Military Review

Media: America wants to keep up with the Russian Federation and China, resuming production of F-22

76
The Pentagon believes that the resumption of production of the F-22 Raptor fighter, which was discontinued in 2011 g, will allow it to level the gap between Russia and China, writes Defense News magazine.


Media: America wants to keep up with the Russian Federation and China, resuming production of F-22


“Almost five years ago, the American company Lockheed Martin ceased production of the fifth-generation multipurpose fighter F-22. In 2009, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates decided to reduce the fighter production plan by four times, and by 2011, instead of the alleged 749 aircraft, only 187 was released, ”the article says RIA News.

“But in the light of the growing feeling that the US Army is losing a technological advantage over rivals such as Russia and China, Congress during the budget period expressed a clear interest in resuming production,”
reports the magazine.

According to the publication, “the combat subcommittee aviation and the US Army Armed Forces Committee instructed the Air Force Secretary to conduct an analysis of the costs associated with the possible production of at least another 194 aircraft. ” The document must be submitted to the Committee by the end of the year.

Earlier, NI wrote that the old aircraft may be more useful for the Pentagon than the “ambitious multi-billion dollar project of the F-35 fighter-bomber”.
Photos used:
U.S. Department of Defense
76 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 April 21 2016 12: 30
    +10
    So, with a quiet glanders and crammed, mericatos, F-35 under the bed. And billions of bucks have already been sawn under the 35s program! laughing
    1. Error
      Error April 21 2016 12: 42
      +6
      Well, it’s in vain that they clearly got excited! The only right thing is to start the project from scratch! This one is too expensive. And service time just think about 19 million per hour. dust particles are blown off from it and military equipment must fight
      1. DIMA45R
        DIMA45R April 21 2016 13: 06
        +7
        Ay molotsa !!! Krasava, gold machines are still needed.
        Hey congress, Putin has blasters and cyborgs, and you are worse lol, or you are backward rogues, let’s get a bunch of lyamov ... good
        1. PHANTOM-AS
          PHANTOM-AS April 21 2016 15: 01
          +5
          Quote: DIMA45R
          Hey congress, Putin has blasters and cyborgs, and you are worse

          mattresses will never catch up!
    2. vkl.47
      vkl.47 April 21 2016 13: 02
      +3
      it turns out we impose an arms race on them laughing
      1. lelikas
        lelikas April 21 2016 13: 08
        +7
        Quote: vkl.47
        it turns out we impose an arms race on them

        No, this is their lobbying system that continues to work perfectly, and we are just an excuse.
        1. jjj
          jjj April 21 2016 13: 26
          0
          Quote: lelikas
          Quote: vkl.47
          it turns out we impose an arms race on them

          No, this is their lobbying system that continues to work perfectly, and we are just an excuse.

          This is the implication
          1. mav1971
            mav1971 April 21 2016 14: 18
            +5
            Quote: jjj
            Quote: lelikas
            Quote: vkl.47
            it turns out we impose an arms race on them

            No, this is their lobbying system that continues to work perfectly, and we are just an excuse.

            This is the implication


            So far, only they are imposing themselves ...
            So to speak, they arranged an internal brawl.
            Until ours or the Chinese build 160 fighters, there is no arms race.
            They will have superiority.
            As catching up in quantity, it will be possible to honestly talk about parity.
    3. mQn
      mQn April 21 2016 13: 25
      0
      something I don’t really believe in similar news ...
      1. Grabberxnumx
        Grabberxnumx April 21 2016 14: 10
        +6
        They would learn to do parachutes ..
        1. Kasym
          Kasym April 21 2016 14: 58
          +3
          It seems to me parachutes were opened, but the equipment was poorly fixed to them. hi
        2. The comment was deleted.
    4. hartlend
      hartlend April 21 2016 20: 29
      0
      "Silently", not quietly.
  2. oleg-gr
    oleg-gr April 21 2016 12: 30
    +2
    Will Americans print new candy wrappers? Themselves cried about the crazy price of this product and that it is not worth that kind of money.
  3. BilliBoms09
    BilliBoms09 April 21 2016 12: 31
    +7
    The Pentagon believes that the resumption of production of the F-22 Raptor fighter, discontinued in 2011, will allow it to level the gap between Russia and China,
    The Americans can understand that the F35 is a cheaper version of the 5th generation aircraft. And Russia has a full version on its way. The T50 was designed taking into account the operation and use of the Raptor. And avionics and electronics have gone a long way since the design of the F22!
    1. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn April 21 2016 12: 37
      +3
      And what are they behind Russia and China?
      1. Scoun
        Scoun April 21 2016 12: 41
        +5
        Quote: Stirbjorn
        And what are they behind Russia and China?

        EW
        1. Leto
          Leto April 21 2016 13: 03
          -1
          Quote: Scoun
          EW

          Argument ... Or according to the principle "they do not have a single khibiny"?
          1. Scoun
            Scoun April 21 2016 13: 08
            +3
            Quote: Leto
            Quote: Scoun
            EW

            Argument ... Or according to the principle "they do not have a single khibiny"?

            Do you propose to argue the statements of American specialists and the military? Internet help you, this is my argument for your "remark".
            Quote: Aaron Zawi
            Quote: Scoun
            Quote: Stirbjorn
            And what are they behind Russia and China?

            EW

            Yeah. And also in electronics, software development, and in general on high-tech. In short, that's all.

            (Separately for Aron Zaavi and still lag behind in air defense, but to see here you have missed a lot when doing flood))))
            In fact, if you hang out on the VO forum, then some of the statements of American and other people could be noticed by yourself, and if in this part it is completely "zero", then the Internet will help you and read a lot of interesting things from American primary sources.
            In the future, many of the most effective weapons used against the U.S. armed forces are likely to be invisible: this refers to electromagnetic waves that interfere with radio reception or interfere with the global positioning system, paralyzing the functioning of combat units.
            This area of ​​warfare is called electronic warfare, which after the 9/11 events had a lower priority than fighting rebel groups with precision weapons and drones. Defense officials now say they are worried that the ability of the US army to conduct electronic warfare is almost lost, and America lags behind countries such as Russia and China.

            "We have no technical means, - says Colonel Jeffrey Church, head of electronic wrestling... "We are working on it, but we are only engaged in conversations so far, having lost years, while our opponents are doing it right now."

            The place where the opponents of the United States demonstrated their skills in electronic warfare was eastern Ukraine - there the Pentagon carefully watched the Russian troops, trying to learn something useful for itself.

