Carter: work to improve the project F-35A will continue

241
The announcement of the American command of the “initial combat readiness” of the newest fighter F-35A does not mean that the work on this project has been completed, it reports RIA News statement by Pentagon head Ashton Carter.

Carter: work to improve the project F-35A will continue


“I know that even after the declared readiness, there is still work to be done on this critical program. But the Air Force, the Air Force Combat Operations Command, the men and women of Hill Air Air Force Base should be proud of this big step forward. ”
said Carter.

At the same time, he said that "F-35A will allow the United States for many years to maintain dominance in the air."

Earlier, the US Department of Defense reported that "the first squadron of the F-35A is in combat readiness and has been placed at the disposal of the Air Force Combat Operations Command." It is noted that the Marines began to receive their F-35B last year.

The corporation Lockheed Martin also announced the achievement of a fighter level "initial combat readiness", which allows you to transfer the machine to the Pentagon.

"With the F-35A, the air force will receive a fighter combining stealth technology that allows you to escape from radar, supersonic speed, maneuverability and logistical support with the most powerful and integrated sensors in stories fighters ", - says the release of the corporation.
  • AP Photo / Rick Bowmer
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

241 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +13
    August 3 2016
    "which allows you to elude the radar," - Do they believe it themselves?
    1. +13
      August 3 2016
      "which allows you to elude the radar." Slips away ... even in the toilet ...
      1. +3
        August 3 2016
        Again, an article about the F-35 and again went jokes, smiles ... as the American technology, so immediately "cut, rust, sucks", but as Russian, then "super duper, technology of the day before." But everyone understands, no matter what they say, the F-35 is a wonderful aircraft. It would be bad, the Americans, who know how to count money, would not order so much, and neither would the Allies. The order book is impressive! And this cannot be explained by "twisting hands". The plane is really good. All these malfunctions are childhood illnesses, all new technology goes through this, especially innovative. Banter and grins are the lot of weaklings. You can do even better and in more - do it! Who's in the way? If you cannot, be silent at least. Grinning at the potential of a potential adversary has never led to good. Throughout the history of mankind!
        1. +6
          August 3 2016
          .
          But everyone understands, no matter what they say, the F-35 is a wonderful airplane. It would be bad, Americans who know how to count money would not order so much

          And the option "devil and expensive", you mean, do not consider it possible in the Light of democracy?
          1. -4
            August 3 2016
            Well, or vice versa, advancedness will come to light in the course of operation, and not according to the comments of VO users. but "expensive" ... it costs less than the T-50, by the way
            1. +2
              August 3 2016
              The fact that this is a nanodepelaz, it can be seen right away, the forehead as in the F-22 and dviglo just one. Only LMers could stir up such pornography lol
              1. +6
                August 3 2016
                combining stealth technology that allows you to elude the radar

                55Zh6M "Sky-M" is a mobile radar complex of medium and high altitudes using radars of different types in a modular design. According to the ROC "Sky-M", an interspecies radar system for detecting air targets in a wide wavelength range was being developed.
                The RLK 55Zh6M implements significant detection zones for small and inconspicuous targets, incl. made according to the "Stealth" technology, short time for setting tracks for high-speed targets, high rate of updating and issuing information, incl. for high-speed and maneuvering targets, long detection ranges for ballistic missile launches, large ceilings in the tracking mode for ballistic targets.
              2. 0
                August 3 2016
                Actually, our designers have projects with one engine, too. I see no reason for grins.
            2. +5
              August 3 2016
              Greetings! And how did it happen that it became cheaper than the T-50?
              1. +4
                August 3 2016
                But no way. A citizen is just a bit of a lie. Nobody has yet produced the T-50 in series, so its cost for our army is not yet known. In terms of development costs, our T-50 is also very far from the F-35. And lastly, comrade apparently is not aware that the T-50 needs to be compared with the F-22, but not with the F-35. Heavy and light fighters are slightly different machines, both in terms of performance and cost.
                1. 0
                  August 3 2016
                  In addition, the price of one aircraft, which is operated here, most likely there is a price for one specific contract, and can vary greatly depending on the conditions, so this is not an indicator. The closest thing to a correct understanding of "price" in the aspect we need, in my opinion, is the cost of its production. It is clear that the state secret and all that, but, judging only by the declared cost of the projects, the T-50 is significantly cheaper. The United States made a good plane, but for some reason decided that their allies would buy it at any price, and just then difficulties began.
                  1. -3
                    August 3 2016
                    Quote: Knizhnik
                    In addition, the price of one aircraft, which is operated here, most likely there is a price for one specific contract, and can vary greatly depending on the conditions, so this is not an indicator. The closest thing to a correct understanding of "price" in the aspect we need, in my opinion, is the cost of its production. It is clear that the state secret and all that, but, judging only by the declared cost of the projects, the T-50 is significantly cheaper. The United States made a good plane, but for some reason decided that their allies would buy it at any price, and just then difficulties began.

                    In the usa, all air force budgets are in the public domain. Yes the price is some tender too.
                    For the Air Force, the Sash F-35 costs $ 98 million with all costs.
                    1. +1
                      August 3 2016
                      unfortunately from the minuses of the F-35 will not become more expensive :(
                      Yes, this also offends me, as it was easier if it could be destroyed by minuses
                      All the F-35A price (with a detailed breakdown) for 2017 from the approved budget of the United States Air Force. -93,513 million $
                      Airframe $ 62.475
                      CFE Electronics $ 16.315
                      Engines 12.889 $
                      ECO 1.834 $
                      + investments to expand production. and add. equipment for the plant.
                      = $ 98.994 million
                      There will be a slight decrease, so add. order for 11 F-35 for 2017
                      www.saffm.hq.af.mil/budget/index.asp
                      1. 0
                        August 4 2016
                        To be honest, cost and "own air force contract price" are slightly different things. I have already mentioned that the "contract price" can jump at amazing heights for a variety of reasons. Still, they would not have sold their Air Force at the lowest price, this is after all the flurry of criticism about the high cost (you will be surprised how much the T-50 will sell to the Russian Aerospace Forces). Would you like to add extra charge to each car for the billions you've already invested? No, because the US government pays for their Air Force to buy an aircraft for no more than 100 million, and I suspect that the breakdown of the components was also adjusted to this amount (yes, self-deception, but so what?). Why 100 million? I suppose because this is the cost of the T-50 under a certain contract. Of course, "these are two big differences," but go and prove it to every narrow-minded journalist and politician. They will also pay for a second "tweak" campaign, which they decided to carry out when the high-priced passions subside and new budgets open up. Because the plane was considered necessary, and they continue to fight for it. But this can be learned from the Yankes.
                2. +1
                  August 3 2016
                  It is already safe to say that the price of T 50 will be in the region of 3,5 - 4 billion rubles apiece.
            3. 0
              August 3 2016
              Quote: xetai9977
              But everyone understands, no matter what they say, the F-35 is a wonderful airplane. It would be bad, Americans who know how to count money would not order so much

              The aircraft is not much superior to the 4th generation in performance, everyone is aware of the difference in cost. The American military-industrial complex has a jigsaw with which they got the hang of cutting the budget.
              Quote: xetai9977
              it is cheaper than the T-50, by the way

              How did you manage to calculate the cost of the T-50 which has not been put into service and has not yet gone into production?
              In general, it’s good that the Americans put into service the F-35. Let them buy, go broke, tinker with technical problems, this is in our hands.
          2. -4
            August 3 2016
            Quote: Berkut24
            And the option "devil and expensive", you mean, do not consider it possible in the Light of democracy?

            Rather, the stupidity of most commentators
            1. -6
              August 3 2016
              Dozens of NATO planes will be removed from the sky
              1. -2
                August 3 2016
                Quote: Dormidont2
                Dozens of NATO planes will be removed from the sky

                Killed Thousands will withdraw, thousands, that little things 8)
        2. +8
          August 3 2016
          Quote: xetai9977
          Again, an article about the F-35 and again went jokes, smiles ... as the American technology, so immediately "cut, rust, sucks", but as Russian, then "super duper, technology of the day before." But everyone understands, no matter what they say, the F-35 is a wonderful aircraft. It would be bad, Americans who know how to count money would not order so much. And neither would the Allies

          Well, to be honest, I don't quite agree with you. Yes, the plane (perhaps) turned out to be good, at least it is beautiful and its dimensions are not large, but ... All these grins are not casual. For example, if the troops are supplied with machine guns under the index "A" and every second will misfire, then it makes no sense to talk about improvements under the index "B". We need the most complete prototype, and improvements increase the cost of the final product.
          Roughly speaking (!), The F-35A is now not much different from a corn gun with a gun. Expensive and unfinished.
          Of course, I may be wrong, because this is a purely personal opinion and aviation specialists can correct me.
          1. -2
            August 3 2016
            Quote: piratehnik
            Well, to be honest, I don't quite agree with you. Yes, the plane (perhaps) turned out to be good, at least it is beautiful and its dimensions are not large, but ... All these grins are not casual. For example, if the troops are supplied with machine guns under the index "A" and every second will misfire, then it makes no sense to talk about improvements under the index "B". We need the most complete prototype, and improvements increase the cost of the final product.

