The source announced the transfer of four Su-57s to the Aerospace Forces with a slight delay

January 4 2022 55

Information appeared on the Web that four Su-57 fighters produced at the aircraft plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur were handed over to the Russian military. Thus, albeit with a slight delay, the earlier promise made by the aircraft manufacturers was allegedly fulfilled.

However, this is unverified information and no details are available. The Russian Ministry of Defense did not officially report on the receipt of these aircraft from the Russian aviation industry for the Russian Aerospace Forces, which were planned to be delivered by the end of 2021.

On December 31, 2021, the United Aircraft Corporation cheerfully reported that its enterprises have fulfilled all obligations under the state defense order and are increasing their capacity to increase the rate of serial production of the Su-57. The corresponding video was posted on the company's YouTube channel, but there is very little specifics in it.

At the same time, on December 21, the commander of the Eastern Military District, Colonel-General Alexander Chaiko, told the media during the final board of the Russian Ministry of Defense that the Air Defense Forces will receive the first Su-57 in 2022. Considering that there were no talks about other military districts, it can be assumed that he was talking about the above four Su-57s, without a time reference. Consequently, these four Su-57s will be based in the Far East, away from Russia's tense western border.

Note that the production of this batch of fifth-generation aircraft was closely monitored throughout 2021. Chinese, American и Russian MASS MEDIA.

55 comments

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

gunnerminer

-23

4 January 2022 14: 39

It is doubtful whether the Su-57 belongs to the fifth generation of the aircraft. Its crew is not equipped with a God-eye-type helmet. With all-round visibility and full display of important information on the helmet. The invisibility of this aircraft is doubtful. There are many protruding parts, the characteristic sawtooth edge of the doors is only in the weapons compartment. and technological hatches on the fuselage are conventional rectangular. There is a noticeable amount of bare metal in the area of the power plant - it should be perfectly visible in the radio range. Second stage engine not ready product 30.
An air expert, a former designer of the Sukhoi Design Bureau, Vadim Lukashevich, on the air of the NSN, explained why the Su-57 cannot yet be considered fifth-generation aircraft.

“Fifth generation aircraft have three key metrics. These are supersonic cruising speed, low visibility and integration of all aircraft systems into a single complex. If we compare American planes with ours, then ours is not yet the fifth generation. It does not yet meet the stealth indicator, it needs to be adjusted. There are also no standard engines that will allow it to match in speed. For the Americans, if we talk about the F-22, then this is a full-fledged fifth-generation aircraft, "he explained. According to the expert, the Su-57 is ahead of foreign aircraft only by its super-maneuverability, but it is not needed for a fifth-generation aircraft.

“All modern air battles are carried out at medium range, 30-50 km. The weapons system decides in them: you need to quickly detect the enemy and launch a missile. The whole ideology of the fifth generation is not to engage in close maneuvering combat. The car went into production, and rightly so, but the designers will still bring it to mind. The fact that she went into the series does not mean that she was adopted for service. Until the plane receives the engines for which it was designed, and the weapons systems that are now being developed, we cannot talk about the fifth generation. It will take several years to fine-tune it, ”Lukashevich stressed.

The Su-57 was created in response to the production of the F-22, and the Su-75 as a response to the F-35. The F-22 produced over 100 units for the United States Air Force. The F-35s produced 160 units for the US Air Force, and several hundred for US vassals.
1. KENTEK
  
  +6
  
  4 January 2022 15: 08
  
  Rukaletso, what nonsense.
2. Old Skeptic
  
  +12
  
  4 January 2022 16: 17
  
  Dear guvnerminer, you are simply, Lev Myshkin, and useless.
  
  Do not use OUR when writing about Russia. You are not ours, take it at last, you don’t even look like it.
  
  Stupid balabol. Stop shitting in the comments, just write your nickname and everyone will understand everything, do not waste letters.
  1. gunnerminer
    
    -17
    
    4 January 2022 16: 33
    
    Don't be nervous, you are among friends.
    1. Old Skeptic
      
      +11
      
      4 January 2022 16: 38
      
      Tambov Wolf is your friend.
3. unholyknight
  
  +9
  
  4 January 2022 17: 47
  
  Ohoho. Mde. You should at least have played aviasims to realize that the battle takes place within minutes at 30-50 km, and if the first missile exchange was unsuccessful, then you have to either scatter or approach again. this is where the aircraft's ability to maneuver and fire melee missiles comes into play.
  
  First, the “god’s eye” helmet turned out to be a chocolate eye - heavy and uncomfortable, which in conditions when it takes a little longer to fly than to fight will only negatively affect the pilot’s efficiency. Not to mention the all-out touchscreens on the F35, which the pilots swore at that it was difficult to work with them, especially when it was necessary to maneuver.
  
  Second, all these tales about "protruding details" are like fairy tales. And they are based on photos of prototypes, which, as it were, are not serial samples and on which various solutions were tested. On the serial ones, the protruding parts were removed. So it's just a hand-egg.
  
  Third - forgotten L-spectrum radars in the wings, which this stealth is just a side. That is, a situation will not work out when the F-35/22 can enter invisible, because thanks to these radars, the pilot of the Su-57 will stupidly KNOW that THERE IS SOMETHING. And already having knowledge of where the enemy is, you can work with this, and it is also easier to dodge missiles. Oh yes - the beloved AAMRAAM needs to be kept with the radar beam until it locks onto a target at a distance of 10 km. This is just in case.
  
