Requirements for the aircraft of the 5th generation. New Russian military aircraft - what do we have and what can we expect from the military-industrial complex? Expensive and very secret

Anatoly Kvochur, Honored Test Pilot of the USSR, tells about Russian aviation in the past, present and future, about the uniqueness of domestic fighter aircraft, about the leading characteristics of foreign military aircraft and military doctrines of different countries, about the possibility of achieving international parity in aviation and much more. Hero of Russia, chief designer of the "Aircraft Research Center", lieutenant colonel of the reserve. He is called in the West the "Russian flying legend" and is included in the top ten test pilots of our time.

T-50 (PAK FA) cool, but unarmed. About the fifth generation secret fighter

“A person does not have wings and, in relation to the weight of his body to the weight of muscles, is 72 times weaker than a bird. But I think that he will fly, relying not on the strength of his muscles, but on the strength of his mind,” said N. E Zhukovsky, father - Founder of national aerodynamics. Thought is primary. It is the intellect and scientific imagination of aircraft designers that make unique aircraft take off, which are being improved with the movement of world scientific and technological progress.

Aviation technology is one of the fastest growing industries, especially in the military-industrial complex. And in the world of geopolitics, the wording "who rules in the sky - rules on earth" has been tacitly established. The recent operation of the Russian Aerospace Forces in Syria partly demonstrated this formula in action, raising even more acute issues of developing the defense and combat capability of countries and the struggle for leadership in the air force. Let's try once again to figure out "who is who" in modern military front-line aviation.

Russian aviation after the collapse of the USSR

- Anatoly Nikolaevich, I would like to start talking about our Russian military aviation in the context of changes after the collapse of the USSR and the current state. What happened during this time and what are we moving towards now?

- Really promising aircraft were created. "Su-35" is already on the way out. "T-50" - several years of testing. These are all positive developments, because in the mid-1990s no one could even think that such a thing could happen. A clear trend towards the beginning of the exit from the spin, as our "corkscrews", specialists in corkscrew tests, has been identified somewhere since the mid-2000s. And now the implementation is taking place, so there are clear shifts. From an aviation point of view.

But aviation is such a complex thing, such an industry that only in the Soviet Union could they make powerful planes and helicopters on their own. But when the Union split, a significant part of the aviation industry (for example, aircraft factories) remained abroad. In particular, the largest enterprise "Motor Sich" (now Zaporizhia Joint-Stock Company "Motor Sich" is one of the largest in the world and the only enterprise in Ukraine for the production, testing, support in operation and repair of 55 types and modifications of economical and reliable engines for dozens of types aircraft and helicopters for various purposes operated in 106 countries of the world - auth.), the largest design bureau (KB) of Antonov, where they made excellent aircraft, including the largest in the world (An-124, An-224, Mriya).

Many enterprises of the aviation industry remained in the south-east of the USSR, now it is a separate state. For example, in Tashkent there is the largest plant that produced the Il-76 military transport and civilian aircraft, as well as Il-78 tankers. There are many such examples.

What does this mean for us, for Russia? This means that industrial cooperation somehow works, but is lame, because it is no longer a relationship between enterprises, but between states. The price of the issue is growing, it is necessary to maintain interstate relations, but they are developing hard, difficult, in any case.

We have competitors - while it is clear that the competitors did not have such changes. In France, which is one of the leaders in the aircraft industry, for example, everything is fine in general. The UK continues to work. The Germans got involved very actively - since they once had an aviation industry, with the help of which they almost captured the Soviet Union.

And it's all being restored. This is our competitor. We have lost a lot of time. And time in competition is one of the determining factors. This is not only money, but lost ideas, missed opportunities, and most importantly, specialists who left the industry.

Fifth generation aircraft

- The President of the Russian Federation spoke about this - and the meaning of the statement boils down to the fact that although we lost time, it gave us a chance to create technologies taking into account the latest developments and surpass foreign partners in some way.

- This is true. In the part that while the Americans were developing themselves, assuming that there was a protracted crisis in the USSR, they were inventing and building something. It turned out that this was not entirely successful. And, for example, the F-22 Raptor, the 5th generation American fighter, was conceived and launched at about the same time as our 5th generation MiG aircraft, which was called "Project 1.42". He did not have a serial name, but this aircraft was created and he had a flight. I have been a part of this process since I was appointed lead test pilot for the project in 1987. In 1992, it was rolled out, in 1994 it made its first flight, although according to the plans of the Soviet Union in 1989, the aircraft was supposed to fly.

F-22 flew a little later, but there is a different approach. We had a definite leading organization and cooperation that should deal with this. The Americans, by using a significant part of the planet's resources, and not just their own, could afford to create a different approach. They have six companies, major developers of military aircraft, participated in the project competition.

According to the results of the competition, these six companies were divided into two associations, each of which was allocated funds from the budget for the construction of 2 copies of the experimental aircraft YF-22 and YF-23, which further participated in the competition, already according to the results of the achieved characteristics. In addition, both of these aircraft, such as the YF-22, were equipped with different engines.

The planes were the same, but with different engines. As a result, the YF-22 and YF-23 models were chosen. YF-22 won, and the winning corporation expanded at the expense of the losers.

The first real F-22 combat aircraft flew in 1997. At that time, “democratic changes” were rapidly developing in our country. We could well compete with him. But as soon as our "counterweight" weakened, they apparently also relaxed, which happens quite objectively, and, as it turned out, they missed a lot.

In particular, the F-22, for example, was recognized as an unsuccessful project, about one and a half hundred aircraft were produced, as about 700 were planned. At present, the production of this aircraft has been discontinued. This fighter was given approximately the same requirements as ours: low visibility, super maneuverability, operational manufacturability and cruising supersonic (supersonic speed in non-afterburning engine mode - ed.). Everything was implemented to one degree or another, but the aircraft was considered unsuccessful.

- They found themselves in a situation where they have practically no aircraft of the 5th generation.

- That one is unsuccessful, and they did not start building the other in time. Russia, with a time shift, has created a fundamentally new T-50 fighter, which can become a very competitive combat vehicle. In addition, tests are being completed and serial production of the Su-35 aircraft has begun at my native aircraft plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur - this is such an intermediate version, a highly optimized, improved copy of the Su-27.

With super-maneuverability, huge flight ranges, with a qualitatively new onboard sighting and navigation system, with complex weapons, etc. This gives us hope that parity can be restored.