            To begin with, the Americans do not one aircraft. They make three planes. Three fairly different aircraft. Make at the same time, on the same base. But no one will say that SVD, PKK and AK are one and the same, although they all have a sufficient number of similar nodes and similarity in design.
            Most grins are due to the unprecedented openness of the program and the narrow knowledge and ability to reflect on commentators. Which I can not figure out that now the Americans ALREADY have more than fifth-generation 300 machines.
            1. +3
              August 3 2016
              unprecedentedly drive disinformation ...
            2. 0
              August 3 2016
              f-35 in the United States is no longer considered to be either a fighter or 5 generation
              1. -4
                August 3 2016
                Quote: Simpsonian
                f-35 in the United States is no longer considered to be either a fighter or 5 generation

                More, dear little friend, more
                1. +2
                  August 3 2016
                  “Russian” is not a friend to “Latvian” (Austrian, American) - well, you know, or did he make aliyah the other way around?
          2. 0
            August 3 2016
            Quote: piratehnik
            All these grins are not casual.

            Not those stupid Zadornov called ... winked
        3. +4
          August 3 2016
          The plane may be good, but in different areas it is worse than the F-22 and F-15SE.
          1. +8
            August 3 2016
            More than mediocre and / and not a fighter, but still it is better than the decommissioned F-117
            1. 0
              August 3 2016
              why put a minus - is it even worse?
            2. +2
              August 3 2016
              The fighter is good, but not for the 5 generation. Now as was the best fighter Raptor, and remains.
              1. 0
                August 3 2016
                Quote: Forest
                The fighter is good, but not for the 5 generation. Now as was the best fighter Raptor, and remains.

                5-th, without a doubt. Try to argue that there is not.
                1. 0
                  August 3 2016
                  Because it is seriously inferior to F-22 and, in fact, not much better than the latest versions of F-16. The advantage in stealth is consumed by weapons that cannot fit in the fuselage, and in the opposite case, too few weapons. Do not fly in droves in droves behind the link of enemy fighters. Speed ​​may not be enough to get away from other fighters.
                  1. +2
                    August 3 2016
                    Quote: Forest
                    Because it is seriously inferior to the F-22 and in fact not much better than the latest versions of the F-16. The advantage in stealth is consumed by weapons that cannot fit in the fuselage, and in the opposite case, too few weapons. Do not fly in droves in droves behind the link of enemy fighters. Speed ​​may not be enough to get away from other fighter

                    In missions, air-to-air is inferior. In air-to-ground missions, head-to-head is better than f-22. The internal compartments carries the standard F-16 drum kit. And if you add external ones, then much more. Although now one bomb, one target is striking her and home, there is already a limitation both in fuel and in risks.
                    Quote: Forest
                    as a fighter, there are more EPR and very few suspended weapons inside the fuselage compared to the Raptor, there may not be enough speed to get away from another fighter, a very hot exhaust, modern OLS will be far from noticed. Like a bomber, in comparison with the Needle, there is a small load inside, less survivability.

                    Small compared to the report .... update your knowledge (F-35 is much better for land and water). In all recent exercises, he shot down both the F-16 and the F-15E. He’s survivability is no less than that of the F-15
                    1. +1
                      August 4 2016
                      So the Raptor is not a strike aircraft, but a fighter of gaining air supremacy. In the internal compartments of all 4 places, and very limited in volume. The survivability is low due to one engine, the maximum compression of internal systems, which developers themselves declare, and therefore the minimum number of duplicate systems.
                      And for the sake of advertising they will say that he already shot down UFOs, if only the consumer would believe.
                      1. -1
                        August 4 2016
                        Quote: Forest
                        So the Raptor is not a strike aircraft, but a fighter of gaining air supremacy.

                        Then why does it compare with raproprams? With the same success, you can compete with the B-52- and say that a small combat load.

                        Quote: Forest
                        The survivability is low due to one engine, the maximum compression of internal systems, which the developers themselves declare, and therefore the minimum number of duplicate systems.

                        On the contrary, there are many duplicate systems; this is one of its features including the engine must work with damage.
                        Su-30. explosion of one engine. Loss of aircraft, two engines are not a panacea.

                        4th place is enough. And they are larger in volume than the F-22. Yes, and there are not 4 of them (as was the case with the F-22 initially). Maxim to 6 in Block 3f-4.
                        There may be such an option.
                      2. 0
                        August 4 2016
                        Lightning will replace both the Raptors and the Needles. Apparently, the manuals were replaced about duplicate systems in advertising - in 2012 in Lockheed they said that because of the small size and the huge number of systems needed for installation, understudies were minimized. The F-22 4 nodes in the fuselage accept the same 2x450 kg of bombs and 2xAIM-120 as the F-35 and 2 side nodes carrying AIM-9.
                      3. 0
                        August 4 2016
                        Quote: Forest
                        Lightning will replace both Raptors and Needles

                        Brad.
                        F-35 changes F-16, F-18 and then only the usual AV-8 hornet.
                        Quote: Forest
                        Apparently, the manuals were replaced about duplicate systems in advertising - in 2012 they said in Lockheed that due to the small size and the huge number of systems needed for installation, the understudies were minimized. The F-22 has 4 nodes in the fuselage, which take the same 2x450 kg of bombs and 2xAIM-120 as the F-35, and 2 side nodes carrying AIM-9.

                        oooh ... you have more problems in the knowledge of the mat. parts. Far from being the same, the F-35 is much wider than the range of weapons.
                        not the 2 bombs that the F-35 has.
                      4. 0
                        August 5 2016
                        Neither F22 nor F35 will replace anyone; stealth aircraft are a separate class of weapons.
                      5. 0
                        August 5 2016
                        B-2 also did not replace B-1.
                  2. -2
                    August 3 2016
                    Quote: Forest
                    Because it is seriously inferior to F-22 and, in fact, not much better than the latest versions of F-16. The advantage in stealth is consumed by weapons that cannot fit in the fuselage, and in the opposite case, too few weapons. Do not fly in droves in droves behind the link of enemy fighters. Speed ​​may not be enough to get away from other fighters.

                    F-35 subsonic. The short-term transition to supersonic refers to generation "4" without any advantages. The thrust-to-weight ratio is less than one, the combat load is low. All this takes it beyond the concept of a 5th generation aircraft.
                    1. +1
                      August 3 2016
                      The thrust-weight ratio of F 35 is equal to one - 9100 kilograms. And he is a real fifth generation aircraft like the F 22.
                      1. +4
                        August 3 2016
                        Quote: Vadim237
                        The thrust-weight ratio of F 35 is equal to one - 9100 kilograms. And he is a real fifth generation aircraft like the F 22.

                        well, just people think, not considering that the F-35 has 2 times more fuel than its classmates and the payload. And if you equate these numbers ...
                        F-16 empty block weight 52 9000kg ++ (closer to 10t) we add 4000kg and fuel and 2 tons for weapons to it, and we get 13 146 kg with thrust on the afterburner for GE F110-GE-129.
                        We consider 13146 / 15000kg = 0.8764
                        F-35A weight 13290 kg + fuel 4000 + weapons 2000kg, thrust on the afterburners F-135 19 500. We consider
                        19500 / 19290 =1,01.
                        Even if you compare it with a heavy aircraft, everything is far from bad, for example, the Su-30. Empty weight 18.800 traction in two AL-31f 25.000kg. Add the same conditions 4000 tons of fuel and 2000 tons of weapons.
                        25000 / 24800 = 1,008
                        The f-35 for a multifunctional drummer is quite a norm
                      2. 0
                        August 4 2016
                        It’s just in the order of educational program. Usually the thrust-weight ratio is considered with half of the internal fuel (unless otherwise specified separately, see the well-known history of the comparison of the Mig-29 and Su-27) and the armament of VV.S with the latter, options are possible. (MiG-2, F-21, f-5). For MiG-16, for some reason, they counted with 23 X R-2, for F-23 -c 15 Sparrow. I don’t know yet where the Penguin is.
                      3. 0
                        August 4 2016
                        Quote: sivuch
                        Just okay educational program

                        If this is an educational program, it means that there is a document about it, which is precisely how and not otherwise measured.
                        Quote: iwind
                        consider at half the internal fuel (unless otherwise specified separately, see the well-known history of the comparison of the Mig-29 and su-27)

                        And it turns out that with the irrigation tank F-16 will be able to fly around the airport and go home, as well as Eurofater and rafel. Therefore, you need to compare the equal input data. That's what they will be over threatened territory. The weight of the weapon averaged for a ridiculous mission is the thrust ratio for aircraft, this will not change if everything is reduced or convicted.
                      4. 0
                        August 4 2016
                        I wonder, suddenly why? laughing
                      5. 0
                        August 8 2016
                        Quote: Vadim237
                        The thrust-weight ratio of F 35 is equal to one - 9100 kilograms. And he is a real fifth generation aircraft like the F 22.

                        If he is without ammunition. Don't be weird. Fu-35 to "5" as to China cancer. Everyone in the usa is talking about it. Don't trust the advertisements too much.
                    2. 0
                      August 4 2016
                      Quote: GSH-18

                      F-35 subsonic. The short-term transition to supersonic refers to generation "4" without any advantages. The thrust-to-weight ratio is less than one, the combat load is low. All this takes it beyond the concept of a 5th generation aircraft.

