be unraveled .. "Schaub did not tear off" (erosion).
    But UO do not understand this
    Quote: Operator
    Aviation electronic countermeasures complex "Khibiny" provides protection against anti-aircraft

    And what. PUK?

    Quote: opus
    all him EW modules (L-175V, L-265) against : ground-based electronic warfare systems for air defense systems (such as the module for electronic warfare "Chain mail"),RVV with radar guidance of attacking fighters

    read laziness or not overpower?

    Quote: Operator
    installed on the Su-34 and provides group protection

    Then what?
    How to detect F-175 with this micro radar in the L-2,1V, with a peak power of 22 kW?
    How to stun his adversary then? (with its 18.5 kW AN / APG-77)
    Huh?
    1. opus
      opus April 15 2016 21: 26
      -1
      Quote: Operator
      and it is located exactly on the flanks of the Su-35S strike group.

      And what does it give?
      Right Su-34 does not see the left SU-34?
      Why SU-35s
      Quote: Operator
      exactly on the flanks
      "slow-moving", sounding like an F-111? weakly maneuverable SU-34 with the Khibiny REP (sharpened against the ground and RVV MD)
      WHEN does the Su-35 have its own complex Khibiny-M / L-265?


      fool
      Thinking hard? I understand the "operator" position is
      Quote: Operator
      Knot with mushrooms

      Roll your lips: it will be easier to sleep, otherwise the pillow is already all in saliva
    2. Operator
      April 16 2016 00: 13
      +1
      This is what happens - in your opinion, the core and the ball at 1, 2 and 3 space speeds fly along the same path, but at 0,9 and 0,5 speeds fly at different speeds? laughing

      First, most of the flight path of warheads and the false targets of intercontinental ballistic missiles lie outside the atmosphere at an altitude of 100 km, as well as outside the layers of the ionosphere at altitudes of 200-300 km.
      Secondly, the density of gases at such heights is negligible.
      Thirdly, the time of the ballistic flight of the BB and LC in the airless space is no more than half an hour, which is absolutely not comparable with the time of the orbital flight of satellites, which is days, months and years.
      Therefore, the braking forces of the BB and LC about trace atmospheric residues at altitudes above 100 km are much smaller in magnitude of the deflecting forces that arise when the BB and LC are discarded from the dilution stage.

      That you have clung to the "Khibiny" - it is said by the link - their numerous varieties work for aviation detection equipment too. At the same time, it is clear that if they can jam the most powerful ground-based weapons, then they will somehow cope with aviation.

      Here, for example, SAP-14 with quite decent power
      1. opus
        opus April 16 2016 00: 48
        -3
        Quote: Operator
        This is what happens - in your opinion, the core and the ball are at 1, 2 and 3

        On the Louboutins

        For reference: Odessa pensioners from the women's team "Josipovsky Battalion" from a village in the Savransky district

        What can I tell you about the sacramental:
        “Dear seniors, imagine that you went up to the tower with two coins of 5 and 3 scudos. The first should fall faster, the second - slower. If you tie the coins with twine, the weight will increase, and they should fall faster, but, on the other hand, a coin of 3 scudos, as a lighter one, should slow down 5 scudos. The resulting contradiction is removed by one statement - the weight of the item does not affect the rate of free fall. "(quote from Galileo)

        6 formulas!
        ?
        Not. I’m afraid that the Manul cat is hanging around here, I’m afraid I’ll get under the distribution again.
        Quote: Operator
        That you clung to the "Khibiny" - it is said by the link -

        Stop Monsieur, stop.
        specifically "latched on"

        Quote: Operator
        In each strike group, the Su-35C includes two EW / RTR Su-34 aircraft (to illuminate the airspace sector

        Quote: Operator
        Here, for example, SAP-14 with quite decent power

        How was the power determined?
        By eye? maybe the elemental base is too big?
        Frequency Range 1-4 GHz (SAP-14), the rest xs.
        but the trouble is. The INPUT (consumed by SAP-14) is still no more than 3,2-3,8 kW.
        So?

        SAPSAN-E is also Baaalshoy

        1. Operator
          April 16 2016 01: 36
          +1
          Remember how you sent me to the Lockheed head office for an answer?
          H-o-o-o-t, therefore, regarding the operation of various "Khibins", contact the headquarters of KRET.

          On my own behalf, I’ll add that your favorite power of EW aircraft in the hanging container form factor takes place in prototypes of American products with an internal air impeller of a container electric generator. If I am not mistaken, at a speed of 900 km / h and an impeller diameter of 500 mm, this promising horseradish autonomously generates 63 kW of power.
          The problem that the Americans are now solving is different - they want to use the AFAR to the source of interference in order to simultaneously suppress multiple radars spaced in space.
          The power of one interference can be small, since the power of the reflected radar signal from the target is even lower.
          Mention of promising developments is in the article under discussion.

          Moreover, in a situation of confrontation between EW aircraft and AWACS, it is not at all necessary to split the jammer power into several directions, since the jamming object is, by definition, one. The purpose of jamming is simple - to bracket the AWACS and provoke the F-22 to turn on-board radars.
    3. CC-18c
      CC-18c April 16 2016 16: 30
      0
      Why can't this ICBM give a speed above 1 space?
      Attention is a matter of simple logic. If the ICBM can send satellites to near-earth orbit (7,9), and if the MBR can send the warhead bluntly directly into space where the thread is in the direction of the sun (more than 7,9), then with what fright the MBR cannot give warhead 1 cosmic speed (7,9 ,XNUMX)????
      And attention, mbr rs36orb;)

      Warheads can and should fly above "1 space", everything stupidly depends on the flight path to the target, for example, in the picture, there may well be MDRs that accelerated the warheads to speeds above 8 km / s, then they do not stupidly fly into space, the reason is simple, on a certain trajectory, braking is activated, depending on the beginning of the time, braking will depend on where the warhead will fall. In general, it seems like it's elementary.
      1. opus
        opus April 16 2016 18: 18
        -1
        Quote: CC-18c
        Why can't this ICBM give a speed above 1 space?

        maybe maybe not what
        Quote: CC-18c
        fright

        take it easy.
        1. But not with warheads, but with lighter payloads (as a rule)

        Launch 1.2 launch vehicle - from the Zeya spacecraft (ICBM Topol)

        Minotaur 1 (TacSat 3) is MX


        2.And nafuya?
        Why is ICBM 1st space?
        Let’s get down to 7,94 km / s, which would then slow down (waste fuel, time)
        1 space your BG will hang out for a long time. And the time of the combat mission (flight) is 25-40 minutes.
        To do this, and apply Nastilnoe (small apogee)
        Quote: CC-18c
        And attention, mbr rs36orb;)

        This has nothing to do with the topic.
        The brains of the "operator" are arranged in such a way that it does not reach them that gravity acts on any body

        Which, among all others, depends on body weight.
        For his brain: on a turd (weighing 200g) flying along a parabola and on a cast-iron ball weighing 1000kg -THE SAME GRAVITY IS ACTINGThis is a camera axiom and I can’t convince him
        Strength is acceleration, acceleration is d (V) / d (t). Not only the velocity scalar is changing, but also its vector
        Quote: CC-18c
        In general, it seems like it's elementary.