- There is evidence that the F-35 is also recognized as an unsuccessful project. The Australians brought our two aircraft ("T-50" and "Su-35") with American ones (F-22 and F-35) according to various technical parameters. Russian fighters were ahead by a wide margin. The result is the F-35, a third generation aircraft with elements of the fifth.

- Here I can express my point of view in this way. Firstly, the F-35 aircraft is implemented in three versions: land, vertical takeoff and landing, short takeoff and landing, for basing not only on aircraft carriers, but also on aircraft carriers without ejection take-off devices and braking machines with cables for hook engagement.

Secondly, in the USSR, a similar aircraft was also built, flew, landed on an aircraft-carrying cruiser - in general, they underwent full-scale tests. It was called "Yak-41". The Yakovlev Design Bureau is the only design bureau that has mastered vertical takeoff and landing technologies. This is a unique design bureau that developed, tested and put into mass production the Yak-38 aircraft, which was operated on aircraft-carrying cruisers.

Based on this knowledge and technology, when in the Design Bureau. Yakovlev, my good friend and comrade, Alexander Nikolaevich Dondukov, who for some time was a leading engineer, then deputy chief designer for the MiG-29K carrier-based aircraft, began to create a vertical take-off and landing aircraft using approximately the same technology as the F-35 (this lift motors arranged differently, etc.).

He ("Yak-38" - auth.) could be supersonic, its design was supersonic. Moreover, the engine, as in the F-35, could include a forced mode, with heavy loads, temperatures and high thrust. When the country (USSR - ed.) stopped in its development, this project was discontinued.

I suppose that our technologies "leaked" abroad, because the Americans did not have such knowledge in creating vertical take-off and landing aircraft. They used the Harrier - it's a British aircraft, and the UK is a very strong country in terms of aircraft construction. I was familiar with two English test pilots who built and tested this aircraft.

A lot of intelligence was invested in this aircraft by both design engineers and test pilots. When I flew it myself, I realized how easy it is to operate, it didn’t even require special knowledge. Easier than a helicopter. True, he does not have supersonic. So all this knowledge was transferred to the Americans. At one of the air shows in Farnborough, English colleagues in the profession, veterans who participated in the Harrier tests, said that they were participating in the F-35 project.

How unsuccessful is he? A number of aspects must be taken into account. Firstly, there are always "difficulties in growth", which are resolved as the aircraft matures, as well as when it is tested in serial operation. Secondly, it is a matter of military doctrine, of this or that state.

We have a completely defensive doctrine: we must protect our country, people, industry, science - everything that the state lives on. And we do not need to land on aircraft carriers, sail and fly somewhere to other continents. The United States has a different doctrine - the doctrine of global domination. Today they have, in my opinion, 17 aircraft carrier ships, and we have one. And they need planes that they could bring on aircraft carriers, whether it be to Vietnam, or to Cambodia, or to the Middle East.

Of course, they are unlikely to enter the North Sea, somewhere from the Arctic Ocean, because it is difficult. We see different doctrines. Accordingly, different projects of aircraft. They are like this (vertical takeoff and landing - ed.) an aircraft is needed, but we, in my opinion, are quite satisfied with such aircraft carriers that we now have, such as the Admiral Kuznetsov. If a sufficient number of normal aircraft are based on them, if there are more of these aircraft carriers, then we will be able to cover our shores in the Far East at the approaches. Such is my understanding.

USA Fighters

- Anatoly Nikolaevich, in continuation of the conversation about US fighters ... The Americans are investing unrealistic efforts, money, overcoming a lot of difficulties in order to eventually, roughly speaking, spread the F-35 around the world, for their closest allies (Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia and etc.). In connection with the aggravation of the conflict in the East China Sea, the States intend to rearm Japan and South Korea, for example, with these latest aircraft, replacing their existing F-15s and F-16s. Do you think such efforts will have an effect?

- Here it is not clear to me why Japan needs the F-35, which in fact does not have aircraft carriers. After all, this aircraft has optimal characteristics to take off from the ship. And if it is intended for such operations that do not require a ship, but an airfield is enough, then it carries the extra weight inherent in a vertical take-off aircraft, extra equipment.

This is very suboptimal, because the price of the issue in terms of effective cost for the Japanese will greatly deteriorate. That is, the price will be high, and its efficiency is worse than even that of the modernized F-15, because the F-35 does not have good supersonic sound, it cannot raise a lot of weapons.

Yes, he has some signs of stealth, this is not a completely stealth aircraft, especially if you hang the weapon on an external sling.

- The F-35 is available in three versions - and they are all vertical takeoff?

— No, not all. There is a short takeoff, vertical and there is a purely land aircraft. The one that cannot land on an aircraft carrier is lighter, in theory it should have better supersonic characteristics, and so on. But in any case, in my opinion, it is difficult to fit good characteristics into such a design.

In my understanding, the F-16, a single-engine aircraft, is more ideal. He has been living for almost four decades and feels great. But it was created precisely as an airfield-based aircraft with all the consequences. In my opinion, even the American land version of the F-35 did not become better than the F-16. And maybe even worse.

- The F-35 also has one engine. Does this mean "goodbye, afterburner supersonic"?

— It could be. This was also planned for us when I was on the creation of a fifth generation fighter. The plane was supposed to fly without afterburner and on those engines in 1987 yet. The point here is not this, but the fact that, having undertook to make a universal single-engine aircraft, the Americans, in my opinion, did not succeed in this or that properly.

As they used to say, a fighter-bomber - what is it? This is a fighter minus a bomber. I flew a fighter-bomber in the army almost 40 years ago, I really liked it. But it's still at the expense of some other qualities.

Another thing is that a modern combat aircraft, taking into account the technologies that mankind already has at its disposal, of course, must be multifunctional. But this does not mean that any boxer can equally be a Greco-Roman wrestler, perform well in karate, and so on, because these are different cultures. It's impossible. There must be some kind of main function. The rest can be good, but auxiliary. If this is a fighter-bomber, then it is still a fighter first of all. In my opinion, the F-35 did not turn out very well as a fighter.

"Multipurpose Fighter"

- Anatoly Nikolaevich, they say that in Russia until recently there was no concept of a "multifunctional fighter" at all.