                      For a start, the planes go to supersonic mode less frequently, this is due to the increased fuel consumption.
                      Secondly, you just confuse supersonic with the possibility of cruising at supersonic speeds without using an afterburner for several tens of kilometers. And at this stage, F35 is capable of this (240 km), although initially this function was refused.
                      Thirdly, the fifth generation is a very conditional concept. And the formula, once formulated by the Americans, is also very conditional - they formulated, they built the first plane using this formula, and the second, taking into account the experience they have, they want to sculpt, changing the formula in the direction they want. Because they are leaders, and they already have 10 years in service with fifth-generation machines.
                      1. 0
                        August 5 2016
                        the concept of their leadership is just as arbitrary as everything else ... lol well, if "as they want" then let them be laughing
                        the first such aircraft was not built by them, they were the first to launch it in a series
                      2. 0
                        August 8 2016
                        For a start, the planes go to supersonic mode less frequently, this is due to the increased fuel consumption.

                        The mode of cruising supersonic flight is one of the main qualities of MFIs of generation "5". Didn't you know that? If the 35-penguin is not even capable of doing this, not to mention the children's combat load and the ridiculous range of use, what generation can we talk about?
                      3. 0
                        August 8 2016
                        out of 5, only stealth in it, but the stealth was really subsonic F-117

                        Regarding cruising supersonic, it’s generally muddy, SR-71 flew at the bypass and the Chinese version of the MiG-21 is something like this
            3. 0
              August 3 2016
              To be better than F 117 is not too difficult!
          2. vv3
            -3
            August 3 2016
            In what different areas? The Americans have their own strategy for using aircraft. It provides for the conduct of long and medium air combat and the destruction of the enemy without detecting their aircraft. At the same time, both the aircraft itself and other information tools can be used as target designation, global integration is provided.All this provides significant computational capabilities and the complexity of on-board equipment.Even pindos had difficulties with this. We don’t have all of this, so we came up with a close and possibly medium air battle, where our planes have an advantage. Now think for yourself, you still have to fly before such a battle, and after all, American tactics are sharpened to try to prevent this. That's all spheres. Dream on ....
            1. +2
              August 3 2016
              Quote: vv3
              In what different areas? The Americans have their own strategy for using aircraft. It provides for the conduct of long and medium air combat and the destruction of the enemy without detecting their aircraft. At the same time, both the aircraft itself and other information tools can be used as target designation, global integration is provided.All this provides significant computational capabilities and the complexity of on-board equipment.Even pindos had difficulties with this. We don’t have all of this, so we came up with a close and possibly medium air battle, where our planes have an advantage. Now think for yourself, you still have to fly before such a battle, and after all, American tactics are sharpened to try to prevent this. That's all spheres. Dream on ....

              where are you going to conduct a long air battle over the ocean? F-35 is now a strategic bomber? F-15 / F-16 will be enough to fight with the Papuans, and if you are going to crush air defense with a massive strike by the KR, then the F-35 will have nowhere to return. F-35, IMHO, it's quite a plane, but not a masterpiece, comparable to our 4 ++.
              1. vv3
                -8
                August 3 2016
                Are you a farmer, or are you picking tomatoes? It’s not yours, you don’t have to spew out a set of empty, unrelated phrases. They tell you, they teach you, and you, like a ram by the horn ... Remember and rejoice. Each word is balanced, double-checked and can be proved. They don’t argue with you ...
                1. 0
                  August 4 2016
                  but do not be rude
            2. +5
              August 3 2016
              Yes, there is a strategy, but are you sure that it will work as intended? That is, the enemy will not try to ruin this whole harmonious concept?
              No, if we are talking about Papuans, like Iraq or Libya, then of course it will, but if the enemy is more serious, then it is unlikely
            3. +4
              August 3 2016
              in Vietnam it already was, dream on, take off your gun ...
              1. +1
                August 3 2016
                ... cut the fly ...
                1. 0
                  August 3 2016
                  Stop changing flags, please! In the eyes already dazzled !! lol
                  1. 0
                    August 4 2016
                    do I really have more of them than labels along the side of this pepelats, whose base was seized from the USSR?
                    why is there no Russian on it in this garland? smile
                  2. 0
                    August 4 2016
                    Quote: sharp-lad
                    Stop changing flags, please! In the eyes already dazzled !!

                    Flags exposes the site
            4. 0
              August 3 2016
              As a fighter, there are more EPR and very few outboard weapons inside the fuselage compared to the Raptor, there may not be enough speed to get away from another fighter, a very hot exhaust, modern OLS will be far from noticed. Like a bomber - in comparison with the Needle, a small load inside, less survivability.
        4. +2
          August 3 2016
          Quote: xetai9977
          But everyone understands, no matter what they say, the F-35 is a wonderful airplane.

          Let's specifically what is it beautiful? The average performance is not even for the 5th generation! That F-22 was a breakthrough aircraft. But they didn’t even pull it, they limited themselves to an experimental series.
          1. +2
            August 3 2016
            The combat load is the highest of all light fighters - 9100 kilograms, low visibility, BERO better than all existing bomber fighters - in terms of their capabilities - there are no analogues, even in Russia.
            1. +2
              August 4 2016
              Quote: Vadim237
              The combat load is the highest of all light fighters - 9100 kilograms, low visibility,

              That's just the point, there is either a combat load or conspicuity. With a combat load of 9 tons on the wings of the f-35 will be no better than a 4th generation fighter. It will be invisible only without weapons, since its internal compartments contain less than our training Yak-130.
              And about the load, they say the Su-34 can be visited if desired 12 tons, if you really need to.
              Quote: Vadim237
              BERO is better than all existing fighter bombers - in its capabilities - there are no analogues

              Perhaps you wanted to write avionics? A counter question, but what specifically gives and what characteristics does the avionics add to the aircraft, and what is its uniqueness?
              1. 0
                August 4 2016
                Quote: Stas157
                The fact of the matter is, there is either a combat load or visibility. With a combat load in 9 tons on the f-35 wings will not be better than the 4 generation fighter.

                Actually, it will be. At the expense of other qualities and new weapons.
      2. 0
        August 3 2016
        Carter: work to improve the project F-35A will continue

        Estessno! So much dough has already tumbled down!
    2. +4
      August 3 2016
      Yes, apparently they have their own Serdyukov.
      It is strange that it is possible to put so much money into an airplane and still not have combat capability.
      Yes, and TTX to put it mildly not in the fifth generation.
      About slipping away from the radars is also not serious, I recall the Yugoslav stealth shot down by ancient air defense. Oh, and the F35 will not become invisible, the only question is the novelty of the radar, the distance and direction (it doesn’t always fly in the face on the radar, it’s much more visible from the side).
      Moreover, given its cost, you understand that in real conflicts it is unlikely to appear (like a Raptor, which is much more efficient).
    3. +4
      August 3 2016
      Quote: dsm100
      "which allows you to elude the radar," - Do they believe it themselves?

      It's not his faith, but the knocking out of dough from NATO countries and the desire to further cut funding for this project
    4. +1
      August 3 2016
      Do they themselves believe in that?

      They are the only ones who believe in it. And as for the arguments and thoughts that this aircraft will not be able to pose a serious threat, this is a big question. You need to be realistic, and understand that a lot of money has already been invested in this plane and the Americans will not curtail the project, but on the contrary, they will finalize it whatever it may be. To date, the United States has the largest number of 5th generation aircraft, and this is a fact. Perhaps they have problems with quality, but everything is fine with quantity. As the first rule of war says: "Do not underestimate the enemy"
    5. +2
      August 3 2016
      "Saw, Shura, saw!" - the classics do not age, if only Ostap Ibrahimovich would turn around in the current USA ...
      What is good in Americans is constancy, no matter how the political vector changes, they are always ready to spend money on weapons.
    6. 0
      August 3 2016
      Quote: dsm100
      "which allows you to elude the radar," - Do they believe it themselves?

      Well, you definitely don’t believe it. A priori...
      And they themselves are forced to include transponders in the exercises so that they have the opportunity to work out their tasks. For example, in the anti-air defense exercises, they included The radars did not see them and it was impossible to work out evasion maneuvers.
      1. +8
        August 3 2016
        Quote: Leto
        Well, you definitely don’t believe it. A priori...
        And they themselves are forced to include transponders in the exercises so that they have the opportunity to work out their tasks. For example, in the anti-air defense exercises, they included The radars did not see them and it was impossible to work out evasion maneuvers.


        Are you personally reporting about transponders in exercises from the Pentagon, or were you there as an observer ?!
        1. +3
          August 3 2016
          Yes, this article was shoved across all sites. Another thing is that not a word is said about which ground-based radars were discussed.
          If there is someone stubborn and persistent, check what radars are there at AB Mountain Noom, Idaho. I did not find
        2. +1
          August 3 2016
          Quote: Diana Ilyina
          Are you personally reporting about transponders in exercises from the Pentagon, or were you there as an observer ?!


          Bravo, Diana !!!
      2. 0
        August 3 2016
        Moreover, those who have a stigma in the gun - Penguin's lobbyists - spoke about the "switching on" of transponders.

        The US Secretary of Defense, saying that the Penguin still needs to be finished and finished (in every sense), is not mistaken bully
      3. +2
        August 3 2016
        Have you personally seen this? hi
        1. 0
          August 3 2016
          I read the article in the original source (following the link to Paralai) and became convinced of the positions of those who gave interviews about transponders.