        Seriously?
        And did you understand what the talk was AT ALL?
        1. CC-18c
          CC-18c April 19 2016 18: 53
          0
          Quote: opus
          1. But not with warheads, but with lighter payloads (as a rule)

          STA? O_O
          In your opinion, if instead of a ball with antennas they put a cone cone, would we not get the first satellite of the earth? laughing grow up mardusti.
          I thought that the laws of physics are the same for everyone, but it turns out the laws of physics for one but for PN or another object are different, this is something new)

          The warhead can fly from 1 space. I repeat once again, this is a purely question of the trajectory and strength of ICBMs. They will want to give a "flight task" to bang on the moon, let's say, I hope you know that here you need a speed higher than 1 space speed, they will want to do it and no one will ask the warhead. Another thing is that let's say that in order to get to Washington, the BCH should at the end The sections have a speed below 1 space, this happens due to braking both about the atmosphere and forced by engines.

          Quote: opus
          Let’s get down to 7,94 km / s, which would then slow down (waste fuel, time)

          And why should the car accelerate at startup if it slows down anyway?
          In general, calculate the distance flying from the start to the moment of the fall of the warhead, if it is 8000 km along the surface of the earth, then it is higher along the flight path, and now you will know the speed, time, distance, knowing the distance and time. It will turn out approximately 8km / s, but this is the speed of the zhej including and zero at the time of launch, that is, if the average is 8 while it was exactly at some point less than 8, then it is logical to understand that at some point the speed was higher than 8. This is just an example, with what speed fly mbr warhead and what trajectory I myself do not know;)

          Quote: opus
          To do this, and apply Nastilnoe (small apogee)

          Actually not for this, obviously not for fuel economy! here it is just the biggest expense for acceleration and then for braking. Did not know?

          Quote: opus
          This has nothing to do with the topic.
          The brains of the "operator" are arranged in such a way that it does not reach them that gravity acts on any body

          And why is that?
          RS-36orb is an ICBM for launching warheads into near-earth orbit into standby mode, for which REQUIRED so that the warhead reached speed 1 space. And it was written for you that MBR cannot give a speed of 1 space and warheads do not fly at a speed of 1 space
          So I brought you a specific ICBM and ten warheads that EXACTLY accelerate to 1 space or higher, get into orbit and get the same 7,9 speed that you don’t want to recognize.
        2. CC-18c
          CC-18c April 19 2016 18: 54
          0
          Quote: opus
          The brains of the "operator" are arranged in such a way that it does not reach them that gravity acts on any body. Which, among others, depends on body weight.
          For his brain: on poop (weighing 200g) flying along a parabola and onto a cast-iron ball weighing 1000kg - THE SAME GRAVITY IS ACTING. It's an operator axiom and I can’t convince him

          Actually, this is so. Here the question is in understanding what it affects - acts or receives.
          On the any acceleration acts on the mass, but gravitational force on any mass not is valid.

          I will explain to you so on an object with a mass of 200 grams and an object of 1000 grams are affected by the same acceleration g. They are really affected by the same gravity, but they carry different gravity in themselves, this happens because one force acts on them, but together with their native masses, they themselves begin to influence. It's like let's say a stream of water pours on you, the stream of water is not your power !!!! this flow of water acts on you, but together with you with your mass you get the force of impact by hitting your head against all sorts of objects) You know what the salt is, the earth's gravity has the same force of influence on all objects, but this force is not an effect, this force of the object itself .. The power of the mass itself is a bit of a philosophy of understanding the object. The keyword is "on".
          On the poop weighing 200 grams and poop weighing 1000 grams acts equal strength.
          BUT
          Poop weighing 200 grams and poop weighing 1000 grams have different gravity.



          PS: the presence of a large number of pictures is not connected in any way and does not prove your case in any way only convinces me that you are a Troll, do not do this !!! Children will like the pictures and they will naive think that your post makes more sense. Fill the value of the text with letters of words and meanings.
  • sivuch
    sivuch April 16 2016 11: 32
    0
    And if a short-term (several seconds) overload was above 10? This was done by pilots of the 3rd generation. One komeska from Bagai-Baranovka brought overload 23 on 12-11.3 (though the airframe could not be restored). Simple mathematics says that AMRAAM can fly by .
    I suppose that the Su-34 EPR is larger than that of the Su-35. But I don’t know how much both have and I don’t want to guess
    1. opus
      opus April 16 2016 11: 38
      -1
      Quote: sivuch
      And if the short-term (several seconds) overload is above 10?

      And where does the overload?
      That is, do you think that the "operatic" is the correct idea?
      Quote: Operator
      To each strike group Su-35S include two EW / RTR Su-34 aircraft (in order to illuminate the airspace sector), which determine not only the bearing, but also the distance to the source of radio emission by the triangulation method.

      ?

      What does generation and operational overload have to do with it?


      Quote: sivuch
      I suppose that the Su-34 EPR is larger than that of the Su-35. But I don’t know how much both have and I don’t want to guess

      Well, thank God. And I "tell fortunes"
  • CC-18c
    CC-18c April 16 2016 15: 45
    0
    From the legend, Su34 is a decoy, not the first shock wave.
    On su34, all the same, more reb funds can take on itself, if you still don’t hang a bunch of bombs and a lot of fuel on it, then the plane will be very cheerful and maneuverable, giving way to su35s but not giving way to su27. Accordingly, at the first danger, su34 will not get involved in the battle, but will quickly flee by pulling out f22. Aim missiles will not have enough energy to catch up and hit su34.
    1. opus
      opus April 16 2016 18: 23
      -1
      Quote: CC-18c
      On su34, all the same, more reb funds can take over

      Who said such nonsense?
      SU-34 "sharpened" for INTO?
      Pralno: for attacks on ground targets.
      F-22 discussed here is what?
      The SU-34 radar is generally a flawed lamp, compared to the SU-35s radar.
      And "hang" - do not write nonsense. he ate everything: PNO and fuel supply, 2nd pilot and armored capsule, kitchen, toilet, recreation area, ejection system, etc.
      1. CC-18c
        CC-18c April 19 2016 19: 04
        0
        Quote: opus
        Who said such nonsense?
        SU-34 "sharpened" for INTO?
        Pralno: for attacks on ground targets.
        F-22 discussed here is what?
        The SU-34 radar is generally a flawed lamp, compared to the SU-35s radar.
        And "hang" - do not write nonsense. he ate everything: PNO and fuel supply, 2nd pilot and armored capsule, kitchen, toilet, recreation area, ejection system, etc.

