While the West flies in light fighters, Russia is confidently transplanting to the "heavyweights"


While light fighters prevail in the air forces of Western countries, the Russian aerospace forces are transplanted to “heavyweights,” writes the American edition of Military Watch.


MW notes that Moscow has relied on heavy combat platforms. Reducing the total number of military vehicles due to the failure of the old equipmentcompensated by more efficient and modern aircraft.

Indeed, the basis of fighter aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces is the Su-30SM (empty vehicle weight is almost 19 tons), the upgraded MiG-31 (almost 22 tons) and the latest Su-35 (19 tons). At the same time, in Western countries, NATO prefer light combat vehicles.

So, the British, Germans, Italians and a number of other Europeans fly on the Eurofighter Typhoon (11 tons), the French on the Dassault Rafale (10 tons), the Swedes on the Saab JAS 39 Gripen of their own production (7 tons). In addition, many countries, including the United States, are massively switching to F-35 fighters. For many armies, this 13-ton aircraft will become the main combat aircraft in the coming years.

In Russia, for the needs of the airborne forces, only heavy fighters are purchased, almost forgetting about the light MiG-29 (11 tons) and the new MiG-35 (13 tons).

The advantages of heavy vehicles are obvious: such fighters have a significantly greater radius of action, which is very important in the conditions of Russia's vast expanses. Moreover, they are ahead of their light counterparts in payload, and sometimes in dimensions of wearable ammunition. Another plus to the piggy bank of heavy combat aircraft is their maximum speed, as well as maneuverability, which is often higher than that of light vehicles.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed oshЫbku Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

54 comments
Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in

  1. Arkharov Offline
    Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 16 July 2020 11: 00
    -1
    • 3
    • 4
    And this then how:

    The upgraded F-15EX will be the heaviest fighter in the world

    https://topcor.ru/15576-modernizirovannyj-f-15ex-stanet-samym-tjazhelym-istrebitelem-v-mire.html
    1. Kristallovich Online
      Kristallovich (Ruslan) 16 July 2020 11: 18
      +3
      • 5
      • 2
      And what does it have to do with it? Does the material discuss the heaviest fighter in the world?
      1. Arkharov Offline
        Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 16 July 2020 12: 09
        0
        • 4
        • 4
        The advantages of heavy fighters over light ones are propagated here, and judging by the article:

        ..in the air forces of Western countries light fighters prevail ...

        I just remembered a note 2 days ago with a completely different example. It seems that the facts that are needed at the moment are being pulled out, and an attempt is not made to give a general objective picture.
        1. Kristallovich Online
          Kristallovich (Ruslan) 16 July 2020 12: 13
          +3
          • 5
          • 2
          You write frank nonsense. The heaviest fighter in the United States and the general trend of using light vehicles in Western countries are two facts that do not contradict each other. There is no connection!
          1. Arkharov Offline
            Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 16 July 2020 12: 16
            -4
            • 1
            • 5
            It depends on what is western for you, if only Europe, then yes, but for now. But for us, the West historically usually goes along with the United States, everything here is somewhat different.
        2. master2 Offline
          master2 (Zhora) 16 July 2020 20: 03
          +4
          • 6
          • 2
          pull out the facts necessary at the moment

          - you are absolutely right. And note that everything related to Western technology is definitely worse, has a bunch of flaws, does not meet the requirements, etc. - This is banal propaganda.
    2. boriz Offline
      boriz (boriz) 17 July 2020 10: 45
      +1
      • 2
      • 1
      I, like, wrote there in the commentary that there is a MiG-31BM. He is much harder. And already 3 km / h are flying. Just look at the wiki and compare the weight yourself. And in speed I gave a link in the comment.
  2. Kyctyk ardax Offline
    Kyctyk ardax (Kyctyk ardax) 16 July 2020 11: 27
    -4
    • 5
    • 9
    The United States is now creating 200 new F-35 fighters per year.
    And Russia will be able to create 10-20 Su-30-35 fighters.
    1. gorenina91 Offline
      gorenina91 (Irina) 16 July 2020 11: 36
      -1
      • 5
      • 6
      And Russia will be able to create 10 -20 Su-30-35 fighters each.