- It was created, I participated in this project, but there was devastation in the country. For example, there was a unique MiG-31M aircraft. This is an aircraft with a supersonic cruising speed of 2500 km/h. There are no analogues! American combat aircraft do not reach this speed at all. And this one has cruising speed! Maximum - 3000 km / h. At the same time, the MiG-31M could lift only 10 tons, which is a very typical huge load. Of these, 6 large semi-fuel missiles, approximately 700 kg each with a firing range of 300 km. There was a powerful locator that worked at a distance of 300 km. That is, it was necessary to see the target, launch a missile at it, which requires speed, aircraft altitude, an appropriate sighting system and guided missiles. All this was created as a single system.

We flew this aircraft, got all the excellent performance about 20% above the base model. And what happened? In 1994, we completed the last combat work, MiG specialists received a congratulatory letter from the president, and after 2 months the plane was laid up - and it never flew again ... And no one explained why. Anyone would say it's absurd. After all, an airplane is a huge cooperation. For example, about 40-45 thousand people worked at the Gorky plant, where 5 types of different classes of aircraft were produced. Then he stopped...

The MiG-31 was a leadership project, because it is high-tech things related to steel welding, titanium welding, which few people could do at that time. And these projects got up.

- Now, as far as we know, the MiG-31 project has been reanimated, there is a MiG-41 project.

- Yes. In the State Duma of the Russian Federation, there were 3 or 4 high-level hearings initiated by the Defense Committee. There is an opinion there that it is necessary to resume the production of MiG-31 aircraft. But, of course, at a qualitatively different level than 25 years ago. This issue is being resolved. I can say on my own that there are no analogues to this aircraft yet. The only thing is that the Chinese "imperceptibly" how they made an aircraft carrier will be able to create something like that. But it will be just a slap in the face of Russia. Because if we, having such a technological backlog, such personnel in due time, we will lag behind those who start from scratch, like China, for example. And it's the same as building a house - and leaving to live somewhere in a shack.

- There was information that during the period of stagnation and the catastrophic situation at the enterprise, specialists from the MiG Design Bureau were forced to leave to work abroad, primarily to China.

“I heard about it too. There were also prosecutions, because these are specialists who are few in the world. They were placed in conditions of forced cooperation with foreign firms. They were left here doing nothing - this is one aspect. The second aspect is that the state did not have any clear understanding of what is possible and what is not. However, there were cases of suppression. How systemic they were, I do not know anything.

- In the end, it came to understanding what is possible and impossible?

“I think those who were put in charge of our secrets understood this, naturally. Another important factor was political will. But a lot, in my opinion, information somehow left the country.

- What is your professional opinion about Chinese fighters?

- In China, in my opinion, the only fighter is ours. They launched their own projects, they practice a lot in this. Something they copied from the MiG-21 or MiG-19. At some stage, I visited exhibitions in China several times (in Zhuhai - ed.) and, let's say, these planes did not impress me. It was all aspiration. But they made them and so on. It must be understood that this is a process of their successive approximation ...

The Chinese nation is a nation that, of course, can master any high technology, including information technology. And the fact that they rolled out a carrier-based aircraft to their new aircraft carrier - I watched the landing of this aircraft - I can say that this is a rating of "5+" on a 5-point scale. Very clean landing. The plane looks like a Su-33. Very similar. It can be seen from the approach style that he is a very good pilot and, apparently, he has very good information support. He landed very cleanly, stopped, immediately began to clean up, fold the wings on the rollback - as we once knew how. It was the first landing! And she's always tense. And the plane itself is like a beautiful model, clean, neat, painted and, it seems to me, light even in relative terms. So they have mastered it. How it was, I don't know. But it is so similar to our Su-33 that only a completely blind person will not see the resemblance.

- It is known that the Chinese are actively working on a fifth-generation fighter.

- Yes. They have two fighters. One big, one small. Both are single-engine, but the engines are different and of different dimensions. Approximately like the MiG-29 and Su-27. Only at a new level - technological and ideological.

Chinese aircraft of the 5th generation are being tested, as can be seen in the open press. When I saw this for the first time, I thought that the props, the layout, the Chinese are misinforming the world community. But a year later the plane had already flown. That is, it turned out that everything was not so. Suddenly. It's unexpected for me.

- What can you say about the fifth generation Chinese fighter?

— What can be said? China is the world's factory. They have something of their own, but, for example, they were not at the forefront in the field of microelectronics. Southeast Asia and Japan have become the best developers of modern microelectronics.

Now there is a lot of Chinese everywhere. And they have all the electronics with which you can make combat complexes. They have production - and it doesn’t matter if they themselves invented it when there was a research search, or they bought this technology from someone. It is a fact. They now have open access to this technology and can improve, to make out microns, as they say. They have the largest factories on this. Therefore, all electronics are made in China.

Our situation is not like that. And let's imagine that these technologies are embodied in a combat sighting and aviation complex? Quite.

- How then to interpret the fact that they are testing their fifth-generation aircraft, but are negotiating with our Sukhoi Design Bureau to purchase Su-35 aircraft?

- If we supply these aircraft, then, probably, we can only rejoice. But the fact is that our technology is leaving with our aircraft. They have already built more Su-27s than ours. And the Su-27 is one of the most outstanding fighter aircraft projects in the world. As a direction, as a concept, as a project.

The Chinese, when creating analogues on the Su-27, had problems with the engines, which was more difficult for them than the airframe itself. They have been mastering the engine for a long time, and I assume that they could already master it. But for a super-maneuverable aircraft, like the Su-35, thrust vector rotation is required - this is an even more difficult technological task.

However, if the industry is constantly working, if engineers are constantly improving, designers are growing, then it is not Gods who burn pots, and they can learn this. For example, the Israelis had the Lavi project, but the Americans stopped it because they were losing the aircraft market. Then this project was implemented by the Chinese in the J-10 aircraft, which is almost a copy of Lavi. A very progressive project, it was difficult to implement it without high information and production technologies.

In addition, there is a party in the PRC. One party. And this party fulfills and ensures the political will of the country's leadership. This will is unshakable, they have no discussions about which way to go. Arming with one party is easier. Building something is also easier and faster. This is known. Can you imagine that Hitler had two parties or five parties before the war? Or would Stalin have had five parties - and they would have consulted among themselves? We simply wouldn't exist.

counterfeit

- The Chinese have gained access to technology, but due to the development of the era of post-industrialism, world trade and the diversification of the world economy, many components from China go to Europe and America. There are counterfeit products. Why? Because along with components, including those for the defense industry, there are built-in chips with codes that can crack defense systems on military equipment at the right time. The US Senate Arms Committee released a shocking 70-page report on numerous shipments of counterfeit electronics to the US military. The Committee conducted a year-long study, during which it turned out that during the period from 2009 to 2010 alone, about a million suspicious parts and components passed into the US Department of Defense supply chain.