        Do you understand what you wrote?
        See load rating su34.
        Since when did the cockpit and pilot weight begin to be credited to the carrying capacity, and why then doesn’t this count the raptor? let's count the fuel as well; booking a capsule toilet kitchen; all the power elements; a chair; and a mass of floor coverings. Such a macar at f22 will not have weight even for 1 missile.
        Generally do not write nonsense.

        Su25 is imprisoned for working on land, but Su34 is not, it is su27 adapted for working on land, but still this is a family of su27 - MULTIPURPOSE FIGHTER.
        Su34 radar worse than su35s so what? do you think if radar is worse then e34 suXNUMX will not work? where is the logic? you threw such nonsense such porridge is all in vain and about nothing.

        And you need to read carefully what they write before commenting on them!
        On su34, all the same, more reb funds can take over, if you still don’t hang a bunch of bombs and a lot of fuel on it, then the plane will be very vigorous and maneuverable, giving way to su35s but not giving way to su27.
  • X Y Z
    X Y Z April 15 2016 08: 23
    +1
    No Dave Majumdar. who would explain to Andrey Vasilyev that Steals is theirs all. And how the F-22 will appear out of nowhere and smash our Su-35. Saw the loot and believe wink
    1. KaPToC
      KaPToC April 15 2016 15: 09
      0
      I wonder what Americans will do if they need to protect an object or group of aircraft. What if the enemy needs to be met and stopped, and not cowardly to hide in inviz?
  • Operator
    April 15 2016 08: 25
    0
    GOS of Russian air-to-air missiles
    1. Leto
      Leto April 15 2016 08: 27
      0
      Quote: Operator
      GOS of Russian air-to-air missiles

      all centimeter.
      1. Alex_Sis
        Alex_Sis April 15 2016 10: 19
        +1
        and what is written in the middle? "Millimeter waverange", no?
        1. Leto
          Leto April 15 2016 10: 37
          0
          Well, then, yes, the Ka range can be considered millimeter 0,75-1,11 cm, I did not notice.
      2. opus
        opus April 15 2016 18: 01
        -2
        Quote: Leto
        all centimeter.

        Ka millimeter

  • Leto
    Leto April 15 2016 08: 26
    0
    and the battle will inevitably enter the phase of close air combat (the combat mission of both sides remains unchanged - gaining superiority in the air). In this phase, the advantage of the Su-35S becomes undeniable: the best super maneuverability speaks for itself

    Does not say anything. Over-maneuverability gives an advantage when fighting at a distance of no more than 5-10km., At 20-30 km. it will not matter to the enemy what kind of somersaults you turn, it will be even more convenient to direct a missile with a TGSN.
    1. mav1971
      mav1971 April 15 2016 10: 21
      -4
      Quote: Leto

      Does not say anything. Over-maneuverability gives an advantage when fighting at a distance of no more than 5-10km., At 20-30 km. it will not matter to the enemy what kind of somersaults you turn, it will be even more convenient to direct a missile with a TGSN.


      This cannot be explained to them.
      People do not understand that the Cobra maneuver is only in the speed range 500-600km / h.
      Exit from Cobra - 200-250km \ h.
      Then the plane needs to accelerate. To at least somehow move.

      Super-maneuvers - special control modes!
      Performing super-maneuvers is the destiny of units of specially trained specially trained pilots.
      Special modes - not available for combat units and combat pilots.

      That's it.
      All "super maneuverability" is a purely advertising and populist slogan!

      The dream boat is breaking on the rocks of being and reality.
  • dsm100
    dsm100 April 15 2016 08: 35
    +4
    All this is a theory and nothing more. In my opinion, the one who attacks first will have superiority. It will usually be a massive raid and of course a lot depends on those who are at the helm.
  • VIT101
    VIT101 April 15 2016 08: 53
    +4
    This article is useful for raising the general level of knowledge about modern aviation.
    The prerequisites for a simulated on-the-air battle between the Stealth + AWACS and Super-maneuverability + EW ligaments were decisive for the final result of the battle. In reality, how did a party using a bunch of Super Maneuverability + EW technologies determine the presence of Stealth aircraft before launching the AIM-120D and, accordingly, build its tactics of action? By airborne AWACS only? And surprise is the determining factor in this case. Whoever saw the enemy first, had previously launched rockets, he won.
    1. Operator
      April 15 2016 09: 22
      +1
      AWACS without fighter cover in the front zone do not fly, otherwise they could get a RVV-DB (300 + km) or KS-172 (400 + km).

      Mirror this applies to the F-22 and F-35 in stealth mode.
    2. Philip Staros
      Philip Staros 3 October 2016 04: 05
      +1
      Whoever discovered and launched long-range missiles at stealth or aircraft with super-maneuverability and electronic warfare on board (personal defense), he illuminated himself and wasted the missiles, most likely. The development of electronic warfare and other things leads to the fact that battles in any case are reduced to meneuvering at ranges of operation of OLS, highly maneuverable and, more often, IR missiles ... And here "hello raptor" - there are not so many advantages. Although the Raptor is not an iron at all, as many imagine it - in traditional maneuvers (bends, etc.) it will twist any 4+ even. Only now our dryers will not chase after him - they will turn on the spot and whip.
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter April 15 2016 09: 14
    +7
    A more experienced crew with approximately equal weapons has an advantage in battle. A radical technological advantage, when invisible and deadly, invulnerable, and so on, hits all air targets and returns to its airfield without a single scratch. Well, this is a must read Tom Clancy. In real battles, unfortunately or fortunately - I don’t know, advanced opponents did not meet. There has always been a radical technological advantage on one side. The real combat capabilities of the aircraft of the "partners" will become clear only in a direct clash (God forbid, of course) with an equal enemy - the Aerospace Forces. Article "plus", the analysis is interesting and not trivial.
  • Lincoln
    Lincoln April 15 2016 09: 31
    0
    If we compare the super maneuverability, then let's compare the maneuverability of the American missile against the Sukhoi loaded to the eyeballs, since they are chasing after drying as in 41 no one will hi
    1. Foofighter
      Foofighter April 15 2016 09: 54
      +1
      In Vietnam, MiGs and even Phantoms somehow dodged
      1. Lincoln
        Lincoln April 15 2016 10: 13
        -3
        You still remember the airship ...
        1. sivuch
          sivuch April 15 2016 18: 26
          +1
          Once again, yes, they went out on 10-11G and dodged. Despite the operational overload of phantoms -8. And the rocket (if one) should have an overload 4 times greater than the target
      2. mav1971
        mav1971 April 15 2016 10: 46
        0
        Quote: FooFighter
        In Vietnam, MiGs and even Phantoms somehow dodged


        In those days, the probability of a missile strike miscalculated as 0.3.