      - Yes, and these ... - immediately sell to anyone ...
      1. Kyctyk ardax Offline
        Kyctyk ardax (Kyctyk ardax) 16 July 2020 11: 39
        -4
        • 2
        • 6
        Hindus plan to buy more than 200 cars.
    2. 123 Online
      123 (123) 16 July 2020 12: 37
      +4
      • 7
      • 3
      The United States is now creating 200 new F-35 fighters per year.
      And Russia will be able to create 10 -20 Su-30-35 fighters each.

      Why do you need 200 a year? Do you want to break a record?
      1. Sergey Tokarev Offline
        Sergey Tokarev (Sergey Tokarev) 16 July 2020 15: 40
        -1
        • 2
        • 3
        He wants to immediately remove them all from duty and drive them into the repair due to another shortcoming ...
    3. Oyo Sarkazmi Offline
      Oyo Sarkazmi (Oyo Sarkazmi) 16 July 2020 13: 11
      +6
      • 9
      • 3
      Quote: Kyctyk ardax
      The United States is now creating 200 new F-35 fighters per year.

      They cost 85 million - WITHOUT ENGINE. Net budget cut, an airplane with M = 1,4 ... 1,6 versus M = 2,4 ... 2,6.
      F-35 inherited all the shortcomings of the Yak-141 - low speed and low carrying capacity, poor maneuverability.
      Therefore, the more they are made, the less good aircraft the United States will have.
      1. Arkharov Offline
        Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 16 July 2020 17: 11
        -4
        • 2
        • 6
        What kind of "inherited"? Trying to hint at spirit-lifting fakes that the F-35 is a slightly modified Yak-141?
        1. Oyo Sarkazmi Offline
          Oyo Sarkazmi (Oyo Sarkazmi) 16 July 2020 19: 00
          +1
          • 3
          • 2
          Quote: Arkharov
          that the F-35 is a little modified Yak-141?

          Heavily redesigned in aerodynamics, and complete preservation of the layout of the propulsion system. There are a dozen tubes of a special profile, you just can't bend.
          After all, the Americans were armed with Harier, both the first and second. But the Americans themselves could not do anything similar.
          1. Arkharov Offline
            Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 16 July 2020 19: 24
            +1
            • 4
            • 3
            As for the straws, it's you, please, someone else. And all these arrangements, and there are only a few, have been known even before the “141” decades.
            Is this, apparently, from that series of jokes?

            - In Germany, archaeologists excavated. Traces of copper were found. They came to the conclusion that the ancient Germans used telephone communications.
            - In Japan, traces of glass were discovered. Came to the conclusion that the ancient Japanese used fiber optic communications,
            - On the territory of Russia, archaeologists have not found anything. They came to the conclusion that the ancient Rusich used mobile communications.
            1. Oyo Sarkazmi Offline
              Oyo Sarkazmi (Oyo Sarkazmi) 16 July 2020 20: 39
              +2
              • 3
              • 1
              Quote: Arkharov
              As for the straws, it's you, please, someone else.

              No, I’ll tell you all the same:
              Since air taken from the compressor is used for vertical take-off and landing (I will not describe the turbojet engine device), and the engine is located behind, pipes of very high pressure and temperature go to the nose of the aircraft and to the tips of the wing, well, and the tail is on driven thrust vector relies. These pipes take away both usable volume and payload. In addition, an engine with a thrust greater than the weight of the aircraft is required. This is a minus in fuel consumption.
              Even the F-35A with all the gadgets removed for vertical take-off turns out to be overweight and pumped up with unification "steroids".
              1. Michael1950 Offline
                Michael1950 (Michael) 17 July 2020 08: 49
                -4
                • 2
                • 6
                Listen, would you try to talk about something that you have even the slightest idea about? You expose yourself here such a layman that there are simply no words!
                1. Oyo Sarkazmi Offline
                  Oyo Sarkazmi (Oyo Sarkazmi) 17 July 2020 08: 58
                  0
                  • 2
                  • 2
                  Quote: Michael1950
                  - Listen, would you try to talk about something

                  Well, enlighten how vertical take-off and landing works. By what holy spirit, if not a jet stream, the plane hangs in place?
                  There is a structural diagram of the Harier and Yak-38 on the Internet, admire it, enlightened, by the interweaving of air ducts so that the plane SUSTAINABLY hangs in place. And the Yak-141 is supersonic, and no one before him managed to create a dynamic balance for such an aircraft.
                  The British were able to bring Harier-2 to mind, but they did not aim at supersonic.
                  1. Michael1950 Offline
                    Michael1950 (Michael) 17 July 2020 10: 07
                    -1
                    • 1
                    • 2
                    - The F-35B just hangs nicely in place:







                    But maneuverability:

      2. Michael1950 Offline
        Michael1950 (Michael) 17 July 2020 09: 34
        -2
        • 1
        • 3
        F-35 inherited all the shortcomings of the Yak-141 - low speed and low carrying capacity, poor maneuverability.