          And I believe the US Secretary of Defense about the need to finish the Penguin - why should he lie in this matter?
    7. +2
      August 3 2016
      And on December 12 we are waiting for the arrival of the first pair of F-35. American pilots will deliver them, and already on the 13th, our flyers will sit at the helm. Our pilots are nice guys)))
  2. +1
    August 3 2016
    Despite the fact that this development is crude and not fully developed, as well as very expensive, it is worth recognizing the fact that deliveries to the troops of these aircraft are already underway. Quantity has an important role in the military arena. Therefore, we should launch PAKFA in a series as soon as possible in order to compete with these aircraft.
    1. 0
      August 3 2016
      Interestingly, they are constantly adopting and begin to produce unprepared equipment, and then stop production.
      1. 0
        August 3 2016
        Add a sky-ready aircraft carrier. Also not a sour cut
    2. +3
      August 3 2016
      [quote = Sergey K.] Despite the fact that this development is crude and not fully developed, as well as very expensive, it is worth recognizing the fact that deliveries to the troops of these aircraft are already underway. Quantity has an important role in the military arena ...
      Well I do not know. This is how I imagine myself in a trench with a "raw and not fully refined" weapon, and even all my fellow soldiers with the same (this is about the number and its role), so it immediately becomes a little sour.
      However, this is the headache of the Pentagon and the flyers there. The main thing for us is to bring our samples to mind, put in order and prepare pilots.
  3. +1
    August 3 2016
    flying gold bars bully
    1. +3
      August 3 2016
      Quote: soroKING
      flying gold bars bully

      So ce flying bullion)
    2. 0
      August 3 2016
      Quote: soroKING
      flying gold bars bully

      This "bar of gold" is now worth less than other new Western aircraft ....
      Less than 100 million apiece
      1. 0
        August 3 2016
        Quote: iwind
        This "bar of gold" is now worth less than other new Western aircraft ....
        Less than 100 million apiece

        I read your comment yesterday about this, you were absolutely right.
        1. 0
          August 3 2016
          yon forgot to count platinum dviglo wink
        2. +3
          August 3 2016
          Quote: Leto
          I read your comment yesterday about this, you were absolutely right.

          Uh-huh.
          The comments of some people are similar to the denial of reality or something ...
          The aircraft has already been put into service. The plane is already cheaper than its western "competitors". Already, there is an increase in orders and winnings in tenders. Air Force pilots from different countries speak very well of the F-35.
          I read it.
          "until now it does not have a combat-ready." "Flying scam" "flying gold bars", about the difference in cost, everything is in the know ", etc.
          I’m interested to start something deltas, what should happen? There has never been a situation when the USSR / RF had no competitor to US aircraft. And then your own LFI when there will be another big question. fool
          1. 0
            August 3 2016
            cheaper due to the fed press. against invisible even Buk will work in the infrared range, and powerful dual-band AFAR radars will detect it
            1. +2
              August 3 2016
              Quote: Dormidont2
              cheaper due to the fed press

              Cheaper due to more series and optimization of production processes
              Quote: Dormidont2
              against the invisible even Buk will work in the infrared range, and powerful dual-band AFAR radars will detect it

              Here's how it works, write. Yes, I’m waiting for dual-range missiles in the GOS ... Even the S-400 radars are conventional, see range.
              Ps write to UAC that in vain they so bother with stealth PAK-fa.
              1. 0
                August 3 2016
                MANPADS "Verba" is equipped with three (3) band seeker, there are over-the-horizon VHF radars, electronic optical stations ... well, a lot of things, you can't tell about everything at once.
            2. 0
              August 3 2016
              Do you have any AFAR radar as part of Su fighters?
              1. 0
                August 4 2016
                There is, in comparison with a lamp, nothing complicated.
                By stealth, by the way, PFAR works better wink
              2. -2
                August 4 2016
                In the United States, FAR appeared on fighters only after the Americans at the beginning of 2000 bought the missing piece of technology that Adolf Tolkachev, who worked at the Phazotron, could not steal for them in the USSR.
                In the USSR, with the headlight, another MiG-25 flew Yes
                Then, since the USA had already forgotten how to make light powerful and reliable lamp technology, they almost immediately began to make AFAR in which the HEADLAMP was simply replaced by an array of solid-state semiconductor emitters laughing
        3. 0
          August 3 2016
          Penguins bullshit. Proved on a simulator in Canada.
          1. +1
            August 4 2016
            Quote: GSH-18
            Penguins bullshit. Proved on a simulator in Canada.

            I wonder, do you at least understand what nonsense you are carrying?
  4. +2
    August 3 2016
    Each has its own fate: Russia is destined to be proud of the best fighters, the United States - the most expensive.
  5. 0
    August 3 2016
    whatever the child (Ashton Carter) was amusing, if only he did not ask for money, but it asks.
  6. +2
    August 3 2016
    Well done, finish the abdominal to the mind, distribute to allies, enter the staff of your aircraft. A flag in your hands, an electric train to meet you, hair back.
  7. -4
    August 3 2016
    Flying scam. Work will continue - translate rollback and cut will continue.
    1. +1
      August 3 2016
      Quote: RuslanNN
      Flying scam. Work will continue - translate rollback and cut will continue.

      Work is underway on any product to improve its performance, it should be rejoicing if Carter announced that the fighter itself is perfect and the further modernization of the aircraft is futile
  8. +2
    August 3 2016
    Translated into a normal language, you need more money.
    1. +1
      August 3 2016
      Quote: lwxx
      Translated into a normal language, you need more money
  9. +9
    August 3 2016
    And uh is already more than f-22, At the moment given 196 pieces.
    F-35 Already Announced

    As he wrote since 2012, this will happen, but there are no Americans fools, etc. so let's better laugh.
    What does it have now? The MiG-35 is still in trials. Its massive lfi is 5 pok. Not even visible on the horizon.
    Had a good laugh
  10. 0
    August 3 2016
    Maneuverability? Well, yes, yes, yes ... taking into account the video, where Rafale chases him ... And what for is maneuverability, if they don’t get into close combat.
    1. 0
      August 3 2016
      Quote: Canecat
      Maneuverability? Well, yes, yes, yes ... taking into account the video, where Rafale chases him ... And what for is maneuverability, if they don’t get into close combat.

      Well, the Raptor is maneuverable, so they don’t drive him anywhere, you see too expensive!
      The most pacifist eroplan turned out)
      1. +4
        August 3 2016
        "Well, the Raptor is maneuverable, so they don't drive it anywhere, you see too expensive!" ///

        Chasing. Several F-22s participated in operations over Iraq and Syria.
        Bombed ground targets.
        1. -5
          August 3 2016
          in Syria, su 35 easily detected stealth UAV amers
          1. +1
            August 3 2016
            No doubt. Visually. And the MiG-15 would have discovered it, flying side by side.
        2. 0
          August 3 2016
          But with a completely absent air defense and air force. hi
    2. +3
      August 3 2016
      Quote: Canecat
      Maneuverability? Well, yes, yes, yes ... taking into account the video, where Rafale chases him ... And what for is maneuverability, if they don’t get into close combat.





      From the first minute I recommend to look
      1. 0
        August 3 2016
        Already so many times answered these clumsy excuses ... wassat
    3. +1
      August 3 2016
      And it not only depends on them.
      The F-22 has high speed and good throttle response.
  11. -3
    August 3 2016
    I am happy for them. They will have such crap, well, absolutely! It’s a pity that only will be ...
  12. +2
    August 3 2016
    Reminiscent of the epic Starfighter, who killed more pilots than in the average war.
    We'll take a look at the use of the Penguin.
    And whether our radars see it or not - well, who will tell about it? laughing This is the very surprise, you fly yourself, you are not afraid of anyone, nobody sees you, and suddenly - bang! And you are already in heaven.
    1. +3
      August 3 2016
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Reminiscent of the epic Starfighter, who killed more pilots than in the average war.
      We'll take a look at the use of the Penguin.

      196 cars were built, more than one thousand hours flew in (combat pilots) did not lose a single car.
      1. -1
        August 3 2016
        Quote: Leto
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        Reminiscent of the epic Starfighter, who killed more pilots than in the average war.
        We'll take a look at the use of the Penguin.

        196 cars were built, more than one thousand hours flew in (combat pilots) did not lose a single car.

        Well, all the same, one was badly damaged, and most likely it will be allowed to go to sn.
        They now have a raid of much more than 60.000 hours. So according to statistics they should soon fall. Too big a raid for a new car without coming, so that in 2017 or 2018 they will be such statistics are heartless :)
      2. +4
        August 3 2016
        Yeah, and the engine never burned
    2. -3
      August 3 2016
      "Whether our radars see it or not - well, who will laughing about it" ////

      That's it. Imagine what happens if the manufacturer
      Does the S-300 and S-400 admit that its stealth does not see its radars?
      They will immediately lose all state orders and all customers. Therefore, they bluff. And there,
      you see, in X years, they will make a radar that will see the stealth.

