Military Review

The National Interest: why is America and the whole world afraid of Soo-27

52
Many domestic developments in the field of armaments and military equipment are commendable, and therefore regularly receive the most positive ratings. Most often, for obvious reasons, domestic weapon and the technique is praised by experts and amateurs from our country. Nevertheless, some samples are awarded approval by the results of evaluations by foreign experts. Consider one of the examples of this attitude to the Russian technology.


July 22 The American Interest published the American edition of Robert Farley’s “Russia's Russia's F-15 Killer: Why America (and the World) Fears the Su-27 Flanker” (“Russian killer F-15: why America (and the whole world) is afraid of 27 ”). The subtitle of the material says: "It was the best plane - it was the best aircraft of the USSR, and it can still be dangerous." As is clear from the title of the article, its topic was a close examination of one of the most successful Russian fighters. The American author, having studied the question, came to very interesting conclusions.

The National Interest: why is America and the whole world afraid of Soo-27


In the eyes of the West, as R. Farley writes, most of the legendary Soviet planes of the Cold War were designed by the design bureau A.I. Mikoyan and M.I. Gurevich. This organization created the MiG-15, MiG-21, MiG-25 and MiG-29 fighters, which in the NATO classification have the code names Fagot, Fishbed, Foxbat and Fulcrum, respectively. At the same time, the best Soviet Cold War fighter was created by another design team. The Su-27 project was developed by the P.O. Dry.

Su-27 (according to the NATO classification - Flanker) was created as a means of gaining superiority in the air. In the event of a conflict with NATO, such aircraft were supposed to destroy the American aviation equipment over Central Europe. In addition, their task was to patrol in the border areas in order to intercept the attacking enemy bombers. Su-27 survived the end of the Cold War, and soon became one of the leaders in the international market for fighter aircraft.

Origin

The author of The National Interest reminds that the Su-27 project emerged as part of a large and complex program that involved the parallel creation of heavy and light fighters of various types. Similar views on the development of fighter aircraft dominated the United States and the USSR in the seventies and eighties of the last century. The result of this approach was the emergence of several types of aircraft. The US industry has created the F-15 and F-16 fighter for the air force, as well as the F-14 and F / A-18 for the naval carrier aircraft. In the Soviet program of developing new technology, the role of a light fighter was assigned to the MiG-29 aircraft. Heavy aircraft with higher performance became Su-27.

R. Farley believes that the Su-27 project was developed taking into account the available information about the American F-15 Eagle project. As a result, the aircraft appeared, having a certain similarity with its foreign competitor. Su-27 and F-15 have high speed and long range, and also carry quite powerful weapons. At the same time there are noticeable differences in the design. The American fighter looks like it was “well fed”, and the Soviet plane is different “hungry view”.

Despite the initial goals of the project, which implied the creation of a fighter to achieve superiority in the air, the Su-27, like the F-15, later mastered the job of intercepting and striking ground targets. On the basis of the original fighter in the future, the firm "Sukhoi" created several versions of specialized aircraft designed to solve specific combat missions.

Unlike the F-15 and the MiG-29, in the early stages, the Su-27 project faced certain difficulties, which led to a serious delay in the main works. There have also been tragedies: the tests of the new aircraft took the lives of several pilots. It was only in the mid-eighties that the car was able to be brought to service in the military, although some problems continued to haunt it after that. Finally, the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the characteristic problems of that time led to a sharp reduction in orders for the construction of serial equipment.

The American author notes the high characteristics of the Soviet / Russian fighter. The maximum speed of the Su-27 reaches M = 2,35, and the ratio of engine thrust and take-off weight, depending on the amount of fuel and load, can exceed one. The pylons under the wing and fuselage can accommodate up to eight short-range or medium-range air-to-air missiles. Long-range missiles are included in the ammunition of some modifications of the fighter. Also, the aircraft can carry bombs and unguided rockets of various types. Under the control of an experienced pilot, the aircraft is able to perform various maneuvers and aerobatic maneuvers, which has been repeatedly demonstrated at numerous Russian and foreign aviation equipment exhibitions.