- I'm not an expert on this. But there are persistent rumors that the unsuccessful launches of spacecraft may be due to components from China. But it seems to me that for China this is probably too small, most likely it is Southeast Asia. But in Southeast Asia and Japan, at one time everything was created with US money, as far as microelectronics is concerned. And now it is slowly acquiring a regional purpose.

- Anatoly Nikolaevich, " in the past, the danger was that people became slaves. The danger of the future is that people can become robots, "said Erich Fromm. Today we are witnessing the creation of unmanned aerial vehicles and their application in practice. But what is the moral price of the issue? Some experts say that with the development of technology, people can already be removed from aviation, and bet on drones.

- The writer Ivan Efremov, whom I once read avidly, has thoughts about the role of robots, for example. And then there are the brothers Strugatsky and Stanislav Lem, who also raised such topics, but on a different level, more western, less spiritual. So the question was: people can be replaced by robots, and then what will a person do? The answer was very difficult.

Man is so arranged that he must constantly develop. Once it stops developing, it's something else. If a person is placed only in production, where he will shift parts from one place to another, then he will turn into a soulless being. A person needs to develop. Without this, as the ancient Greeks said, there is no progress - there is regression. And there is no middle ground. Therefore, robotization at some stage must have some limitations.

But you may have heard that the Americans at one time moved a lot of production outside the United States - from the point of view of a long-term vision, this becomes dangerous for a person. Because a person must constantly do something: science, production. Production "transferred" to robots. Science, too, can probably be given over to computers over time. There is such a situation - a stalemate, a dead end. I'm not an expert, but it seems to me that this threshold cannot be reached.

- The pilot will control the drone, but sitting somewhere in a chair in the Headquarters with a joystick in his hands ...

- Yes. From the point of view of their worldview, they justify everything correctly: why would they send so many people to their deaths? After all, they understand that wars will be unfair, otherwise there will be no remorse, for example. For them, this is normal. Because they do not protect themselves, but organize other programs - and attack someone. That's the way it is, in their opinion. In my opinion, if you defend the country, it will be difficult to get by with robots. It will still require dedication, self-sacrifice.

- The minds of scientists have long been excited by the idea of super-high-altitude flight, and the plane did not rise above 40 km. In this regard, they propose the concept of a fundamentally new apparatus without relying on air - the concept of a ballistic rocket plane with a hypersonic speed of up to 20 thousand km / h. In this regard, they predict that there will be no military aviation in our traditional sense. These will be completely new rocket and space systems that have nothing in common with the current military aviation. How realistic is all of this?

- I think that, of course, it is feasible. As for airplanes, now there is already a project for a civilian passenger aircraft, which should fly at a speed of approximately 4000-4500 km / h. This is a characteristic supersonic speed for combat aircraft. The average cruising speed of passenger aircraft today is 800 km/h. There was our plane "Tu-144", which flew at speeds up to 2500 km / h. He was "shut down".

Time goes by, technology develops. There is an Anglo-American project to create a passenger hypersonic, as they call it, aircraft with a cruising speed of about 4500 km/h. It will fly at an altitude above 20 km, it must become environmentally friendly. Its power plant is not based on a traditional jet engine, and there is a lot to do with electricity.

Half of the energy will be spent on generating electricity, through which plasma will be generated, a plasma cloud in front of the aircraft. Thus, the characteristics of its fuel efficiency are approaching those of a subsonic aircraft. From an environmental point of view, it will be the same, and maybe even better. So far, this is mostly business people. I talked a lot with our high-ranking people that it is time for us to create such an aircraft too. But this requires a miracle engine, a lot of knowledge and technology.

- What engine generation?

— This is the sixth generation engine.

- Some media write that in Russia there is only a prototype of the fifth generation engine - model 117C - on our latest aircraft, which is presented as a result of modernization, and not a fundamentally new development, while the American Raptor and F-35 are equipped with engines of the fifth generation F119-PW-100 and family F-135. How would you comment on this?

- I am ready to fully stand up for our engines, which have been competitive for a long time, and our super-maneuverable aircraft fly in series in different countries. For example, the Su-30MKI in India, the Su-30MKA in Algeria, the Su-30MKM in Malaysia for 15 years. And I flew it. This is a unique aircraft with a deflectable thrust vector, with huge resources.

Today we have reached a new technological level. So far, neither the Americans nor the British have such aircraft that would have similar resources with a controlled afterburner engine. I do not know of a single case of failure of our engines. And for him it was necessary to make a control system - this is also the intelligence of our developers.

Therefore, someone here is clearly "twisting" in the wrong direction. Our drivers are top notch. And in general, when the "noose" for our industry was loosened, everything began to work, as if there had not been a huge break.

T-50-1 and T-50-2 (c) Dmitry Kostyukov/AFP

In the 80s, Soviet designers, perhaps for the first time after the war, ensured such a clear advantage of domestic fighters over American ones, launching the MiG-29 and Su-27 in a series as a response to the F-16 and F-15. Not to mention super-maneuverability, it was finally possible to reach an approximately world or even somewhat higher level in engine building ...

It was possible to achieve excellent parameters in radar, which made it possible to see targets in difficult conditions (against the background of the earth, in the mountains, in conditions of interference, as well as inconspicuous targets) better than American airborne radars can. Indeed, the generally recognized lag in the element base, and simply speaking, in radio components, did not at all mean a lag in radio electronics, especially where, in addition to electronics proper, serious science was also needed, for example, issues of processing radar signals, identifying targets in conditions of interference, etc. . Here we have always been ahead.

It was possible to introduce into the series a helmet-mounted aiming system and highly maneuverable missiles complete with it, which had a rotary nozzle and could turn around on a target literally on a patch. It was precisely because of the lack of such missiles that the Americans refused to introduce such a system on the F-16 and F-15, considering it ineffective. It was possible to increase the flight range. The ferry range of a fighter without external tanks of 4,000 kilometers is impressive.