  Oh yes - the beloved F-22 has no lateral projection radars. Cut to reduce the price. And there is no IRST station either. What this leads to - was seen in Syria, when the Su-35 insolently took a picture of all such stealth F-22 at a distance from the cannon. Something after that, the Americans somehow abruptly stopped using them there.
  1. gunnerminer
    
    -21
    
    4 January 2022 19: 19
    
    At least hang up the Su-57 with radars, five obsolete AWACS and U complexes, for all districts and fleets, its crew will not be helped.
    
    to radars, the pilot of the Su-57 will stupidly KNOW that THERE IS SOMETHING
    
    His old helmet will not allow such a flow of information. 4 Su-57s will not cope with so many enemy aircraft. Moreover, in the absence of a continuous Russian information space. Without long-range air-to-air missiles. The God's eye helmet is used more than one place in combat conditions. on the Syrian bridgehead. The crew of any AWACS and NATO complex expands the capabilities of the F-35 and other NATO aircraft, more than 50 km. But the Russian crews have no one to rely on. Neither organized reconnaissance, nor a continuous reliable information field, nor modern ammunition. even the old minuscule. Given the size of the operational zones of the Russian military districts and fleets.
    1. Vissarion Golubov
      
      +3
      
      5 January 2022 15: 52
      
      So savor our misses!
      Ancestors sent congratulatory telegrams to Japanese admirals after Tsushima? As they say, you can't leave the breed ...
      1. gunnerminer
        
        -12
        
        5 January 2022 16: 55
        
        I don’t relish. Just discussing.
    2. Vissarion Golubov
      
      +1
      
      5 January 2022 18: 10
      
      Ulyanovsk will accelerate modernization. IL -76, riveted and A100. No question: the main thing is that the production is not in Tashkent.
      1. gunnerminer
        
        -9
        
        5 January 2022 19: 46
        
        Ulyanovsk modernization has been promised since 1994.
        
        Vissarion Golubov
        
        -1
        
        11 January 2022 14: 49
        
        Ulyanovsk, from scratch, IL-76, participated in the transfer of specialists to Kazakhstan. So, dashing trouble: the beginning! I think Ulyanovsk will accelerate!
        
        gunnerminer
        
        -5
        
        23 February 2022 01: 12
        
        IL-76MD-90A, only four aircraft participated in the transfer of 3200 military personnel. The remaining 50 museum exhibits of the IL-76. In 1979, 100 brand new Il-76s and 20 Aeroflot Tu-154s participated. And they transferred the airborne division. In the 80s, Uzbeks at TAPOIC manually assembled 50 Il-76s a year. Ulyanovsk residents are now, on an automated line, barely mastering three Il-76MD-90A a year.
  2. gunnerminer
    
    -7
    
    5 January 2022 16: 17
    
    Something after that, the Americans somehow abruptly stopped using them there.
    
    Have applied, are applied. But two Su-57s spent most of the Syrian holidays in a sealed hangar. At the same time, NATO crews are provided with AWACS and U systems constantly, in the Syrian theater of operations. And the only Russian old morally old A-50U is constantly parked. The rest of the questions are answered below.
    1. EMMM
      
      0
      
      22 February 2022 23: 16
      
      And interestingly, do you sometimes look at the Internet, or do you write only under the dictation of the curators? I advise you to see that two Su-57s on the same "117" engine flew to Syria, and this engine was miraculously delivered from Syria to Russia in two days to install and transfer the second aircraft.
      By the way, if someone is interested in this story, I can post the material.
      1. gunnerminer
        
        -5
        
        23 February 2022 01: 14
        
        This is a fable for pre-conscripts of the youngest age, from the slums of Copenhagen.
4. maiman61
  
  +6
  
  4 January 2022 20: 33
  
  I often see you with subversive thoughts. Maybe it's time to take care of the FSB?
  1. gunnerminer
    
    -11
    
    4 January 2022 20: 41
    
    Forward ! Get busy.
    1. maiman61
      
      +2
      
      5 January 2022 18: 30
      
      Smack while you can!
  2. Old Skeptic
    
    +5
    
    4 January 2022 21: 51
    
    Solovki cry for him.
    1. gunnerminer
      
      -13
      
      4 January 2022 22: 22
      
      Get busy with the officers of the Kadyrov regiment, and be sure to wear a heavy-duty body armor before your interview.
5. S WITH
  
  +9
  
  4 January 2022 21: 30
  Lukashevich, from his words, developed rubber fuel tanks, so he can only be considered an aircraft designer))
  God's eye - for the first time in the world, a helmet-mounted sight was installed on a mig-29 pilot's helmet 40-35 years ago)) .. a su57 pilot can aim a rocket by moving his pupil, at night the helicopter's helmet is equipped with night vision devices, plus the image is projected onto special eyepieces with video cameras swir, ir, uv, etc. there is no bare metal on serial samples, everything is covered with a composite, and a lamp is made of polycarbonate, epr su57 = epr f22 = 0,3
  the engine of the first stage corresponds to the 5th generation, it allows you to take off without afterburner, this can be seen in the take-off video)) thrust is 15t, for f22 engines the thrust is 15,7, but the empty weight of f22 is 1,2 tons more.
  so that the thrust-to-weight ratio is par, but in terms of range, the radius of su57 exceeds by 30%, carries almost 3 tons of fuel more. AFAR su57 is more advanced on gallium arsenide, it can withstand high currents (voltages) and temperatures, as a result, a more powerful and long-range impulse is generated, su57 sees at a distance of up to 400 km, f22 up to 200 km.
  also su57 is equipped with side AFAR, which increases the viewing angle to almost 300 degrees, in f22 120 degrees, also su57 is equipped with a radar of the decimeter range (f22 does not), there is a radar in the tail to detect incoming missiles. there is an OLS (f22 does not), su57 has an AI that pilots an aircraft as an autonomous UAV and will soon learn how to fight, and this is the 6th generation, which will be equipped with ROFAR (working samples have been created and are working). the armament of the su57 also surpasses the f22 in range by almost 2 times, gsn afar. airborne eb jamming and blinds gos missiles and deceives radar fighters creating dozens of false phantom targets.
  I am not writing this to you, you are aware of all this)) but to those who doubt that su57 belongs to the 5th generation, but this is not the 5th generation)) this is 5,5-6 generation (6 will be with ROFAR)
  1. bobba94
    
