Su-35 vs F-35: the Arabs abandoned the best aircraft


In 2017, the UAE and the United States began negotiating the sale of the fifth generation F-35 stealth fighter-bombers to Dubai. However, the Americans were in no hurry with the deal and stopped consultations on this issue due to political circumstances, writes the Indian edition of the EurAsian Times.


USA agreed to sell the F-35 to its Gulf ally only in 2020. This happened after the UAE recognized the state of Israel. According to experts, the presence of the F-35 from the Arabs may affect the balance of power in the region.

It should be noted that over the past few years, the UAE has also been negotiating with Russia on the acquisition of 35 ++ generation Su-4 multipurpose super-maneuverable fighters, and Moscow was just one step away from selling a squadron of these aircraft to Dubai. But in the end, the Arabs abandoned the best option in favor of the worst.

Today the F-35 and Su-35 are two of the most advanced fighters in the world. Moreover, the "Russian", deprived of stealthof technologies, in some respects surpasses the American stuffed with cutting-edge and advanced developments.

The F-35 is inferior to the Su-35 in terms of speed and maneuverability, whose engines have three-dimensional thrust vector control. At the same time, the Su-35 is more difficult to detect the F-35 in the air, but the pilots are assisted by ground-based radars. In addition, the Russian combat vehicle has an excellent electronic warfare system and a jamming system. In fact, the advantages of one of the fighters in one of the characteristics are offset by a competitor in another area.

The Su-35 climbs 50 m / s faster than the F-35, but the Russian has two engines, while the American has only one. Therefore, the F-35 wins in energy efficiency, but hopelessly loses to the Su-35 in maneuverability. Moreover, the F-35 cannot compete with the F-22 Raptor and even the F-16 in this. In modern combat, only skill and experience can save an F-35 pilot from death.

In terms of armament, the F-35 carries missiles only in its internal limited compartments. Therefore, it is desirable for an American to engage in battle at a distance, avoiding rapprochement with a Russian. At the same time, the Su-35 is armed with a whole arsenal of various ammunition.
24 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in
  1. Andrey Naumov Offline Andrey Naumov
    Andrey Naumov (Andrey Naumov) 5 November 2020 10: 31
    10
    The article contains very inaccurate performance characteristics of the compared aircraft. First, the rate of climb of the Su-35 exceeds that of the F-35 not by 50 km / h, but by 50 m / s. And this value is not actual, since there is no exact data on the rate of climb of the F-35. Secondly, the F-35 has a "beast mode" in which weapons are placed on the outer wing pylons. This mode significantly reduces radar stealth and is used when air supremacy is won and the enemy has no effective air defense.


    The F-35 will not be used without the support of AWACS, electronic warfare and F-15EX fighters (air-to-air missile arsenals). The F-35 will not be using its radar in active mode for most of the combat. He will receive target designation on enemy aircraft, as well as the general operational situation in the air and on the ground, from external sources, systematize information and distribute it to other allied units. The F-35 itself will not allow a dangerous approach at a detection distance, much less engage in close air combat. Of course, it will be impossible to completely avoid such situations, but the F-35 will try to take an advantageous position for the first salvo of melee missiles.
    There is only one question. When will all this work for the F-35? So far, there is only a large list of imperfections both in the design of the aircraft and the range of weapons, and in the software. And the Su-35 is a fully operational weapons complex.
    1. Rum rum Offline Rum rum
      Rum rum (Rum rum) 5 November 2020 13: 49
      10
      I.e. To have an advantage over drying, everyone still needs to buy: AWACS, f-15EX, and ground stations?
      This, I understand marketing.
      1. Andrey Naumov Offline Andrey Naumov
        Andrey Naumov (Andrey Naumov) 5 November 2020 16: 16
        +4
        The Americans are more focused on AWACS. Ground stations do not work well on targets in the folds of the terrain and in difficult terrain, the detection range is limited even for the S-400. Therefore, the A-50U was created in the USSR, and now the A-100 Premier is being tested and refined in Russia. The difficulty of detection by ground-based radars is evident from the work of the Israeli Air Force in Syria. Syrian ground stations are late in detecting airborne weapons using the approach from the radio shadow of the mountains. Usually, the air defense of the SAR works on gliding bombs and missiles, and not on their delivery vehicles - F-16.
        So, the Su-35 also needs a set of support equipment. In Russia, it is more focused on ground-based air defense and electronic warfare systems, this is a legacy of the USSR concept. In 1982, in the Lebanese (Syrian-Israeli) war, it did not justify itself, then Israel had a technological advantage even over the USSR. But now it's not a fact that everything is so sad. The appearance in the USSR and the development of AWACS (working with targets on the ground and against the background of the underlying surface), electronic warfare and electronic reconnaissance aircraft, automated battle control information systems (network-centric systems) says that that experience was taken into account.
        1. Rum rum Offline Rum rum
          Rum rum (Rum rum) 6 November 2020 20: 00
          +2
          And who argues about the benefits of AWACS, but how many have it?
          And the ground stations?
          It turns out the F-35 - only for the Americans, is fully effective in the concept of the fifth generation, and the rest are wasting a lot of money.
        2. Alexey Sergeev Offline Alexey Sergeev
          Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) 11 November 2020 17: 07
          +1
          Therefore, the USSR created the A-50U