Here is what the head of the Lipetsk Aviation Center, General Kharchevsky, then still a colonel, says about this (yes, yes, the same Kharchevsky who drove Putin to Chechnya on the Su-27):

Of course, not everything was immediately implemented on serial machines, but work continued. It was impossible to stop and rest on our laurels, because the Americans are not the kind of people to put up with the superiority of a potential enemy in the air. And to give way to positions in the arms market - even more so.

Preliminary work on the creation of a multifunctional front-line fighter of the fifth generation (MFI) began in 1979. Then it was called I-90 - a fighter of the 90s. That is, the work went in parallel with the Americans. A competition was also envisaged - in the Sukhoi Design Bureau they developed their own version.

MiG MFI

Taking into account the need to protect the vast territories of the Union, the Mikoyanites developed two aircraft - a heavy multifunctional fighter and a light front-line fighter (LFI), as was the case in the fourth generation of fighters, and these projects should have been unified as much as possible. They won the competition from the Sukhoi Design Bureau, in 1986 they were entrusted with further work. Taking into account the fact that the possibilities for improving the light MiG-29 were far from being exhausted, the Customer decided to focus his efforts only on the MFIs.

The requirements of the Customer, that is, the Air Force, were very strict for him. The aircraft had to have all the features of the fifth generation that we have already mentioned: supersonic cruising speed; high maneuverability, both at subsonic and supersonic speeds; stealth; multifunctionality, that is, the ability to work on both air, ground and sea targets; improved takeoff and landing characteristics; reduction in the cost of a flight hour and ground handling;

Integration of onboard equipment into a single information and control complex with elements of artificial intelligence (the so-called expert systems), which, among other things, would not only give recommendations to the pilot, but also "forgive" beginners for gross piloting errors;

Indication of the tactical situation with the possibility of mixing information, i.e. simultaneous output and mutual overlay on a single scale of images from various sensors (remember the miracle helmet on the F-35), as well as the use of telecode information exchange systems with external sources (this, in particular, allows you to combine the radar of several aircraft into one, as it were, virtual, but a more powerful radar. I will not load readers with terms like "antenna aperture", very simplified, if, for example, enemy stealth "flashes" by chance at least one aircraft, everyone will see. A similar system was implemented on the MiG-31, and then it was implemented on both the MiG-29 and the Su-27).

It was also planned to introduce a device for assessing the physical condition of the pilot: in the event of a loss of consciousness, it would automatically bring the aircraft into a safe mode.

A quick-mount springboard was also provided, which made it possible to take off from short sections of the runway that had survived the bombing.

And even access to the cab is via a 250mm wide retractable ladder rather than a traditional portable ladder.

There were many more requirements, more specific, some of which even now, after many years, are amazing.

Work on the creation of domestic processors for the aircraft was carried out in Zelenograd, the AL-41F engines with thrust vector control were developed by Lyulka Design Bureau, aerodynamics were designed with the participation of TsAGI, a new way to reduce visibility in the radio range (by two orders of magnitude!) - plasma - was developed at the research center named after . M.V. Keldysh, a new ejection seat and an anti-g suit - in the Zvezda Design Bureau, etc.

Please note that stealth was provided in all three ways: without sacrificing aerodynamics and super-maneuverability, somewhere they used forms characteristic of stealth (sloped keels, S-shaped air intakes so that the perfectly reflecting engine blades were not visible to the locators); somewhere - absorbing mastic, and somewhere - and plasma. Why is plasma not everywhere? The same paradox of "blindness" of stealth: after all, plasma absorbs not only enemy radiation. These three methods were supposed to provide acceptable stealth without compromising other parameters.

The fighter was supposed to outperform the American F-22A Raptor, which was being developed at the same time, information about which was already leaking through various channels to our designers.

The aircraft received a working index MiG-1.42, and the first, somewhat simplified version for testing - MiG-1.44. Version 1.46, significantly improved in terms of characteristics, was worked out and was being prepared for construction. These three versions should not surprise anyone: after all, some specific decisions are made only on the basis of the results of testing the first samples, and the best thoughts may appear later, and sometimes some subcontractor can develop the desired node only after a few years, but for now you have to make do with it. , what is. The F-22 is still being finalized, as, indeed, any other aircraft, even those in the series.

The first experimental aircraft was ready in the early 90s, and the most necessary equipment for the first flight (engines, for example) was supplied by allied companies in early 1994. Let's not forget that the so-called "perestroika" with "conversion" led to the fact that many subcontractors were more puzzled by pots, pans and other survival than direct duties. And where to go if the first person of the country and the CPSU talks about "universal" values and disarmament? In the MiG Design Bureau, the role of "pots and pans" was played by lawn mowers, called factory wits, as is customary in aviation, by the names of the authors: ShiZa, i.e. Shifrin-Zaleev. I don’t know how they were with super-maneuverability ... This was in the second half of the 80s. In the 90s, consumer goods in the country were no longer of interest to anyone, and "survival" was carried out by renting out, or even selling off, production facilities, suburban recreation centers and pioneer camps that belonged to defense industry enterprises.

And as a result, the first flight took place only in May 1999. This is despite the fact that the Chinese offered their participation in the program, subject to the transfer of a license for its production.

The end of this story is known. In 1999, it was decided to give priority to the developments of the Sukhoi Design Bureau, and include MAPO "MiG" in its composition. The motives were probably the high declared price of the MFI and M. A. Pogosyan's statements about the superiority of the S-37 over the MFI in terms of performance characteristics and the possibility of launching it into a series in the near future. Despite this, work on the MFI continued, and on February 29, 2000, the first prototype of the MiG 1.42 nevertheless took off. Nevertheless, the new head of the design bureau was not interested in the further development of someone else's project, despite the failures of his own S-37 and the high level of readiness of the MFI, which could already be put into serial production at the Sokol. As a result, in 2002, a government decree was issued on the creation of the PAK FA, which finally buried both the MFI and the S-37.

Su-47 Berkut

Su-47, aka S-37, aka Su-27KM. There are plenty of conflicting versions about him in the press, so I will state one, the most, in my opinion, plausible.

It began as a competitor to the MiG MFI. Of course, the project provided for all the requirements for the fifth generation (or almost everything, more on that below), but the main, clearly visible difference from other aircraft is the swept back wing (KOS). And if for the majority of those interested in aviation it only raised questions like "Why did they screw the wings back to front?", then the doubts of specialists were much more justified.