    +3
    
    4 January 2022 22: 56
    
    In one of his comments, the miner wrote that there is no hypersound now, not at all, someday there will be hypersonic missiles, but now they are not. Today I saw a link to the "aviaexpert" Vadim Lukashevich. I know the biography of this expert, hundreds of design engineers worked at the Design Bureau then, he was one of them, no better and no worse ... Why am I? It turns out like an old Chinese proverb:
    
    You said - I believed, you repeated - I doubted, you began to insist, and I realized that you were lying.
6. Arthur -ashf
  
  0
  
  6 January 2022 12: 51
  
  Well, how can you write anything like a threshing floor ?! If only they asked who this Lukashevich is ?!
7. dpu
  
  +2
  
  6 January 2022 17: 24
  
  The F-35 has a cruising speed of 850 km / h. Supersonic is simply contraindicated for him. Pieces of it fall off. Or supersonic is required only for 5th generation Soviet (Russian) aircraft. Directly some sick Scandinavians with legal doping in biathlon and cross-country skiing. They can, but the Russians are not allowed. Nonsense...!
8. Gadley
  
  0
  
  30 January 2022 05: 08
  
  The F 35 is also not a 5th generation aircraft; its engine does not support supersonic. So, apart from the F 22, there are no more 5th generation aircraft.
9. EMMM
  
  0
  
  22 February 2022 23: 06
  
  Sir, you're fixated on "God's Eye" like a drunk on a bottle. This system does not work in principle, and your spells are already getting a little
Sergey Latyshev

-8

4 January 2022 18: 01

On the one hand, it is joyful that it is there and that 4 SU57s have allegedly been secretly handed over / will be handed over.

On the other hand, it shows the relationship to promises. The promises were given out loud and officially, while 57 were passed / not passed on secretly and silently.

The main thing is to distribute. At least 1 layout 75, at least in a year they changed 1 round nozzle to 1 flat one, even though the super-propagated SUPERJET is now AURUS.
5 foreign letters is a completely different matter.
Teaser

-5

5 January 2022 10: 37
Quote: unholyknight
Ohoho. Mde. You should at least have played aviasims to realize that the battle takes place within minutes at 30-50 km, and if the first missile exchange was unsuccessful, then you have to either scatter or approach again. this is where the aircraft's ability to maneuver and fire melee missiles comes into play.

For this, the new F-15EX can take up to 22 air-to-air missiles.

First, the "gods eye" helmet turned out to be a chocolate eye - heavy and uncomfortable, which in conditions when you have to fly a little longer than fight will only negatively affect the pilot's efficiency.

It continues to improve. So far, the main drawback is that it is very expensive, up to 400 thousand dollars per unit.

Second, all these tales about "protruding details" are like fairy tales. And they are based on photos of prototypes, which, as it were, are not serial samples and on which various solutions were tested. On the serial ones, the protruding parts were removed.

If radar blockers have not been installed in the input devices, talking about "protruding parts" does not make sense. Have they been installed? Not yet. Otherwise it would have been announced on the BBC!

Third - forgotten L-spectrum radars in the wings, which this stealth is just a side.

This is not true: the L-band is 1–2 GHz, the wavelength is 15–30 cm. Someone lied to you that in this range stealths are seen "much better", this is not true. They are not yet visible "as in the palm of your hand" at wavelengths of ~ 1.7 meters (radar type "Sky"), problems with stealths begin with a range of 5+ meters (radar "Resonance-NE"), and as in the palm of your hand, stealths are visible only over-the-horizon radars ("Container", etc.), with a wavelength of 28+ meters. The L-range for stealth is "like a pellet to an elephant," so don't tell this tale to anyone else anywhere in decent places.

That is, a situation will not work out when the F-35/22 can enter invisible, because thanks to these radars, the pilot of the Su-57 will stupidly KNOW that THERE IS SOMETHING.

See above - this is the phuflogony of an amateur who has no idea what the difference is between optical scattering of radio waves (a> 4λ), resonant scattering (a ~ λ) and Rayleigh (a << λ), where a is the length / width / height object to be located, λ is the wavelength. In the L-band, the scattering of probing pulses is completely optical, since the dimensions of even a relatively small F-35:
Length: m 15.7
Wingspan: 11m
Height: 4.4 m
Which is many times greater than four times the wavelength of the L-band. Therefore, stealth does not disappear there, it worsens by several percent - and that's it.... Therefore, it is more than likely that on the combatant Su-57, the wing radars will be abandoned - as unnecessary and ineffective, in addition, they dramatically increase the aircraft's own signature, even in the off mode.