            "The Russians have worked hard in recent years to develop electronic warfare," General Ben Hodges, the commander of US forces in Europe, said in a recent interview. "Their actions in eastern Ukraine and Crimea have helped us study the problem."

            One Ukrainian special forces colonel who took part in the battles near Donetsk stated that his people became the target of an artillery attack after Russian-backed separatists discovered the location of Ukrainian positions solely by radio interception. According to him, the radio equipment that they used was American-made under the Harris brand.
            1. Leto
              Leto April 21 2016 13: 21
              -2
              Quote: Scoun
              "We don't have the technical means," says Colonel Jeffrey Church, head of the electronic warfare unit. "We are working on it, but we are just talking, having lost years, while our opponents are doing it right now."

              You know, it looks like a wife who has all the cabinets clogged with clothes, and a separate room for shoes no longer holds all the boxes; she complains to her husband that she has nothing to put on.
              If for you the argument is the moaning of an official who uses the moment to knock out additional allocations, and not a list of the range of electronic warfare equipment, then what to talk about with you?
              Quote: Scoun
              One Ukrainian special forces colonel who took part in the battles near Donetsk stated that his people became the target of an artillery attack after Russian-backed separatists discovered the location of Ukrainian positions solely by radio interception.

              The greatest discovery ... something like seeing earlier a radio interception was not used to open the enemy’s positions. Is this a serious argument for you?
              Quote: Scoun
              According to him, the radio equipment that they used was American-made under the Harris brand.

              Those. Are Americans behind Russia using American equipment?
              1. Scoun
                Scoun April 21 2016 13: 42
                +7
                Quote: Leto
                Those. Are Americans behind Russia using American equipment?

                Do you read or what? How did you tie Russia to American equipment?
                You are a talent simply)))
                It is Ukrainian troops that came under fire using equipment under the Harris brand.
                Further ... I see it is meaningless, the wife’s clothes were still attributed to ....
                1. Leto
                  Leto April 21 2016 14: 42
                  -3
                  Quote: Scoun
                  You are a talent simply)))

                  Well, wrong, with whom it does not happen
                  Quote: Scoun
                  Further ... see pointless

                  Why so? What do you know about US EW weapons? About Application Experience?
                  1. Scoun
                    Scoun April 21 2016 17: 05
                    +2
                    Quote: Leto
                    Quote: Scoun
                    You are a talent simply)))

                    Well, wrong, with whom it does not happen
                    Quote: Scoun
                    Further ... see pointless

                    Why so? What do you know about US EW weapons? About Application Experience?

                    1. If in the course of several years the "tone" of conversations on some "topic" begins to change, this means that a "shift" has occurred.
                    We recall how loudly the US UAVs started, how then their laurels began to fade a little and the UAVs themselves "whole" to fall (at least Iran), then the "milestone" 2008, when our soldiers used mobile phones and the Air Force was forced to use the Su-34 located in Lipetsk the center and not the troops (something like that) and "cherry" is the Crimea. The American military admitted that by all means of intelligence they profited a huge movement of military equipment and troops, that is, they saw something but could not listen to Merkel. (search for proofs yourself)
                    2. I do not know about the means of electronic warfare of the USA. I see their statements and actions, including the ban on flying within the framework of the "open skies"

                    Quote: Leto
                    Quote: Scoun
                    There are also such as Krasukha-4, "Vitebsk", "Lever-AV", "Mercury-BM", SP-14 / SAP-518 and this is only what is available to all readers

                    I can roll out dozens of acronyms for US Army electronic warfare to you, will this be an argument for superiority?

                    If you "roll out" their latest developments, then I will be grateful and say that their military, who say that they are behind in this area, are banal balabolki.
                    Quote: Scoun
                    According to the deputy head of the US Armed Forces Cyber ​​Command Ronald Pontius, Russian reconnaissance aircraft pose a threat to America, Washington is not keeping pace with their pace of development.

                    say ronald chatterbox
                    Quote: Scoun
                    says Colonel Jeffrey Church, head of the electronic wrestling division. - We are working on it, but so far we are only talking, having lost years

                    I'll call him a dummy
                    The other day, the Wall Street Journal talked about how the American special forces miscalculated the “invasion” of the Russians in Crimea. In a material dated 24 in March, journalists Adam Entous, Julian E. Barnes and Siobhan Gorman share with the reading public their thoughts on how the Kremlin managed to fool not only intelligence analysts, but also military satellites that monitored the Crimea. The authors conclude that the Russians probably learned to circumvent the western wiretapping.
                    http://topwar.ru/42371-kak-amerikanskaya-razvedka-krym-promorgala.html

                    I hope I answered so clearly? it just really gets boring to remind "obvious things" through time and the conversation turns into a flood and so here the branch "got littered". )))
            2. Leto
              Leto April 21 2016 13: 33
              -7
              Quote: Scoun
              (separately for Aron Zaavi and still lag behind in air defense but to see here you missed a lot when doing flood

              The concept of air defense includes several components, if you have a ground component in the form of air defense systems, then the Americans have long surpassed the Russian Federation in this field.
              The most important characteristic of an air defense system is its accuracy. The Americans implemented the principle of hit-to-kill, their missiles hit directly into the air target, does not explode nearby, but strikes with a direct hit. We could not realize this, although they tried.
              1. i80186
                i80186 April 21 2016 14: 48
                +4
                Quote: Leto
                We could not realize this, although they tried.

                It is strange why then the mass of the warhead 9M96E2 is only 24 kg? That is, exactly the same as the last Patriot modification? smile
                1. Leto
                  Leto April 21 2016 15: 19
                  -4
                  Quote: i80186
                  It is strange why then the mass of the warhead 9M96E2 is only 24 kg? That is, exactly the same as the last Patriot modification?

                  The question is not addressed, I am not the creator. Regarding a direct hit, yes, it had to hit, but could not, on it warheads with a controlled lesion field.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                2. mav1971
                  mav1971 April 21 2016 16: 44
                  0
                  Quote: i80186
                  Quote: Leto
                  We could not realize this, although they tried.