        Currently, probability is considered 0.9.

        And this is provided that the aircraft did not remain at the level of Vietnam.

        I hope it is clear. that your thoughts about that war are already worth forgetting and not remembering them.
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm April 15 2016 15: 19
          +3
          Quote: mav1971
          Currently, probability is considered 0.9.

          Who and what brought down the F-22 or Su-35?
          1. mav1971
            mav1971 April 15 2016 16: 09
            0
            Quote: saturn.mmm
            Quote: mav1971
            Currently, probability is considered 0.9.

            Who and what brought down the F-22 or Su-35?


            Do you consciously turn on the fool mode?
            Or do you not understand Russian letters and words for perception?
            The Russian language says:
            In those days, the probability of a missile strike miscalculated like xnumx.
            Current probability considered 0.9.


            This is a theory, but based on practical tests ...
            1. bk316
              bk316 April 15 2016 18: 48
              +4
              Quote: mav1971
              Do you consciously turn on the fool mode?
              Or do you not understand Russian letters and words for perception?

              Why are you so aggressive?
              It is necessary to simply throw out 40% of your posts in order to weed out aggressive blah blah.
              1. Operator
                April 15 2016 20: 55
                -1
                40% is still a very good result laughing
            2. saturn.mmm
              saturn.mmm April 15 2016 20: 46
              +2
              Quote: mav1971
              This is a theory, but based on practical tests ...

              I repeat, where modern missiles were used against the F-22 or Su-35, provided that all the means of defense were used by the aircraft, I do not argue that modern missiles will work at 0,9 when the planes of the Vietnam War were destroyed.
              As one famous academician said, "The best theory is practical experience."
          2. opus
            opus April 16 2016 00: 04
            +1
            Quote: saturn.mmm
            Who and what brought down the F-22 or Su-35?

            about the Su-35 with -Do not know.
            about F-22 let me report?
            2 times, "shot down" Boeing EA-18 Growler (EW aircraft, if anything)

            Quote: Aspeed
            It was just that, and twice. Melee and rangedusing AMRAM.

            I also know about rafael and Hindus, but it was a melee. The specific destruction of F22 is specifically F18, and it is Groler


            And he shot down AIM -120 .... (which he CANNOT carry, and he also does not have a pylon for it).
            But knocked down, tse "fact". HZ when, and HZ who saw it, but shot it down.
            Same Many many times and MANY MANY PIECES (all 100%) F-22s were shot down by Indians on SU-30 "simple"

            Quote: Aspeed
            You can, by the way, chuckle at simple, cool Indian pilots, in close combat, they crushed all US planes they encountered on simple Su-30s, including F22.


            karoche


            Quote: Aspeed
            In general, check out the materiel.

            wink
            1. KKND
              KKND April 16 2016 00: 12
              +3
              Sometimes it seems to me that if local patriots bungle an article from some "National Interest" where an unnamed general tells how an F-22 was shot down by some "Vietnamese" MiG-17 during an exercise organized by the United States, they will choke for a long time with delight and then for a long time this story in the comments will be frequent.
        2. Foofighter
          Foofighter April 15 2016 15: 43
          0
          What are the reasons for such changes? 35 years after Vietnam and 15 years before now, the coolest Serb on a non-maneuverable export MiG-29 with a weak avionics dodged 15 missiles launched at it, and the coolest one from 6.

          Yes, of course, in that Vietnam war, you got a kick from the pilots of the country of the 3 world, so you must forget how to deal with this Vietnam syndrome ...
          1. mav1971
            mav1971 April 15 2016 16: 54
            -2
            Quote: FooFighter
            What are the reasons for such changes? 35 years after Vietnam and 15 years before now, the coolest Serb on a non-maneuverable export MiG-29 with a weak avionics dodged 15 missiles launched at it, and the coolest one from 6.

            Yes, of course, in that Vietnam war, you got a kick from the pilots of the country of the 3 world, so you must forget how to deal with this Vietnam syndrome ...


            1. Proof will be about 15 missiles?
            2. Who are you talking to now?
            I have at least no EU badge ... :)
            1. Foofighter
              Foofighter April 15 2016 19: 05
              0
              what do you think is "proof"?
            2. opus
              opus April 16 2016 00: 10
              +1
              Quote: mav1971
              1. Proof will be about 15 missiles?

              And about the media pruffff on 16 RVV?
              1. mav1971
                mav1971 April 16 2016 07: 32
                0
                Quote: opus
                Quote: mav1971
                1. Proof will be about 15 missiles?

                And about the media pruffff on 16 RVV?


                If this is for me - about what topic - remind me pliz ...
              2. The comment was deleted.
              3. Foofighter
                Foofighter April 21 2016 19: 42
                0
                Like on April 16th they wrote and not the first? lol
        3. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek April 15 2016 11: 14
      +2
      The maneuverability of modern missiles of the R-77 type will allow the maneuverable fighter not to be corrected or not. They have long had a UVT on the engine. If the attack is not shot down by electronic warfare systems or the Countermeasures system, then in 99% of cases the target song will be sung. For longer-range missiles, the task of hitting a fighter is more difficult, because higher range and more factors.
  • tchoni
    tchoni April 15 2016 09: 34
    +2
    The cant is that stealth technology can be filled up with electronic warfare systems easily, but vice versa more difficult ...
    1. KaPToC
      KaPToC April 15 2016 15: 25
      +2
      The claim to F22 is not that it is inconspicuous, but that it is inconspicuous to the detriment of other important characteristics.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni April 15 2016 18: 37
        -1
        Stealth is the most important characteristic.
        1. KaPToC
          KaPToC April 15 2016 20: 01
          -1
          Of course, where up to it are such parameters as speed, maneuverability, load, combat stability.
          1. tchoni
            tchoni April 16 2016 07: 32
            -1
            Here, the last parameter is noticeability and autumn is an important component ... LLC, very ... Because, as calculations of any duel situation, it includes 4 variables: 1) probability of detection, 2) probability of capture for escort, 3) probability of destruction, 4) probability of destruction . Moreover, it is in this order that they go, and a zero value of the first coefficient automatically leads to a win in the dueling situation.
            1. KaPToC
              KaPToC April 16 2016 10: 42
              -1
              Combat sustainability is the ability to hold a punch, the ability to avoid a punch is from another area. One must not run from the enemy; one must defeat the enemy.
              1. tchoni
                tchoni April 17 2016 07: 21
                -1
                And the best way to keep the blow is to not receive it at all.
                The enemy must be defeated - here I agree. But then again - the best way to defeat him is to become invisible to him until that bright moment when the enemy is destroyed.
                I wrote to you about the four components used to calculate combat survivability in duel situations. Three of them include visibility directly. Maneuverability - only in one. The capabilities of the reb complex are determined by two of them. Is visibility so unimportant?
                1. KaPToC
                  KaPToC April 17 2016 16: 53
                  0
                  Quote: tchoni
                  But then again - the best way to defeat him is to become invisible to him until that bright moment when the enemy is destroyed.