        1. F-35B did not inherit the main drawback of the Yak-141 - the presence of front lift engines, very capricious and very dangerous to operate: the failure of either of the two during vertical ascent / descent leads to "pecking" and requires immediate pilot ejection, and automatic the reaction was not enough.
        2. F-35B payload - in the internal compartments - two 1000-pound bombs (453.6 kg) + two AIM-120D missiles. F-35A and F-35C - take two 2000-pound bombs (907 kg) + two AIM-120D, and external pendants - 5000 pounds (2268 kg) for inner pylons and 2500 pounds (1134 kg) for medium pylons. On the outside - 300 pounds, two AIM-9X air-raids. Total: total payload 9.8 tons! Few?!

        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AF%D0%BA-141

        The combat load:
        at start-up 120 m: 2600 kg

        Options for additional suspension is not provided.
        3. Yak-141: Maximum operational overload: 7 g of

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II
        _ F-35A __F-35B__F-35Cg limit__9__7__7.5
        The maximum critical angle of attack for the F-35 is 50 °! Poor maneuverability, you say ?!
        1. Arkharov Offline
          Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 17 July 2020 11: 06
          -2
          • 1
          • 3
          Finally, someone correctly explained to the "pseudo-patriotic" profane, otherwise they cling to their fake to the last.
        2. boriz Offline
          boriz (boriz) 17 July 2020 11: 43
          +3
          • 4
          • 1
          And what have you rested in comparison with the Yak-141?
          The speed of the F-35 corresponds to the 3rd generation. Modifications B and C from the spring of this year will not fly at supersonic speeds. That is, A is a 3rd generation airplane with 5th elements, and B and C are 1st generation airplanes with 5th elements.
          The biggest stupidity is to use the VTOL aircraft as a base for the main fighter. They don’t put a lifting fan, but the round cavity with the power set remains, which is not ice. As a result, the plane looks pregnant. Hence the speed and maneuverability. And for placing missiles it is better to have a narrow and long compartment, rather than round.
          It is necessary to compare, for example, with the Su-35.
          Suspension of the combat load on the pylons - goodbye, stealth, which is already doubtful.
          Before throwing inappropriate words at a person who has not personally said anything bad to you, read at least the "Criticism" section of the F-35 Wiki. Wiki is always distinguished by moderate Russophobia, so everything is objective there.
          1. Michael1950 Offline
            Michael1950 (Michael) 17 July 2020 13: 01
            -3
            • 1
            • 4
            And what have you rested in comparison with the Yak-141?
            The speed of the F-35 corresponds to the 3rd generation.

            And who needs speed, except for interceptors - for emergency interception? Everyone flies on a subsonic cruising supersonic - 85M-0.9M. At these speeds, combat radii are calculated.

            Modifications B and C from the spring of this year will not fly at supersonic speeds. That is, A is a 3rd generation airplane with 5th elements, and B and C are 1st generation airplanes with 5th elements.

            This is where Hochma begins: what do the "fifth generation elements" give ?! ALL. And victory in aerial combat, first of all.

            The biggest stupidity is to use the VTOL aircraft as a base for the main fighter. They don’t put a lifting fan, but the round cavity with the power set remains, which is not ice. As a result, the plane looks pregnant.

            He takes in his belly two bombs per ton, not half a ton, + two AIM-120D missiles. There is no empty space on “A” and “C” from the place of fan “B”.

            Hence the speed and maneuverability.

            Both high speed and awesome maneuverability are in the F-22. A F-35 was planned, firstly, as a drummer - what they wanted, they got it.

            And for placing missiles it is better to have a narrow and long compartment, rather than round.
            It is necessary to compare, for example, with the Su-35.