                  It is strange why then the mass of the warhead 9M96E2 is only 24 kg? That is, exactly the same as the last Patriot modification? smile


                  The warhead is normal there. Shrapnel. With directional demolition field.
              2. alstr
                alstr April 21 2016 15: 05
                +3
                Well. as already answered here - they created a rocket. Another question. that the production of such a rocket is not adjusted.
                But there is also the question of which is better. Sometimes an indirect hit is better because if the construction is tight (and this is a common practice for hiding the number of planes in a group), then with an indirect hit (the formation of a cloud of striking elements) there is a chance to hit several targets.
                It's me that we need rockets with both methods. This applies primarily to the S-300 / S-400 / S-500 line.
                1. Leto
                  Leto April 21 2016 15: 39
                  -10%
                  Quote: alstr
                  Sometimes an indirect hit is better because if the construction is tight

                  And who is it interesting to fly in tight formation? Give me one example?
                  Quote: alstr
                  It's me that we need rockets with both methods

                  Well, then in theory it doesn’t matter how you killed the enemy in the field, with a gap of 152mm. a shell 30 meters from him or a sniper bullet in the forehead, in any case, he died. But the means are different. In the first case, the Howitzer with the calculation, means of transportation and transport with ammunition. In the second case, a sniper with a rifle and a second number.
                  The analogy is somewhat exaggerated, but the Patriot PAC-3 on the launcher has 16 missiles, and the S-400 has only 4.
                  Or compare the dimensions of the THAAD PRO defense system

                  and only its analogue S-500 being developed

                  You can give a lecture on intensive and extensive development paths.
                  1. Muvka
                    Muvka April 21 2016 22: 25
                    +1
                    Quote: Leto
                    Quote: alstr
                    Sometimes an indirect hit is better because if the construction is tight

                    And who is it interesting to fly in tight formation? Give me one example?
                    Quote: alstr
                    It's me that we need rockets with both methods

                    Well, then in theory it doesn’t matter how you killed the enemy in the field, with a gap of 152mm. a shell 30 meters from him or a sniper bullet in the forehead, in any case, he died. But the means are different. In the first case, the Howitzer with the calculation, means of transportation and transport with ammunition. In the second case, a sniper with a rifle and a second number.
                    The analogy is somewhat exaggerated, but the Patriot PAC-3 on the launcher has 16 missiles, and the S-400 has only 4.
                    Or compare the dimensions of the THAAD PRO defense system

                    and only its analogue S-500 being developed

                    You can give a lecture on intensive and extensive development paths.

                    But nothing that the S-400 can load the same 16 missiles?
                    1. Leto
                      Leto April 22 2016 10: 00
                      0
                      Quote: Muvka
                      But nothing that the S-400 can load the same 16 missiles?

                      In your imagination, load at least bricks, do not confuse reality with harsh reality
                      1. CC-18c
                        CC-18c April 23 2016 05: 23
                        0
                        it’s your only continuous fantasies.
                        From the first days of the S-400, the Russian Aerospace Forces have long had 36-48 zeroes in one S-400. And this is not the limit, but your 16 zurik on pin dos kih pu limit for THAAD

                  2. CC-18c
                    CC-18c April 23 2016 05: 20
                    0
                    Quote: Leto
                    and only its analogue S-500 being developed

                    from what oak is THAAD PRO analog S-500?
                    THAAD PRO is something around S-300B4 or S-400, the only thing is that our systems do not have radars for monitoring up to 1000 km, this is their plus.
                    At the same time, THAAD is a pure missile defense system, it is generally useless against ordinary aircraft and non-ballistic missiles, that is, their "plus" has turned into a huge "minus". And our analogs just work for all purposes, and the missile defense element is an additional "feature".

                    Patriot PAC-3 is the same trouble, the purest missile defense only in the near radius, just exactly in the S-300PMU category, only unlike ours, their pack3 is practically useless against a plane or a ballistic missile.
                    Among other things, the probability of hitting a target in a modern patriot is almost several times worse than that of the S-300 model of the 80s.
                    TTX missiles. Target height:
                    Patriot Pak3 = 20km.
                    S-300 PMU = 40km.

                    The S-500 has no analogues, which it will not be known yet, but according to the requirements of the military, it significantly exceeds THAAD missile defense, so


                    THAAD has only 2x 8PUs, not 16, only 16 zeroes in the whole complex, can no longer. Only one or two, generally minuscule, can lead to the target.
                    PAK3 also has 2x 8PUs in total, 16 zeroes in total, and also more likely simply can no longer.
                    The S-400 has 4PUs on each installation, the number of "xs" installations, they will supply as many as needed, but definitely more than 48 zurki per 1 S-400 air defense system.
                    "--- Maximum targets fired simultaneously:
                    80 (10 goals of each air defense system, up to 8 air defense systems in total under general management) (until 2012 - 36 (6 air defense systems of 6 goals))
                    --- Maximum missiles aimed at targets:
                    160 (20 missiles each SAM, total up to 8 SAMs under common control) "


                    And in all respects, the US air defense systems, even with missile defense, are much inferior to air defense of the USSR / RF, even simply with missile defense elements as an addition.
              3. CC-18c
                CC-18c April 23 2016 04: 47
                0
                Quote: Leto

                The concept of air defense includes several components, if you have a ground component in the form of air defense systems, then the Americans have long surpassed the Russian Federation in this field.
                The most important characteristic of an air defense system is its accuracy. The Americans implemented the principle of hit-to-kill, their missiles hit directly into the air target, does not explode nearby, but strikes with a direct hit. We could not realize it, although they tried.

                yes you are sick! fool
          2. Scoun
            Scoun April 21 2016 13: 35
            +2
            Quote: Leto
            Quote: Scoun
            EW

            Argument ... Or on the principle "they have not a single hibina no"?

            The war of the sixth generation: how do we jam foreign radars ...
            mk.ru ›politics / 2015/01/02 / voyna-shestogo ... kak-my ... i ...
            Unique developments: Moscow-1, "Himalayas" и "President-S". ... Today, in the field of electronic warfare, Russia occupies a leading position in the world, which Western experts are now forced to admit.
            There are also such as Krasukha-4, "Vitebsk", "Lever-AV", "Mercury-BM", SP-14 / SAP-518 and this is just what is available to everyone to readers
            1. Leto
              Leto April 21 2016 15: 42
              -5
              Quote: Scoun
              There are also such as Krasukha-4, "Vitebsk", "Lever-AV", "Mercury-BM", SP-14 / SAP-518 and this is only what is available to all readers

              I can roll out dozens of acronyms for US Army electronic warfare to you, will this be an argument for superiority?
        2. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi April 21 2016 13: 03
          0
          Quote: Scoun
          Quote: Stirbjorn
          And what are they behind Russia and China?

          EW

          Yeah. And also in electronics, software development, and in general on high-tech. In short, that's all.
          1. Lt. Air Force stock
            Lt. Air Force stock April 21 2016 13: 29
            +2
            Quote: Aron Zaavi
            Yeah. And also in electronics, software development, and in general on high-tech. In short, that's all.