Over time, it turned out that the Su-27 is very successful and flexible in terms of the use of a platform for creating specialized aircraft. To date, the Russian Aerospace Forces have a fleet of vehicles consisting of various models and modifications of aircraft based on the Su-27, designed to solve various combat missions. With the help of modern electronic equipment, aircraft improve their ability to attack air and ground targets. Some variants of the Flanker fighter even stand out in separate models.

Export

Su-27 early modifications, despite their considerable age, are still of interest to operators. Such equipment is now used by 11 air forces of the world. The largest fleet of such equipment is available in the VKS of Russia - 359 machines. Another 59 units are available from the air forces of the People’s Liberation Army of China. R. Farley notes that in some cases, Su-27 aircraft are in service with both countries involved in "smoldering conflicts." To such conflicts, the author attributes the notorious “war” of Russia and Ukraine, as well as the Ethiopo-Eritrean conflict and the differences of Vietnam and China. In total, according to the calculations of the American author, customers were supplied 809 Su-27 aircraft of the first model. There are also numerous contracts for the supply of modifications and new equipment based on the existing platform.

Separately, R. Farley mentions events that have evolved around the supply of Russian aircraft to China. A relatively long time ago, the Chinese army purchased from Russia a number of ready-made Su-27 aircraft. In addition, there were agreements on the joint production of machinery and the license to assemble fighters on their own. Subsequently, the Russian side accused the Chinese partners of violating the terms of the existing agreements. The reason for the charges was the equipment of aircraft J-11 (Chinese designation of fighters), electronic equipment produced in China. In addition, the Chinese industry assigned some Russian developments, which were later used in the new project J-16. Disagreements persisted for a long time, but by now the situation has returned to normal thanks to the continuation of military-technical cooperation between the two countries.

The battle

R. Farley believes that Su-27 fought quite a bit for such a famous and remarkable aircraft. However, such fighters had to perform combat missions in several theaters of operations around the world. During this combat operation, aircraft were mainly used to gain air superiority. First of all, this technique was involved in conflicts that accompanied the collapse of the Soviet Union. In addition, the American author claims that Su-27 is used in the "wars of Russian reconsolidation", in particular by both parties to the conflict in Ukraine. Also, the Su-27 of the Russian VKS, as well as machines based on them, are involved in the current Syrian operation.

Abroad, Su-27 had time to participate in the Angolan civil war and the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea. It is to the last war that occurred at the turn of the nineties and the two thousandth, are the only known air victories of the Su-27 over enemy aircraft. Ethiopian pilots shot down three Eritrean MiG-29.

The Soviet / Russian Su-27 was the last of the "main" fighters of the fourth generation, put into service and put into mass production. During the tests and service, these aircraft showed how successful the project turned out to be. The planes turned out to be quite large and relatively powerful, which allows them to continue their modernization and production for a long time. Such features of the original project and developments based on it look particularly important in light of the recent problems of the Advanced Aviation Complex of Frontal Aviation (PAK FA or T-50). In the future, the PAK FA will have to replace both the Su-27 with its modifications and the MiG-29. In the meantime, Su-27 and its modifications are the basis of the Russian fighter aircraft.


The article “Russia's F-15 Killer: Why America (and the World) Fears the Su-27 Flanker”:
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/russias-f-15-killer-why-america-the-world-fears-the-su-27-17082
Author:
52 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Leto
    Leto 27 July 2016 06: 23
    +29
    The National Interest: why is America and the whole world afraid of Soo-27

    I have counter questions:
    Why does The National Interest publish any heresy? If the author believes that the whole world is simply shaking with fear when realizing the existence of Su-27, then let him give evidence. Judging by the table of contents, this is an axiom and, at any point on earth, pronouncing Su-27, can we expect a panic reaction?
    Personally, in my opinion, there will be no more than 10% of the inhabitants on earth for whom the Su-27 will cause at least any associations with aviation.
    Why did the Russian press and VO specifically love the publication The National Interest, whose ignorance and amateurism was repeatedly convinced by local respondents?
    1. Mifcada
      Mifcada 27 July 2016 06: 41
      -5
      Quote: Leto
      The National Interest: why is America and the whole world afraid of Soo-27