            Oh! "But the men didn’t know!" They blasted on it, no, to learn a little man at Russian design bureaus ... laughing And make bays like on a Su-35 !! laughing lol

            Suspension combat load on the pylons - goodbye, stealth

            This is an option when in the stealth version the main and most dangerous air defense will be destroyed.

            ... which is already doubtful.

            Yeah, it’s doubtful for those whose stealth never happened, didn’t even smell close to them ...

            Before throwing inappropriate words at a person who has not personally said anything bad to you, read at least the "Criticism" section of the F-35 Wiki. Wiki is always distinguished by moderate Russophobia, so everything is objective there.

            It’s you and Vicky’s friend who read it, I don’t need it ... lol
            1. Oyo Sarkazmi Offline
              Oyo Sarkazmi (Oyo Sarkazmi) 17 July 2020 14: 10
              +2
              • 3
              • 1
              Quote: Michael1950
              A F-35 was planned, firstly, as a drummer - what they wanted, they got it.

              Gee, drummer. His sabotage and terrorist activity is the main thing. Among the Papuans with low-skilled air defense. He flew up, dropped bombs on the market or a wedding, and the next day, “white helmets” with cameras were running in, a mode of shame.
              When the A-50 appeared in Syria, the Israelis stopped flying on the F-35. In Syria, F-22s fly only with reflectors - so that the real profile is not lit. Because they understand that Russian radars are not targeted for advertising. And the Turks shod with the F-35 when they bought the S-400.
              5th Generation Invisibility is a PR move to raise prices. If Trump hadn’t come to power, they would have started the 35th for 300 million dollars. Well, the Fed will print the money, it’s not a pity.
  3. 123 Online
    123 (123) 16 July 2020 12: 31
    +4
    • 5
    • 1
    So, the British, Germans, Italians and a number of other Europeans fly on Eurofighter Typhoon (11 tons), the French on Dassault Rafale (10 tons), the Swedes on Saab JAS 39 Gripen own production (7 tons). In addition, many countries, including the United States, are massively switching to F-35 fighters. For many armies, this 13-ton vehicle will become the main combat aircraft in the coming years.

    If the country is smaller than the Tyumen region, a large range is not particularly needed. Where to fly on it? The United States simply has no choice, the F-22 is discontinued and is prohibitive, and the F-15 is not abandoned.
    As for Russia, if the Indians or anyone else who buys a decent lot, the production will be launched at their expense, which means that the Mig-35 will go into our army.
    1. Arkharov Offline
      Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 16 July 2020 17: 14
      -4
      • 1
      • 5
      Should I still look at the ratio of empty to payload? Empty weight is not an end in itself.
      1. Michael1950 Offline
        Michael1950 (Michael) 17 July 2020 08: 52
        0
        • 2
        • 2
        Absolutely right! And here with horror it turns out that the “lungs” “Rafal”, “Eurofighter” and F-35 are capable of carrying a load bоlighter than the Su-30SM and Su-35S! lol
        1. Arkharov Offline
          Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 17 July 2020 11: 08
          -1
          • 0
          • 1
          We almost always had such a problem with this ratio.
        2. Michael I Offline
          Michael I (Michael I) 18 July 2020 09: 16
          +1
          • 1
          • 0
          Still light fighters need to be done with one engine in order to reduce the cost of maintenance. In Russia now there is no suitable engine, therefore light MiGs are made twin-engine.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  4. Sergey Latyshev Offline
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 16 July 2020 12: 33
    -6
    • 2
    • 8
    This is exactly the opposite.
    Light fighters usually have one engine, a smaller size: that is, better maneuverability, efficiency, cost of operation. Given the smaller sizes of Western electronics ..... and countries ..... then everything is justified. West knows how to count loot ....

    And heavy ones - often not enough for some fairly light and good engines. So you have to cram 2 so that it flies well and far ...

    They don’t write about it directly in the Uri-media, but according to reservations about servicing our aircraft in Europe, the time before replacing our engines is supposedly 3-6 times shorter. And the cost of maintenance is relatively higher ....
    1. Oyo Sarkazmi Offline
      Oyo Sarkazmi (Oyo Sarkazmi) 16 July 2020 13: 15
      +5
      • 6
      • 1
      Quote: Sergey Latyshev
      the time before replacing the engines in our supposedly shorter 3-6 times. And the cost of maintenance is relatively higher ....