And already having knowledge of where the enemy is, you can work with this, and it is also easier to dodge missiles. Oh yes - the beloved AAMRAAM needs to be kept with the radar beam until it locks on a target at a distance of 10 km. This is just in case.

There is no need to "keep the target in the beam", for many years now it is not necessary - ALL AMERICAN radar stations operate in a) "tracking on the passage" mode; b) all radars with AFAR have LPI mode - low probability of intercept. You again "share with the members of the forum" data from 40 years ago...

Oh yes - the beloved F-22 has no lateral projection radars. Cut to reduce the price.

No. They did not set it so as not to reduce stealth. It has enough range in azimuth and elevation +/- 60 °.

And there is no IRST station either.

No, it has been in combat operation for 16 years already - it has an on-board radar "which has no analogues in the world." And through her he discovers and kills 98% enemies in the DVB. "They do not seek from goodness."

What this leads to - was seen in Syria, when the Su-35 insolently took a picture of all such stealth F-22 at a distance from the cannon.

Naturally - when one (of a pair) F-22 came down close, at arm's length to the Russian Su-25, who were trying to bomb someone there in the Kurdish territories, and told them to "reel in the fishing rods", otherwise they would be finished. And the guys got it right - they went home, and "didn't do that anymore" - they want to live. Because the second F-22 of a pair (never fly one at a time) somewhere there, at an altitude of 16 km, somewhere a little to the side, he kept everyone "at gunpoint"... Including the Su-35 ...

Something after that, the Americans somehow abruptly stopped using them there.

Brazen and stupid lies: F-22s over the entire territory of Syria are on patrol CONSTANTLY, NOW. The Russian Aerospace Forces know this, so no one runs into it. Only couch hamsters are "waving checkers" and "fables tell" about Syria.
1. gunnerminer
  
  -8
  
  5 January 2022 16: 14
  
  For this, the new F-15EX can take up to 22 air-to-air missiles.
  
  Such a set of missiles only for a significantly reduced range, with a full supply of fuel.
  
  but as in the palm of your hand, stealths are visible only over-the-horizon radars ("Container", etc.), with a wavelength of 28+ meters.
  
  It depends on how high the Stealth aircraft is moving, and at what speed.
2. Vissarion Golubov
  
  +2
  
  5 January 2022 18: 29
  
  In principle, they wrote well, read it with interest, except for the fable about a pair of F-22s. By the way, where did they come from? As long as Russia retains the ability to develop and manufacture modern aviation, albeit with difficulties, everything is fine ... By the way, is Israel able to develop a 5-generation fighter? Or again, for R&D, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Berkeley will be pulled up (just kidding). And we are all with our hump and, thank God, a lot comes out!
Teaser

-1

5 January 2022 16: 42

Quote: gunnerminer
Quote Teaser (Vasily) That is why the new F-15EX can take up to 22 air-to-air missiles.

Such a set of missiles only for a significantly reduced range, with a full supply of fuel.

No. Combat radius will be reduced notmuch.
F-15E - 13,550 lbs Internal = 6146 kg, - no PTB, no conformal TB. With conformal fuels more:
Each of the low-drag conformal fuel tanks that hug the F-15E's fuselage can carry 750 gallons of fuel.
0.8*3,785411784*750*2=4542.5 кг
Will fly far away ...

Quote Teaser (Vasily) and as in the palm of your hand, stealths are visible only over-the-horizon radars ("Container", etc.), with a wavelength of 28+ meters.

It depends on how high the Stealth aircraft is moving, and at what speed.

On the any height and with any speed. For the ZG radar, this does not matter.
1. gunnerminer
  
  -8
  
  5 January 2022 16: 50
  
  ZGRLS for detecting high-altitude high-speed targets. The combat radius will be reduced to 25% of the full. with a full supply of fuel, and with a full ammunition load.
unholyknight

+1

5 January 2022 18: 00

Quote: gunnerminer
For this, the new F-15EX can take up to 22 air-to-air missiles.

Um ... is this the same 4th generation plane WITHOUT stealth? Who will be cynically shot down just at the maximum distance of defeat, simply because it can be seen from afar and guided by a rocket? Well, yes. A great way to waste millions of dollars in the trash. And another question - how far will he fly with 22 missiles? And if you need to refuel in the air, then this is a great opportunity to find the whole group, because refueling does not do it over the constraints. As well as AWACS aircraft, by the way, because in real conditions, when it is necessary to gain air superiority in AWACS aircraft, missiles will fly first. Just long-range missiles that the Americans do not have.

Quote: Teaser
It continues to improve. So far, the main drawback is that it is very expensive, up to 400 thousand dollars per unit.

The main drawback is that he is uncomfortable and heavy. The price is not something that is of paramount importance to the American army and air force.

Quote: Teaser
If radar blockers have not been installed in the input devices, talking about "protruding parts" does not make sense. Have they been installed? Not yet. Otherwise it would have been announced on the BBC

Ohoho.

times http://s8.uploads.ru/euWbY.jpg

two https://topcor.ru/uploads/posts/2020-12/1607335820_4sfbbrzjgyo.jpg

And you continue to listen to the BBC, it will be calmer to sleep.

Quote: Teaser
There is no need to "keep the target in the beam", for many years now it is not necessary - ALL AMERICAN radar stations operate in a) "tracking on the passage" mode; b) all radars with AFAR have LPI mode - low probability of intercept. You again "share with the members of the forum" data from 40 years ago ...