            Well, for example, where are the US Army’s ground-based electronic warfare systems? They are not visible not heard. Rumor has it that only the plane jamming director Groler.
            1. Leto
              Leto April 21 2016 14: 38
              +1
              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              Well, for example, where are the US Army’s ground-based electronic warfare systems? They are not visible not heard.

              AN / MLQ-40 (V) 3 Prophet

              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              Rumor has it that only the plane jammer Groler

              There are many more ...
              1. Lt. Air Force stock
                Lt. Air Force stock April 21 2016 17: 35
                +4
                Quote: Leto
                AN / MLQ-40 (V) 3 Prophet

                Yes, of course, what they built on the basis of Hammera clearly has comparable capabilities with what we have (sarcasm). I’ll ask a question, otherwise they have analogues of Krasukha-2, Krasukha-4, etc. etc.?

                Something I doubt that this Hammer-based little doll has the same capabilities as Krasukha-2. Or say that they have gone so far in the development of electronics that they can push Krasukha-2 into a hammer?
            2. mav1971
              mav1971 April 21 2016 15: 40
              -1
              Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              Yeah. And also in electronics, software development, and in general on high-tech. In short, that's all.

              Well, for example, where are the US Army’s ground-based electronic warfare systems? They are not visible not heard. Rumor has it that only the plane jamming director Groler.


              If you do not know about them, then this is the level of your development.
              Simply, if you do not read about them on the Topvar website, then you think that they are not there?
              There are also much more famous and powerful aircraft in the US Army, such as various versions of the EU-130 ...
              This is the way ...
              And there is also the EU-130CL version - super powerful RTR systems that have been secret for almost 30 for almost ...

              They are actually unmeasured ...
              Almost any type of weapon with the letter Q at the end is related to EW / RTR / REP. Type TLQ, MLQ.

              There is an EW brigade in the army corps - almost 1500 people.
              In the brigade 3 battalion.
              Do you think they serve butterfly nets?
              1. Scoun
                Scoun April 21 2016 16: 13
                +2
                Quote: mav1971
                Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
                Quote: Aron Zaavi
                Yeah. And also in electronics, software development, and in general on high-tech. In short, that's all.

                Well, for example, where are the US Army’s ground-based electronic warfare systems? They are not visible not heard. Rumor has it that only the plane jamming director Groler.


                If you do not know about them, then this is the level of your development.
                Simply, if you do not read about them on the Topvar website, then you think that they are not there?
                There are also much more famous and powerful aircraft in the US Army, such as various versions of the EU-130 ...
                This is the way ...
                And there is also the EU-130CL version - super powerful RTR systems that have been secret for almost 30 for almost ...

                Well, just how can we be? It turns out that they say something wrong ... we immediately "assess" that they are begging for money from the Senate for cutting ... and if you just mentioned airplanes, then here is another statement from another American to them. Is it simple for us to be, or just trolling on the site like some pots? )))
                Russian Surging Electronic Warfare Capabilities
                Russian new developments in electronic warfare are on display in Ukraine and Syria.

                reference to the original

                http://thediplomat.com/2016/04/russias-surging-electronic-warfare-capabilities/

                According to Ronald Pontius, Deputy Head of the Cyber ​​Command of the US Armed Forces, Russian reconnaissance aircraft pose a threat to America, Washington is not keeping pace with their development.
                1. mav1971
                  mav1971 April 21 2016 22: 27
                  -3
                  Quote: Scoun
                  http://thediplomat.com/2016/04/russias-surging-electronic-warfare-capabilities/


                  You yourself are not funny to give this link?
                  did you translate it yourself?

                  A quote from it: "Russian military hackers have jammed all Ukrainian military computers."
                  Question: where are military computers in Ukraine? Which can be messed up over the Internet ...



                  IL-20, mentioned in the article, cannot be an analogue of the Lokhidovsky EP-3Е ???
                  But when was this very American analogue released? And when to write off to ours?
                  The article on this silence ... But the threat is damn ...

                  About Tu-214P - how many of them do we have? Two probably ...
                  A terrible threat ... Everyone is shaking ...
                  And how many RC-135 and EU-130 aircraft do adversaries have?
                  Under 50, probably?
                  Well, isn’t it funny?

                  And most importantly, the author of the article. Normal translator from Arabic. A woman who, at best, flew RTR aircraft in the Middle East and translated radio intercepts. And most likely she was in Norfolk in some sort of sharashka for translating interceptions.
                  Fucking pancake, it turns out - a trusted source ...
                  Now it’s clear who the authors of the capricious translations are.

                  Recommendation.
                  Do not put ridiculous sources as evidence ...
                  1. CC-18c
                    CC-18c April 23 2016 05: 38
                    0
                    Quote: mav1971
                    And how many RC-135 and EU-130 aircraft do adversaries have?

                    RC-135 produced 32 pieces only.
                    Of these, how many are in service xs, from a force of 15. The plane was very emergency.

                    Tu-214R + IL20 + IL76 (some modifications) + tu154 + Tu95 + ... but what kind of bases for RTR electronic warfare were not in the USSR / RF. TOTALLY EXACTLY not 2 how are you hanging noodles on the ears of people.
            3. BIGLESHIY
              BIGLESHIY April 22 2016 15: 37
              0
              Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              Yeah. And also in electronics, software development, and in general on high-tech. In short, that's all.

              Well, for example, where are the US Army’s ground-based electronic warfare systems? They are not visible not heard. Rumor has it that only the plane jamming director Groler.

          2. Scoun
            Scoun April 21 2016 14: 33
            +4
            Quote: Aaron Zawi
            Quote: Scoun
            Quote: Stirbjorn
            And what are they behind Russia and China?

            EW

            Yeah. And also in electronics, software development, and in general on high-tech. In short, that's all.

            and on flights to Space, more often than the Chinese, they began to send astronauts, but oh bad luck .. on "Soyuz")))
            In short, we have cured the polymers and are not ahead of anything))
            1. mav1971
              mav1971 April 21 2016 17: 07
              -5
              Quote: Scoun
              Quote: Aaron Zawi
              Quote: Scoun
              Quote: Stirbjorn
              And what are they behind Russia and China?