      I have counter questions:
      Why does The National Interest publish any heresy? If the author believes that the whole world is simply shaking with fear when realizing the existence of Su-27, then let him give evidence. Judging by the table of contents, this is an axiom and, at any point on earth, pronouncing Su-27, can we expect a panic reaction?
      Personally, in my opinion, there will be no more than 10% of the inhabitants on earth for whom the Su-27 will cause at least any associations with aviation.
      Why did the Russian press and VO specifically love the publication The National Interest, whose ignorance and amateurism was repeatedly convinced by local respondents?




      How why did you fall in love? Because national interest constantly writes things that are pleasant for a Russian cheer patriot. And it’s okay that they do not correspond to the facts, the worse for the facts.
      1. loft79
        loft79 27 July 2016 07: 40
        +26
        Where have you seen jingoistic patriotic things there? From time to time I look through NI articles on Russian technology (and not only), there is a lot of critical attitude. The headline is just a typical journalistic trick to get attention. When they write about "their" technique, they mostly extol it. So you are not objective. hi
        Threat. Here is an example: an article about the state of the submarine fleet.
        http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-submarine-force-back-how-worri
        ed-should-america-be-16858
      2. Altona
        Altona 27 July 2016 08: 07
        +16
        Quote: Mifkada
        How why did you fall in love? Because national interest constantly writes things that are pleasant for a Russian cheer patriot. And it’s okay that they do not correspond to the facts, the worse for the facts.

        --------------------
        American publications also write things that are pleasant to the American reader and cheers. Such things are written for internal use, to terrify the layman and make Congress allocate additional defense allocations. The message of such publications is only in this.
        1. Gray brother
          Gray brother 27 July 2016 09: 38
          +4
          Quote: Altona
          The message of such publications is only in this.

          Russians are scary.
        2. Bayonet
          Bayonet 27 July 2016 10: 42
          +2
          Quote: Altona
          American publications also write things that are pleasant to the American reader and cheers.

          We have so much in common with this. yes
        3. gladcu2
          gladcu2 27 July 2016 16: 17
          -6
          Altona

          These "additional appropriations" were given to you. The share of the military-industrial complex in the US industry is not significant, which would constantly refer to the supposedly hypothetical need for increased funding.

          NATO’s activity is not linked to threats or to financing the defense industry.
          1. Cresta999
            Cresta999 27 July 2016 22: 14
            +4
            Judging by the flag, this was written by a man from a country that cannot even declare war on another country on its own behalf. Probably because there is no international tension and the United States is not escalating the situation. And there is no industrial lobby. And in general there is nothing, the army can be dissolved, and we all invent conspiracy theories. With a sincere wish for independence.
            1. gladcu2
              gladcu2 29 July 2016 23: 45
              0
              cresta

              Leave your conversation through the lip.

              My country has kept the level of social guarantees higher than now in Russia. And at the same time it is next to the flagship of capitalism.

              And to you, a person simply does not have enough level of education to formulate his claims at least somehow.

              The level of the defense industry for the US industry is very small.
          2. Orionvit
            Orionvit 28 July 2016 23: 04
            +3
            The share of the defense industry in the US industry is not significant
            What is the US industry in recent times, and what is it eaten with? If almost all goods in the states (except for iPhones) are Chinese. The industrial superiority of the USA has come to an end, now the entire economy of the citadel of democracy is kept solely by printing the dollar.
            1. gladcu2
              gladcu2 29 July 2016 23: 50
              0
              Orionvit

              Ok, I will answer.

              To start the production of high-quality shoes at Chinese prices in the United States is enough 3 x months.

              Why? Because there is a production of group A. And an absolutely perfect logistics system.

