Military Review

NI: Su-35 can be the best machine in the history of aircraft construction

131
The Russian Su-35 can become a very serious opponent for Western aircraft F-15, Eurofighter and Rafale. In some respects, this fighter even bypasses fifth-generation aircraft, leads RIA News An article from The National Interest.

NI: Su-35 can be the best machine in the history of aircraft construction


“The aircraft has unsurpassed maneuverability at the expense of engines with an all-discursive thrust vectoring control. The nozzles of the AL-41F1C turbojet engines of NPO Saturn in flight can independently deviate in different directions, which helps the aircraft to create the desired roll angle and allows you to create a very large angle of attack. Thanks to this technology, the Su-35 can move in one direction, while its nose looks in the other. This function has only one active Western fighter - the F-22 Raptor, ”writes the magazine.

“The maximum speed of the Su-35 Mach 2,25 (2500 km / h) at high altitude is faster than the fifth-generation fighter F-35. The most massive fourth-generation fighter, the F-16, also lags behind the Su-35 in this indicator, ”the author notes.

According to him, "one of the most important advantages of the Su-35 compared to the predecessor fighter aircraft that makes the aircraft a difficult target is the L175M Khibiny electronic warfare complex, which distorts the enemy’s radar waves and sends its missiles on a false course."

“If the F-35 stealth fighter enters the air duel with the Su-35 at a short range, it will be in great trouble,” writes the magazine.

According to the author, the 48 Su-35 fighters are currently in service with the VKS, and their number will increase by more than 5 times over the 2 years.

Su-35 may be "the best air combat aircraft for the entire history and an excellent means of delivering missiles to the target, ”concludes the publication.
Photos used:
RIA News. Ramil Sitdikov
131 comment
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Pereira
    Pereira 21 July 2016 11: 07
    +17
    Good but not enough.

    “If the F-35 stealth fighter enters the air duel with the Su-35 at a short range, it will be in great trouble,” writes the magazine.

    This means that the F-35 will not enter a duel at a short range. Consequently, the plane has room to develop.
    However, this question is already to the creators of rockets.
    1. lelikas
      lelikas 21 July 2016 11: 14
      +6
      Quote: Pereira
      Good but not enough.

      Here, rather, "The best, the enemy of the good", in anticipation of the T-50 they will not be built.
      1. Pereira
        Pereira 21 July 2016 11: 23
        +8
        In fact of the matter. T-50 will not be much. And what will the main mass fly on?
        1. maiman61
          maiman61 21 July 2016 11: 37
          +7
          On the MiG-35! T-50 in value is equal to three Mig-35.
          1. Pereira
            Pereira 21 July 2016 11: 53
            +4
            And so it can be. Only the MiG-35 never declared the main machine of the Air Force.
          2. Dormidont2
            Dormidont2 21 July 2016 12: 01
            .
            for a moment 35 you need to put the AFAR, defense systems otherwise they will be invisible knock down like blind kittens
            1. Alexey-74
              Alexey-74 22 July 2016 10: 09
              +2
              What kind of nonsense?
              1. Pilot
                Pilot 23 July 2016 20: 32
                +1
                Quote: Alexey-74
                What kind of nonsense?

                I also wanted to ask.
            2. silver_roman
              silver_roman 22 July 2016 12: 10
              -2
              Quote: Dormidont2
              for a moment 35 must put AFAR

              On it and so it will stand.

              Quote: Dormidont2
              defense systems otherwise their invisibility will be shot down like blind kittens

              FAR does not always lose AFAR. The same Irbis on the Su-35 in terms of performance characteristics (!) For 400 km.

              EW funds must go on board + reduced EPR (of course not compare with a raptor or penguin), I don’t know about the Khibin on the MiG-35.
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 23 July 2016 00: 40
                +4
                Quote: silver_roman
                FAR does not always lose AFAR. The same Irbis on the Su-35 in terms of performance characteristics (!) For 400 km.

                Generally, AFAR is more effective than PHAR. And ROFAR is approaching, which will "see" for 500 km, even the pilot in the cockpit of an enemy aircraft.
                1. venik
                  venik 23 July 2016 18: 03
                  +2
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  In fact, AFAR is more effective than FAR.A on the ROFAR approach


                  In general, the main advantages of the AFAR in relation to the VFD are its better energy efficiency and compactness (the AFAR of the same power weighs less and is more compact). In addition, they are considered more reliable. Disadvantages - it is more difficult to manufacture and much more expensive.
              2. venik
                venik 23 July 2016 17: 55
                0
                Quote: silver_roman
                I don’t know about Khibin on the MiG-35


                For some reason I’m sure that the Khibiny or some modification of it will certainly be there, at least in the form of an optional system (hanging or conformal containers or something like that) !!
              3. Pilot
                Pilot 23 July 2016 20: 35
                0
                Quote: silver_roman
                I do not know

                The enemy hears everything! :)
            3. NEXUS
              NEXUS 23 July 2016 00: 38
              +3
              Quote: Dormidont2
              for a moment 35 must put AFAR, defense systems

              On the MIG-35 and is AFAR-ZHUK-A.
              Quote: Dormidont2
              otherwise invisible people will bring them down like blind kittens

              Absolute invisibility does not exist in nature ... there is inconspicuousness, and, accordingly, there are means to "see" such inconspicuous targets.
              1. Pilot
                Pilot 23 July 2016 20: 38
                +1
                Quote: NEXUS
                There is no absolute invisibility in nature ...