      Are you surprised that the helicopter protection system did not save the helicopter from MANPADS?
      There is the same story: Russian defense systems protect against ... Russian weapons. "President" - from Needle (but not from Stinger),
      "Blind" is from Cornet (but not from Tou).
      S-400 - from Su- and MiG, but not from stealth.
      1. 0
        August 3 2016
        MI8 was shot down from an anti-aircraft gun, it cannot be shot down from a MANPADS because a multispectral laser of the defense system burns out IR missiles of the missile, and invisibility is easily detected by two-band radars plus IR has not been canceled. the same Beech will be removed by heat, the position has grown. Air defense covers the shells that easily detect and shoot down anti-radar missiles and plastic drones
        1. 0
          August 3 2016
          "The positions of the Russian air defense are covered by the Armor" - you generally know how many Armor we have in all of Russia - and 60 pieces will not be typed - the Ministry of Defense stopped buying them, waiting for a newer complex.
          1. 0
            August 4 2016
            What is this?
            1. 0
              August 4 2016
              SM shell with the ability to intercept hypersonic planes and missiles - promise to be adopted in 2018.
      2. +3
        August 3 2016
        In fact, such claims must be proved. While it turns out in the style of the professor’s adon.
        What radars from the S-300 and S-400 missile systems do not see stealth? And which of the stealth, by the way.
        For a fairly ancient S-300V, it was possible to shoot down targets with an EPR of 0.02 sq.m
        You claim that this is a lie. Naturally, I would like some confirmation
        1. 0
          August 3 2016
          European military pilots said that the radars of their aircraft did not totally distinguish the large F-22
          even when he was in clear visual contact with their aircraft. Stealth cover
          F-35 is a significantly improved coating of F-22, which was redone in the process of exploitation.
          They absorb up to 70% of the radio waves of different ranges that irradiate the aircraft.
          Plus the small size of the F-35, plus the shape.

          .
          1. 0
            August 4 2016
            You were asked about ground-based radars. About an Australian pilot who saw the reporter glazily, but not on the MFD, I already read a hundred times from Uncle Misha
      3. -1
        August 3 2016
        We believe and believe you: the Russian S-400 air defense missile systems do not see a single stealth (they are behind their development in the development of the Soviet C-125, which shot down the F-117, isn’t it), and the Israeli Patriot air defense missile system shoots down UAVs (in two missiles) bang babah) laughing
        1. +2
          August 3 2016
          "Soviet S-125, which shot down the F-117," /////

          Using an optical device made in France, when the F-117 flew frivolously
          week on the same route, at the same time. smile
          It is a sin not to bring down a fraer ...
          1. 0
            August 3 2016
            Yes, even if so - I shot down laughing
            In reality, an F-117 with an EPR of 0,025 sq. M was detected by a survey radar of a meter range at a distance of 30 km and was captured by a target centimeter range radar at a distance of 13 km, after which it was hit by a missile with radio command guidance.

            You can figure out how far the F-35 with ESR 0,3 sq.m will be detected and captured.
            1. -1
              August 3 2016
              EPR F-35 0,005 actually ... just 100 times less than that of the Su-35.
              But who pays attention to such trifles? wink
              1. 0
                August 3 2016
                The EPR reduction of F-22 / F-35 is ensured (among other things) by applying an external coating with a thickness of approximately 3 mm from a ferromagnetic material - a chemical compound of iron oxides with oxides of other metals.

                The EPR reduction of the F-117 (among other things) was ensured by the use of radio-absorbing glider panels of the aircraft, filled with honeycomb filler with a thickness of 200 mm.

                Therefore, such a difference in EPR - 0,025 versus 0,01 / 0,3 sq. M - with similar aircraft sizes.
              2. 0
                August 3 2016
                Rapotr, According to official reports of Lockheed and the testing company by order of the Pentagon, has a frontal EPR 0,0001 sqm - approximately EPR of a metal bead
                (It is known that the frontal EPR is F-22 0,0001 sq.m. (-45 dBsm), and the average EPR is 0,0018 sq.m. (-37.45 dBsm). These figures have been published for a long time, they were also on the Lockheed website and were confirmed by independent experts who tested the Raptor for the Pentagon at Howland and were recorded by the US Government’s National Radar Cross Section Test Facility (NRTF), and this is also the norm for regular inspections of the Raptor in use by the USAF.)
                EPR F-35 (-35 dB, 0.0015 sq.m.)
                1. 0
                  August 4 2016
                  Proofs for all this grace would be nice. And even a thunderstorm of the Internet Voodoo-Breeze-Spitfire-Ben-Yitzhak gives fewer zeros after the decimal point.
              3. 0
                August 4 2016
                Did someone talk about the Su-35?
          2. +2
            August 4 2016
            Initial detection by the usual Terek at a range of 20-25km. It was shot down on the third night, more precisely at 9 pm, it didn’t smell like a week. And, by the way, 99% that there was no mention of any Phillips French thermal imager bought by Zoltan Dani on their own. 125 matches when using TOV?
            The accuracy of the P-15, and even more so, the P-18 is not enough to capture the TOV-m, therefore, first it is captured at the AS of the SNR via the radar channel ti only then -Karat.
            A month later, the second Goblin was hit, but managed to get to AB Aviano. And there were much more seizures, but usually they ended in failure. Well, the technique wasn’t the newest.
            .
            1. 0
              August 4 2016
              even more nedotyla, all was shot down 3-4pcs
              Serbia is a small country sweeping through, in order to hit targets in it it was rarely necessary to go into its airspace at all, which means that even a downed (not even a downed) plane rarely crashed into its territory

              in Iraq, about 15 pieces, the first was dumped back in the first

              in the 90s, the F-117 had a detection radius on old (not meter) Soviet radars only 1,5 / 2 times smaller than a regular plane of the same size

              the basis of its stealth is that it was plastic, while the metal parts were protected from leaving the affected radio waves like an ordinary microwave smile
              1. +1
                August 4 2016
                Quote: Simpsonian
                even more nedotyla, all was shot down 3-4pcs

                What trivia-300
                1. 0
                  August 5 2016
                  Well, that's why you are "masters", but no one else ... lol but the F-117 after 2003 completely disappeared from weapons laughing
    3. -1
      August 3 2016
      Either Pvoshniki sit on the Shells or Triumphs, all is calm. Suddenly, out of nowhere, appeared ... Northern animal)))
      1. 0
        August 4 2016
        And if you do not rave?
  13. +4
    August 3 2016
    men and women of the air base

    and the transgender (pah) of this base why not mentioned? Mess wassat
    1. 0
      August 3 2016
      because the plane is for transgender people, and M and F can (according to the quote) only "be proud" laughing
  14. +5
    August 3 2016
    Carter dripped again laughing
  15. The comment was deleted.
  16. The comment was deleted.
  17. +2
    August 3 2016
    The flaws of the 35s are revealed by the operation, not our opinions and wishes. And the elimination of these shortcomings is carried out, contrary to our opinions and wishes. So no matter how much you say that a penguin is a substance, it does not become and will not become worse. Well, if he has any inherent incurable shortcomings except the price and they are known to our designers, then well, thank God.
  18. +2
    August 3 2016
    The stripes turned out to be a serious plane. Smaller and lighter than the T-50, but with the same bomb load! Vertical take-off / landing, as well as the cost of the car! There is something to think about in our design bureau.
    1. +2
      August 3 2016
      Quote: Elephant
      Serious aircraft have turned striped. Smaller and lighter than the T-50, but with the same bomb load! Vertical take-off / landing, as well as the cost of the car!

      Here one of the main mistakes - you start to mix different versions of F35, which, in fact, are three different aircraft.
      1. -1
        August 3 2016
        Given the one from which plane it was copied (and then just added stealth), it’s especially funny ...
        1. +3
          August 3 2016
          Quote: Simpsonian
          Given the one from which plane it was copied (and then just added stealth), it’s especially funny ...

          Stupidity and illiteracy, dear little friend, do not brag. Brave worth knowledge. At least in that from one YK-141 for one of the modifications F35 (and I dare to remind them of 3, and all differ significantly from each other) - only the design of the PMD nozzle is taken. And the principle of lifting (the engine against the fan), the glider and other cute little things differ significantly. So do not rush to swing illiteracy, dear little friend. Not worth it.
          1. +1
            August 3 2016
            Where did they get about
            Quote: Pimply
            only PMD nozzle design taken

            bully
            not only were they allowed to touch the Americans laughing
          2. +1
            August 3 2016
            And why do we fit in for LM this is an American not an Israeli company ... these "illiterate" could then change the round nozzle to a square one on it and, having turned out to be from the two-boom Yak scheme, put the second on "two other" F-35A / C aircraft engine,
            By the way, they also did not know how to balance the PD or the fan with PMD, on the British stolen before the amers the Harrier had only one engine, it wasn’t needed on it, on the F-35B laughing
  19. -7
    August 3 2016
    In other words, the "sawing" potential has not yet been exhausted.
    1. -3
      August 3 2016
      Quote: Machete
      "sawing" potential has not yet been exhausted.