              EW

              Yeah. And also in electronics, software development, and in general on high-tech. In short, that's all.

              and on flights to Space, more often than the Chinese, they began to send astronauts, but oh bad luck .. on "Soyuz")))
              In short, we have cured the polymers and are not ahead of anything))


              And about space flights, I highly recommend reading our immediate plans and that of the adversaries ...
              We can say that there are no plans, or rather the scale of them is such that consider it not ...
              1. CC-18c
                CC-18c April 23 2016 05: 40
                0
                and what has more imagination when writing plans, and he won and better? laughing is that so now children are measured by pussy?)))))))
                how funny however you have a post
      2. lelikas
        lelikas April 21 2016 13: 12
        +1
        Quote: Stirbjorn
        And what are they behind Russia and China?

        On the planes, they are in the lead, but the military and Lockheed Martin ran out of money and, against this background, they quickly sang. The reason can be absolutely anything - even
        Iranian ekranoplans.
        1. Stirbjorn
          Stirbjorn April 21 2016 16: 27
          +1
          Quote: lelikas
          On the planes, they are in the lead, but the military and Lockheed Martin ran out of money and, against this background, they quickly sang. The reason can be absolutely anything - even
          Iranian ekranoplans.

          Well, I’ve asked about airplanes, it’s quite concrete, and an article about them - and in response to me about air defense and electronic warfare, or, in general, about space fellow . So it’s possible to wrap about a dap too - of course we have an advantage over the USA, if only because they don’t have them, only apl.
          1. SSR
            SSR April 21 2016 21: 02
            0
            Quote: Stirbjorn
            Quote: lelikas
            On the planes, they are in the lead, but the military and Lockheed Martin ran out of money and, against this background, they quickly sang. The reason can be absolutely anything - even
            Iranian ekranoplans.

            Well, I’ve asked about airplanes, it’s quite concrete, and an article about them - and in response to me about air defense and electronic warfare, or, in general, about space fellow . So it’s possible to wrap about a dap too - of course we have an advantage over the USA, if only because they don’t have them, only apl.

            Well, in aviation we are ahead in terms of a controllable vector, in terms of ... In general, some elements have become mobile (patents on T-50 type tail rotate) in general, we bypass mechanics.
      3. ASG7
        ASG7 April 21 2016 13: 31
        +3
        The question is not correct. One had to ask why they stopped releasing. The answer to which is obvious - a number of unresolved issues arose during operation.

        P.S. It happened to me too. Here is something that does not work, you put it off for a long time, and then you think "this is what you did not do before," but this is only until you take it up again. And so in a circle.
        1. mav1971
          mav1971 April 21 2016 15: 42
          -4
          Quote: ASG7

          P.S. It happened to me too. Here is something that does not work, you put it off for a long time, and then you think "this is what you did not do before," but this is only until you take it up again. And so in a circle.


          Those. made 170 hammers, although you know what doesn't work?
          so chtoli?
          Actually, if it doesn’t work out, 1-2 is enough.
          The most stubborn 10-20 gets.
          But so that 170 - and it doesn’t work out - you know ... You’re exaggerating too much.
      4. lis-ik
        lis-ik April 21 2016 16: 02
        -8
        Exactly, I also don’t see the lag, they have f-35 almost in series, and we don’t even talk about PAKFA.
    2. Altona
      Altona April 21 2016 12: 57
      0
      Quote: BilliBoms09
      And avionics and electronics have gone far from the time of designing the F22!

      --------------------
      So now we must also finish up the mind of the F-22. There are also jambs of various kinds, including the main one, not to fly above 6900 meters due to oxygen starvation. At the same time, there are good versions of improvements of the 4th generation. The Strike Eagle F-15E is the same.
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock April 21 2016 13: 22
        +1
        Quote: Altona
        including the main one, do not fly above 6900 meters due to oxygen starvation.

        They kind of solved this issue cheaply and angrily, simply by installing an oxygen cylinder in the cockpit.
        1. Altona
          Altona April 21 2016 13: 29
          0
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          They kind of solved this issue cheaply and angrily, simply by installing an oxygen cylinder in the cockpit.

          ----------------------
          I just described the simplest case, there are a lot of things. Outdated electronics, some kind of jambs with target recognition, completely closed communication channel. That is, communication in the group is not carried out directly, but through the CP. How is it now? This will be a new plane in the old glider.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh April 21 2016 14: 56
            0
            "completely closed communication channel" ///

            The big mistake of the Americans.
            Therefore, they were not used in campaigns. There was
            need a quick connection with ground forces.
            And the F-22 was made too "strategic" weapon.
            On the contrary, the F-35 is a universal aircraft platform with
            network connection with land, helicopters, UAVs ...
            1. Lt. Air Force stock
              Lt. Air Force stock April 21 2016 17: 48
              0
              Quote: voyaka uh
              completely closed communication channel "///

              The big mistake of the Americans.
              Therefore, they were not used in campaigns. There was
              need a quick connection with ground forces.
              And the F-22 was made too "strategic" weapon.
              On the contrary, the F-35 is a universal aircraft platform with
              network connection with land, helicopters, UAVs ...

              And what prevented the communication channels from being dual-mode? That is, so that the pilot has the ability to switch the operating modes of the channels depending on the type of mission?
            2. saturn.mmm
              saturn.mmm April 21 2016 19: 43
              -1
              Quote: voyaka uh
              And the F-22 was made too "strategic" weapon.
              On the contrary, the F-35 is a universal aircraft platform with
              network connection with land, helicopters, UAVs ...

              All F-22 will be upgraded to avionics level F-35, part of the F-22 have already been upgraded.
              1. mav1971
                mav1971 April 21 2016 21: 02
                +1
                Quote: saturn.mmm

                All F-22 will be upgraded to avionics level F-35, part of the F-22 have already been upgraded.


                I have not heard about the modernization.

                I read that in 2014 there was only a test flight with communication equipment from F-35.
                As I understand it, the F-22 is the same software platform "in itself". And to put even just a "different connection" - you have to rewrite hundreds of thousands of lines of code ...
    3. Alexanast
      Alexanast April 21 2016 14: 20
      +8
      That's it, until they decide what kind of F they need, both will become obsolete ... and again, give the money, you need to catch up.
    4. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh April 21 2016 14: 50
      0
      "F35 is a cheaper version of the 5th generation aircraft" ////

      Right. Like now F-15 and F-16. But the first one has the main task -
      gaining dominance in the air, the second thing is work
      on the ground. Although both can be both a fighter and a light bomber.
      So is the F-22 and F-35.
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock April 21 2016 17: 51
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        But the first one has the main task -
        gaining dominance in the air, the second thing is work
        on the ground. Although both can be both a fighter and a light bomber.
        So is the F-22 and F-35.