One hell, you need to irradiate the plane with radar so that AAMRAAM receives data for correction. For homing, the 120th radar is too weak that the Britos have learned. The fact that a radar with AFAR has a mode of low probability of capture is so yes, there is. But there is already a question of the sensitivity of the opponents' radars, the presence of stealth in the opponents because of what it is necessary to fly closer, jamming systems and other moments.

Quote: Teaser
No, it has been in combat operation for 16 years already - it has an on-board radar "which has no analogues in the world." And through it, he discovers and kills 98% of the enemies in the DVB. "They do not seek from goodness."

Yeah. This is not necessary, and not because with the end of the Cold War, the American Ministry of Defense has buried money for a bunch of additional functions, which they even put on 4th generation eurofighters.

Quote: Teaser
No. They did not set it so as not to reduce stealth. It has enough range in azimuth and elevation +/- 60 °.

Koneeyechno. Better to see 60 degrees ahead rather than 300 degrees around the plane. To make it easier for the enemy to sneak up and shove a rocket into the nozzle. Or to fly in a zig-zag path and waste fuel for detection. Or have an AWACS aircraft nearby that literally screams "there is someone here! Shoot at me, blind the entire air group!" Oh well.

Quote: Teaser
Naturally - when one (of a pair) F-22 came down close, at arm's length to the Russian Su-25, who were trying to bomb someone there in the Kurdish territories, and told them to "reel in the fishing rods", otherwise they would be finished. And the guys got it right - they went home, and "didn't do that anymore" - they want to live. Because the second F-22 of the pair (they never fly one at a time) somewhere there, at an altitude of 16 km, somewhere a little to the side, kept everyone "at gunpoint". Including the Su-35 ...

Oha. Of course. Where do you get the weed?

Quote: Teaser
Brazen and stupid lies: F-22s over the entire territory of Syria are on patrol CONSTANTLY, NOW. The Russian Aerospace Forces know this, so no one runs into it. Only couch hamsters are "waving checkers" and "fables tell" about Syria.

Oha. Oh well. The latest information about at least some participation of the F-22 over Syria dates back to 2018. What, are we feeding our readers 4-year-old info?
1. gunnerminer
  
  -6
  
  6 January 2022 13: 26
  
  A radar station with AFAR is sufficient for this aircraft platform. Aircraft of the fifth will be provided
  generations. All Russian fighters are without stealth and without AFAR. Russian aircraft AWACS and U will not fly. Even on Khmeimim. There is only one, it saves a tiny resource. And in total there are 4 combat-ready for all districts and fleets.
Teaser

-3

5 January 2022 19: 06
Quote: gunnerminer
ZGRLS for detecting high-altitude high-speed targets.

ANYONE!

The combat radius will be reduced to 25% of the full. with a full supply of fuel, and with a full ammunition load.

Nonsense... (Or did you think that the combat radius is considered without weapons ?! )
Mass - 335 lb (152 kg). 152 * 22 =3344 kg.
https://www.airforcemag.com/app/uploads/2020/11/15E_VS_15EX_graphic-e1604686173206-796x1024.png

Maximum load F-15EX - 29.500 lbs = 13,381 kg.
For him, these 3,344 kg are "seeds". The resistance of each missile is scanty.
"25% of the maximum combat radius with 22 air-launched missile systems" is not even a joke.
1. gunnerminer
  
  -6
  
  5 January 2022 19: 40
  
  It's not about the resistance of the rocket, but about its weight; an aircraft with a full supply of fuel and full ammunition will not take off.
Teaser

-1

5 January 2022 19: 32

Quote: unholyknight
Quote: gunnerminer
For this, the new F-15EX can take up to 22 air-to-air missiles.

Um ... is this the same 4th generation plane WITHOUT stealth? Who will be cynically shot down just at the maximum distance of defeat, simply because it can be seen from afar and guided by a rocket? Well, yes. A great way to waste millions of dollars in the trash.

I understand how your soul aches for the budget of the US Air Force. How your heart bleeds for them! Most importantly, you think you're smarter than the Congressional and Senate Defense Commissions and Committees! That's great! "And the peasants don't know!"

And another question - how far will he fly with 22 missiles?

It is very far away - its ferry range is 4,814 km, which means that the combat radius (without PTB - there will be missiles) is about 950-1000 km offhand, along the upper-upper-upper profile.

And if you need to refuel in the air, then this is a great opportunity to spot the entire group, because refueling tankers do not do stealth. As well as AWACS aircraft, by the way, because in real conditions, when it is necessary to gain air superiority in AWACS aircraft, missiles will fly first.

None of them sends the first refuellers and AWACS aircraft (their functions in the most tense places have long been transferred to the F-22) /

Just long-range missiles that the Americans do not have.

There is. AIM-120D - 180 km, AIM-260 - 250 km. Moreover, there may be 15 of these on each F-22EX.

Quote: Teaser
It continues to improve. So far, the main drawback is that it is very expensive, up to 400 thousand dollars per unit.

The main drawback is that he is uncomfortable and heavy.

Did the F-35 pilots tell you this ?!

Quote: Teaser
If radar blockers have not been installed in the input devices, talking about "protruding parts" does not make sense. Have they been installed? Not yet. Otherwise it would have been announced on the BBC

Ohoho.
times http://s8.uploads.ru/euWbY.jpg
two https://topcor.ru/uploads/posts/2020-12/1607335820_4sfbbrzjgyo.jpg

Show a normal picture ?? From a production plane? They will soon go in jamb!
1. Teaser
  
  -2
  
  5 January 2022 19: 47
  Quote: Teaser
  There is no need to "keep the target in the beam", for many years now it is not necessary - ALL AMERICAN radar stations operate in a) "tracking on the passage" mode; b) all radars with AFAR have LPI mode - low probability of intercept. You again "share with the members of the forum" data from 40 years ago ...
  