                Well, rightly said.
            4. Orionvit
              Orionvit 23 July 2016 04: 45
              +1
              otherwise invisible people will bring them down like blind kittens
              Where did you see the stealth planes? Low visibility, yes, there are simply no invisibles. Only the Arvbes and the rest of the stupid natives do not see them. Remind you of Yugoslavia? Where the old Soviet complex S-125, found and shot down the "invisible and non-kill" F-117, which put an end to the myth of the "invisible" aircraft. In addition, if not by radar, then they are perfectly recognized in other ranges of the electromagnetic spectrum. In the Soviet Union, they knew it back in the early 60s, and the unpromising idea was thrown to the Americans, who threw fucking billions into a dummy. And the states know very well that the Russian air defense system cannot be fooled by invisibility, but to admit to the whole world is to admit its failure, and so they continue to put a good face on a bad game. They sell their imperfections at a ridiculous price to their puppets, almost by force.
              1. Navigator Basov
                Navigator Basov 28 July 2016 11: 53
                0
                Quote: Orionvit
                Vparivayut their imperfections at a frantic price to their puppets, almost by force.
                Well dumb-s-s-s! ©
                Seriously, in the world of colors a little more than black and white. Armament with stealth aircraft as the main property meets American needs, namely early warning, sudden strike and retreat. Everything, as they like in any military sphere, not only in aviation. In contrast to them, fighter aircraft are developing to a lesser degree in the direction of stealth, but more in the direction of super-maneuverability, precisely in order to have an advantage in their field - in close combat. Undoubtedly, this close combat must first be imposed, because the Americans are trying to avoid it, but here it is also necessary to understand that they have very little developed traditional military air defense (in this sense, they rely on air defense air defense), unlike us. As you know, stealth is a combination of a set of characteristics, of which, in fact, there are only two variables for each type of aircraft in a certain configuration: the exposure angle (EPR changes) and range. In this regard, no matter how inconspicuous the stealth is, it only reduces the likelihood of detection and capture (for tracking with an aiming system), but cannot exclude detection and capture (you described an example). So for their stealth, we have a key, but whether they have a key against over-maneuverability - these fears are precisely what NI expresses. That's all.
            5. venik
              venik 23 July 2016 17: 43
              0
              Quote: Dormidont2
              for a moment 35 you need to put the AFAR, defense systems otherwise they will be invisible knock down like blind kittens


              Well, firstly, they are planned there! And secondly, who told you active headlights have an overwhelming advantage over passive ones (in any case for aircraft radars)?
          3. Lecha57
            Lecha57 21 July 2016 15: 22
            -1
            I think that it’s not about the cost of the aircraft, but about new technologies, the secret of which will remain for the next 10-15 years.
            1. Kasym
              Kasym 21 July 2016 16: 50
              +6
              Of great importance is the cost of maintenance and operation of the aircraft. If the hour of flight and maintenance will be beyond the limits of that F-35, then it makes no sense to release a large series - they will stand on the ground.
              For example, as the VAF wrote, the MiG-29 service is at times !!! cheaper than the Su-27. And if the MiG-35 has the ability in most cases to replace the Su-35 (for example, patrolling and intercepting a potential enemy near the border), then they need more.
              This F-22 was removed from production in my opinion, not only because of the high cost, but also because of expensive maintenance. hi
              Serving that F-35 and an hour of flight goes beyond tens of thousands of dollars. And if there are several thousand of them, then tens of mil come out. per hour of flight of such a horde. If we take into account that the average raid of that Amer. the pilot about 200-250 hours. That leaves numbers of 10 zeros (tens of billions - and this is only one F-35 fighter). So, financially, service cannot be discounted.
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 21 July 2016 18: 44
                0
                Quote: Kasym
                This F-22 was removed from production in my opinion, not only because of the high cost, but also because of expensive maintenance.

                They took it off not because of this and not because of the other. F-22 is a "clean fighter". With the end of the Cold War, the need for such fighters dropped dramatically. No one could come close neither in number, not in quality. And to produce 750 cars is not only paying for them, but also maintaining them.

                - for the 2008 fiscal year, the cost of one flight hour of the F-22, including only variable costs, was 19 750 dollars. While for the F-15 this indicator was 17 465 dollars;
                - for the same 2008 fiscal year, the total cost of one flight hour of F-22, including variable, fixed and other indirect costs, was 44 259 dollars. While for F-15 the same figure was 30 818 dollars. USA;

                These figures differ mainly due to the fact that there are fewer machines.
                That's the whole secret.

                It was removed because a "clean" fighter is now almost not in demand.
                1. silver_roman
                  silver_roman 22 July 2016 12: 12
                  0
                  Quote: Pimply
                  F-22 - "clean fighter"

                  Are you kidding me? This is a multi-purpose machine that carries the appropriate weapons.
                  F-22 turned off almost because of the cost of the program. The F-35 was designed specifically for cost optimization, but the Pentagon has always had problems with this. Cut go crazy. Our Serdyukov and Co. are just puppies in comparison with lockhids and cooperation.
                  1. iwind
                    iwind 22 July 2016 13: 37
                    0
                    Quote: silver_roman
                    Are you joking?

                    Nah. He is not joking
                    Quote: silver_roman
                    This is a multi-purpose machine that carries the appropriate weapons


                    These are two types of bomb VZ (JDAM-1000 and SDB (gbu-39)) and all ...
                    Quote: silver_roman
                    The F-35 was designed specifically for cost optimization, but the Pentagon has always had problems with this.

                    To complement the F-22 aircraft with priority on the ground.
                    1. silver_roman
                      silver_roman 22 July 2016 16: 37
                      +1
                      Quote: iwind
                      then two types of bomb VZ (JDAM-1000 and SDB (gbu-39)) and all ...

                      Given its performance characteristics, this is apparently enough. Adjustable bombs, which differ apparently mass warhead.
                      Nevertheless, it is not easy to shove the entire nomenclature of air-ground into the internal compartments.
                      Even the requirements for the 5th generation include multifunctionality. This is of course not a Lancer or B-2, but nevertheless F-22 can perform highly specialized tasks on the ground successfully.
                2. NEXUS
                  NEXUS 23 July 2016 00: 42
                  +1
                  Quote: Pimply
                  It was removed because a "clean" fighter is now almost not in demand.

                  Generally speaking, the pangolin is a multipurpose vehicle capable of operating against both ground and air targets. "Pure" fighters ended at the beginning of the 4th generation, around the 80s ..
          4. The comment was deleted.
          5. silver_roman
            silver_roman 22 July 2016 12: 07
            +1
            Quote: maiman61
            On the MiG-35! T-50 in value is equal to three Mig-35.

            There are still no prices for either one or another aircraft.
            And the MiG-35 doesn’t quite fit under the multifunctional car. More clean fighter. Of course, its parameters are significantly expanded in comparison with the MiG-29, but still drying is more functional.
          6. cyberhanter
            cyberhanter 22 July 2016 14: 05
            0
            Mig 35 light multi-purpose, also the fourth generation. expensive like if its price is already a third of T50
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 23 July 2016 00: 46
              +3
              Quote: cyberhanter
              Mig 35 light multi-purpose, also the fourth generation. expensive like if its price is already a third of T50

              MIG-35 is a 4 ++ generation multipurpose fighter and comparing it with the same fourth generation MIG-29 is like comparing a Niva with a Land Rover.
          7. Bator
            Bator 22 July 2016 19: 48
            0
            Mig-35 generation 4 ++ and T-50 5 GENERATION
          8. NEXUS
            NEXUS 23 July 2016 00: 35
            +2
            Quote: maiman61
            On the MiG-35! T-50 in value is equal to three Mig-35.