          4 (already) elderly A-50U and 5 old A-50.
          A-100 one.
    2. King3214 Offline King3214
      King3214 (Sergius) 6 November 2020 09: 58
      +3
      It all looks great in an advertising brochure. In reality, it is almost impossible to create all the necessary conditions for the departure of "His Majesty" F35.
      1. Alexey Sergeev Offline Alexey Sergeev
        Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) 11 November 2020 17: 21
        +2
        What is the problem? Group tactics, several F-35s are flying, radar in LPI mode. Choose the best time to attack with AMRAAMs.
        SPO on the Su-35 (if you're lucky) will only indicate the fact of irradiation and the azimuth of the source. OLS has a short range, especially in PPS to the target.
        Yes, the Su-35 can be equipped with missiles, but its maneuverability will decrease. When attacked, it will drop most of its weapons while maneuvering. Again, the main medium / long-range missiles are still modifications of the R-27 (PARL seeker or TGSN), when "they" have only missiles with ARL seeker.
        In close combat there are more chances, but you have to live to see that. With an oncoming 4x4, 1-2 Su will break through to the nearest one. And the enemy attacks from several sides, using melee missiles with OVT (similar to our R-73m) and the best NSC. Losses are possible, but in such a scenario the 4ka F-35 will win.
        1. King3214 Offline King3214
          King3214 (Sergius) 12 November 2020 11: 30
          +1
          It remains to check this "advertising script from the advertising booklet" in practice.
          Something tells me that the result will not be so enchanting for the F-35.
          1. Alexey Sergeev Offline Alexey Sergeev
            Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) 17 November 2020 02: 09
            0
            I forgot to add that a lot depends on the training of pilots and their raid. But here we have no advantage.

            Something tells me that the result will not be so enchanting for the F-35.

            So you don't have to believe your feelings to understand that going out with the R-27 against the AIM-120 is of little use. (Ask about the application features)
            This is without even mentioning the difference in radar signature and avionics.
            1. King3214 Offline King3214
              King3214 (Sergius) 17 November 2020 15: 11
              +2
              Theory rarely coincides with practice.
              And the practice of piloting in the USSR and the Russian Federation differs from piloting in NATO. Therefore, it is difficult to understand your conclusion that Russian pilots are inferior to American ones?
              And why use the F35 R-27 when the R-35M missile can be used with the SU-37?
              1. Alexey Sergeev Offline Alexey Sergeev
                Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) 18 November 2020 18: 16
                0
                And the practice of piloting in the USSR and the Russian Federation differs from piloting in NATO.

                Who flies more, flies better. A universal principle.

                Therefore, it is difficult to understand your conclusion that Russian pilots are inferior to American ones?

                I said that we have no advantage in pilot training.

                And why use against f35 r-27

                Because it is still the most common (medium-range) missile in our Air Force. On the “same” side, 20 years ago, a complete rearmament of the AIM-120 took place.

                when can the R-35M missile be used with the SU-37?

                In theory. How many of them are in the arsenal, two or three dozen? (not widespread) It is good if the planes raised on patrol are armed at least partially with R-77.
                After all, no one will warn which enemy aircraft will meet.
                In addition, RVV-BD inferior to R-77 and AIM-120 in maneuverability (Max target overload 8g)
                1. King3214 Offline King3214
                  King3214 (Sergius) 18 November 2020 19: 15
                  +2
                  So it's not war now.
                  It will take a lot - they will do a lot.
                  1. Alexey Sergeev Offline Alexey Sergeev
                    Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) 18 November 2020 23: 53
                    0
                    It will take a lot - they will do a lot.