        So for the work on the ground specifically created a modification of the F-15 Strike Eagle? The F-16 is rather a versatile, low-cost mass fighter capable of providing air defense and operating on ground targets (when using the Lantirn hanging container).
        1. mav1971
          mav1971 April 21 2016 21: 15
          0
          Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
          Quote: voyaka uh
          But the first one has the main task -
          gaining dominance in the air, the second thing is work
          on the ground. Although both can be both a fighter and a light bomber.
          So is the F-22 and F-35.

          So for the work on the ground specifically created a modification of the F-15 Strike Eagle? The F-16 is rather a versatile, low-cost mass fighter capable of providing air defense and operating on ground targets (when using the Lantirn hanging container).


          F-15E was developed and adopted, only in view of the massive failure of the F-111. They campaigned out their resource much stronger than originally planned. And it was planned to have them before the 2010 year.
          And so that would not be left without information security in general, and raised the topic with the Strike Eagle ...
  4. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek April 21 2016 12: 32
    0
    Reasonably, for cheapness, you can again divide the machine into air defense and shock.
  5. Same lech
    Same lech April 21 2016 12: 32
    0
    The US military boastfully declares that one F-22 is capable of “filling up” 10 or even 30 of the latest Russian aircraft in an air battle. Like, his missiles hit targets at a great distance.



    http://svpressa.ru/society/article/6986/

    It is known that the Air Force purchased 179 F-22 fighters at a price of more than $ 400 million apiece, but not one of these miracle planes took part in the hostilities in Iraq, Libya or Afghanistan.


    A ruinous machine ... for a protracted war, the exhaustion of enemy forces is absolutely unsuitable.
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov April 21 2016 12: 42
      +7
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      but not one of these miracle planes took part in the hostilities either in Iraq, Libya or Afghanistan.

      Lech, this is a plane of gaining superiority in the air. They simply had no one to fight there.
  6. Shuttle
    Shuttle April 21 2016 12: 35
    +1
    To resume old production is not only to take blueprints from the shelf. It is also to renew old production chains, supply chains. So let's see how they NOW will cope with this, what will be the culture of production.
    You can’t take it like that. just resume production.
    It just won't be.
    1. Leto
      Leto April 21 2016 13: 12
      -3
      Quote: Shuttle
      It just won't be.

      For LM, there will be no particular difficulties, the question is money. There will only be no production. To make the Raptor in the form that it is now stupid because for so many years progress has moved forward, you have to refine it to some Block-II, and this is a certain amount and not small. LM of course with all hands for starting the conveyor, but the chances are zero.
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock April 21 2016 13: 23
        +1
        Quote: Leto
        To make the Raptor in the form that it is now stupid because for so many years progress has moved forward, it will be necessary to refine it to some Block-II,

        They are modernizing the F-22, there is a modernization program. Now not armed with the F-22 model of the early 90's.
        1. Leto
          Leto April 21 2016 15: 53
          +1
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          They are modernizing the F-22, there is a modernization program. Now not armed with the F-22 model of the early 90's.

          Not understood. LM representatives will say to anyone that it is pointless to produce an aircraft with old equipment, the military will nod their heads, and then LM will roll out a bunch of sweets with which you can fill the Raptor so that it matches the 21st century and of course surpasses possible threats from Russian and Chinese developments they will start wailing how America has lagged behind Russia and how the Russians are all advanced, that the Raptor is really a goof). Then the divorce of American taxpayers will begin, etc. Those congressmen who are not involved in the lobby of the great monster LM, realizing this (well, not fools are sitting there, especially when it comes to money) will put a spoke in their wheels because "the baby elephant is small and there is not enough for everyone", in general, they will not give money.
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh April 21 2016 15: 05
      -3
      "it is not only about taking blueprints from the shelf. It is also about renewing old
      production chains, supply chains "////

      Heh .. A raptor is already an era without pockets and drawings on the shelves. Everything in the computer.
      Deliveries, chains in the States are flexible and fast. This is generally their main strength,
      I would say.
      But in terms of electronics, the F-22 is already out of date. And he is a closed system, where it’s difficult
      make changes.
      Now it would be much more practical for them to create a "twin-engine F-35".
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm April 21 2016 19: 48
        -1
        Quote: voyaka uh
        But in terms of electronics, the F-22 is already out of date. And he is a closed system, where it’s difficult
        make changes.

        They completely throw away the old stuff and put a similar avionics F-35. The program, like, for 16 billion, for all Raptor.
  7. Jatviag
    Jatviag April 21 2016 12: 39
    +2
    "Keeping up"? A funny term .... To keep up with those who have not yet adopted these aircraft and have not begun mass production? While everyone else is trying to keep up with the United States in this regard.
  8. iwind
    iwind April 21 2016 12: 45
    0
    Keep up ... Nah, well, I might have missed something, but when it was built in China or Russia, at least 100 aircraft would be conquered superiority in the sky for 5 generations. View in the morning since yesterday they were not there.
    I offend when they push F-22 and F-35 ... Although what is the relationship between these projects, I do not understand.
    PS It’s more like the military’s Wishlist hurt the F-22, they will allocate money, although $ 150 million apiece, they will pull, but why?
    1. jekasimf
      jekasimf April 21 2016 13: 32
      -1
      You really missed. F 22, although it is called a multi-role fighter, but it is not a fighter, i.e. an airplane of gaining superiority in the air, in its pure form. Because the fighter must have a WORKING RADAR, and not fly in stealth mode, and also have super maneuverability. Its task is not to engage in air combat with enemy aircraft, but secretly get close to the enemy and suppress him first of all, radar and other key ground targets .. And if it flies in search mode with the radar on, and especially after launching any missile, it automatically loses its only advantage. Well, what about the F 22 chances in close air combat, already a lot on isano.
      1. iwind
        iwind April 21 2016 14: 53
        0
        Quote: jekasimf
        You really missed. F 22, although it is called a multi-role fighter, but it is not a fighter, i.e. a plane of gaining superiority in the air, in its pure form. Because, the fighter must have a WORKING radar, and not fly in stealth mode, and also have super maneuverability

        Hm. To whom and what should an airplane do? belay And why does he have a non-working radar, and with maneuverability is he doing well? The included radar does not equal to the fact that the aircraft is immediately visible to everyone (there are various modes of operation of the radar). AGSN missiles do not need constant target illumination. And it can be carried out by another plane, not just by the rocket itself. For example, 4 planes launch one missile.