  One hell, you need to irradiate the plane with radar so that AAMRAAM receives data for correction. For homing, the 120th radar is too weak that the Britos have learned. The fact that a radar with AFAR has a mode of low probability of capture is so yes, there is. But there is already a question of the sensitivity of the opponents' radars, the presence of stealth in the opponents because of what it is necessary to fly closer, jamming systems and other moments.
  
  Quote: Teaser
  No, it has been in combat operation for 16 years already - it has an on-board radar "which has no analogues in the world." And through it, he discovers and kills 98% of the enemies in the DVB. "They do not seek from goodness."
  
  Yeah. This is not necessary, and not because with the end of the Cold War, the American Ministry of Defense has buried money for a bunch of additional functions, which they even put on 4th generation eurofighters.
  
  They are "stupid", these Yankees-pindos! You know what is better to put on their F-22, and they ought to find out ?!
  
  Quote: Teaser
  No. They did not set it so as not to reduce stealth. It has enough range in azimuth and elevation +/- 60 °.
  
  Koneeyechno. Better to see 60 degrees ahead rather than 300 degrees around the plane to make it easier for the enemy to sneak up and shove a rocket into the nozzle. Or to fly in a zig-zag path and waste fuel for detection.
  
  See above. Your brightest mind is against American stupidity!
  
  Or have an AWACS aircraft nearby that literally screams "there is someone here! Shoot at me, blind the entire air group!" Oh well.
  
  Do not write complete stupid nonsense, please ?! I understand that you are smarter and more literate than all the US aviation specialists put together, but only you and your wife know this. Nobody else knows!
  
  Quote: Teaser
  Naturally - when one (of a pair) F-22 came down close, at arm's length to the Russian Su-25, who were trying to bomb someone there in the Kurdish territories, and told them to "reel in the fishing rods", otherwise they would be finished. And the guys got it right - they went home, and "didn't do that anymore" - they want to live. Because the second F-22 of the pair (they never fly one at a time) somewhere there, at an altitude of 16 km, somewhere a little to the side, kept everyone "at gunpoint". Including the Su-35 ...
  
  Oha. Of course. Where do you get the weed?
  
  This is true. "I like it, I do not like it - be patient, my beauty!"
  
  Quote: Teaser
  Brazen and stupid lies: F-22s over the entire territory of Syria are on patrol CONSTANTLY, NOW. The Russian Aerospace Forces know this, so no one runs into it. Only couch hamsters are "waving checkers" and "fables tell" about Syria.
  
  Oha. Oh well. The latest information about at least some participation of the F-22 over Syria dates back to 2018. What, are we feeding our readers 4-year-old info?
  
  It's just that in Uryupinsk not all information is brought to you on time. Therefore, such "judgments" arise. Do you think there are no more Americans in Syria ?? And you don't need to cover anyone else from the air ?! From the evil Russian aces playing a balalaika in the Syrian sky, having drunk vodka ?!
  Stars and stripes on the map (along the river) - there are Americans. And above them are American fighters, including the F-22, of course.
Teaser

0

5 January 2022 20: 00

Quote: Vissarion Golubov
In principle, they wrote well, read it with interest, except for the fable about a pair of F-22s. By the way, where did they come from?

No one ever patrols one at a time, only a couple. Even Soviet and Russian missile carriers fly over neutral seas and oceans only in pairs. Just in case, so that if something happens to one, the other can tell.
And about fighters - it's a no brainer here - one comes up to "checks documents", the other insures him, his finger on the trigger, from hostile actions. Have you ever been on a patrol, nerd?

As long as Russia retains the ability to develop and manufacture modern aviation, albeit with difficulties, everything is fine.

Russia has not been producing any modern aviation for a long time... You just don't know ...

..By the way, is Israel capable of developing a 5th generation fighter?

Israel is small, smaller than Moscow in terms of population. He has not the slightest reason to get over it when he can buy ready-made American ones. It took $ 22 billion to develop the F-62, and even a little more to develop three F-35s. We don’t have that kind of money for it.... Nobody deals with the absurdity here.

Or again, for R&D, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Berkeley will be pulled up (just kidding). And we are all with our hump and, thank God, a lot comes out!

The Jews of Israel are happy to use the developments of the Jews from MIT, or from any other world institution. We are not proud people ...
1. Stanislav Bykov
  
  +1
  
  8 January 2022 00: 04
  
  Naturally - when one (of a pair) F-22 came down close, at arm's length to the Russian Su-25, who were trying to bomb someone there in the Kurdish territories, and told them to "reel in the fishing rods", otherwise they would be finished. And the guys got it right - they went home, and "didn't do that anymore" - they want to live. Because the second F-22 of the pair (they never fly one at a time) somewhere there, at an altitude of 16 km, somewhere a little to the side, kept everyone "at gunpoint". Including the Su-35 ...
  
  Oha. Of course. Where do you get the weed?
  
  This is true. "I like it, I don't like it - be patient, my beauty!"
  
  Do you so want it to be true, in fact, this is nothing more than your erotic fantasies, or did the American flyers tell you about this personally? What makes you think that if there was a pair of F-22s, then there was only one Su-35?
Teaser

-2

5 January 2022 20: 08

Quote: gunnerminer
It's not about the resistance of the rocket, but about its weight; an aircraft with a full supply of fuel and full ammunition will not take off.