      Well, at least something new came up ... lumberjacks damn fool
  20. +2
    August 3 2016
    “I know that even after the declared readiness, there is still work to be done on this critical program. But the Air Force, the Air Force Combat Operations Command, the men and women of Hill Air Air Force Base should be proud of this big step forward. ”
    That is, the work remains, but a step forward has already been taken? That's really really - either the cross must be removed, or the panties must be put on. On the other hand, advertising is the engine of commerce. “Starfighter” was also positioned as a step forward and, despite its failure, was in service to the last. The money is paid.
  21. -2
    August 3 2016
    air supremacy belay in front of whom? before the Afghans? fool He is not handsome negative the plane should be beautiful, our planes themselves hold the sky, a person can look endlessly at water, fire and Russian planes, DRY in the sky HOST and LORD good drinks
  22. +1
    August 3 2016
    A fighter whose concept is fundamentally vicious cannot be a wonderful one. Do not count the money, but one design cannot satisfy absolutely all consumers. If we add to this a very significant corruption component, then the future of this machine is not very enviable. The fine-tuning is extremely necessary if it is a classic fine-tuning, and not permanent patching of holes with the prospect of limiting flight characteristics.
    1. 0
      August 3 2016
      Quote: XYZ
      There can be a wonderful fighter, whose concept is fundamentally flawed.

      Read more about the depravity of the concept.
      1. +2
        August 3 2016
        We have already said above - a Swiss, a reaper, and a dude in one pipe in one bottle
        1. +1
          August 3 2016
          Quote: sivuch
          We have already said above - a Swiss, a reaper, and a dude in one pipe in one bottle

          mmm Is it?
          Quite the usual concept of a fighter-bomber to the addition of F-15, F-22.
          If heavy fighters are "specialized" for gaining superiority in the sky, then light ones for strikes on the ground. And here the F-35 fits 100%.
          1. +2
            August 3 2016
            It took several years only to agree on the requirements of the Air Force, Navy and Marines.
            Naturally, I had to make compromises (for example, because of a hefty fan I had to increase the midsection) and, accordingly, worsen the performance characteristics.
            That is, I mean the relative deterioration - compared to the barely noticeable replacement for the F-16
            And if for USAF the F-35 will be an addition to the Raptor, then in other countries it will also be a conqueror. For Israel, its capabilities are definitely enough, but for others, it is unclear.
            1. +1
              August 3 2016
              Quote: sivuch
              And if for USAF the F-35 will be an addition to the Raptor, then in other countries it will also be a conqueror. For Israel, its capabilities are definitely enough, but for others, it is unclear
              for other countries where God forbid the entire order / Air Force 60 aircraft.
              They all will not be able to win something alone there. They need something there as flexible as possible for their money. And here it is better to have conditionally 60 aircraft in air-to-air missions. than 30 but specialized.
              Quote: sivuch
              It took several years only to agree on the requirements of the Air Force, Navy and Marines.
              Naturally, I had to make compromises (for example, because of a hefty fan I had to increase the midsection) and, accordingly, worsen the performance characteristics.
              That is, I mean the relative deterioration - compared to the barely noticeable replacement for the F-16

              F-35A, F-35B and F-35C have different profiles. The fan has nothing to do with the F-35A version at all.
              I had to fit in the size of the F-16 almost 2 times more fuel and internal weapons.
              1. 0
                August 3 2016
                The midship is the same for all 3 probes, otherwise it would just be different planes. And you could cram fuel more efficiently. Even a simple increase in the length of the aircraft for aerodynamics and handling would be better
                1. 0
                  August 3 2016
                  Quote: sivuch
                  The midsection is the same for all 3 veroyants

                  Quote: sivuch
                  And it would be possible to cram fuel more efficiently. Even a simple increase in the length of the aircraft for aerodynamics and handling would be better

                  belay yes it is seen that no
                  And can not a modest question? And how many planes you made. And then just in the description of the JSF program, the extension was crossed out, as this would have affected the LTX even worse and would have reduced volume of useful space. There really is no desire to offend you, but you seriously think that the designers and, there have purged so many options. Yes, maybe it could be done better, but how ...
                  Quote: sivuch
                  And it was possible to cram the fuel more successfully.

                  Options? The F-35 has fuel even on horizontal planes. You can say every free cc is used for fuel.
                  1. +3
                    August 3 2016
                    And can not a modest question? And how many planes did you make
                    ----------------------------------
                    I don’t even count. Like a break at work, I take an A4 sheet and make an airplane.
                    And then a counter question to you - how this lengthening of the fuselage could worsen the performance characteristics (compared with the increase in the midship). That's because for an aircraft carrier it’s not good, yes, no one disputes. Well, I had it in the form would be a stealth replacement for a viper, and sailors with marines somehow somehow themselves.
                    And fuel in all planes is the norm of life. In the MiG-25, I remember, even they poured into keels
                    1. -1
                      August 3 2016
                      Quote: sivuch
                      I don’t even have to count. Like a break at work, I take an A4 sheet and make an airplane.
                      And then a counter question to you - how this lengthening of the fuselage could worsen the performance characteristics (compared with the increase in the midship). That's because for an aircraft carrier it’s not good, yes, no one disputes. Well, I had it in the form would be a stealth replacement for a viper, and sailors with marines somehow somehow themselves.
                      And fuel in all planes is the norm of life. In the MiG-25, I remember, even they poured into keels

                      Passion washed surface. And that was one of the reasons for making a compact airplane. And at the same time, we need a deep compartment for internal weapons, so that 2000 pound bombs would enter there, and not like the F-22.
                      Carriers rather more deprivation a couple of meters of weather would not have done remember F-14 19 m in length. F / A-18E / F - 18m. The length was not connected with the aircraft carrier, but with a wave of deliberate choice of designers - and they are clearly more visible than us.
                      1. +1
                        August 4 2016
                        And when you inflate the fuselage in breadth, then the washed one does not increase?
                        And yet, the total length of the aircraft affects the number of these same aircraft on AB.A for the marines with their landing vessels, this is even more critical
                      2. 0
                        August 4 2016
                        Quote: sivuch
                        And when you inflate the fuselage in breadth, then the washed one does not increase?
                        And yet, the total length of the aircraft affects the number of these same aircraft on AB.A for the marines with their landing vessels, this is even more critical

                        Increase, but less. The amount to start from many factors, now AB does not bear its maximum already since this is not necessary. Yes, and the F-35 is a maximum of 1/4 of the total aircraft carrier wing. UDC there maxim 6-8 F-35B- the main load is the landing helicopters. The size of the F-35 is not connected with the ships - they would not have made a couple of meters of weather. Such was the decision of the designer and I think they are much smarter than forum experts. and they knew how to count the middle.
                        And already teaching them to build an airplane is a very stupid task, at least if not himself the chief designer of the "dry".
                      3. 0
                        August 5 2016
                        Quote: iwind
                        That was the decision of the designer and I think they are much smarter,

                        They are so "smart" that they forgot about the Sears-Haak body (and a lot more), which you, the "expert", did not know about. lol
                    2. +1
                      August 4 2016
                      Quote: iwind
                      Passion washed surface. And that was one of the reasons for making a compact airplane. And at the same time, we need a deep compartment for internal weapons, so that 2000 pound bombs would enter there, and not like the F-22.
                      Carriers rather more deprivation a couple of meters of weather would not have done remember F-14 19 m in length. F / A-18E / F - 18m. The length was not connected with the aircraft carrier, but with a wave of deliberate choice of designers - and they are clearly more visible than us.

                      how does this washing (and what?) of a waterfowl penguin enthusiastically agree with the Sears-Hack body bully
                      or didn’t you know such clever words yet?

                      two propaganda parrots (a bayonet still) were brought to the emergency room so that they wouldn’t prevent them from praising the fu-35 in stupid picture agitators, clumsily copied by the gobbling America from Soviet Yak in the 90s and flying off publicly only 25 years (a quarter of a century) later bully
            2. 0
              August 3 2016
              To gain air supremacy means participating in short-lived dog dumps and launching long-range missiles.

              With the "success" of Penguin's participation in dog dumps, everything is clear and without words.

              But any launch by a Penguin of a long-range explosive missile immediately destroys all its stealth technology - the missile is guided along the radio command line from the Penguin and it starts to illuminate itself in the radio range for enemy missiles.

              So Penguin as a conqueror will live in battle until the first stage / enemy missiles - not for long, but brightly bully
              1. +1
                August 3 2016
                "With the" success "of Penguin's participation in dog dumps, everything is clear and without words" ////

                Words still won’t hurt. Recently, Norwegian pilots conducted training fellow
                battles of their F-16 against their F-35. And, to their surprise, the F-35 handled the maneuverable F-16
                in close combat ...
                1. +2
                  August 3 2016
                  The melee penguin will try to act not against F-16 (God forgive me), but against Su-27, Su-30 and Su-35С.
                2. +3
                  August 3 2016
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  "With the" success "of Penguin's participation in dog dumps, everything is clear and without words" ////

                  Words still won’t hurt. Recently, Norwegian pilots conducted training fellow
                  battles of their F-16 against their F-35. And, to their surprise, the F-35 handled the maneuverable F-16
                  in close combat ...