        Quote: jekasimf
        F 22, although it is called a multi-role fighter, but it is not a fighter, i.e. pure air superiority aircraft

        It is completely multi-purpose with priority, of course, by air. But in F-22, in the modification of Increment 3.1,2, the EW functions and the extension of the VZ tasks can
      2. mav1971
        mav1971 April 21 2016 16: 25
        -1
        Quote: jekasimf
        You really missed. F 22, although it is called a multi-role fighter, but it is not a fighter, i.e. a plane of gaining superiority in the air, in its pure form. because, the fighter must have a WORKING radar, and not fly in stealth mode,


        I understand that the most important parameter for the operation of this aircraft, such as the use of its airborne radar in active LPI mode, is unfamiliar to you ...
        And after that, you try to talk about the tactics of using an airplane, which I can be sure of, do you know anything ???

        PPC ...
        1. jekasimf
          jekasimf April 21 2016 16: 46
          +1
          Summary:
          LPI mode for detection distances has nothing to do with the maximum or working radar detection distances. because it is determined by other parameters.
          The maximum distance in theory to 55 km, in real life less than 50 km. in the complete absence of jamming by the drinker, because this mode is very sensitive to the noise component.
          This distance is on the border of the detection distance of an aircraft operating in LPI by means of optoelectronic target search. For fighters of the last generation, it approaches 60-70 km. for non-replaceable targets in the infrared range.
          This mode is convenient to sneak up to the enemy’s newest aircraft, while remaining invisible. When meeting with an airplane that has a modern OEC detection. as well as during the operation of electronic warfare systems, all its advantage is reduced to zero.
          1. iwind
            iwind April 21 2016 17: 40
            -2
            Quote: jekasimf
            The maximum distance in theory to 55 km, in real life less than 50 km. in the complete absence of jamming by the drinker, because this mode is very sensitive to the noise component.
            This distance is on the border of the detection distance of an aircraft operating in LPI by means of optoelectronic target search. For fighters of the last generation, it approaches 60-70 km. for non-replaceable targets in the infrared range.

            and where does this information come from? Yes and not one LPI
            Yes, since the APG-77v1 AFAR, it is possible to work with short pulses by a directed beam, which significantly complicates the direction finding of the F-22.
            Turned on, discovered, launched a rocket, turned off.
            1. Operator
              Operator April 21 2016 17: 53
              +1
              Everything is exactly the opposite: launched a medium-range missile - turned on the radar to transmit radio-guiding commands to the missile on the marching part of the flight.

              But in short-range combat, a radar is not needed - for normal aircraft, OLS is used for the range of DB missiles.

              And then where should poor Khryaptor with his LPI (but without OLS) go? am
          2. mav1971
            mav1971 April 21 2016 20: 57
            -1
            Quote: jekasimf
            Summary:
            LPI mode for detection distances has nothing to do with the maximum or working radar detection distances. because it is determined by other parameters.
            The maximum distance in theory to 55 km, in real life less than 50 km. in the complete absence of jamming by the drinker, because this mode is very sensitive to the noise component.
            This distance is on the border of the detection distance of an aircraft operating in LPI by means of optoelectronic target search. For fighters of the last generation, it approaches 60-70 km. for non-replaceable targets in the infrared range.
            This mode is convenient to sneak up to the enemy’s newest aircraft, while remaining invisible. When meeting with an airplane that has a modern OEC detection. as well as during the operation of electronic warfare systems, all its advantage is reduced to zero.


            Where did you get this from?
            The LPI mode in the APG-77 product has only 15-20% reduction in detection range ..
            Those. for a target with EPR in 1km - the range will not be 220, but 180km. And for EPR in 5km - under 300km.

            And your 50km are ordinary IR detectors.
            Moreover, on all F-35 slop-drenched, a similar system works on airplanes at distances beyond 100km (AN / AAQ-37)
  9. Beetech
    Beetech April 21 2016 12: 47
    +1
    Whatever the topic "catch up and overtake", just a thought in my head ...

    The ability to "saw" budgetary funds in mattress makers is developed at "five-plus". Why puff up, create something new - if you can push the old one again? winked
  10. demiurg
    demiurg April 21 2016 12: 47
    +1
    400 millions per plane. Dollars. For the fighter, the consumables of the war.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 April 21 2016 15: 07
      0
      And two billion rubles for the Su 30 or almost 4 billion rubles for the T 50 - is this not a consumable type of war?
    2. mav1971
      mav1971 April 21 2016 16: 26
      -1
      Quote: demiurg
      400 millions per plane. Dollars. For the fighter, the consumables of the war.


      The plane costs 150 million
      400 is the price of the contract with all the service staff, fuel, and salaries of pilots for the entire life time, 2 was first laid down, or 25 years ...
  11. teron
    teron April 21 2016 12: 49
    +2
    What are we and the Chinese doing so epoch-making that the US Air Force can't keep up with us? Maybe two hundred T-50s are already in service in Russia? Or a few hundred SU-35s and SU-34s? Or has one of the 5th generation Chinese fighters actually reached this very generation? Or maybe this is a stuffing intended for taxpayers to knock out additional allocations for defense?
    1. jekasimf
      jekasimf April 21 2016 13: 37
      +2
      Yes. The United States was the first to rivet the aircraft, which they called the "5th generation". But history already shows that their concept of the 5th generation is a dead end. So the number of F 22s is not yet an indicator that China and Russia are behind.
  12. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec April 21 2016 12: 50
    +1
    The train has left. It seems that Russia has chosen its strategy correctly. It is starting to produce results. You can and must crush this entire western enclave and create another world axis, more just and humane. The main thing now is not to stop and move forward.
  13. abc_alex
    abc_alex April 21 2016 12: 58
    +5
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    Quote: The same LYOKHA
    but not one of these miracle planes took part in the hostilities either in Iraq, Libya or Afghanistan.

    Lech, this is a plane of gaining superiority in the air. They simply had no one to fight there.


    Yeah. And in a war with the Russian Federation or China, it will not be fighters that will fight, but the Strategic Missile Forces, or simply missile troops. Raptors, on the other hand, are likely to suffer casualties at bases. And after the exchange of missile strikes, there will be no air defense on either side, and the Raptors will again "have no one to fight" ...

    A paradoxical machine ... It could have torn everyone to rags, but just look wherever you go - there’s no one to fight with! winked
  14. Mihalich17
    Mihalich17 April 21 2016 12: 58
    +1
    “But in the light of a growing sensation ... he expressed a clear interest in renewing ...”