                    You can also remember how ANOTHER state, with a different economy and industry, “churned out” the T-34 en masse.
                    They won't. There is not a single example that
                    it is possible. Our modern industry does not make records.

                    So it's not war now.

                    So "they" do not have a war. It's just that the size of the economies and production capacities made it possible to update the arsenal of fighters, completely abandoning outdated (by the very principle of operation) missiles with the GOS PARL by the end of the 90s.
                    We still use the R-27 versions as medium-range missiles, at best, in half with the R-77. (Not from the wealth of the latter)





                    1. King3214 Offline King3214
                      King3214 (Sergius) 19 November 2020 13: 19
                      +2
                      Because there are many of them.
                      And the rockets have a warranty and shelf life.
                      This is well known in Ukraine, where all Soviet missiles have already exceeded their storage periods. And in reality there is nothing to fight with, even though there are enough weapons "on paper".
                      A lot of weapons with shelf life, and in peacetime, is a waste of resources. Well, or sabotage.
                      How the chip will fall.
                      1. Alexey Sergeev Offline Alexey Sergeev
                        Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) 19 November 2020 21: 53
                        0
                        I am not particularly interested in Ukraine. I heard that they were planning to buy F-16 or Gripen, with them there will be no shortage of modern missiles.
                        It took us a very long time to bring the P-77 to work. And even now they are not enough.
                        An article on bmpd on this topic:

                        https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4122588.html

                        Russian military aviation is just beginning to receive massively missiles with active homing heads. So far, the fighters are using semi-active guided P-27 ammunition. Even in Syria, the planes initially went with these obsolete Soviet models. In video frames and photographs from the Khmeimim airbase, the new R-77-1 rarely appeared.
    3. bratchanin3 Offline bratchanin3
      bratchanin3 (Gennady) 6 November 2020 10: 26
      +2
      That's right, but all these advantages are good for a technically weak enemy, for fighting partisans. All these assistants such as AWACS Iran and Egypt (not to mention Russia) will take control of their strike forces in the first place.
  2. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 5 November 2020 12: 22
    +5
    In fact, there was no chance of selling SU to the emirates, IMHO. Only promises for the media.
    It is worth comparing the shares of their trade with the Russian Federation and the United States, and what their Air Force flew before.
    RF planes and helicopters are not there at all.
    1. Pete mitchell Offline Pete mitchell
      Pete mitchell (Pete Mitchell) 6 November 2020 17: 06
      +2
      Quote: Sergey Latyshev
      In fact, there was no chance of selling SU to the emirates

      From the word quite - dancing around the Su-35 is rather an "invitation to dance" of the Americans, traders one word
  3. boriz Offline boriz
    boriz (boriz) 5 November 2020 14: 51
    +2
    ... whose engines have three-dimensional thrust vector control.

    Oh, Lord, everything is your will! Who wrote this, and how does he understand?
    The nozzle can move either in one plane (for example, only in the vertical or only in the horizontal) or in two. Where does the third dimension come from? Will it get longer or shorter? What for?
    1. Michael I Offline Michael I
      Michael I (Michael I) 6 November 2020 08: 39
      0
      As far as I know, the nozzle moves there, roughly speaking, in the lower hemisphere. That is, it deviates to the right-left and down
      1. King3214 Offline King3214
        King3214 (Sergius) 6 November 2020 10: 00
        0
        X-axis, Y-axis and Z-axis. There are actually three of them. For you: Left-Right; Top bottom; Straight. (Three again!))))
        1. Michael I Offline Michael I
          Michael I (Michael I) 6 November 2020 22: 05
          0
          I know this, just trying to explain the author's logic)))
  4. Wiener scandals Offline Wiener scandals
    Wiener scandals (Wiener Scandals) 6 November 2020 18: 20
    +1
    Something to me all this reminds me of a "chicken coop" - their aircraft-carrying group at the head of the "rooster" and the rest of the attendants. If there are so many servants for each such unit, then what do they do when it does not fly?
  5. Tazhetdin Offline Tazhetdin
    Tazhetdin (Farit) 9 November 2020 08: 55
    0
    A strange expert. I have been in aviation for over forty years. And for the first time I hear when they talk about the rate of climb in km / h. It is always in m / second. This is utter nonsense.