            The price of the serial PAK FA is still very unspecific, as well as the price of the MIG-35, which was built in one copy. Do not mislead people, dear. Those figures that are published are very approximate and can significantly differ from the realities.
        2. weksha50
          weksha50 21 July 2016 11: 57
          0
          Quote: Pereira [b
          ]In fact of the matter. T-50 will not be much. [/ B] And on what the bulk will fly?


          In fact of the matter...
          The Hindus ALREADY broke the contract with the French over Rafaley, giving preference to our T-50 (which is still practically not in service with us, which has not yet been brought to mind, but the test results were impressive) ...
          Our capacities are far from enough for the production of the T-50 for its VKS and for sale for export ...

          True, it is not clear there: they seem to purchase a small batch from us, and the rest of the T-50 will be produced in India at their production facilities ...
          1. Dormidont2
            Dormidont2 21 July 2016 12: 03
            +2
            Indians will receive T50 technology and will sell for export, and we will suck paw
            1. silver_roman
              silver_roman 22 July 2016 12: 14
              +3
              Quote: Dormidont2
              Indians will receive T50 technology and will sell for export

              No one will give them the right to export aircraft. Such things are spelled out extremely rigidly in the contract.
              I’ve started to buy ours anyway, then it’s possible they will have an assembly line deployed and produce aircraft under license as with the Su-30MKI. Nothing wrong with that.
              even profitable. Our capacities will be occupied to our needs.
          2. Pimply
            Pimply 21 July 2016 12: 04
            +8
            Quote: weksha50
            Hindus have already broken the contract with the French about Rafale,

            Didn't break

            Quote: weksha50
            I have a preference for our T-50 (which is still practically not in service with us, which has not yet been brought to mind, but the test results have impressed them) ...

            One contract with another is only indirectly related. They will have this and that. They will have this and that. And the Indians will not be T-50, but FGFA will still have different machines.
            1. weksha50
              weksha50 21 July 2016 17: 49
              0
              Quote: Pimply
              Didn't break


              I do not know ... Just yesterday, I read information about it ...

              Another question, what and how the media covers all this ...
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 21 July 2016 18: 45
                +1
                Quote: weksha50
                I do not know ... Just yesterday, I read information about it ...

                Another question, what and how the media covers all this ...

                Read again. There was a little about something else.
          3. operrus
            operrus 21 July 2016 13: 56
            +1
            Capacities can be increased as with the S-400, there would be orders.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 23 July 2016 00: 55
              +1
              Quote: operrus
              Capacities can be increased as with the S-400, there would be orders.

              It's not about capacity. The FGFA is a two-seat fighter and they will only begin to assemble it after our single-seat version of the PAK FA begins to be delivered to the troops. And there will be a lot of differences between our T-50 and FGFA, which will impose additional difficulties in the design of a fighter for Indians.
          4. NEXUS
            NEXUS 23 July 2016 00: 52
            +2
            Quote: weksha50
            Hindus ALREADY broke the contract with the French about Rafaley, giving preference to our T-50

            The Indians initially invested in the PAK FA project, but they do not need a single T-50, they need a two-seater and they discussed it on the doorstep. The version for India is called FGFA. Since it was conceived as a two-seater, it will be heavier than our PAK FA, and almost certainly avionics will be "curtailed". It's also a big question which AFAR will be on the FGFA, maybe I'm not sure that Belka will be put on it. We'll live and see.
        3. Vadim237
          Vadim237 21 July 2016 21: 17
          0
          Our Air Force leadership is speeding up the creation of the sixth generation - the engine was done, last year KRET started creating the radar, even glider material was made - an aluminum alloy that is four times stronger than steel.
          1. Ze Kot
            Ze Kot 21 July 2016 22: 28
            -1
            Quote: Vadim237
            Our Air Force leadership is speeding up the creation of the sixth generation - the engine was done, last year KRET started creating the radar, even glider material was made - an aluminum alloy that is four times stronger than steel.



            Even the appearance of the 6th generation has not been fully created.

            What engine did? T-50 with old engines flies.

            So airplanes are not steel anyway.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 23 July 2016 00: 57
              +4
              Quote: The Cat
              What engine did? T-50 with old engines flies.

              And with the "old" engine, he issued 384 m / s world record for rate of climb. hi
        4. dima mzk
          dima mzk 23 July 2016 22: 34
          0
          MIG-35 - light SU-35-heavy T-50 new generation, Yak-130 combat training, SU-34 bomber, MIG-31 interceptor. And on the list, why do you need more?
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 23 July 2016 22: 36
            +1
            Quote: dima mzk
            MIG-35 - easy

            The MiG-35 is not exactly light, but rather an average multi-role fighter. It is heavier than the 29th, but lighter than the Su-35 ...
      2. INVESTOR
        INVESTOR 21 July 2016 13: 23
        +2
        In the case of the SU-35 mass is important, as with the t-34 in the Second World War, but it is not yet.
    2. Wiruz
      Wiruz 21 July 2016 11: 15
      +9
      Was it not the same edition last year that wrote, they say, "The Su-35 is complete nonsense that no one except Putin's Army is buying"? wassat
      1. weksha50
        weksha50 21 July 2016 12: 01
        +3
        Quote: Wiruz
        Was it not the same edition last year that wrote, they say, "The Su-35 is complete nonsense that no one except Putin's Army is buying"?



        There is no need to respond either to swearing at our weapons, or even less so to their over-praise ...

        The Western press (and not only) - it is so wondrous ... And its journalistic analysts, experts — well, everyone who knows them ...
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 21 July 2016 12: 05
          +2
          Quote: weksha50
          The Western press (and not only) - it is so wondrous ... And its journalistic analysts, experts — well, everyone who knows them ...