                  This is in an ideal situation, in practice, while you are sitting in your invisibility, the enemy will bomb your bridges, train stations, military convoys.
                  1. tchoni
                    tchoni April 18 2016 05: 45
                    +1
                    Quote: KaPToC
                    in practice, while you sit in your invisibility, the enemy will bomb your bridges, train stations, military convoys.

                    Buddy! Do you smoke that? How to sit in "invisibility" have you reviewed Harry Potter? Or is the only option for you to reduce visibility is Iraqi stealth? Reduction of visibility by burying combat aircraft in the sand?
                    Low visibility is simply a property of a fighter. It does not turn on! It just IS! It is LAYED IN ITS DESIGN AND ARCHITECTURE! A fighter with low rl visibility is conducting ordinary combat work! It’s just more effective, because it is later detected (the detection range is directly proportional to the object’s EPR - the BASIC law of radar! (EPR of a 4th generation fighter of 2–3 m.sq. EPR of a fighter with low radar detection of 0.1–0.001 m 200, i.e. if the first find at a distance of 10 km - the second is twenty times closer! (XNUMX km))). Having discovered it later, it will be taken for escort ... To disrupt it, much less powerful electronic warfare equipment of both group and individual protection will be needed - and this is a gain in mass - and this is a large amount of fuel, more weapons, great opportunities for maneuvering (maneuvers with full combat load in aviation are sharply limited if you are not aware, due to excess airframe loads) Less EPR, this also reduces the size of dipoles (shot traps), a reduced IR signature - increases the likelihood of uvo yes rocket IR shop ...
                    So, my friend, read literature, and preferably not "Harry Potter". Take, for example, the work of Ufimtsev. Read the tutorial "Fundamentals of Radar". It is not secret. Do not be afraid.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
  • guzik007
    guzik007 April 15 2016 10: 03
    +1
    even if the advantage is 1: 1,3 (1,5) in our favor, then I’m afraid it will be a Pyrrhic victory, if we take into account the factor of numerical superiority of the Merikos in the Air Force
  • Lincoln
    Lincoln April 15 2016 10: 21
    +3
    The number of relatively modern flyers:
    Su-30 about 90
    Su 35 48
    at the same time, it is somehow pretentious to say that the amount of 187 f22 is small, is not it?
    1. KaPToC
      KaPToC April 15 2016 15: 27
      0
      What have ours managed to fight, in F22 - no.
      1. mav1971
        mav1971 April 15 2016 16: 11
        +2
        Quote: KaPToC
        What have ours managed to fight, in F22 - no.


        Our Su-30, 35 - took part in air battles?
        Where?

        Oh, alternatives ...
        You should write fiction in books, Dontsova would go broke ...
        1. KaPToC
          KaPToC April 15 2016 16: 21
          0
          Not only planes are fired at missiles at planes and helicopters; fire is also being fired from the ground. On this site they posted videos of how SIX missiles were fired in Mi-24 and not a single one got hit, the electronic warfare vehicles are driving.

          P.S. Dypak himself.
          1. mav1971
            mav1971 April 15 2016 16: 57
            -2
            Quote: KaPToC
            Not only planes are fired at missiles at planes and helicopters; fire is also being fired from the ground. On this site they posted videos of how SIX missiles were fired in Mi-24 and not a single one got hit, the electronic warfare vehicles are driving.

            P.S. Dypak himself.


            Well, you started about the combat experience of aircraft ...
            But it turns out that you only have to say "on business" about the Mi-24 helicopter ...

            Chatterbox ... Why lie then?
            If you have nothing to say, don’t think of one. what was not ...
            The Ministry of Defense didn’t say anything about shelling our planes from the ground — but you know, but you can’t say it.
            Yes, you just don’t know. it just wasn’t.
            And you look up come up with much ..
            The kindergarten is real
            1. KaPToC
              KaPToC April 15 2016 17: 25
              0
              It is so duplicitous, in the spirit of Western jurisprudence, to rest on the details, ignoring the facts. Russian planes four plus plus, despite the fact that they have almost begun to produce them, have already managed to be noted in the Syrian conflict. American F22, despite the fact that they were created some time ago, and during this time the US army managed to fight, were not noted anywhere.

              This is so in the West, to follow the letter, and not the spirit of the treaty, to put the law ahead of justice.

              P. S. Ministry of Defense does not say much.
              1. Lincoln
                Lincoln April 15 2016 17: 43
                +1
                The Americans made thousands of sorties in Iraq Syria Afghanistan Kosovo, many of these pilots were transplanted to f22, f35, but of course in your alternative world they have no combat experience, but the Russian Federation chasing militants ...
                1. KaPToC
                  KaPToC April 15 2016 17: 54
                  +3
                  Chukchi is not a reader? Chukchi writer!
                  Especially about Afghanistan, it’s said a lot, but what does my dialogue have to do with mav1971?
                  Where and with whom did I discuss American pilots and their experience?
                  1. Lincoln
                    Lincoln April 15 2016 21: 09
                    -1
                    Quite rightly respected Chukchi, planes do not fight, people fight, is that clear?
                  2. Come on
                    Come on April 17 2016 06: 48
                    +1
                    In Libya and Iraq, F-22s were used, in both countries there was a dangerous, though not the most modern air defense. And the use of dryers in Syria is no different from the landfill, with air defense if only at the level of MANPADS with a range of 3-5 km.
                    1. sivuch
                      sivuch April 17 2016 18: 44
                      -1
                      F-22s used in Iraq? Can I talk about this a little more?
                      I’ve heard about the application of V-2003 V-2 in Libya and Iraq-XNUMX, but about Raptors-only from you. I would like to fill the knowledge gap.
                      And the air defense that Iraq, that in Libya was frail
                      1. Come on
                        Come on April 22 2016 10: 38
                        0
                        I apologize, confused with B2, you are right. I mixed people and horses :)) The theme was then B2, but for the Raptor there were no goals. B2 just the entire Iraqi air defense and rafigachili. Which of course is weaker than the Russian, but not as weak as that of ISIS, whose air defense is MANPADS, Zushka and Shilka, and that is not wherever needed. Although the experience for the videoconferencing is generally valuable of course, in terms of logistics.
  • Verdun
    Verdun April 15 2016 10: 35
    +1
    Without AWACS, it is difficult to use any type of aircraft. Fighting without intelligence is difficult both in the air and on land. As for highly maneuverable aircraft, one should not forget that the concept of the Soviet Air Force included both the maneuverable Su-27 and MiG-29, and the MiG-31 high-speed interceptors. It's just that with the economy and technology at the moment, it so happened that with the production of the MiG-31 - nothing ...
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek April 15 2016 10: 40
    +3
    I liked the article, but it seems to me that the MiG-31M air defense planes have not been deservedly forgotten. It seems to me that the most effective link is the MIG-31 link and 3-4 Su-35S links.
  • abc_alex
    abc_alex April 15 2016 10: 54
    +6
    Quote: Linkoln
    If we compare the super maneuverability, then let's compare the maneuverability of the American missile against the Sukhoi loaded to the eyeballs, since they are chasing after drying as in 41 no one will hi