              No need to write off the United States. This is still a super power.
            2. Navigator Basov
              Navigator Basov 31 July 2016 01: 20
              0
              Quote: Orionvit
              The industrial superiority of the USA has come to an end, now the entire economy of the citadel of democracy is kept solely by printing the dollar.
              Well, if without extremes, then due to the service sector: medicine, education and other trade in vacuum cleaners at home. The US economy, of course, is the most developed, and in absolute terms, industry is stronger, but structurally, it is no longer industrial (industrial), but post-industrial. The share of industry (2012) is 22,1% versus 36,6% in Russia (2014).
      3. Alexey-74
        Alexey-74 27 July 2016 10: 10
        +16
        I put a plus to the author for bringing the information ... no more. The article itself is weak, not reflecting the actual characteristics of the Su-27 ...
        In August 1992, an opportunity was presented to meet in the training aerial battle against the aircraft against which the Su-27 was created - with the American fighter for gaining air superiority F-15 Eagle.

        The delegation, composed of pilots Colonel A. Kharchevsky (currently Major General) and Major E. Karabasov, was led by Major General N. Chaga, Head of the Lipetsk Center for Combat Training and Retraining of Flight Personnel. “By technique” the team included two Su-27UB two-seater aircraft and the Il-76 military transport aircraft.

        During a visit on a friendly visit to the American Langley air base by the Russian side, the Americans invited the Americans to conduct a training air battle. The Americans politely refused the battle in full view, referring to the intense air traffic in this zone and the high population density, despite the fact that the air base, of course, has its own “chopped” air zone, closed for flights or temporarily closed for flights civil airlines and private jets.

        Ultimately, the Americans organized the so-called “joint maneuvering” in the Atlantic Ocean. Pilots of the 1 th wing of tactical fighters, considered the best aviation unit in the US Air Force, whose pilots traditionally have high flight qualifications, excellent tactical training and pilot the most modern fighters, worked against ours.
      4. Alexey-74
        Alexey-74 27 July 2016 10: 11
        +17
        For joint maneuvering, an air zone was allocated 200 km from the Atlantic coast of the USA in the echelon of heights 2500-8500 m. A double Su-27UB (a Russian pilot in the front cockpit and an American pilot in the rear cockpit) were sent to the pilot zone, F- 15D (an American pilot in the front cockpit and a Russian air attache, also a pilot who acted as an interpreter in the rear) and a double F-15D as an escort and surveillance aircraft, in which the photographer was in the back cockpit. The conditions were typical for close air combat: an attack from the rear hemisphere (ZPS) and an attempt to stay “on the tail” of the enemy, who, in turn, is trying to thwart the attack and enter the ZPS of the attacker himself.

        In the first "round" the role of the target was played by F-15D, which was attacked by Su-27UB. In the future, it was supposed to swap places. For the American “eagle” the task of “shaking off” the Russian fighter from the tail turned out to be impossible. But the "twenty-seventh" kept the enemy in sight without much effort.

        Change of position further widened the gap in results. Attacked by an American, the Su-27UB with the help of an energetic U-turn with climb on full fast and furious detached himself from the enemy, and after one and a half full turns left the tail of the "fifteenth", capturing the target. True, after the Su-27UB “flunked” the F-15, it turned out that he thereby “removed” the witness, who turned out to be an innocent F-15D escort aircraft.

        After that, the Russian pilot took up his specific opponent - the two-seater F-15D. And he completely lost sight of the Su-27UB and was forced to request an escort aircraft about the location of the enemy. At this time, the "twenty-seventh" went into the tail of the F-15D and, remaining undetected for that, firmly held it in the sight, which was reported from the escort aircraft. The American repeatedly tried to break away from the pursuing "twenty-seventh", but all his attempts were futile.

        The change of pilots in the cockpits of the "fighting" aircraft did not bring any surprises to the results. And the second Russian pilot “beat” the new American pilot who occupied the F-15D cockpit. The vaunted American “eagle” was put to shame by a Russian Su-fighter, which this time left air superiority at the near approaches to the United States. Of course, the results of this friendly meeting were not covered by the American media.
        1. Dimon19661
          Dimon19661 27 July 2016 11: 13
          +4
          At that time, American pilots noted * unexpectedly high acceleration characteristics of a Russian aircraft *
    2. Alex_59
      Alex_59 27 July 2016 08: 33
      +9
      Quote: Leto
      Why does The National Interest publish any heresy? If the author believes that the whole world is simply shaking with fear when realizing the existence of Su-27, then let him give evidence.