          It's not about the Western press. The case in fig translators, riveting on the basis of good articles of garbage and sofa experts, wrinkling their brows with a smart look, and reasoning about what fig western press
          1. Black Colonel
            Black Colonel 21 July 2016 14: 00
            +1
            Dear, Can you throw a reference to read the original? I will be grateful! drinks
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 21 July 2016 14: 04
              0
              Quote: Black Colonel
              You can throw a reference to read the original? I will be grateful!

              Already threw
    3. Homo
      Homo 21 July 2016 11: 28
      +5
      Quote: Pereira
      So, the F-35 will not engage in a duel at short range.

      So this is not only dependent on the F-35. wink
    4. Lord of the Sith
      Lord of the Sith 21 July 2016 11: 31
      +5
      The problem is that we have less missiles in distance.

      Photo for desktop. Click on image to enlarge)
      1. Dormidont2
        Dormidont2 21 July 2016 11: 57
        .
        it is not known whether the su35 can detect f22-35 further than 70 km, the invisible ones are the first to launch su35 missiles, one hope for the khibiny
        1. faridg7
          faridg7 21 July 2016 14: 54
          +2
          And he doesn’t need to discover fu35 from such a distance himself. To do this, there is an A50 or something else, just deliver a missile to the area. And then let him try to get away from her. then he’s up to Su 35 like to the moon
          1. silver_roman
            silver_roman 22 July 2016 12: 20
            0
            Quote: faridg7
            For this there is A50

            A-50 is not only for this, that number is not so large. Whenever possible, aircraft should highlight the goals themselves.
            Quote: Dormidont2
            Su35 detect f22-35 further than 70 km

            You are aware that the entire notorious EPR of the "invisible" is achieved in the front hemisphere.
            All these disputes are based solely on TTX. In practice, things can be different.
            In addition, there is such a thing as OLS, which that epr to one place. True, her radius is not large.
      2. NEXUS
        NEXUS 23 July 2016 01: 04
        +3
        Quote: Sith Lord
        The problem is that we have less missiles in distance.

        Who has "us". If you are talking about air-to-air missiles used by the United States, then the Russian "long arm", sorry for the tautology longer than 300 km (R-37) versus 180 km (AIM-54 Phoenix). -172 with a range of 400 km.
        1. Navigator Basov
          Navigator Basov 28 July 2016 20: 45
          0
          Quote: NEXUS
          If you are talking about air-to-air missiles used by the USA, then the Russian “long arm”, sorry for the tautology, is longer
          Well, why so destroy the entire training manual at once, a person can have a mycardial infarction, this is such a scar.
          Quote: NEXUS
          against 180 km (AIM-54 Phoenix)
          And she was in service only in the U.S. Navy, and already removed from service (remains in service with the hated Iran). That is, in fact, the United States does not have long-range missiles, but there are only fighters for it: D They only pulled a medium-range missile to 180 km (AIM-120D), but have not yet adopted it.
    5. g1v2
      g1v2 21 July 2016 12: 52
      +3
      F35 and is not going to engage in close combat with anyone. request He is imprisoned for a simple scheme - to detect the enemy earlier than that and launch rockets from a long distance. Accordingly, this is his principle. If our plane detects it earlier or approaches the medium distance, then f35 will suddenly flop. request
      Well, and the title is strange - almost every serious new aircraft becomes "the best in history" for some time. Then a new plane appears and it becomes the best. crying
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 21 July 2016 13: 13
        +2
        Quote: g1v2
        Accordingly, this is his principle. If our plane detects it earlier or approaches the average distance, then the 35 will sharply poplocheet.

        Not really, actually. The Americans proceeded from the fact that the pilot is still not capable of experiencing the same overloads as a modern all-aspect rocket. Therefore, they replaced super-maneuverability with a set of measures - a "transparent cockpit", new types of missiles, the creation of an integration system - when an aircraft has additional "eyes" in the form of a drone system, as well as a bunch of other things.
        1. sir_obs
          sir_obs 21 July 2016 18: 17
          +1
          They proceed only from the fact that they will not be noticed, and they will launch missiles from afar. Melee is not considered at all, in melee they have minimal chances, even with additional eyes, ears, noses and other wonders, which are advertised, but do not work, as written in advertising booklets.

          Ideally, AVACS from afar detected and aimed at the target "invisible". If he turns on his station, he will be immediately spotted. Therefore, it is a missile platform that does not require agile aerial combat.
          By the way, the story repeats itself. During the Vietnam War, when there was a similar concept that rockets would solve everything, and guns were no longer needed. It turned out that no. The planes are drawing closer, close maneuvering combat has not gone away. And again returned the returned guns to the phantoms.
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 21 July 2016 18: 56
            +1
            Quote: sir_obs
            They proceed only from the fact that they will not be noticed, and they will launch missiles from afar. Melee is not considered at all, in melee they have minimal chances, even with additional eyes, ears, noses and other wonders, which are advertised, but do not work, as written in advertising booklets.

            True? And why should he then vserakursny review?
            For fun, read the report of Major Morten Hanoi from the Norwegian Air Force who flew more than 2000 on the F-16 and compares with it the F-35 not in favor of the first one.

            "The improved ability to aim at the enemy allows me to use ammunition faster than I used to do it on the F-16," writes Hansha, who had flown on a fighter of the previous generation for more than 2 hours.

            At the limiting angles of attack, the F-35 reacts faster to pressing the pedals, which deflect the nose of the aircraft to the side, Hanshe writes.

            In a report, Hanshe points out the possibility of the F-35 shedding speed significantly faster than the F-16. “It may be difficult to understand why a fighter should be able to“ brake ”quickly,” writes the pilot. - During the attack, it is extremely important at which point I direct my nose at the enemy, who turns in my direction. At this moment, the distance between the aircraft is rapidly decreasing. The ability to slow down faster allows me to stay aimed at the enemy longer, which in turn gives a greater opportunity to open fire on him until the defensive and attacking positions change roles. ”

            Noted the pilot and the shortcomings in the behavior of the new aircraft, we are talking about the emerging shaking, buffering, which occurs on the F-35 at high overloads and at high angles of attack, and on the F-16, by the way, is constantly observed. Previously, the F-35 pilots already complained that they could not read on the screen because of the shaking.