    And at the same time, let us "remember" the MiG-31, which was carefully "forgotten" by the supporters of US concepts. And let's try to assess the chances of AWACS when attacking this fool with a link of 31s. And after that we will talk about whose missiles they will chase after. You do not need to consider everyone more stupid than yourself, I dare to assure that the flying AWACS chandelier that shines along half the horizon will be shot down in the first place, as you rightly noted, this is not 1941, there are no bad ones to play with the enemy according to his rules. As a reminder, each MiG-31BM carries at least 4 R-33/37 class missiles with a range of up to 300 kilometers. Note that these are REAL missiles, not planned-theoretical ones like the US Air Force :) In addition, the MiG-31 implements in real life, and not theoretically, like the Raptor, a data exchange system in the air via a closed channel, so the MiG-31 link is capable control a front up to 800 km wide and not in theory, as in the US Air Force, but in practice to issue target designation to aircraft of the Su-27/35 class.

    The author debilitated the situation in advance, limiting it only to convenient aircraft models and conducting a "battle" within the framework of his vision. And you chuckled.
    1. Operator
      April 15 2016 12: 17
      -1
      Do not remember in vain MiG-31, otherwise the intrigue of the fight will disappear, never having been born laughing
      For the luminous for a thousand miles AWAX, a simpler option is also suitable: Su-27 with KS-172
      1. mav1971
        mav1971 April 15 2016 13: 07
        -3
        Quote: Operator
        Do not remember in vain MiG-31, otherwise the intrigue of the fight will disappear, never having been born laughing
        For the luminous for a thousand miles AWAX, a simpler option is also suitable: Su-27 with KS-172


        Again came the Operator from the alternative universe ...
        And again he is trying to eats a brain with a teaspoon.

        In fact.
        The missile layout was first demonstrated at MAX-1993.
        Designed by the Novator Design Bureau since 1984.
        Not adopted!

        So we continue to live and think in an alternative story?
        So operator?

        The production order went towards RVV-DB.
        With which is the same big ass.
        Technology rocket - the beginning of the 80's.
        Only Mig-31M \ BM.
        Fully Ukrainian components - therefore, the release of recent years is not and is not expected.
        1. mav1971
          mav1971 April 15 2016 14: 46
          -2
          And the Operator turned out to be notable .....
          All his messages are now hidden from my sight ... :)
          How to live on ...

          And then he instructed the minuses ...
          Not otherwise, he has several nicknames for minus those who "offend" him .. Doesn't give him an alternative reality to move to the masses ... :)

          Funny...
          1. xtur
            xtur April 16 2016 01: 34
            +4
            > And then I instructed the minuses ...
            > Not otherwise, he has several nicknames for the minus of those who "offend" him .. Doesn't give him an alternative reality to move to the masses ... :)

            you don’t need to call all opponents fools or similar expressions in meaning, and be surprised that in response to this, people who are disgusted to read it react.

            PS. because I'm not sure that you will correctly understand what has been said, I repeat - do not active dissatisfaction ascribe to your rudeness only to one person
            1. mav1971
              mav1971 April 16 2016 07: 41
              -1
              Quote: xtur

              PS. because I'm not sure that you will correctly understand what has been said, I repeat - do not active dissatisfaction ascribe to your rudeness only to one person


              No need to live in an alternate universe.
              The man is lying.
              "He lies like Trotsky" - remember such a childish phrase?
              He lies about our missiles - which in fact are not and never will be.
              He lies about our planes - which are not and never will be.
              Lying about some kind of victory - which is not and was not.
              He just invents them - while others read his lies.
              I understand. that here to someone his lies seem like a balm!
              But who benefits from his lies?
              Indeed, in reality - only harm!
              Oge in these conditions is equated with misinformation!
              Incidentally hostile action for the state.
              And why should a person who engages in disinformation be gently soothe?
              Yes, he needs a candelabrum ...
              and select the keyboard ...
              Precisely for a lie.
              Causal relationships track ...
              Before you draw your conclusions.
              Tolerance leads to an increase in crime.
              In view of impunity.
              Tolerance of liars leads to the same. The growth of lies.
              1. xtur
                xtur April 16 2016 22: 57
                +2
                > No need to live in an alternate universe.

                where I live, dignity is respected. For such behavior as yours, and for words like yours, in real life you would have big problems

                so the alternative universe is just with you - in which you can be rude to everyone
                1. mav1971
                  mav1971 April 17 2016 21: 21
                  0
                  Quote: xtur
                  > No need to live in an alternate universe.

                  where I live, dignity is respected. For such behavior as yours, and for words like yours, in real life you would have big problems

                  so the alternative universe is just with you - in which you can be rude to everyone


                  F I mean I live in a spherical vacuum ...
                  And one and a half million people around me are an abstraction ...
                  And tens and hundreds of people with whom I meet every day are the same fiction.

                  Human dignity?
                  You "did not beguiled the coast" ???

                  When a person is Worthy - they respect him!
                  When a person is a liar, his hands are not served.
                  And they boldly say in person that he is a liar and complete!
                  And for trying to lie again and in public - they can fill your face.

                  Is it not so in your reality?
                  In your reality, liars and liars sing hosannas and support: "Continue! Lie further! You love you!" ...

                  Enough of this garbage to carry as the Helsinki group of their echo matzah ...
    2. Assistant
      Assistant April 15 2016 13: 37
      0
      But will the MiG-31 launch its missiles at AWACS, if the latter cuts its chandelier at full power in the jamming mode?
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Operator
        April 15 2016 14: 04
        -1
        AWACS does not have such a regime.
      3. Leto
        Leto April 15 2016 15: 15
        0
        Quote: Assistant
        But will the MiG-31 launch its missiles at AWACS, if the latter cuts its chandelier at full power in the jamming mode?