      The usual catchy headline to grab the attention of readers. Typical journalistic practice. "Scandals, intrigues, investigations". Don't focus on these audience engagement tricks. In fact, the article is an ordinary statement of known facts. Su-27 successful aircraft? Yes. Commercially successful? Yes. Better than the F-15? Well actually yes. It is foolish to argue with this. No jingoistic patriotism. Boring ...
      1. potroshenko
        potroshenko 27 July 2016 10: 57
        +5
        such fighters had to perform combat missions at several theaters of operations around the world. During this combat operation, aircraft were mainly used to gain superiority in the air. First of all, this technique participated in the conflicts that accompanied the collapse of the Soviet Union. In addition, the American author claims that the Su-27 are used during the “Russian reconsolidation wars,” in particular by both sides of the conflict in Ukraine.

        How can such nonsense be carried? Readers are fed with unknown what and why articles from NI.
    3. doework
      doework 27 July 2016 17: 46
      0
      The TNI is a mediocre magazine trying to look like a serious publication ... "international analytics for housewives". IMHO, translations from this edition should not be posted on this resource at all.
      Read more about TNI here: http://inosmi.ru/nationalinterest_org/
    4. Achilles
      Achilles 27 July 2016 19: 18
      +1
      SU-27 is a very good car, and at the end of the 80's they were really afraid of it
  2. afrikanez
    afrikanez 27 July 2016 07: 07
    0
    R. Farley believes that the Su-27 project was developed taking into account the available information about the American F-15 Eagle project.
    And not that F-15 was born after the hijacking of our MIG-25 to Japan. fool
    1. kytx
      kytx 27 July 2016 07: 21
      -10%
      hijacking is hijacking, but all the same, su27 is much more similar to f15 than either one and the other for a moment25.
      1. Leto
        Leto 27 July 2016 08: 03
        -5
        Quote: kytx
        but still, su27 is much more similar to ф15

        At North American Rockwell FX, the look of Su-27 was written from him about which they did not hide in Sukhoi Design Bureau.
        1. Alex_59
          Alex_59 27 July 2016 08: 35
          +11
          Quote: Leto
          At North American Rockwell FX, the look of Su-27 was written from him about which they did not hide in Sukhoi Design Bureau.

          Here you are above the evidence of awe of the world community before the Su-27 demand, but yourself? Can you prove that the look of the Su-27 was written with North American Rockwell FX?
          1. Leto
            Leto 27 July 2016 10: 18
            -5
            Quote: Alex_59
            Can you prove that the look of the Su-27 was written with North American Rockwell FX?

            The layout of the T-10 was created in May 1971. based on the proposed in 1970g. Samoilovich integrated circuit. North American Rockwell as part of the FX contest presented its project in 1968., I.e. before it dawned on Samoilovich.
            By the way, the T-10 existed in two versions, 1 version with an integrated circuit and the second version of the classic circuit. The first variant was strangely similar to the FX project from North American Rockwell, and the second variant to the FX McDonnell Douglas project, which later became the F-15. She was shown in the film "SU-27 history of creation".
            As far as I remember, the first circuit was approved by P.O.Sukhoy himself and subsequently the creators of the Su-27 zealously watched the result of the FX contest and were glad that the Americans had abandoned the integrated circuit. It was in some of the films on the history of the creation of Su-27, but unfortunately forgot.
            1. Alex_59
              Alex_59 27 July 2016 10: 42
              +11
              Quote: Leto
              The layout of the T-10 was created in May 1971. based on the proposed in 1970g. Samoilovich integrated circuit. North American Rockwell as part of the FX contest presented its project in 1968., I.e. before it dawned on Samoilovich.
              By the way, the T-10 existed in two versions, 1 version with an integrated circuit and the second version of the classic circuit. The first variant was strangely similar to the FX project from North American Rockwell, and the second variant to the FX McDonnell Douglas project, which later became the F-15. She was shown in the film "SU-27 history of creation"

              That is, in your opinion, the design work consists in collecting pictures of enemy airplanes and copying them onto tracing paper? Copied - hurray! The plane is ready! Obviously, the main argument is the comparison of airplane silhouettes. Children in the sandbox, I swear. Some epithets - "dawned". You would be in KB for an internship.
              Quote: Leto
              It was in some of the films on the history of the creation of Su-27, but unfortunately forgot.
              Yeah. It happens. smile
              Quote: Leto
              rejoiced that the Americans abandoned the integrated circuit.