                  A couple of years ago, Indians took part in the Red Flag exercises, which are held in the United States and flew on their Su-30MKI.
                  Very quickly, American F-15 pilots developed tactics that forced Indian pilots to maneuver using thrust vector control, which led to a sharp drop in speed and a "drawdown" of the Su-30MKI on the tail. As a result, in the course of close combat training, all Su-30s were conditionally shot down without inflicting damage on the conditional enemy. The Sushki engines brought a lot of trouble to the organizers of the exercises. For take-off from one runway, Dryers required an interval of at least 4 minutes. Failure to do so could cause the engines to fail or surge. At the cost of great efforts, the Americans managed to achieve a reduction in the take-off interval to 2 minutes, but this is also unacceptable if hundreds of aircraft must take off. By the end of 3 days of flights, ALL engines were out of order and required replacement, and transport with replaceable engines was late. When, finally, the engines arrived, it turned out that their replacement would take several days (on the F-15, the standard time for replacing the engine is 8 hours for a team of technicians of 3 people. By the way, on the F-22 this standard is only 4 hours and for 2 person). A lot of complaints were caused by the hydraulics of the chassis retraction mechanism - constant leaks, puddles, topping up fluids during maintenance, etc. As a result of massive breakdowns, the Indians refused to continue to participate in the exercises.

                  http://ru-aviation.livejournal.com/3364836.html
                  1. +1
                    August 3 2016
                    Yes, referring to LJ is cool. And there's nothing to add.
                    1. +1
                      August 4 2016
                      Professor wrote otherwise laughing
                    2. +1
                      August 4 2016
                      LJ is different.
                    3. 0
                      August 5 2016
                      Yes, referring to LJ is cool. And there's nothing to add

                      Yes .... refer to the Hero of the Soviet Union, Honored Test Pilot the USSR... it’s really cool, especially when Comrade Colonel, while still the Deputy for Testing, was tearing me, still the senior lieutenant for the badly written flight assignments ..... I still remember wassat
                      1. 0
                        August 5 2016
                        Did the special department miss all this? The Americans have not yet found any methods against the Su-27, so these "exercises" with the Indians are carried out regularly.
                      2. 0
                        August 5 2016
                        Prior to that, they had "joint maneuvers" with a Su-27 in Virginia in August 1992 in which the F-15 was a Su-27 in a dry bit. Which did not have any OVT like the Su-30, simply because the Su-27 is a statically unstable aircraft.
                        after which they poured bad kerosene on our pilots in revenge (and they don’t hide it, unlike the fact of these exercises) and they almost crashed several times on the way back from there
                        Now they are conducting exercises with the Idians, "they are looking for methods," it is not clear why Rosoboronexport is not against this, probably because there can be no methods, but all the same - why?
                3. +2
                  August 4 2016
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  Recently, Norwegian pilots conducted training fellow
                  battles of their F-16 against their F-35. And, to their surprise, the F-35 handled the maneuverable F-16
                  in close combat ...

                  which mushrooms did which team eat?
                4. 0
                  August 5 2016
                  At one time, in Akhtubinsk, a "dog dump" was held between the MiG-21bis and American F-5s.
                  further a small quote from our Deputy on Flight Tests of V. Kandaurov
                  In the summer of 1976, an American F-5 fighter, or rather its last modification F-5E with high-thrust engines, arrived at the Akhtubinsk base in disassembled form. It was smaller in size than the MiG-21, with two engines paired in the fuselage, a sharp downward sloping nose and small trapezoidal wings. The Vietnam War was over, and the US air force left this long-suffering country, in a hurry, abandoning several such aircraft at one of the airfields. One of them was handed over to the USSR along with the "Instructions to the pilot". There were no technical descriptions, but our specialists, "having thought", assembled it completely and brought it to working condition, having understood not only foreign "pieces of iron", but also in numerous electric harnesses. To carry out special tests, a test team was formed and a program of 35-40 flights was drawn up. I was one of the top three pilots. Senior - Nikolay Stogov.

                  Those wishing to read more, here is the link http://testpilot.ru/review/runway/volga/volga_xvi.htm
                  1. +1
                    August 5 2016
                    The F-5 was the most dangerous opponent for the MiG-21, only something in Vietnam they did not defeat them ...
  23. 0
    August 3 2016
    Quote: Elephant
    The stripes turned out to be a serious plane. Smaller and lighter than the T-50, but with the same bomb load! Vertical take-off / landing, as well as the cost of the car! There is something to think about in our design bureau.

    cost ... and how much swelled into it ?, and still want hi
    1. +1
      August 3 2016
      Does the striped money have little? Even Trump noted that "the printing press cannot be bankrupt" ...
      1. 0
        August 5 2016
        possible if the cost of these same hemp papers on which is printed, and the cost of paint exceeds the face value of the banknote
        therefore, in America, more and more non-cash laughing
  24. -8
    August 3 2016
    Funny Americans are proud of the lack of a plane. We, by the way, are also proud of their miserable aeropup, for it is not suitable for our cars even with shoes.)))
    This is a paradox, straight Bernard Shaw. smile
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. 0
        August 3 2016
        Did you and I drink? I don’t remember something, because I don’t drink with elephants. wink laughing
        1. +1
          August 3 2016
          But with the rest you still drink bitter ...
          1. -1
            August 3 2016
            With good people, why not have a drink! Ah, here with fools and elephants - no. For elephants drink elephants, and they are violent.
            1. 0
              August 3 2016
              What is not kvass? Are you soldering only good people?
              1. 0
                August 4 2016
                Yes, that I have drunk all the good people in this forum and in Russia in general.
                1. 0
                  August 4 2016
                  in vain I removed the ending ... I would understand bully
                2. 0
                  August 4 2016
                  in vain I removed the ending ... I would understand bully
                  1. 0
                    August 4 2016
                    Not sure, so I'm somehow simpler, more understandable for you.
                    1. 0
                      August 4 2016
                      not sure - do not overtake.
    2. +3
      August 3 2016
      Quote: Pyohar
      Funny Americans are proud of the lack of a plane. We, by the way, are also proud of their miserable aeropup, for it is not suitable for our cars even with shoes.)))
      This is a paradox, straight Bernard Shaw.

      Here, first and foremost, most are proud of their own illiteracy.
      1. -1
        August 3 2016
        Yes, and fools who understand a little written, we also have enough. laughing
        1. +4
          August 3 2016
          We have enough fools of cheer patriots. And there are roads ...
          1. -2
            August 3 2016
            ... and elephants.
        2. -1
          August 4 2016
          Not with us but with them. bully
          1. 0
            August 4 2016
            Of course they have.
            1. 0
              August 4 2016
              I think they still can’t get any sense from anyone laughing
              1. +1
                August 4 2016
                You think correctly, for, I think, that you also didn’t understand anything.
                1. 0
                  August 4 2016
                  but I think that you are already thinking wrong.
                2. 0
                  August 4 2016
                  but I think that you are already thinking wrong.
                  1. 0
                    August 4 2016
                    And once again, try to think. I'm not in a hurry, I’ll wait.
                    1. 0
                      August 4 2016
                      I would like to know what you think about other comments, you can also take your time
  25. 0
    August 3 2016
    Breaking the pattern. Usually, the Russian peasant built the hut mainly himself: the carpenter, the joiner, and the stove-maker, and he managed to do it in the field. And in the West, a narrow specialist was invited for each operation. Here, on the same platform, it was supposed to make different machines for different purposes. But, "it is not possible to harness a horse and a quivering doe in one harness." developed mechanization. Someone has already said that they have an approach: weapons should be effective and expensive. The more money invested, the more terrible it is to admit that the path is wrong. Pure psychology: exceptional people cannot be wrong.
    You should not go over to personality, not in Russian.
  26. +4
    August 3 2016
    Quote: Simpsonian
    The fact that this is a nanodepelaz, it can be seen right away, the forehead as in the F-22 and dviglo just one. Only LMers could stir up such pornography lol

    Do not forget that the United States is already putting in service the Second Generation 5 fighter. As before, there were F-15 (heavy) and F-16 (light) -Here are also PARA. And we only experience one (heavy) -and there is no end .
    And yet, news from the FRS - no malfunctions were found in the machine printing dollars! No matter how much it (F-35) costs, they will bring it and build it! And the "green paper" will be given on credit by other countries (including Russia) - because they take with okhoty. And we will pay the whole world for new "pepelatsy". hi
    1. 0
      August 3 2016
      And what was (heavy) and (light) for? You are still the top three F-14/18 and forgot to count the Super Hornet.
      There will be no plane with the same face but only one dviglom nominal aircraft ever. It will fly about the same and show the same characteristics as the F-22 with one failed.
  27. -3
    August 3 2016
    “The F-35A will allow the United States to maintain air supremacy over the years.”
    Let them not even think about it. "Trash" will not be able to fight, and even more so to exercise at least some kind of domination, again PR "pure water" fool
    1. +1
      August 3 2016
      So, they will fly throwing bombs, Raptors and Superhornets will fight in the air for it
  28. +1
    August 3 2016
    Carter: work to improve the project F-35A will continue

    Well, there is no limit to perfection, but money will still be printed. request laughing
  29. +3
    August 3 2016
    "work on improving the F-35A project will continue"

    What a "good" project! How many people have provided a permanent job. Keep it up, Americans! smile
  30. +2
    August 3 2016
    "With the F-35A, the Air Force will receive a fighter that combines stealth technology that allows radar evasion, supersonic speed, maneuverability and logistics support using the most powerful and comprehensive sensors in fighter history," the corporation said in a release. ...
    They hang noodles on the ears of an illiterate man in the street with the help of these "sensors".
  31. -1
    August 3 2016
    Quote: Simpsonian
    You are still the top three F-14/18 and forgot to count the Super Hornet.