        The main thing is to break the connection of the missile with the MiG-31, then it will fly away to e-nya that AWACS systems are quite capable of it, the onboard 1MW generators generate a radar ... 1MW Karl!
        1. Foofighter
          Foofighter April 15 2016 15: 48
          0
          And how do anti-radar missiles work?
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Operator
          April 15 2016 16: 28
          -2
          Any missile launched via AWACS does not require guidance from a carrier aircraft: the AWACS antenna chandelier is the best radio beacon in the world.
    3. NEXUS
      NEXUS April 15 2016 14: 32
      +1
      Quote: abc_alex
      And at the same time, let us "remember" the MiG-31, which was carefully "forgotten" by the supporters of US concepts. And let's try to assess the chances of AWACS when attacking this fool with a link of 31s.

      All this is certainly good ... but the author has narrowed the confrontation of technologies too much. We also have the A-50 and there was infa that the development of the A-100 is in full swing. So, I think it’s not correct to talk only about super-maneuver and electronic warfare. And one more thing , which the author for some reason does not mention, are these ground-based detection systems, electronic warfare systems, etc. ... or, in the author’s opinion, are they so easy to suppress? I would argue with that.
    4. Lincoln
      Lincoln April 15 2016 21: 11
      +2
      Quote: abc_alex
      And at the same time, we will "remember" the MiG-31, carefully "forgotten" by the supporters of state concepts

      Dear, I’m not nirazu whose supporter, I’m the opponent of setting the Duns regardless of the flag.
  • shinobi
    shinobi April 15 2016 13: 16
    +4
    In short, without AWAKS, they are blind. And turning on the radar without which the sights do not work, they become visible to everyone. To fight against obsolete weapons and 10 overweight, yes, it will. And since it’s not clear why the garden was fenced. Moreover, AWAKS will be knocked out first of all , aiming, and from afar. Themes are the same 31 MiGs. Ground-based air defense to crush that still a task.
  • MegaDRON
    MegaDRON April 15 2016 13: 36
    +1
    Of course, I do not consider myself an expert in aviation, the article is interesting and informative, but IMHO, in which case the videoconferencing system will fight over its territory, and here also ground-based detection tools will help, which will calmly irradiate and transmit information to our aircraft, which will be located in passive mode and everything is fine to see around ...
    1. mav1971
      mav1971 April 15 2016 13: 55
      -2
      Quote: MegaDRON
      Of course, I do not consider myself an expert in aviation, the article is interesting and informative, but IMHO, in which case the videoconferencing system will fight over its territory, and here also ground-based detection tools will help, which will calmly irradiate and transmit information to our aircraft, which will be located in passive mode and everything is fine to see around ...


      Look at the very first points of impact during interventions in Libya, Iraq, Yugoslavia ...
      The first objectives are air defense and RTV.

      And I don’t know, I have an automated data transmission system for, for example, targeting Air-to-Air missiles, based on airplanes from ground-based radars, similar to Link-16 ...
  • Altona
    Altona April 15 2016 14: 42
    0


    I won’t say anything else, watch the video.
  • barbiturate
    barbiturate April 15 2016 14: 51
    +4
    The article is good, but no one knows where the truth is, because no one knows the REAL characteristics of certain systems and operating modes of equipment, and under what conditions all this will be put into battle, in general, random random. In addition, quite often, after a couple of decades after the appearance of some aircraft (a tank or something else), the operators' revelations come out and it turns out that entire systems on board worked poorly or were not brought to mind at all, but they were considered valid and compared and figured out how to get around them. For example, there was an article "On closer acquaintance, it turned out that the level of reliability and the number of failures in operation of the Tu-160 and B-1 B are practically the same. The problems were also similar - frequent engine failures (at the exhibition in Le Bourget, the crew of the B-1 B , having failed to launch them, was forced to abandon the demonstration flight) and the whims of complex electronics, especially the BKO (the Americans did not hide their special interest in "Baikal": "Does this really work for you ?!") It is the lack of reliability of the power plant and onboard electronic warfare systems AN / ALQ-161 and ALQ-153 prevented the use of B-1 B in Operation Desert Storm "

    So now, someone admires the F-22 (for example), and then it turns out that he has an EPR of 0,5 and is not badly visible and the LPI mode is pure advertising and not brought to mind and there’s a lot of everything that is fundamentally different from advertising, etc. The same thing applies to the Su-35, also little is known for sure.
    But what is less well known is the training fights of the Su30MKI and some quite modern Western machines, and here we can reliably say - our equipment at the 4+ level looks decent
    1. Altona
      Altona April 15 2016 14: 59
      +1
      Quote: barbiturate
      So now, someone admires the F-22 (for example), and then it turns out that he has an EPR of 0,5 and is not badly visible and the LPI mode is pure advertising and not brought to mind and there’s a lot of everything that is fundamentally different from advertising, etc. The same thing applies to the Su-35, also little is known for sure.

      ------------------------
      And all analysts talk about "knightly battles" in the style of the ever-memorable Richthofen, as if one plane with missiles at the ready rush towards another and a "fair fight" will take place. Of course not. Aircraft will be actively operated from the ground by all means of air defense, and, thank God, they are mobile-BUK and Pantsir. And Russia has over-the-horizon radars that will see these stealths earlier, and not on approach. And space reconnaissance can also count the scattered matches, and even the relocation of aircraft and even more so. There are means of destroying ground air bases and airfields. So, the alignment is unknown. And stealth is not a wunderwaffe at all.
  • Denis Skiff
    Denis Skiff April 15 2016 15: 13
    -1
    when you’re already sofa experts, you’ll cut yourself on the nose. we will not attack anyone. over its territory, any Avax hokai and any mutiny in the form of fe-35 is a pile of iron. Compare with the radars of those countries where these Avaks flew.
    We do not start a war. We are finishing them.
    The stingray often squeaks that the athlete will dump with one blow (these are exceptional fsha, balts and small british)
    The athlete (Russia) silently stands on the sidelines and listens with a smile on his face the squeak of drizzle. Until the stingray begins to swing a rake, no one will touch it.
  • MegaDRON
    MegaDRON April 15 2016 15: 47
    +1
    Quote: mav1971
    Quote: MegaDRON
    Of course, I do not consider myself an expert in aviation, the article is interesting and informative, but IMHO, in which case the videoconferencing system will fight over its territory, and here also ground-based detection tools will help, which will calmly irradiate and transmit information to our aircraft, which will be located in passive mode and everything is fine to see around ...