    And you do not find, comrades, that this phrase sounds like -
    a statement of sexual force in the United States,
    from Russia and China?
    )))
  15. Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 April 21 2016 12: 59
    0
    The United States tensed. And this is already good.
    Not all the same, they strain other countries ...
  16. askort154
    askort154 April 21 2016 13: 01
    0
    "Exceptional" becomes uncomfortable. They began to realize that advertising is not only an engine
    trade, but also a destroyer.
  17. Ros 56
    Ros 56 April 21 2016 13: 19
    +1
    Well, this is according to the proverb - "Man proposes, but the Lord disposes." But if the 22nd is inferior to our 35th, then you shouldn't butt the T-50.
  18. jekasimf
    jekasimf April 21 2016 13: 43
    0
    There were rumors that during the first combat use of the F 22, against Syria from the territory of Jordan, the 2 Raptor and the trailer 4 Tumahawk were shot down. Of course, the story is very muddy, but still.
    http://news2.ru/story/389657/
    http://southlebanon.org/archives/87063
  19. VP
    VP April 21 2016 14: 16
    0
    Surely a fake. They continue to finance the F-35 project with kettle bells, they don’t have enough resources to get involved in the renewal of the 22nd, the budget is not rubber, and all Wishlist have long been lacking.
  20. beer-youk
    beer-youk April 21 2016 14: 21
    +1
    Quote: Leto
    The most important characteristic of an air defense system is its accuracy. The Americans implemented the principle of hit-to-kill, their missiles hit directly into the air target, does not explode nearby, but strikes with a direct hit. We could not realize this, although they tried.


    It is difficult to come up with a more meaningless task than shooting a carbine at a duck. A sane person shoots a shot, the cloud of which is guaranteed to bring down a duck. This means that spending time and money on completely unnecessary gadgets is a typical American trait, and here they undoubtedly surpassed Russia. However, they screamed around the world that the Russians had covered their base in Syria with a dome impervious to electronic intelligence.
    1. Foofighter
      Foofighter April 21 2016 15: 33
      0
      A direct hit in the USSR was realized even at the head blocks of ICBMs, it was in the United States, on the contrary, they were able to realize it only now, with the purchase of what the USSR did.
  21. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek April 21 2016 14: 58
    0
    It is important to get a serial and working T-50, the production rate may not be large, this will open up the possibility of upgrading the Su-30 / 35 components that are used in the 5 generation. And this will allow you to have a large grouping of modern aircraft. This, also, will provide an opportunity to quickly develop a lightweight 5 generation fighter. Cabin from T-50, engine from T-50 and simplified avionics ...
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 April 21 2016 15: 09
      0
      Only now the question remains with the "small" - tens of billions of rubles for the creation of such an aircraft.
    2. mav1971
      mav1971 April 21 2016 21: 24
      -1
      Quote: Zaurbek
      It is important to get a serial and working T-50, the production rate may not be large, this will open up the possibility of upgrading the Su-30 / 35 components that are used in the 5 generation. And this will allow you to have a large grouping of modern aircraft. This, also, will provide an opportunity to quickly develop a lightweight 5 generation fighter. Cabin from T-50, engine from T-50 and simplified avionics ...


      And how much cheaper will it be if you plan to use the most expensive?
      Not 110 million dollars as planned by T-50, but 88 million dollars? what to save on?
  22. Algetxnumx
    Algetxnumx April 21 2016 16: 13
    0
    Media: America wants to keep up with the Russian Federation and China, resuming production of the F-22. To keep up with us, he is of course cunning, we do not have such power and resources at the moment, primarily financial, but the Yankes fic will keep up with China, that's for sure And yet, no matter how beautiful these F-22,35s were, the same Chinese will stamp their "fives", in the sense of fifth-generation aircraft, many times more than "Americans", even if they are 1/1 stronger, 1/2 already not a fact, but only 1/3 will be "pushed" by the vaunted "super-duper" conquerors of air superiority for the most "do not play".
  23. Operator
    Operator April 21 2016 16: 55
    +1
    "Reducing technological lag" (C) is not about an experienced fifth-generation fighter T-50, it is about a serial fourth-generation fighter Su-35S, which in terms of its performance is equal or superior to the extreme version of the Raptor:

    F-22 / Su-35С
    empty weight, t ~ 19,7 / 19,0
    fuel weight in internal tanks, t ~ 8,2 / 11,5
    maximum range, km ~ 2000 / 3600
    maximum take-off weight, t ~ 38 / 34,5
    normal take-off weight, t ~ 29,2 / 27,0
    maximum engine thrust, t ~ 31,6 / 29,0
    maximum speed, km / h ~ 2410 / 2500
    all-aspect thrust vector control ~ no / Yes
    wing area, sq.m ~ 78 / 62
    optical location station ~ no / Yes
    active electronic warfare system ~ no / Yes
    number of missiles BB SD ~ 6 / 6
    the number of missiles BB MD ~ 2 / 4
    cost, USD ~ 411 / 30

    Judging by the agenda of the subcommittee of the Committee of Defense of the House of Representatives of the US Congress, it is not so much about resuming production of the F-22, but rather about its modernization in terms of confronting new fighter planes of potential opponents (Russia and China).

    First of all, they are going to equip the Raptor with an optical location station to bring its technical vision to the level of Su-35С (and at the same time to raise the notorious EPR F-22 to the level of F-35, since the OLS reflects in the radio range).
    Secondly, they will replace the closed data exchange system only between raptors with the standard US Air Force system, making it possible for the F-22 to exchange for the first time with other types of tactical aircraft.
    In the third turn, it is the modernization of the Raptor avionics in the form of establishing a radar with the function of active electronic warfare, etc.

    From the list of modernization measures it follows that the Raptor will remain with the Raptor the maneuverability (in terms of the lack of all-aspect control of the thrust vector), speed characteristics (in terms of the inefficiency of the air intake at high speeds) and the payload (in terms of fewer missiles and bombs in the internal compartments) worse than Su-35С.

    Even after modernization, the Raptor will lag behind the T-50 in all respects, except for the front-end EPR.

    PS It looks like "Penguin" is being prepared for decommissioning laughing
  24. VOENOBOZ
    VOENOBOZ April 21 2016 18: 22
    0
    This is what they lagged behind; more than a hundred have stuck and lagged behind.
  25. skeptic
    skeptic April 21 2016 21: 58
    +2
    They would fly the F-22, as good as HUMVEE!
    And there would be world peace !!!