            However, the Hanshe, who flew in the helmet of the third generation, did not experience such problems.
          2. Navigator Basov
            Navigator Basov 28 July 2016 21: 06
            0
            In close combat, I remember, they even ran into their own shells: https://story.dirty.ru/zanimatelnaia-geometriia-585580/
            It’s a joke, of course (not that it wasn’t, but that it is a sign of incapacity in maneuvering combat), but in every share of a joke, as you know, there is only a fraction of a joke.
      2. Navigator Basov
        Navigator Basov 28 July 2016 20: 53
        0
        Well, here is the Kagbe 4 ++ generation aircraft, although it is recognized as the best among all, including 5 generation aircraft (serial ones, as some people like to be proud of). It may be strange that they write it, but NI constantly writes such articles, sprinkles ash on the head of the United States so that defense budgets can be pounded fatter wink
    6. KCA
      KCA 23 July 2016 09: 25
      0
      but where will he go if the SU-35S has a 400 km air target detection range (if the "Military Acceptance" on the "Zvezda" does not lie)
  2. sir_obs
    sir_obs 21 July 2016 11: 08
    +3
    What does it mean? already become.Login - ntcompany
    Password - ntc0mp @ ny
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 21 July 2016 11: 34
      -6
      Quote: sir_obs
      What does it mean? already become.

      In the article, the conclusion is somewhat different
      1. sir_obs
        sir_obs 21 July 2016 12: 53
        -1
        conclusions are made not in articles, but by a real plane in a real demonstration of capabilities. And here he is just quite convincing.
        1. potroshenko
          potroshenko 21 July 2016 13: 14
          +2
          Quote: sir_obs
          conclusions are made not in articles, but by a real plane in a real demonstration of capabilities. And here he is just quite convincing.

          is it possible in more detail? when, where, who convinced?
          1. sir_obs
            sir_obs 21 July 2016 14: 48
            0
            Even Su 27 in terms of performance and flight qualities convinced the Americans repeatedly in training battles with the Indians. Repeatedly. The pilotage, which is similar to what our fighter performs, is not yet available to anyone.
            The Americans reduce all the advantages of their planes to the notorious invisibility. No more advantages.

            And if in the same vein, then in more detail, who and when did not convince?
            1. potroshenko
              potroshenko 21 July 2016 15: 24
              -4
              Quote: sir_obs
              Even Su 27 in terms of performance and flight qualities convinced the Americans repeatedly in training battles with the Indians.

              When did the Su-27 and its upgrades have had 5-generation training battles? When did the Su-27 take part in hostilities (the best test), unlike American aircraft?
              Quote: sir_obs
              The pilotage, which is similar to what our fighter performs, is not yet available to anyone.

              How aerobatics will help in modern combat?
              1. Parsec
                Parsec 21 July 2016 16: 54
                +2
                Quote: potroshenko
                How aerobatics will help in modern combat?


                How many modern battles have you had in piloting a fighter?
                Are you qualified enough to pose such questions?
                1. potroshenko
                  potroshenko 22 July 2016 14: 05
                  -1
                  Quote: Parsec
                  Quote: potroshenko
                  How aerobatics will help in modern combat?


                  How many modern battles have you had in piloting a fighter?
                  Are you qualified enough to pose such questions?

                  I didn’t fight, but do I need to participate in correspondence on the forum?
                  Do you need qualifications to pose such questions?
              2. sir_obs
                sir_obs 21 July 2016 19: 02
                -2
                You are all referring to the article. It includes, among other things, the older NATO park.
                The fifth generation of Americans is so invisible that we can only judge its application and results by the release of Western news. Nobody saw the results of their actions. In addition, as far as I know, we are talking about f22c and that there is a strike aircraft, it is not intended for air combat at all. And in air battles he was not noticed by any one. Well, if only in Hollywood fantasies.

                As the Americans themselves admit, neither f22 nor f35 can carry on an equal battle with older devices like f16 and f15. But in the training battle with them, our aircraft showed themselves quite well. I'm talking about the Indians. The Americans even had to compose a fable that de were not the best pilots, almost first-year cadets.
                1. Pimply
                  Pimply 21 July 2016 19: 36
                  +1
                  Quote: sir_obs
                  we are talking about f22c and this is a strike aircraft, it is not intended for air combat at all.

                  ??
                2. potroshenko
                  potroshenko 22 July 2016 14: 08
                  0
                  Quote: sir_obs
                  As the Americans themselves admit, neither f22 nor f35 can carry on an equal battle with older devices like f16 and f15.

                  Doctors, give the link!
  3. Teberii
    Teberii 21 July 2016 11: 08
    0
    Recognition or another attempt to knock out money.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 21 July 2016 11: 33
      +5
      Quote: Teberii
      Recognition or another attempt to knock out money.

      Cretinism of translators RIA. From normal article making scribble for self-gratification - they say, Americans also recognize. The real article is completely different from this garbage. There is no praise. Weighted analysis, clear language, reasonable questions, a tribute to the merits and disadvantages.
      1. Black Colonel
        Black Colonel 21 July 2016 14: 03
        +1
        I repeat - can throw a reference?
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 21 July 2016 14: 26
          +3
          Quote: Black Colonel
          I repeat - can throw a reference?

          And I repeat - already threw. If you have something with eyes - open them, and find twice as a direct link, and a way to find an article on the site.

          But I understand that you have terrible fatigue and difficulties with the usual search?

          Is it hard for you? Kinu third time.


          http://nationalinterest.org/feature/russias-mig-29-fulcrum-super-fighter-or-supe
          r-failure-17054

          Little educational program - go to Google or Yandex, type in the national interest - go to the page of the magazine. There the search is in the upper right corner. In the search write su-35 - there you find an article from July 16.

          Do I still have a personal translation for you, my little persistent and slightly blind friend?
  4. Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 21 July 2016 11: 10
    +8
    why the hell are smart guys comparing the SU-35 to the FU-35? compare with "raptor".
    1. 76SSSR
      76SSSR 21 July 2016 11: 28
      +6
      The alignment of melee and medium combat will not be in favor of the Raptor, I think at long-range parity. In general, the alignment will change depending on future modernizations and innovations in the field of radar means of military aviation.
      1. weksha50
        weksha50 21 July 2016 12: 05
        -2
        Quote: 76SSSR
        In general, the alignment will change depending on future modernizations and innovations in the field of radar means of military aviation.


        Something constantly, when comparing characteristics, and with that, and on the other hand, the skill of pilots is not taken into account
        Is that a nothing significant factor ??? belay
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 21 July 2016 12: 09
          +1
          Quote: weksha50

          Something constantly, when comparing characteristics, and with that, and on the other hand, the skill of pilots is not taken into account
          Is that a nothing significant factor ???