    F-14 and 18 are naval aircraft, you do not confuse them here. And about "one muzzle", 1-2 engines, you will compare the take-off weight, and the projection of the aircraft. The nose of the aircraft was designed for both taking into account stealth, and for a heavy aircraft -2 engines in a lung-one. Something like this. hi
    1. +1
      August 4 2016
      F-35C and F-35B, as it were, too, so do not get confused. It is not necessary to compare hard with hard, but only the midsection and the number of engines placed in it.
      MiG-29 and F-18, F-5 light, Su-17 heavy ...
  32. +1
    August 3 2016
    combining stealth technology that allows you to elude the radar

    Somewhere in Europe already with such technology rolls around
  33. +1
    August 3 2016
    Oddly enough, he mastered all the comments. It became VERY interesting, is there at least one fighter pilot among commentators? To hear a clear comment. Or is everyone fighting articles from magazines? (IMHO, I want to hear an answer from a person who knows how to sit at the helm. Nothing personal).
    1. 0
      August 3 2016
      Quote: Alex_Tug
      It became VERY interesting, is there at least one fighter pilot among commentators?

      Here, perhaps at least half of the "experts", even a passenger plane was only seen from the side. smile To evaluate the car, you need to fly on it, and such (with respect to the F-35) is unlikely to be found here, even among foreign colleagues. hi
      1. +1
        August 4 2016
        Quote: Bayonet
        Here, perhaps at least half of the "experts", even a passenger plane was only seen from the side. To appreciate the car, you need to fly it, and such (in relation to the F-35) you can hardly find here, even among foreign colleagues.

        Now justify - what are the disadvantages? However, these are modest people, perhaps they will not say anything ... request
        1. +3
          August 4 2016
          Respected Bayonet, this message does not apply to you.
          Now justify - what are the disadvantages? However, these are modest people, perhaps they will not say anything ...

          Why ... what is the most ........ (pass) that professionals who have dealt with ground (IAS) and flight (flight personnel)) operation of aviation equipment are writing less and less on this resource. For on "VO" there are messages that do not have the minimum experience "Lieutenants of the Air Force Reserve" .... and other evil spirits. Gentlemen, you can put "sleepers" on me, even to the disadvantages, BUT ... from some messages, I graduated from a military aviation military university, in the glorious city of Riga ... I go nuts. Really, in the remaining military departments ... they teach such garbage. I have been old for more than five tete. tech on Tu-2M3 in Akhtubinsk ... before leaving for the test department for attack aircraft. I'm about..yu above the level of any "urya-patriots". Gentlemen-comrades ... be more modest
        2. 0
          August 4 2016
          Now justify - what are the disadvantages? However, these are modest people, perhaps they will not say anything.

          Namesake, I'll add it again ..... "ancient"they are not, unfortunately.
          He is like a professional, well, very clearly lays out "couch urya-patriots."
          It is a pity that he and other professionals began to rarely visit, and even more so write their comments.
          1. 0
            August 5 2016
            Try to first find out in an emergency whether he has an "ancient", because he, together with iwind of the "modest", usually brings in an emergency, so they did not interfere with praising the F-35 laughing
          2. 0
            August 5 2016
            Try to first find out in an emergency whether he has an "ancient", because he, together with iwind of the "modest", usually brings in an emergency, so they did not interfere with praising the F-35 laughing
    2. +1
      August 3 2016
      Quote: Alex_Tug
      Oddly enough, he mastered all the comments. It became VERY interesting, is there at least one fighter pilot among commentators? To hear a clear comment. Or is everyone fighting articles from magazines? (IMHO, I want to hear an answer from a person who knows how to sit at the helm. Nothing personal).

      not in Russian a lot. Interview pilots in YouTube a few dozen.
    3. 0
      August 4 2016
      The F-35 is not a fighter, ask the "light bombers" ...
      1. 0
        August 4 2016
        Quote: Simpsonian
        The F-35 is not a fighter, ask the "light bombers" ...

        Norway, for example, do not agree
        1. 0
          August 5 2016
          The Americans agree with this, therefore they already write about the F-35 that it is an "airplane" and not a fighter "and about a certain" vague "5th generation is also mentioned more and more rarely in connection with it,

          Norwegians are pros, they need to be trusted ... bully
    4. +1
      August 4 2016
      Quote: Alex_Tug
      To evaluate the car, you need to fly on it, and such (with respect to the F-35) is unlikely to be found here, even among foreign colleagues.

      then why are you here among a few other party comrades writing which F-35 is good? bully
      1. 0
        August 4 2016
        the question was to the "bayonet", not catching up with the Simpsons ... lol
    5. +1
      August 4 2016
      By the way, why are Lockheed and the Pentagon for American pilots manuals releasing how to answer public questions about the F-35? laughing can't the pilots answer in their own words? or, freedom of speech is no longer?
  34. -1
    August 3 2016
    Quote: xetai9977
    But everyone understands, no matter what they say, the F-35 is a wonderful airplane

    Quote: xetai9977
    And this cannot be explained by "twisting hands

    Yeah, it can be seen. Canadians got off this needle, and the Australians are trying, also go without reason.
    1. 0
      August 4 2016
      They won’t give Australians - the raw material colony, however, is albeit white (by the way, not at all).
  35. +4
    August 3 2016
    I can’t even imagine that our MO, someone "sold" something, even "free", that something that does not meet the requirements of the IDF.
    As an example, once, ours took a couple of Strikers to ride, and .... refused (although they could buy at the expense of military assistance). We decided that it did not fit in a number of parameters, and gave the task to make our own, as a result, 1 rolled out Eitan.


    So, you can beat yourself with your heels in the chest as much as you like, but the fact remains. Ours bought the F-35, so it’s brought to mind.
    1. +1
      August 3 2016
      rolled out Eitan


      Merkava technology was transferred to an armored personnel carrier. Engine placement and hp
    2. 0
      August 4 2016
      Could you give more details than Striker didn’t please?
    3. -1
      August 4 2016
      not finished, and will never be finished ... well, bought and bought - all when it happens for the first time Yes
  36. +1
    August 3 2016
    Quote: Alex_Tug
    Merkava technology was transferred to an armored personnel carrier. Engine placement and hp

    L.S is not located in Merkava, the tank can transport infantry (a couple of people), but this is not practiced.
  37. +3
    August 3 2016
    The fact remains that the F 35 aircraft took place, it has been flying successfully for 16 years, 177 aircraft have been built, 120 are under construction, this aircraft has the most modern and high-tech avionics system in the world.
    1. -1
      August 4 2016
      it "successfully" flies worse and slower than the MiG-21, and why were so many of them built?
      This avionics can be installed in any better aircraft in which it will fit in size.
      1. +3
        August 4 2016
        Quote: Simpsonian
        it "successfully" flies worse and slower than the MiG-21, and why were so many of them built?

        More details?

        Quote: Simpsonian
        This avionics can be installed in any better aircraft in which it will fit in size.

        Damn, and the men did not know. As for all new aircraft build
        1. 0
          August 5 2016
          LTH compare, performances of those and others, Pierre Spray look

          Yes, in which the avionics with the whole world is changing, but the plane remains the same
  38. -2
    August 4 2016
    Somehow there was a bike that Americans spent a lot of money on creating a HI-TECH writing device for astronauts in zero gravity. Soviet pencil cost. High technology is not always a plus. For example, GMO products.
    1. +3
      August 4 2016
      Quote: Samoyed
      Somehow there was a bike that Americans spent a lot of money on creating a HI-TECH writing device for astronauts in zero gravity. Soviet pencil cost. High technology is not always a plus. For example, GMO products.


      Well, now to reality. With the help of GMO products, finally managed to cope with the problem of regular and total hunger. GMO foods are usually illiterate grandmothers, youngsters and deputies of the State Duma. Just because the fact that serious scholars write on this topic cannot be read.

      Secondly, the story about the pens is of course beautiful. Only these pens are still used by fighter pilots, astronauts and cosmonauts. The Soviet Union also purchased them in due time. Before 1967, American astronauts used felt-tip pens or mechanical pencils for writing (the writing unit was taken from a regular pencil, and a lightweight and durable metal case was made to order; taking into account the limited production, it was about $ 100 $ apiece). Soviet cosmonauts used wax pencils, as graphite pencils were sources of small debris and conductive dust.

      NASA did not allocate any funds to Fischer and did not subsidize the manufacture of a special writing instrument. He invented it himself, and then invited NASA to try it out. After that, the AG7 Space Pen, the development of which really cost more than 1 a million dollars, was accepted by the American and Soviet (later Russian) space agencies for further use. The average cost of one pen for the Apollo project was 6 dollars.

      What stupid, stupid Americans!
      1. 0
        August 5 2016
        In reality, hunger in Africa has not gone away, eating GMOs are quickly becoming childless (the problem of hunger, yes, is somewhat solved, but indirectly),
        pencils were chemical without lead.
        of course stupid ... smart people will not confuse the radioactivity of dust from armor from depleted uranium with its toxicity, and pump (or participate in it) a uranium cocktail directly into the ground for the production of shale gas.
        for all this, after all, the smart ones will simply kill those who did it later, when they grow wiser and it opens.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"