- Takes off with 22 air-to-air missiles, a full supply of fuel in internal tanks and a full supply of fuel in conformal tanks.
6146 + 4542.5 = 10,688.5 kg.
What "fuel supply" and what "ammunition load" do you still need? Oh yes, I forgot: the ammunition is attached to the gun, Guns: 1 × 20 mm (0.787 in) M61A1 Vulcan 6-barreled Gatling cannon, 500 rounds of either M-56 or PGU-28 ammunition.
And it won't take off - why ??
empty weight of 14,500 kg
14,500 + 10,688 + 3,344 + 100 = 28,632 kg.
the maximum take-off weight of the aircraft is 37,000 kg
There is still some stock left before the fig!
1. gunnerminer
  
  -6
  
  6 January 2022 13: 29
  
  citation Teaser (Vasily) Takes off with 22 air-to-air missiles, a full supply of fuel in internal tanks and a full supply of fuel in conformal tanks.
  
  This is a fairy tale. Russian Tu-22M3s flew from the Mozdok airfield, for bombing strikes on the Syrian bridgehead, with refueling. With less than 25% of the total ammunition on board. The same is with the aircraft under discussion.
  1. Teaser
    
    -2
    
    6 January 2022 14: 26
    
    What are you talking about? "In the garden there is an elderberry, but in Kiev there is an uncle!"
    
    It's not about the resistance of the rocket, but about its weight; an aircraft with a full supply of fuel and full ammunition will not take off.
    
    The weight of the F-15EX with a full tank (internal + conformal tanks) and 22 AIM-120D missiles is 28,632 kg... Maximum takeoff weight of the F-15EX - 37,000 kg.
    In addition, one could take almost 10 tons - if there was where to hang ...
    What do Mozdok and Rio de Janeiro have to do with it?
    1. gunnerminer
      
      -8
      
      6 January 2022 19: 18
      
      As an example.
      1. Teaser
        
        -2
        
        6 January 2022 22: 58
        
        I kind of told you very clearly ...
        
        gunnerminer
        
        -5
        
        7 January 2022 00: 03
        
        This story will do for simpletons who do not go into details.
        
        Teaser
        
        -2
        
        7 January 2022 00: 40
        
        Are you talking about some strange nonsense? Didn't you really understand the elementary things?
        I can repeat "for the simpletons who do not go into details": the F-15EX aircraft, with 22 air-to-air missiles suspended and the main + conformal tanks completely filled, has a takeoff weight while almost 10 tons less than its maximum takeoff weight! Therefore, he can take off without any effort and fly to the full combat radius.
        How do you understand?
        
        Teaser
        
        -2
        
        7 January 2022 01: 59
        
        Here he is, handsome:
        
        gunnerminer
        
        -5
        
        7 January 2022 19: 20
        
        The main component of this beauty is a highly moral, super-motivated, trained command staff, aerial reconnaissance, numerous AWACS and U complexes with radar with AFAR, a continuous information field, numerous tankers.
2. wamp
  
  0
  
  10 January 2022 15: 19
  
  Quote: Teaser
  Takes off from 22 airborne missiles
  
  What did you mean?
  AIM-9 Sidewinder? Only they are in size ...
  But 3,344 / 22 = 152 hints at the AIM-120 AMRAAM, but 22 pieces are not in size.
  I'm 99% sure that you screwed up.
  
  Quote: Teaser
  the maximum take-off weight of the aircraft is 37,000 kg
  
  Max. takeoff weight of the Su-35: 34,5t. (worst-case: rain, heat, highlands)
  
  Quote: Teaser
  14,500+10,688+3,344+100= 28,632 кг.
  the maximum take-off weight of the aircraft is 37,000 kg
  There is still some stock left before the fig!
  
  Don't you get the impression that something is wrong?
  
  For the Su-35 equipped: 19t + fuel: 10t + armament: 4t = 33t (max 34,5t)
  - everything is close to reality.
  
  Quote: Teaser
  empty weight of 14,500 kg
  
  In the United States, this is completely empty airplane, no lubrication, no hydrofluids, no oxygen, no antifreeze, no pilots, no minimum fuel volume (mandatory balance to the neighboring airfield), no loaded cannon and no 4 short-range missiles.
  In Russia, this is included in the mass "equipped"aircraft (Su-35 19t), but due to the stupidity of the hackers (like you), this weight item was renamed" empty ".
Teaser

-2

8 January 2022 00: 54

Quote: Stanislav Bykov
Naturally - when one (of a pair) F-22 came down close, at arm's length to the Russian Su-25, who were trying to bomb someone there in the Kurdish territories, and told them to "reel in the fishing rods", otherwise they would be finished. And the guys got it right - they went home, and "didn't do that anymore" - they want to live. Because the second F-22 of the pair (they never fly one at a time) somewhere there, at an altitude of 16 km, somewhere a little to the side, kept everyone "at gunpoint". Including the Su-35 ...

Oha. Of course. Where do you get the weed?

This is true. "I like it, I don't like it - be patient, my beauty!"

Do you so want it to be true, in fact, this is nothing more than your erotic fantasies, or did the American flyers tell you about this personally? What makes you think that if there was a pair of F-22s, then there was only one Su-35?