          In the article - taken into account. There, this is straightforward, which is an extremely important factor - the training of pilots, strength, mission profile, means of support, and so on. But in the dumb translation about this not a word
        2. 76SSSR
          76SSSR 21 July 2016 12: 38
          +1
          Quote: weksha50
          Something constantly, when comparing characteristics, and with that, and on the other hand, the skill of pilots is not taken into account
          Is that a nothing significant factor ???

          When comparing the characteristics and capabilities of the equipment is not taken into account, because the person (the pilot in this case) goes as extra. success factor in aerial combat. Otherwise, the comparison is incorrect, because the master in his business a priori has an advantage over the amateur.)
    2. Dormidont2
      Dormidont2 21 July 2016 12: 09
      -7
      without Khibiny, I think F35 will fill up the Su - 35, invisibles have an advantage in the detection range, we can only hope that the Khibiny will protect the Su35
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 23 July 2016 01: 17
        +1
        Quote: Dormidont2
        without Khibiny, I think F35 will fill up the Su - 35, invisibles have an advantage in the detection range, we can only hope that the Khibiny will protect the Su35

        Dear, do not write nonsense. The Khibiny EW complex is only an additional means of protection in countering attacks of adversary missiles, entangling their guidance systems creating fighter phantoms.
        As for the "fill up" ... Sushka, though not AFAR, but the FAR Irbis, but he will see an inconspicuous fighter such as the F-35 at a distance of 90-100 km. In the F-35, if my sclerosis does a long-range missile flies at a distance of 105 km in my opinion. On a collision course, the big question is who will launch the missile first, and almost certainly, the fighters will converge in a close combat. But there are a lot of inputs in this equation: the presence or absence of AWACS and our A-50, air defense , ground-based electronic warfare systems, etc.
      2. Navigator Basov
        Navigator Basov 28 July 2016 21: 30
        0
        And without wings (on the Su-35), its F-35 is even easier to fail, yes. And if you remove the wheels from a Ferrari, I will overtake her on a bicycle, how to give a drink.
  5. kebeskin
    kebeskin 21 July 2016 11: 11
    +8
    It remains only to say. Many thanks to our designers for these machines.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 21 July 2016 11: 30
      0
      Quote: kebeskin
      It remains only to say. Many thanks to our designers for these machines.

      And translators for the sloppy translation of a good article.
      1. Banishing liberoids
        Banishing liberoids 21 July 2016 11: 36
        +3
        Eugene, where to get the exact version of the article ???
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 21 July 2016 11: 47
          0
          Well, where, where? They have a website. I logged in, wrote in the search for su-35 - and found

          http://nationalinterest.org/blog/why-russias-enemies-should-fear-the-su-35-fight
          er-16995? page = 2
          1. quote
            quote 21 July 2016 12: 30
            +1
            Quote: Pimply
            Well, where, where? They have a website. I logged in, wrote in the search for su-35 - and found

            http://nationalinterest.org/blog/why-russias-enemies-should-fear-the-su-35-fight


            er-16995? page = 2

            The author of the article.
            Sébastien Roblin has a master's degree in conflict resolution from Georgetown University and has served as a university professor for Peace Corps in China. He has also worked in the education, editing, and resettlement of refugees in France and the United States. He is currently writing about security and military history for War Is Boring (hence the article).
            The author of the article "Specialist" in aviation? You were worried about the full translation, and who wrote to you on the "drum".
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 21 July 2016 12: 48
              +1
              Quote: devis
              Sebastien Roblin holds a master’s degree in conflict resolution from Georgetown University and served as a university lecturer for the Peace Corps in China. He also worked in the field of education, editing and resettlement of refugees in France and the United States. He is currently writing on security and military history for War Is Boring (hence the article).
              The author of the article "Specialist" in aviation? You were worried about the full translation, and who wrote to you on the "drum".


              Can you open your eyes and read what I wrote? "For starters, this is not an editorial, this is a blog, the BLOG article has a specific author - Sébastien Roblin, a professor at Georgetown University."

              What else do you care? The author is a journalist, military historian and teacher, and nowhere does he expose himself as a strictly aviation expert. In the translation of the article, the author is generally ignored.

              This is an article in the blog blog.
  6. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 21 July 2016 11: 11
    +4
    What does "short range" mean in the interpretation of the author of the article? Line of sight distance? Today, all-aspect missiles for BVB have a range of up to 30-40 km.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 21 July 2016 11: 29
      +2
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      What does "short range" mean in the interpretation of the author of the article? Line of sight distance? Today, all-aspect missiles for BVB have a range of up to 30-40 km.

      Here, believe me, the article is just very intelligible. Translation slop.
  7. Hubun
    Hubun 21 July 2016 11: 13
    +2
    Still the crews appropriate by then were
  8. Wildfox
    Wildfox 21 July 2016 11: 15
    +3
    Cannons? Coincidence? I do not think)))
    The plane is really great, but the main thing is still the pilots. I wish the guys flying on the Su-35 and Ilah a clear sky and that the number of take-offs equal the number of landings.
    hi
    1. weksha50
      weksha50 21 July 2016 12: 08
      0
      Quote: WildFox
      The plane is really great, but the main thing is still the pilots. I wish the guys flying and on the Su-35 and on Ilah clear skies and so that the number of take-offs equals the number of landings


      Good comment, and about the crews, which for some reason everyone forgets - on time ...

      Only - why "Eli"? belay
  9. Skubudu
    Skubudu 21 July 2016 11: 16
    +4
    The best one to win on the battlefield.
    Everything else is theories ...
  10. Dvm70
    Dvm70 21 July 2016 11: 20
    +9
    how there was nothing to torture articles. May become, or may not become
  11. Verdun
    Verdun 21 July 2016 11: 27
    +3
    Only one active western fighter, the F-22 Raptor, has such a function, ”the magazine writes.
    I wonder where the Raptor comes from? From what is known about this machine, it is not intended for close combat. In general, when you read the opus of The National Interest, you are only amazed at how much chatter this publication publishes.
  12. cheburator
    cheburator 21 July 2016 11: 28
    +2
    He is the best! good
  13. Pimply
    Pimply 21 July 2016 11: 28
    +18
    Very, very fig translation as always. It reminds some kind of onanism - to see what they have written about something Russian, to take a normal article, to throw out the whole basic thought, to reinterpret, to translate, to fit the agitation genre, and then to distort it furiously and with pleasure to distort: ​​they say even the Americans and those, and they understand that our plane is the best, and everything else ...