              Really happy? They inflated the balls, arranged dances on the Kuhlmanns, probably sprinkled everything with champagne. And in Mikoyan’s design bureau, there was probably mourning over the lack of an integrated layout for the MiG-31. laughing
              1. Leto
                Leto 27 July 2016 12: 11
                -2
                Quote: Alex_59
                That is, in your opinion, the design work consists in collecting pictures of enemy airplanes and copying them onto tracing paper? Sketched - cheers!

                Of course not. I see nothing wrong with the fact that we have discerned the prospect of an integrated aerodynamic scheme, but not in the USA.
                1. Alex_59
                  Alex_59 27 July 2016 12: 46
                  -4
                  Quote: Leto
                  Of course not. I see nothing wrong with the fact that we have discerned the prospect of an integrated aerodynamic scheme, but not in the USA.

                  It seems like you can be happy, but again an ambush. And what is the prospect of the integral layout as applied to the fighter aviation complex? 90% of a fighter's success is avionics and weapons. The F-22, for example, is not integral, and nothing. All these "cobras" and other somersaults from the airshow have practically nothing to do with real combat use. The aerodynamic quality of the F-15 is 10, the MiG-29 - 10,4, the Su-27 - 11,6. Well, a little better, but not at times.
        2. Bayonet
          Bayonet 27 July 2016 10: 46
          +2
          Quote: Leto
          North American Rockwell FX,
      2. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 27 July 2016 11: 22
        +4
        Quote: kytx
        but all the same, su27 is much more similar to ф15 than the one and the other at the moment 25.

        What does he look like? Fuselage, engine layout, wings of a completely different design.
    2. atalef
      atalef 27 July 2016 07: 24
      +8
      Quote: afrikanez
      R. Farley believes that the Su-27 project was developed taking into account the available information about the American F-15 Eagle project.
      А not that F-15 was born after the hijacking of our MIG-25 to Japan. fool

      belay belay belay
      .Viktor Ivanovich Belenko 6 September 1976 of the year flew to Japan on the MiG-25 interceptor, and transferred the secret plane at that time to the West. Got political asylum in the USA.

      F-15 Eagle.Designed in 1972 year. Designed to gain superiority in the air. Transferred to operation in 1976 year.

      fool
    3. Alex_59
      Alex_59 27 July 2016 08: 43
      +8
      Quote: afrikanez
      And not that F-15 was born after the hijacking of our MIG-25 to Japan.

      Nonsense. Americans and without any hijacking relied on the MiG-25 in work on the F-15. But this does not mean that they copied something, not at all. To borrow some successful layout solutions does not mean copying or theft - in order for your product to fly you need to do such a titanic work on design and testing that no copying is right here. And so, the concepts - yes, are adopted from each other, in general terms. When working on the F-16, they relied on the successful experience of using the MiG-17 and MiG-21 in Vietnam, and the F-15 was made with an eye on the MiG-25. We, in turn, did the Su-27 looking at the F-15, the MiG-29 at the F-16, and the MiG-31 at the F-14. At the next round of development, again, they clearly used our achievements on the MiG-31 and Su-27 in their F-22, and the Yak-141 in F-35. We also make our T-50 based on F-22 solutions. This is normal, it does not detract from the merits of the designers of both sides.
  3. Fei_Wong
    Fei_Wong 27 July 2016 07: 08
    +15
    In addition, the American author claims that the Su-27 are used during the “Russian reconsolidation wars,” in particular by both sides of the conflict in Ukraine.