    Look at the very first points of impact during interventions in Libya, Iraq, Yugoslavia ...
    The first objectives are air defense and RTV.

    And I don’t know, I have an automated data transmission system for, for example, targeting Air-to-Air missiles, based on airplanes from ground-based radars, similar to Link-16 ...


    I’m not about to launch missiles from land-based means, but to the fact that knowing the location of the enemy, they can approach from any direction unexpected for the enemy without revealing themselves and the Su-34 to the last, for example, 200-250 km to AWACS guaranteed destroying it first, and then ... Although I’m probably not going to be clever anymore, I already feel that my level of expertise is going off scale)))
  • Cartalon
    Cartalon April 15 2016 16: 23
    +6
    A terribly informative article, just a terrific discussion, after which you can come to only one conclusion, and hell .. he knows how it will be, the main thing is to not
  • Russian dream
    Russian dream April 16 2016 22: 20
    -2
    Su-35 aircraft of the 4th generation, F22 fifth. What to compare them? Raptor maneuverability is higher, there is invisibility, avionics is much cooler. There is nothing to talk about
  • vital1505
    vital1505 April 16 2016 23: 11
    0
    The winner is the one who can build these more of these aircraft, so the advantage is not in our favor
  • vital1505
    vital1505 April 16 2016 23: 11
    0
    The winner is the one who can build more of these aircraft, so the advantage is not in our favor
  • Photon
    Photon April 17 2016 03: 25
    +3
    Quote: mav1971
    As already mentioned, they will be able to implement super-maneuver quite easily if desired, their design base and the amount of dough allow. But the developed network-centricity system is much more complicated, it is necessary to practically equip all types of troops, re-equip all equipment, and most importantly, to work out concepts, algorithms, and interaction protocols in advance. Create an orbital constellation of communication satellites and much more.

    So I think that it was ours that emphasized the more easily attainable, aka super maneuver.
    Because network-centricity - we did not pull


    But nothing that the first network-centric aircraft was the MIG-31? Attacks of anti-ship missiles even the devil knows when they were network-centric. System scaling? Algorithms? The Soviet Union, if it could be reproached for anything, it was not the weakness of mathematical science. Is network centricity more complicated than hydroaerodynamics? !!! Network-centricity is a problem, mainly engineering, programming. Hydroaerodynamics and, accordingly, super-maneuverability are a much more fundamental, scientific problem. By the 90s, there were 5 KB in the world who could count the wing well. Of these, 3 are in the Soviet Union.
  • Photon
    Photon April 17 2016 03: 45
    +1
    Quote: Russian dream
    Su-35 aircraft of the 4th generation, F22 fifth. What to compare them? Raptor maneuverability is higher, there is invisibility, avionics is much cooler. There is nothing to talk about

    And in more detail about the superiority of the F22 in maneuverability is possible? How did you manage to achieve it? How did you manage to combine invisibility with aerodynamic qualities? And how did you manage to achieve an advantage in maneuverability with less controllability of the thrust vector?
  • Scharnhorst
    Scharnhorst April 17 2016 08: 44
    +1
    I would like to be brief. An article is a plus, a discussion is useful, rudeness is a fight, arguments are disclosed in more detail. Russia is gaining strength and the world understands this. Power is in the truth! Who knows why Europeans and Americans don't go to Tank Biathlon? Likewise in aviation, aggressive advertising hides inferiority complexes. And in Syria, one could measure it for the common good.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh April 17 2016 09: 41
    +1
    Super maneuverability + stealth - a great combination.
    And in this sense, the T-50 is at its best.

    Over-maneuverability WITHOUT stealth now gives a little.
    And in this sense, 4+ airplanes (inclusive Su-35) are becoming obsolete.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Massik
    Massik April 18 2016 21: 10
    -1
    How many flyers on the site belay
  • CC-18c
    CC-18c April 19 2016 17: 10
    -1
    Quote: Leto

    Author, please list the missiles in-in which the ARLGSN have exactly mm ranges?
    For example, the RVV-BD given in the "analytics" does not have such a seeker, the 9B-1103M-350 seeker operates in the cm range and the probability of capturing the F-22 from it is negligible (according to the declared characteristics, at a distance of 40 km. accordingly, the target detection range, even with an EPPR of 5m2, will be calculated in units of kilometers)

    Maneuvering implies a loss of speed and, accordingly, initiative, at a distance of 20 km from the enemy it will not give any advantages, even more so it will not allow you to approach the "cannon shot"

    ignoramus do you know anything about military aviation and missiles? Or only on murzilka with pictures?

    1.
    GOS 9B-1103M-350 will detect f22 at a distance of 10-15km. Up to this point, the Su-35C aircraft will highlight f22. Further to the rapotor kerdyk, he is not so super-maneuverable to get away from the rocket in general there is little chance.

    GOS AIM he sees a target of 3 sq m at a distance of 16 km, Su35s with 0,5 km of a seeker from AIM sees at a distance of 5-10 km. Further, the Su-35s, due to its super-maneuverability, leaves the missile, + AIM, due to the shorter detection range, has less time to react to the target’s maneuver.

    The bummer about lovers of f22 is that an EPR of 0,1 is strictly in the forehead, a little from a different angle, then immediately the EPR sharply increases, which does not happen with the EPR of the Su-35S. The point is a different approach to stealth technologies, we rely more on coverage and the United States relies on ironing. As a rule, an in-in rocket flies in from the upper hemisphere, the first thing the rocket does is climb, and from this angle the f22 glows even better than the su-35s.


    2.
    Loss of speed in close combat means better maneuverability and controllability, while the raptor makes its turn without losing speed, it will have time to dry it 3 times before knocking down once it unfolds towards it. Therefore, in fact, even a pin in a melee system learns to extinguish speed to the lowest possible speed so as to make a bend faster, in f22 this is limited by ironing and weak characteristics, and in su35s there are practically no restrictions.
    so that you write complete nonsense about maneuvering and landability and loss of speed and apparently not even writing what you're writing.
  • Gray wolf
    Gray wolf April 20 2016 20: 36
    +1
    It is immediately noticeable that many of those present here, like the author, consider real air combat to be a copy of a computer game
  • Philip Staros
    Philip Staros 3 October 2016 03: 58
    0
    KKND,
    the task of the radio command guidance of the explosive missile is to bring it to the area where the samelt is located. Then she herself will "look". But, yes, it's not that easy.
  • Philip Staros
    Philip Staros 3 October 2016 11: 09
    0
    Vita VKO,
    he has not forgotten about the quiet mode, but assumes that electronic warfare (!) aircraft in this network mode will calculate the direction to this "noise" radiation. Not an expert and I can't say if this is so, but the idea is this.