    What is written in the article really. And the following is written.

    For a start, this is not an editorial, this is a blog, the article in the BLOG has a specific author - Sébastien Roblin, a professor at Georgetown University. He makes a WEIGHTED assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of the Su-35. In particular, notes that the performance of the machine are at the level of other machines 4-th generation, and may be somewhat superior to them. However, Sebastian wonders if this will be enough to fight the fifth generation machines equipped with new weapons and missiles. And he immediately notes that due to maneuverability and electronic means of struggle, the Su-35 has certain chances. However, he notes that supporters of Su overestimate some of his indicators.

    There is still a lot of the same - a weighted analysis, questions for both our own and others. But especially I think different final phrase.

    "The Su-35 is arguably the best dog dump fighter ever produced. But is that enough to create air superiority in the stealth era?"

    http://nationalinterest.org/blog/why-russias-enemies-should-fear-the-su-35-fight


    er-16995? page = 2
    1. Banishing liberoids
      Banishing liberoids 21 July 2016 11: 39
      +6
      Eugene (Pupyrchaty) - here for such a micro-review from me a plus !!!
    2. iwind
      iwind 21 July 2016 11: 52
      +4
      Quote: Pimply
      Very, very fig translation as always. It reminds some kind of onanism - to see what they have written about something Russian, to take a normal article, to throw out the whole basic thought, to reinterpret, to translate, to fit the agitation genre, and then to distort it furiously and with pleasure to distort: ​​they say even the Americans and those, and they understand that our plane is the best, and everything else ...

      Well, cool? :) when I saw the article for the first time it was curious how it would be "translated"
      Something is not going to happen in the Danish kingdom ... either I didn’t notice or there wasn’t such a frenzy before.
      Ps such news about how someone warned edogan could appear on the yellow sites and now ....
      Will it be again?
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 21 July 2016 11: 58
        +1
        Quote: iwind
        Well, cool? :) when I saw the article for the first time it was curious how it would be "translated"

        Most trynts that this is RIA-news. RIA-machihtak news. Tryndets. A shame
    3. Muvka
      Muvka 21 July 2016 11: 54
      0
      Quote: Pimply
      Very, very fig translation as always. It reminds some kind of onanism - to see what they have written about something Russian, to take a normal article, to throw out the whole basic thought, to reinterpret, to translate, to fit the agitation genre, and then to distort it furiously and with pleasure to distort: ​​they say even the Americans and those, and they understand that our plane is the best, and everything else ...

      What is written in the article really. And the following is written.

      For a start, this is not an editorial, this is a blog, the article in the BLOG has a specific author - Sébastien Roblin, a professor at Georgetown University. He makes a WEIGHTED assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of the Su-35. In particular, notes that the performance of the machine are at the level of other machines 4-th generation, and may be somewhat superior to them. However, Sebastian wonders if this will be enough to fight the fifth generation machines equipped with new weapons and missiles. And he immediately notes that due to maneuverability and electronic means of struggle, the Su-35 has certain chances. However, he notes that supporters of Su overestimate some of his indicators.

      There is still a lot of the same - a weighted analysis, questions for both our own and others. But especially I think different final phrase.

      "The Su-35 is arguably the best dog dump fighter ever produced. But is that enough to create air superiority in the stealth era?"

      http://nationalinterest.org/blog/why-russias-enemies-should-fear-the-su-35-fight



      er-16995? page = 2

      I doubt that Sebastian has access to the secrets of the Su-35, so that he could at least write something about comparing the aircraft with the fifth generation aircraft.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 21 July 2016 11: 56
        +2
        Quote: Muvka
        I doubt that Sebastian has access to the secrets of the Su-35, so that he could at least write something about comparing the aircraft with the fifth generation aircraft.

        And you first read the article in the original, and you will understand what exactly Sebastian values ​​and how. And then you can bend your fingers.
  14. Banishing liberoids
    Banishing liberoids 21 July 2016 11: 41
    +3
    The principle of the adversary cannot be underestimated, in such cases it must be dominant.
  15. fa2998
    fa2998 21 July 2016 11: 45
    0
    Quote: Verdun
    I wonder where the Raptor comes from? From what is known about this car,

    But it’s interesting. Modern Russian cars have not yet encountered. Maybe our 4 ++ is capable of opposing cars. hi
  16. Neputin
    Neputin 21 July 2016 12: 02
    +2
    Perhaps they will go along this path: T 50 separate strike units in especially threatened areas, and SU 30 CM (+ support of a certain number of SU 35) massive ones to gain air superiority. But why is everything so slow, then ah? If it is worked out, then start production to the fullest. Stop riveting outdated SS 30, do only SS 35. Such impression is that someone "grabbed the tail" of our military-industrial complex and does not give a move. Here again, the implementation of the defense order for the Polyment Redut air defense complex was disrupted. Why not discuss it at VO. And then we are increasingly discussing what is "possible", "probably", "in the near future", "will appear soon", etc.
    1. Docent1984
      Docent1984 21 July 2016 12: 44
      +4
      My friend, about the "outdated" SU-30, you got excited. I have seen its modification SU-30SM in the skies over GLITs in Akhtubinsk - so there I, my father, who had served in the Soviet / Russian Air Force for 23 years, stood with my mouth open. The capabilities of this machine are not yet exhausted. There are different opponents. For me, according to my VUS, ground-based equipment is closer, so I know for sure that there is no point in using the "Armata" where the T-72B3 will be enough. Although the SU-35 is, of course, cool) It's nice to see how, in my hometown of Millerovo, Rostov Region, only this year, 29 "veterans" of the MiG-35 were replaced with brand new SU-XNUMXs.
      1. Neputin
        Neputin 21 July 2016 18: 46
        0
        Perhaps you are right, I do not know exactly the capabilities of our fighters in comparison (adequate) with the aircraft of probable friends. But I definitely know one thing: if there is a more advanced equipment, then it must be massively introduced into the troops. Moreover, the price of SU 30 and SU 35 is not very different.
  17. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 21 July 2016 12: 23
    +1
    Quote: Neputin
    Here again, the implementation of the defense order for the Polyment Redut air defense complex was disrupted. Why not discuss it at VO. Otherwise, we are increasingly discussing the fact that "possibly", "probably", "in the near future", "coming soon" etc.