    Should drink less. There will be no double vision.
  4. arkadiyssk
    arkadiyssk 27 July 2016 07: 19
    -9
    Quote: Mifkada

    How why did you fall in love? Because national interest constantly writes things that are pleasant for a Russian cheer patriot. And it’s okay that they do not correspond to the facts, the worse for the facts.

    Most likely, everything is even simpler, in the NI blog sections, the right people write the things we need, at our request.
    RT immediately refers to them as "the opinion of the West" and is already circulating in all Russian media. The worked out scheme.
    Those. even so - the RT leadership is given a "task" and they implement information stuffing under it through several lured bloggers.
    1. potroshenko
      potroshenko 27 July 2016 11: 03
      -3
      Quote: arkadiyssk
      Quote: Mifkada

      How why did you fall in love? Because national interest constantly writes things that are pleasant for a Russian cheer patriot. And it’s okay that they do not correspond to the facts, the worse for the facts.

      Most likely, everything is even simpler, in the NI blog sections, the right people write the things we need, at our request.
      RT immediately refers to them as "the opinion of the West" and is already circulating in all Russian media. The worked out scheme.
      Those. even so - the RT leadership is given a "task" and they implement information stuffing under it through several lured bloggers.

      No matter how it was not unpleasant for local readers, but on NI articles it is obviously visible.
    2. ssergn
      ssergn 27 July 2016 19: 16
      +2
      Oooo, what a dreamer you are. And Nitsche, that this magazine is published by the Center for National Interests of the USA (formerly the Nixon Center), whose honorary president is Henry his mother Kissinger? Scribe, what a pro-Russian organization! laughing
      1. potroshenko
        potroshenko 28 July 2016 09: 57
        0
        Quote: ssergn
        Oooo, what a dreamer you are. And Nitsche, that this magazine is published by the Center for National Interests of the USA (formerly the Nixon Center), whose honorary president is Henry his mother Kissinger? Scribe, what a pro-Russian organization! laughing

        Yeah, and also Pushkov in the editorial board laughing
        We learn materiel and do not write nonsense anymore.
        https://topwar.ru/95470-ob-mnogostradalnom-ni-i-deyve-kak-ego-tam.html
  5. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 27 July 2016 07: 54
    +8
    The article is similar to "Notes from the Yellow House"! The development of aviation has always provided for the choice of the best of the design options for equipment and it is not surprising that sometimes the devices are a little bit alike! But this does not mean that someone copied from someone else (with the exception of Tu-4)! Although if you look closely at the F-15 and Su-27, you will notice a lot of differences! This is me, by the way, but the current options for the development of the Su-27 differ from the prototype as a cart from a cab! And there is no need to put a "shadow on the fence", otherwise you can agree so that the S-500 is a copied amerovsky Patriot!
    1. engineer74
      engineer74 27 July 2016 08: 58
      +12
      The first prototype of the Su-27 (T-10-1), and where is the F-15 ??? fool
      1. Leto
        Leto 27 July 2016 10: 24
        -5
        Quote: engineer74
        The first prototype of the Su-27 (T-10-1), and where is the F-15 ???

        You are absolutely right, the F-15 of the classical scheme, unlike the T-10 in which they implemented the integrated ...
  6. Paul zewike
    Paul zewike 27 July 2016 07: 58
    +6
    Still, people come to topwar, whose level of knowledge is often higher than the knowledge of the authors of such superficial materials. I don’t put a minus. Plus too.
  7. Phoenix_L'vov
    Phoenix_L'vov 27 July 2016 08: 25
    +2
    Su-27 is a good plane, but Su-30- and Su-35 are even better, it was necessary to write about them.
    1. ssergn
      ssergn 27 July 2016 19: 19
      +1
      EMNIP, SU 30 is a modernization of the SU 27. And the glider is not much different. If wrong, correct. There are very cool Specialists! With a capital letter.
      1. Phoenix_L'vov
        Phoenix_L'vov 30 November 2016 18: 43
        0
        And Moskvich-2140 is a modernization of Moskvich-412 ... Yes, and the appearance is not much different. But if you look under the hood ...
  8. Prince of Pensions
    Prince of Pensions 27 July 2016 12: 11
    +2
    The National Interest: why is America and the whole world afraid of Soo-27
    Yes, because the whole world remembers that training air battle.
  9. Kir1984
    Kir1984 27 July 2016 13: 21
    -1
    I don’t know here they have a draw (cartoon of course, but beautifully made)



  10. NordUral
    NordUral 27 July 2016 13: 30
    +3
    The American fighter looks as if it was "well fed", and the Soviet aircraft is distinguished by a "hungry look."