Experiments with such a wing have been known for a long time. Back in 1944, the German Junkers Ju-287 bomber took off for the first time, which, for obvious reasons, did not go into production:

Photo warbirdsresourcegroup.org

Immediately after the war, KOS began to be investigated at the LII (flight test institute). One of the gliders P.P. Tsybin with KOS and a powder accelerator in 1947 reached a speed of 1150 km / h. Then they returned to the tests of KOS in the 70s. Here is a photo of the purge of the experimental version of the MiG-23 with KOS:

Photo fan-d-or.livejournal.com

The Americans did not lag behind, for example:

Experimental Northrop Grumman X-29. Photo airwar.ru

Why is such a wing so stubbornly attracting designers? Pavel Bulat talks about this well at http://www.paralay.com/stat/Bulat_9.pdf. Without going into technical terms, we will briefly list its advantages.

1. Air resistance at subsonic speeds is 20% less.

2. When the flight speed approaches the speed of sound, so-called shock waves or shock waves appear. This again leads to an increase in resistance, which is called wave resistance. KOS has less.

3. KOS behaves better at high angles of attack.

4. KOS has better longitudinal stability characteristics and the effectiveness of controls.

Well, a couple more advantages that are important for the fifth generation.

5. Deviated "inward" leading edge is better for stealth in the front hemisphere.

6. Weapons (rockets and bombs) must be hidden in the internal compartments, and they, for obvious reasons, should be located near the center of gravity of the aircraft. In conventional aircraft, there is also a center section, wing fastening elements, which prevents the creation of large compartments. At KOS, as we see from the photo above, the center section is shifted back, leaving room for weapon bays free.

And from these advantages follows the best maneuverability, even without the use of engines with a controlled thrust vector, and b about Great lift compared to a conventional wing of the same area, and an increase in flight range at subsonic speeds, and good anti-spin characteristics ...

We list the shortcomings, based on the article of the same Pavel Bulat.

1. Flight at supersonic speeds differs from subsonic ones by a shift in the so-called aerodynamic focus (sorry, I couldn’t do without special terminology), and this necessitates a change in the balancing of the aircraft, for which the horizontal tail serves. So, in the normal scheme, the balancing resistance is much less than in the scheme with KOS, and in the "duck" scheme, when the front horizontal tail is used instead of the stabilizer (just like in the MiG-1.42), this resistance also decreases with increasing speed. That is to say, an aircraft with KOS is poorly suited for long-term supersonic flights, and this, as we remember, is one of the requirements for the fifth generation. However, the designers said that with two engines with a thrust of 20 tons each, a long non-afterburning supersonic is possible. Who is right - I do not know.

2. With an increase in the angle of attack, the load on the wing increases, and it bends. At the same time, for a conventional wing, the "local" angle of attack decreases, for a KOS, it increases even more. This is not good, because it causes the destruction of the wing, and they tried to deal with this by increasing the rigidity, which led to an overweight of the structure.

The problem was partially solved with the advent of composites. This is carbon fiber and other new trends. Roughly speaking, these are several dozen layers of special fabric impregnated with a hardening binder and pressed. Composites are in many ways better than aluminum or titanium. With their appearance, it became possible to set the elastic properties so that the local angles of attack do not increase. True, for this it is necessary to provide a complex, directional structure of carbon fiber bundles, and this indicates its unrepairability. After all, the slightest damage with a break in the threads leads to the fact that not this small area of \u200b\u200bthe surface, but the entire panel loses its strength.

But such an aircraft has one indisputable advantage: as one American pilot said (although he said this about the "cobra" maneuver), "Wow factor hits through the roof." This gave grounds to say that KOS was used in order to impress the state commission, win the competition and close the funding for themselves. But in fact, supposedly, various projects for the future PAK FA were already being worked out on paper, and in reality, no one was going to use KOS. M.P. thought so or not. Simonov, the then General Design Bureau of Sukhoi, no one will say now, but this version is also supported by the fact that afterburner supersonic was hardly provided, and the fact that PAK FA was developed according to a completely different scheme, developments with KOS were not used ...

However, the competition was won by the MiG MFI, and the fate of the Su-47, it would seem, was decided: the aviation museum in Monino, next to other exotic projects.

But the project managed to interest the navy. What attracted naval aviators? Two features arising from the properties of KOS. The takeoff / run length was only 90 meters, and in addition, the KOS, due to the large permissible angles of attack, allowed an aircraft carrier to take off from the springboard with a large but safe drawdown:

I will add that these requirements are especially important also because in Soviet aircraft carriers it was not in vain that they abandoned the steam catapult (as is done with American aircraft carriers) in favor of a springboard: after all, at sub-zero temperatures, freezing of steam is an insoluble problem.

And in order not to advertise the new project too much, they acted very simply: they called it the Su-27KM (modified ship), although it had nothing in common with the Su-27.

Of course, the plane had to be thoroughly reworked. In addition to the brake hook and the keels tilted inward, a flat rotary nozzle appeared, a cabin detachable during ejection, which allowed the pilot to survive longer in the water (however, this is the merit of the famous Zvezda Design Bureau, which developed the K-36 ejection seat previously known to the whole world), and the planes it was planned to fold according to the original scheme.

I'm not strong, but I dare to believe that the wing folding system did not add any strength to it, the wing. In any case, the fact that the PAK FA was developed from scratch, and not according to the Su-47 scheme, clearly indicates that it was not possible to solve all the problems with the KOS, and the maximum speeds and angles of attack of the built Su-47s were significantly limited due to the detected fatigue defects of the wing and center section. This is despite the fact that the wing folding system has not yet been implemented.

Due to the collapse of the country, the project stalled before the tests were over. The completion of the three existing aircraft was already carried out at the expense of the design bureau, and at future MAKS air shows the aircraft was honestly positioned not as a fighter, but as a technology demonstrator. On this aircraft, not only the KOS was tested, but also the weapons compartment, and much more that went into action on the future PAK FA. And large panels made of composites, with a minimum of gaps and fasteners (this reduces radar visibility, weight, and improves aerodynamics) were diligently and in all details photographed at exhibitions by foreign journalists, among whom there is always a fair amount ... mmm ... let's face it , rather spies than journalists.