      If this were so, in the countries of Eastern Europe, former members of the VD, these aircraft would have long disappeared. But no, they change the electronics, modernize them and leave them in service. For the service is just - many times cheaper.
      1. Sergey Latyshev Offline
        Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 16 July 2020 14: 21
        -4
        • 1
        • 5
        Everything is relative. Recently I saw an article in a VO, someone in Europe wanted to continue to service and even upgrade. But such a price for service and an hour of flight was broken, that the devil knows how it will end. Somehow even more than the average Western 6-12-22 thousand bucks per hour came out under the article ...
        1. Sergey Tokarev Offline
          Sergey Tokarev (Sergey Tokarev) 16 July 2020 15: 42
          +4
          • 5
          • 1
          It was probably the Croats who decided to send the planes for ukra repair?)))
          1. Sergey Latyshev Offline
            Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 16 July 2020 16: 25
            -4
            • 1
            • 5
            About ukrov already tired. And the Croats are fresh, yes.

            MiG and Su, by the way, quietly, without notifying the Urya media, continue to serve the remaining aircraft there ....
            1. Sergey Tokarev Offline
              Sergey Tokarev (Sergey Tokarev) 16 July 2020 16: 37
              0
              • 1
              • 1
              About ukrov I agree ... to remember and forget where they were buried.
      2. Arkharov Offline
        Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 16 July 2020 17: 22
        -4
        • 0
        • 4
        It’s just because of poverty, and it’s unlikely that they fly a lot on them, dreaming of replacing them with at least something more or less worthwhile.
    2. rotkiv04 Offline
      rotkiv04 (Victor) 16 July 2020 16: 28
      +1
      • 3
      • 2
      All your arguments are from the OBS, but in fact you are writing heresy, and about 2 engines it is immediately clear that you have no technical education.
      1. Sergey Latyshev Offline
        Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 16 July 2020 16: 44
        -2
        • 3
        • 5
        That is, not heresy: a massive 2-engine aircraft is more economical, 2 engines are easier to maintain than one, and a massive aircraft is cheaper than a light one?
        This is direct revelation from a person clearly with a technical background !!!

        And about the maneuverability you need the TTX to know that somewhere out there on the network ..
        1. Vladimir Tuzakov (Vladimir Tuzakov) 16 July 2020 21: 22
          -1
          • 1
          • 2
          The stuffing of a foreign correspondent with unknown purposes is being discussed as the truth of the highest truth ... There has been no practice of using the modern developed countries of the Air Force in major battles for the last 20 years, so what is it about, who has a stronger bull ...
        2. Fourth Horseman Offline
          Fourth Horseman (Fourth Horseman) 16 July 2020 23: 01
          0
          • 0
          • 0
          Come on?!!
          Su-35 is not a maneuverable aircraft ???
          Curious, which of the single-engine, light aircraft can still somersault?
          1. Sergey Latyshev Offline
            Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 16 July 2020 23: 47
            -1
            • 1
            • 2
            Wouldn't be maneuverable, wouldn't go into series, huh ..

            But since the performance characteristics are hanging around somewhere, people just notice that at an air show, single-engine motors, smaller and lighter, spin around an axis faster than a 2-motor ....
            And it is beautiful to hang in place to be an easy prey, there are no fools outside the airshow.
            1. Fourth Horseman Offline
              Fourth Horseman (Fourth Horseman) 17 July 2020 06: 59
              0
              • 0
              • 0
              AND! Well yes! Who am I telling?
              First-class pilot, ass! And part-time to an ingenious aircraft designer!
            2. boriz Offline
              boriz (boriz) 17 July 2020 10: 55
              +1
              • 1
              • 0
              There are stable results of training battles of the Indians with amers.
              1. Michael1950 Offline
                Michael1950 (Michael) 17 July 2020 12: 42
                -3
                • 0
                • 3
                Do not make the audience laugh ...
                1. boriz Offline
                  boriz (boriz) 17 July 2020 16: 57
                  0
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  I do not hear the answer.
          2. Michael1950 Offline
            Michael1950 (Michael) 17 July 2020 08: 59
            -2
            • 1
            • 3
            And where does a modern fighter have to tumble? Only at an air show. Nowhere else.
            F-22 destroys its opponents with a score of 144: 0, while in level flight... The low-speed F-35, "penguin", destroys its opponents also in horizontal flight, with an average score (Red Flag of two years ago) 21: 1, and the opponents are all the most modern American fighters of the 4th generation ...
            1. Fourth Horseman Offline
              Fourth Horseman (Fourth Horseman) 17 July 2020 13: 59
              0
              • 1
              • 1
              I haven’t heard about missile defense, no?
              And for the destruction by penguins of all and sundry, this is a regular marketing chatter.
              Penguins would not be Americans if they had not praised and promoted their goods, with permanent defects.
              1. Michael1950 Offline
                Michael1950 (Michael) 17 July 2020 14: 15
                -3
                • 1
                • 4
                I haven’t heard about missile defense, no?