Firstly: the Su-35 could have at least a link there (4 aircraft), but the second F-22 has 6 long-range air missile systems + 2 short-range air missile systems. This is enough for a link with interest. Russian pilots know this, there are simply no fools to "jump" on the F-22 and there never will be... Only journalists paint it ...
Let's assume: one F-22 of the pair descended and approached the Su-25s TIGHTLY, to show them on their fingers that they are trying to violate the agreements between the US command in Syria and the Russian command in Syria. At this time, the pilot of the Su-35, who rushed to his rescue, saw the F-22 there (somehow, or according to the report of the pilots of the Su-25), heroically decided to shoot it down!
Can he do it? Will be able. May be. Launched a rocket ... Contrary to categorical the ban of their command.
What will happen in the next seconds ?!
1. The second pilot from a pair of F-22, seeing visually the launch of a rocket at his partner, will immediately shout it to him on the radio! (Russian airborne missile systems have a very unmasking loop during launch, the launch can be seen from many kilometers)

2. The airborne missile launcher does not instantly reach the target, hearing the scream of his partner, the F-22 pilot, who stuck up next to the Su-25s, will instantly jerk the handle towards himself, creating a maximum overload (or exceeding the maximum - in a combat situation this is allowed - 9.5g ) and with a very high probability will leave the sector of the capture of the GOS launched on it by the URVV.
3. The pilot of the observing F-22, after launching the missile at his partner, immediately attacks the Su-35 and will undoubtedly shoot it down. After that, he will destroy both Su-25s.
4. Then both F-22s will report what happened and go to their base, most likely Al Dhafra, in the UAE.
5. Then the US command will declare another protest to the command of the Aerospace Forces - about the inadmissibility of repeating bombing attempts at targets in the territories controlled by the Americans.
6. The Russian command, having lost three aircraft and received a huge "stick" from Moscow, will make a categorical suggestion to its flight personnel. And there will be no more similar incidents.
..............................
Option: The Su-35, by launching the URVV, shoots down the F-22, which was next to the Su-25 (or its missile will shoot down one of the Su-25s, which is more likely). Then the second F-22, as in the first version, shoots down all three, but only the further survival of Russian military aircraft in the Syrian sky will be further questionable. They can start to "get lost" unexpectedly (the appearance of stealth is impossible to control, as well as its work).
So it goes.
Teaser

-1

11 January 2022 02: 02

Quote: Wamp
Quote: Teaser
Takes off from 22 airborne missiles

What did you mean?

AIM-120D, of course.

AIM-9 Sidewinder?

It is a you for some reason (?) took it into my head.

Only they are in size ...

What does "size" mean - for external pendants ?!

But 3,344 / 22 = 152 hints at the AIM-120 AMRAAM, but 22 pieces are not in size.

This is the F-15EX.

I'm 99% sure that you screwed up.

Dogs are bullshit and creatures that do not own human means of communication.

Quote: Teaser
the maximum take-off weight of the aircraft is 37,000 kg

Max. takeoff weight of the Su-35: 34,5t. (worst-case: rain, heat, highlands)

It's about the F-15EX, what does the Su-35 have to do with it?

Quote: Teaser
14,500+10,688+3,344+100= 28,632 кг.
the maximum take-off weight of the aircraft is 37,000 kg

There is still some stock left before the fig!

Don't you get the impression that something is wrong?

Not the slightest. I have no illusions and hallucinations.

For the Su-35 equipped: 19t + fuel: 10t + armament: 4t = 33t (max 34,5t)
- everything is close to reality.

?? But what does the Su-35 have to do with it if we are talking about the F-15EX ??

Quote: Teaser
empty weight of 14,500 kg

In the United States, this is completely empty airplane, no lubrication, no hydrofluids, no oxygen, no antifreeze, no pilots, no minimum fuel volume (mandatory balance to the neighboring airfield), no loaded cannon and no 4 short-range missiles.

Just do not tell anywhere that the (your beloved) Su-35 has a "empty weight" - this is something else. And then SUDDENLY some "4 short-range missiles" - what is the general hangover with them weighing "empty weight" ?!

In Russia, this is included in the mass "equipped"aircraft (Su-35 19t), but due to the stupidity of the hackers (like you), this weight item was renamed" empty ".

Give a link to a serious source? Not out of a madhouse?
And the Su-30SM - empty weight, too, with four suspended short-range missiles?
And the Su-27? MiG-29? There is "empty weight" with how many "short-range missiles"
And I repeat for the fifth time: but what does the Su-35 have to do with it and hell knows what else ?? If we are talking about the F-15EX ?!
Teaser

-1

11 January 2022 02: 32

This nonsense deserves a separate consideration:

Quote: Wamp

Quote: Teaser
empty weight of 14,500 kg

In the United States, this is completely empty airplane, no lubrication

In this place, in more detail: what lubricants, in which places?

... without oxygen

On modern American aircraft, oxygen is produced on board during flight.

... without antifreeze

And where is the "antifreeze" used on the F-15EX ?! Even on the Su-35 - where is the "antifreeze" there ?? What are they "antifirizat" ?!

... without a minimum amount of fuel (mandatory balance to the neighboring airfield)

What does the "empty weight" have to do with it ??

... no loaded cannon and no 4 short-range missiles.

This is just wild nonsense in vegetable oil.

In Russia, this is included in the mass "equipped"aircraft (Su-35 19t), but due to the stupidity of the hackers (like you), this weight item was renamed" empty ".

A link to this nonsense ?!
Demonlivi

-1

7 February 2022 02: 38

Thank you for at least the aircraft numbers. The author did not post it online!