PAK FA (T-50, Su-50)

So, we already know that in the USSR, fifth-generation fighters were developed simultaneously with similar developments in the United States, but the collapse of the country prevented the implementation of the plan.

Has this work gone to waste? No. Of course, the aircraft developed in those years did not go into production, but many advantages were obtained as a result of this work.

Firstly, a huge amount of research and development work has been carried out, a huge amount of experience has been accumulated, which has not gone away.

Secondly, after all, not only the design bureaus of Mikoyan and Sukhoi were engaged in this work. The research institutes of TsAGI, VIAM, CIAM, CIATIM, and engine builders, and radar developers, and a huge number of institutes, design bureaus, and factories worked on new aircraft. After all, thousands of subcontractors are involved in the production of the aircraft, and each of them received his own task.

Thirdly, despite the secrecy, Russian specialists followed with interest the development and testing of the Raptor by the Americans. After all, someone else's experience, whether successful or not, teaches competent specialists something, and besides, it becomes clear what exactly your future aircraft should resist, what you need to strive for so that it surpasses the enemy.

And therefore, when in 1998 the designers again received the terms of reference for the development of a fifth-generation fighter (according to its requirements, it did not differ too much from the previous one), they already had ready-made draft designs in each design bureau. Without going into details, I will say that the task again included two aircraft - a light and a heavy one, and also considered options for a "medium" fighter and a vertical variant. And again they decided that the MiG-35 could be suitable for the role of the LFI, the vertical version was postponed for the future, as a result they settled on the Sukhoi Design Bureau with PAK FA.

What does he represent? Some journalists from the yellow press claim that this is a dumb copy of the American Raptor. Let me tell you right now that this is not the case. This can be seen immediately by an aerodynamic specialist, but it is obvious to anyone who is interested, especially if you compare two aircraft when viewed from the side: a short Raptor with huge keels, and a flat, long PAK FA.

And if you just think a little: the plane was developed precisely with the aim of surpassing the Raptor, otherwise why is it needed at all? And this was controlled not only by the domestic Ministry of Defense, but also by the Indian one, since the project is joint, and they will not spend such huge money in vain. And since the capabilities of the Raptor have long been known, there was no need to even guess. I will add that the Indian representatives put forward very strict requirements for the aircraft, and very stubbornly defended them. They agreed to cooperate only when they got acquainted with the project in detail and were convinced of its prospects.

What does he represent? There are many interesting features.

To begin with, I will say that there are often insistent demands to compare the capabilities of the PAK FA and the Raptor, and at the same time their number, pilot raid and other details. As if the US is already at war with Russia. Guys, I'll tell you scary things in secret: firstly, neither Raptor will be able to fly to Russia, nor PAK FA to the USA. And if it comes to a direct collision, then it is necessary to compare not fighters, but strategic missiles and anti-missile defense systems. Although US supporters will not like such a comparison again, since even the United States still has no protection against the ancient "Satan", whose resource was recently extended. "Star Wars" SDI turned out to be a fake, and there is neither money nor brains for European missile defense.

True, some American journalists were pretty amused when they said that the great and terrible F-35 would patrol over Poland and shoot down Russian ballistic missiles launched somewhere in the Urals, but here one can only envy the fenced grass that they smoke. How many kilometers are there from Poland to the Urals? What missile is capable of such a range? Will the F-35 lift it? And how long will it fly to the Urals? Or chase "Satan" all the way to Washington and fall into the target with her? :)

Well, and compare the capabilities of aircraft? Yeah why not! Only secrecy interferes with this, and therefore do not cling too much to the data: according to Raptor, that according to PAK FA, they are taken, of course, from open sources.

So, the first difference is super-maneuverability. It was retained despite stringent stealth requirements that go against aerodynamics. At the same time, they applied new solutions that are not available either in the Raptor or in other aircraft. This, for example, is the turning part of the wing influx, that is, the influx plays the role of not only a vortex generator, but also the front horizontal tail. This solution reduces visibility.

The engines are spaced apart (the Raptor has them next to each other). This allows for increased maneuverability, while also freeing up more space for internal weapon bays. The ventral tunnel between them increases lift, and maneuverability is maintained even at high altitudes. At the same time, spaced engines increase survivability in the event of combat damage or an engine fire.

Another original solution - the engines are not parallel, but at a slight angle to each other (damn, I once stared at the pictures for a long time, until I was convinced that this was not an optical illusion :). In normal mode, the direction of the jet stream is compensated by an all-angle rotary nozzle, and in the event of failure or combat damage to one engine, this arrangement allows you to more confidently stay in the air. This photo clearly shows that this is not an optical illusion, at the same time both the weapon compartments and the turning part of the wing influx are visible:

The aircraft has two inclined keels, like the Raptor. But there are also new items here: firstly, they are much smaller in area, which reduces visibility, and secondly, they are all-moving, there are no separate rudders. This is also for stealth. In addition, they also play the role of an air brake, that is, they can deviate inconsistently, in different directions. A separate brake is no longer needed, which reduces weight.

However, a puncture came out with the keels. There are too many new things: all-moving, and can serve as an air brake, and a small area, the lack of which is compensated by automation, and are made of carbon fiber (it is lighter in weight and better for stealth), and the way they are installed is rather tricky ... As a result, the strength of the keels turned out to be insufficient, and the then Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force Mikhailov said that a decision was made not to strengthen them, but to limit the maximum speed of the PAK FA to 2M (approximately 2125-2400 km / h - it is not known at what height this figure was meant) instead of 2.15M according to the terms of reference and even more real.

I will add that the message that slipped through the American press that the Raptor reached a speed of 2.6 M is not true. With Raptor air intakes that are not regulated in the classical sense, this is impossible in principle, in addition, at such speeds, the thermal barrier already begins to noticeably act (the heating of the aircraft from air friction at such a speed is over 300 degrees), and neither aluminum nor carbon fiber can withstand it.

It's not worth talking about maintainability, and even more so - about the price of aircraft.