                And who have they helped in the last 30 years? Not a single example ... negative

                And for the destruction by penguins of all and sundry, this is a regular marketing chatter.

                This is a medical fact. Checked repeatedly, certified, recorded, recorded in all digital archives - it can be picked up at any second and shown to new young pilots, trained on the basis of this experience, reproducing everything "life-size" on simulators.

                Penguins would not be Americans if they had not praised and promoted their goods, with permanent defects.

                Yeah, and all the buyers are dumb and illiterate, especially here in Israel: they’re gaining F-35 without looking and picking up, they say that they’ve bombed a number of Iranian factories, and they don’t just get out of Syria ... lol
                Of course, sooner or later the first stealth will be really shot down, but it will be rather late than sooner! wink laughing
              2. Michael I Offline
                Michael I (Michael I) 18 July 2020 09: 39
                -1
                • 0
                • 1
                Do you have other numbers?
  5. Potapov Offline
    Potapov (Valery) 17 July 2020 09: 02
    -1
    • 0
    • 1
    It was not necessary to get rid of the MiG-ovskoy firm demshize ruling ...
  6. Morowind Offline
    Morowind (Aleks) 18 July 2020 01: 44
    +2
    • 3
    • 1
    Quote: Michael1950
    I haven’t heard about missile defense, no?

    And who have they helped in the last 30 years? Not a single example ... negative
    More attentively and thoroughly you need to look for information.
    However, such as you, it is not given.

    And for the destruction by penguins of all and sundry, this is a regular marketing chatter.

    This is a medical fact. Checked repeatedly, certified, recorded, recorded in all digital archives - it can be picked up at any second and shown to new young pilots, trained on the basis of this experience, reproducing everything "life-size" on simulators.
    So go to the doctors and ask for the facts. Well, if certified in all archives, and at any second you can show it, then SHOW.

    Penguins would not be Americans if they had not praised and promoted their goods, with permanent defects.

    Yeah, and all the buyers are dumb and illiterate, especially here in Israel: they’re gaining F-35 without looking and picking up, they say that they’ve bombed a number of Iranian factories, and they don’t just get out of Syria ... lol
    Of course, sooner or later the first stealth will be really shot down, but it will be rather late than sooner! wink laughing

    Yes, of course, it’s not a pity to buy the F-35 with penguin credit money, if anything, and ditch, but you see, and this is not allowed by the penguins. Nowhere is the fact recorded, in any form, and therefore such a fact cannot be shown, about the participation of Israeli F-35s in the bombing of Iranian factories, and even more so in the raids on Syria.
    Are you there at all ...? Who will send you a plane worth 150 million, Karl, 150 million, to bomb sheds that are not even worth the bombs dropped on them?
    Moreover, the penguins will ask in full if the plane is lost, and if it is shot down, then it is a complete disaster. Who would buy such expensive garbage.
    F-16s flew. Something was bombed there, and they tried to fire rockets, but from afar, and without aiming)))
    1. Michael I Offline
      Michael I (Michael I) 18 July 2020 09: 41
      -1
      • 0
      • 1
      This is skill, to shoot from afar and not aim, and regularly hit))
      1. Michael1950 Offline
        Michael1950 (Michael) 18 July 2020 14: 40
        -2
        • 1
        • 3
        The comrades simply do not know that the circular probable deviation of the same GBU-39 (American) is of the order of 1-3 meters, when it is thrown without aiming from a height of 11 km and a range of 110 km. laughing
        Similarly, for three Israeli gliding bombs: Spice-250 (113 kg, range 110 km from 11 km), Spice-1000 (457 kg, range 110 km from 11 km) and Spice-2000 (907 kg, range 70 km s 11 km).