    Well, let's discuss the reasons for the failure of the defense order. "Maybe" You fully know the reasons, then "probably" it makes sense "in the near future" put them on VO, then probably in your apartment "coming soon" competent people to discuss problems ...
    1. Neputin
      Neputin 21 July 2016 18: 51
      0
      Don't scare us with "competent people". Firstly, as the "guarantor" said: "Now is not 37 years old," and secondly, it is not necessary to see ideological enemies in people expressing a slightly different point of view from yours. These people are no less than you, and maybe more patriots of their country and their soul aches for the failures of our military-industrial complex. This is not said to spit in someone's face. And you probably "like a sickle in one place" to discuss an uncomfortable topic. Not all the same time "Urya!" shout. Something has already bored "the whirlwinds of violent attacks ..." The reasons for the failure of the defense order, in my opinion, are known even to children, and only the lazy did not discuss them, right?
  18. Rusfaner
    Rusfaner 21 July 2016 13: 21
    +2
    Quote: Docent1984
    My friend, about the "outdated" SU-30, you got excited. I have seen its modification SU-30SM in the skies over GLITs in Akhtubinsk - so there I, my father, who had served in the Soviet / Russian Air Force for 23 years, stood with my mouth open. The capabilities of this machine are not yet exhausted. There are different opponents. For me, according to my VUS, ground-based equipment is closer, so I know for sure that there is no point in using the "Armata" where the T-72B3 will be enough. Although the SU-35 is, of course, cool) It's nice to see how, in my hometown of Millerovo, Rostov Region, only this year, 29 "veterans" of the MiG-35 were replaced with brand new SU-XNUMXs.

    Both the tank and the aircraft are made by the crew. Winning in battle, and not in a separate battle for the coordinated actions of subdivisions of clans and types of aircraft, IMHO.
    1. Wasiliy1985
      Wasiliy1985 23 July 2016 19: 44
      0
      So why are "sudden checks" in use nowadays? Probably just for practicing actions by crews ..
      And larger connections ..
  19. Prince of Pensions
    Prince of Pensions 21 July 2016 13: 32
    +1
    Russian Su-35 may become
    Is there anything already that he is? Who is brave, come out, the drying pilot will fill up in one go.
  20. Leonid Har
    Leonid Har 21 July 2016 14: 01
    +1
    Fear the adversaries. Not only do you have retaliation weapons.
  21. Shamsik
    Shamsik 21 July 2016 16: 41
    +2
    Su-35 is not only the best, but also the most beautiful!
  22. onibo
    onibo 21 July 2016 17: 08
    +1
    Here is a fully-fledged translation ..
    http://inosmi.ru/military/20160719/237239586.html
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 21 July 2016 18: 58
      0
      Quote: onibo
      Here is a fully-fledged translation ..
      //inosmi.ru/military/20160719/237239586.html

      Yes, better. Some inaccuracies. But in general - the rules
  23. Besmaster
    Besmaster 22 July 2016 20: 28
    0
    I don’t like it when they praise us for something. It becomes uncomfortable. It would be better if they wrote that the plane is bad, and their F-35 is godlike.
    1. Guntruck
      Guntruck 22 July 2016 21: 52
      0
      Don’t worry, it’s not they who praise us, but we ourselves from the type of their face.

      Here on VO there was an article about the fact that this NI magazine belongs to Pushkov, and was created with one obvious purpose - to play the role of a "Western publication", voicing the point of view that is in demand within Russia. In the West proper, no one reads this NI, at all.
  24. Stoler
    Stoler 22 July 2016 21: 58
    +1
    F-35s and 22s are good ONLY because their "backs" usually ALWAYS hangs "AWACS", this alone gives them an undeniable advantage in battle.
  25. Forever so
    Forever so 22 July 2016 22: 37
    0
    Iki, as always - Can it be the best ?? And what does he need for this ?? From the point of view of thieves, he needs slippers on a rubber run. But seriously, the last types of aircraft that could be compared, fought in Vietnam and Korea. After that, American aviation developed in the stream of American ideology, to strike out from under the silence, to strike until they see you, and even better, that they would not see. if the planes of the USSR and Russia are fighters, then the aircraft of America and NATO are cowardly hooligans. Comparisons of AK and f-16 will always mix the same thing. AK is a weapon of battle, and the F-16 is a weapon of police cleansing, well, you can still use it on the target, on targets. And in general today it is ridiculous to consider an airplane separately, without a complex of air and ground guidance and defense systems. Although one on one, there are no equal to our aircraft. Well, if only to miss a stab in the back.
  26. Olena
    Olena 23 July 2016 06: 02
    -2
    -The most dangerous thing is that Russia can get into the production of an expensive military aircraft (SU-35, T-50) .., which in terms of performance characteristics is not much and differs for the better from other Russian military aircraft, the production of which is much cheaper .. -And after all, the success of Russia has always been ensured precisely by the massive "relatively inexpensive" weapons ... -It is unlikely that Russia will be able to "afford" the mass production of T-50, SU-35 and T-15 (Armata) ... -Not better whether to throw all the forces into training military specialists ... - let them fly and shoot more ... - after all, even now Russia has quite effective weapons, and this weapon is still poorly mastered by our servicemen ...
    -Yes, and the main "mistake-trap" for Russia lies in the fact that all these T-50, SU-35, T-15, etc. ... are already "yesterday" ... "another promising weapon" ... -Unmanned aerial vehicles, guided armored vehicles (without crews), laser weapons, pulsed electromagnetic weapons, etc. ... -Many of the above are already being tested and quite successfully ... -And isn't it better to spend money on more "real perspective" than trying to invest huge sums of money on the improvement of already fundamentally outdated weapons ..? -Because this "dead end" is becoming more noticeable ...
  27. Aqela
    Aqela 24 July 2016 02: 08
    -1
    The article is so-so, about nothing ... Zaminusovat for stupidity and worthlessness.
  28. rruvim
    rruvim 24 July 2016 03: 36
    -1
    I do not believe! The "Global Hawk" remains the best aircraft in the aircraft industry. Simply, in terms of effectiveness ...