    So it should be - his task is to devour the enemy.
  11. In100gram
    In100gram 27 July 2016 16: 10
    +3
    The plane is good.

    Passing by this house I always remember the creators.
    The author was not justified in cons. He merely informed us of what was being fed to readers abroad. The hysteria of the threat from the east does not cease. Babos Pentagon asks.
  12. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 27 July 2016 16: 42
    +3
    The praise of the Su-27 and its modern modifications is correct.
    A plane with powerful flight characteristics, sharpened for close combat.

    At some point, the Americans concluded that early detection
    the enemy in combination with their own stealth is more important than maneuverability in close combat,
    since it allows you to shoot first from a greater distance.
    The explosive rockets that appeared, capable of making a full turn in place at 180 degrees, reduced the threat of tail landing.
    But close combat cannot be ruled out. Air ambushes are possible, as are ambushes on earth.
    So Su has a combat potential even against the 5 generation.
  13. K-36
    K-36 27 July 2016 17: 50
    +1
    Quote: Alexey-74
    I put a plus to the author for bringing the information ... no more. The article itself is weak, not reflecting the actual characteristics of the Su-27 ...
    In August 1992, an opportunity was presented to meet in the training aerial battle against the aircraft against which the Su-27 was created - with the American fighter for gaining air superiority F-15 Eagle.

    The delegation of pilots Colonel A. Kharchevsky (currently Major General) and Major E. Karabasova, headed by Major General N. Chaga, Head of the Lipetsk Center for Combat Training and Retraining of Flight Personnel.

    Actually, Karabasov's name was Georgy. Although Kharchevsky often called him Zhora in his interviews for TV. To which, in fact, he had the right, since he himself "saw" and took him as a follower. And Zhorka flew really well. yes It was the airfield of my service (4 PPI and PLC), so I personally saw everything love .
    Sincerely. hi
  14. Dekabrev
    Dekabrev 27 July 2016 22: 38
    0
    The plane is good! This phrase can replace the entire article, because there is no other useful information in it. There were more pictures, because the plane is also beautiful.
  15. Dekabrev
    Dekabrev 27 July 2016 23: 17
    +1
    There was once at an air show with the participation of Su-27 ... Das eats fantastic! As they say in the Bavarian region. In the sky, this product is kept as relaxed as a fly, the size is only slightly larger. When it was laying a candle above our heads after an almost complete stop in the air, the hairs on the head moved and noticeably warmed from the nozzles, although it was already so hot. At this moment, the device was at a height of 30-50 meters (by eye, of course). And then, it seems, he depicted a barrel with a climb and shooting thermal traps. The enchanting sight! The figures, in general, looked like helicopter aerobatics, which Mi-26 then showed (the radius of the turns is comparable) is only many times cooler!
  16. Dekabrev
    Dekabrev 27 July 2016 23: 28
    +1
    By the way, the crash of engines is much smaller than that of the Su-24, oddly enough. When the Su-24, even without any show off ... without any aerobatics passes overhead, it feels like a skull is crumbling.
  17. Voyager
    Voyager 11 November 2016 14: 37
    0
    Quote: Alex_59
    All these "cobras" and other somersaults from the airshow have practically nothing to do with real combat use.

    Not true. All these maneuvers can and are carried out with the aim of a sharp drop in speed, which leads to the loss of the target on the enemy’s radar, are also performed with the aim of maneuvering to evade missiles.
    Some are really only spectacular and designed for air shows, but in general they once again demonstrate the general level of responsiveness of a car in the air, which allows in a critical situation to make more mistakes without fatal consequences for the pilot and the car.