Engines

The flat nozzle was abandoned in favor of super-maneuverability. At the same time, the visibility in the rear hemisphere theoretically becomes worse, but in the previous article we saw the shooting of the Raptor in a thermal imager: it doesn’t save much, to put it mildly. The air intakes, like those of the Raptor, are curved in two planes, that is, the engine blades are not visible to the locators. Now PAK FA flies on one of the modifications of the AL-41F engines. They have less thrust than those that are now being tested and will be installed regularly, but all the requirements for the fifth generation are met even with them. The new engine will have not only higher thrust, but also better efficiency. Although the efficiency of Russian engines has surpassed American ones, already starting with a pair of Su-27s and F-15s. It is difficult to search for specific characteristics of fuel consumption, but here are indirect data:

The first value is PAK FA, the second is F-22

normal takeoff weight: with 100% fuel: 30610 kg / 30206 kg

Fuel mass: 11100 kg / 9367 kg

Practical range: 4300 km / 2500 km

Of course, better aerodynamics compared to the Raptor also reduce fuel consumption, but neither it nor the 1.7 tons more fuel supply by themselves will provide such an impressive difference in range.

By the way, many modifications of both this and the new engine are being worked out, with improved parameters, reduced weight, etc. All of them are designated differently (AL-41, Type-30, item-117, item-129, item-133, project "Demon", etc.), and it's not too easy to figure it out. I recall a heavy sigh in one of the American aviation magazines: "The designation system of the Sukhoi Design Bureau horrifies bourgeois analysts."

A novelty is a plasma ignition system, which allows you to get rid of oxygen replenishment when starting the engine, even at high altitude.

Weapon

By itself, a fighter can be as good as you like, but without a weapon it is worthless. Let's see what the designers have prepared? The set is quite extensive.

For close combat - a 30 mm caliber gun. There are two internal compartments for bombs and missiles, each more than 5 meters long. There you can "hide" from 6 to 12 bombs or missiles. In addition, up to six external hardpoints can be installed. Consider what PAK FA can take with you.

But first, a little about the types of rockets. The first rockets were unguided, it was necessary to aim for their launch using the same sight as for cannons / machine guns. They appeared with us during the Great Patriotic War, terrifying the Germans no worse than the famous Katyusha, but their descendants NURS (unguided rocket) are still used, more often on helicopters. Everyone has probably seen launchers in the form of cylinders with several holes for rockets, these are just them.

Then came airborne locators, or, more precisely, radar stations for interception and aiming, and with them radio-controlled missiles. The pilot captures the target on the locator screen, approaches it to the missile launch range, the "PR" signal lights up - the launch is allowed, we press the trigger, the rocket leaves the pylon, but we continue to keep the enemy on the locator screen. In this case, a narrow beam of the radar is directed at him, and the rocket goes along this beam. And only when she gets so close that you can’t miss, the “Lapel” signal lights up - you can dump. Sometimes this can be dangerous if the target is a heavily loaded bomber or tanker. It can take off in such a way that fragments will get you.

They try to defend themselves against such missiles by shooting passive interference, simple packs of foil tape. In the hope that the locator beam will lose the plane and will follow the ribbons. In response, the radars began to sort targets by speed so as not to notice low-speed ones, and take other measures to combat interference.

Next developed homing missiles. Their thermal homing head (TGSN) senses heat from the enemy's engine. As you approach, the “ZG” light turns on - capturing heads, which means that the missiles saw the target, launch - and you can dump it right away. This is called the "let it go - forget it" principle. It is curious to smoke near such a rocket and see how the GOS is watching your cigarette. At first, it's somehow not very pleasant to see it :)

They defend themselves from them by firing off heat traps, everyone has seen similar footage on TV when a similar "firework" flies out of an airplane.

Well, then there were missiles with a wide variety of guidance methods, including multi-channel ones, which are not so easy to deceive.

1. The main weapon is the RVV-BD, a long-range air-to-air missile.

The maximum launch range is 300 km (export version - 200 km), and according to some reports, it reaches high contrast targets from 400 km. Please note: all the data below is for export versions of missiles and bombs (often the letter "E" in the designation means export), it's just easier to find them. As you can see, it does much better for itself. The mass of the warhead is 60 kg, high-explosive fragmentation. The guidance system is inertial, with radio correction and active radar homing in the final section of the flight path.

Let me remind you that the AIM-120C missile, which the Raptor is armed with, has a launch range of 120 km, in the future it will be modified for the AIM-120D missile with a launch range of 180 km. True, the Americans have serious problems with missiles, their engines suddenly turned out to be unreliable, although before that they worked fine: "Bad luck again! Problems with the AMRAAM rocket engine". They fail at low temperatures, and their acceptance is suspended. Let me remind readers that at an altitude of 10 km the temperature in both summer and winter is approximately minus 56.5 degrees. And since this missile is the main one for all aircraft of the NATO bloc, consider that there is nothing to hit the enemy with ... Or rather, there is something, but only at low altitude, not in winter and not in polar latitudes :)

2. RVV-SD.

The launch range of the "E" variant is up to 110 km. The mass of the warhead is 22.5 kg, rod, multi-cumulative. The guidance system is inertial with radio correction and active radar homing in the final section of the trajectory.

3. RVV-MD.

A missile for close-range highly maneuverable air combat with all-aspect passive infrared guidance (dual-band IGS). Launch range - up to 40 km. The mass of the warhead is 8 kg.

A very interesting rocket. The engine is with a controlled thrust vector, and if the pilot captured the target with the help of a helmet-mounted system somewhere on the side, by turning his head, then this missile is able to turn around on the target.

4. Kh-38MLE.

Refers to short-range modular guided missiles. Through the use of various types of guidance systems and various combat equipment, enhanced combat capabilities are provided for operations against a wide range of ground targets, as well as surface targets in the coastal strip.

X-38MLE - inertial + semi-active laser

X-38MAE - inertial + active radar

X-38MTE - inertial + thermal imaging

X-38MKE - inertial + satellite navigation

The first three types can be equipped with combat equipment with a high-explosive fragmentation or penetrating warhead. X-38MKE - cluster warhead

Launch range from 3 to 40 km

5. Kh-58UShKE.

Anti-radar missile. What it is? We release it to any ground locator, command post, etc., and within a radius of several tens of meters any electronics "dies" - locators, computers, radio stations, control systems, not to mention mobile phones, for example.

The missile can be used both for programmed radar targets and for targets quickly detected by the PAK FA target designation system. The maximum launch range (in the carrier altitude range from 200 m to 20 km) is 76 - 245 km. The probability of a missile hitting a circle with a radius of 20 m, in the center of which there is an operating radar, is at least 0.8. Warhead - high-explosive, weight 149 kg. The launch weight of the rocket is 650 kg.

6. KAB-500S-E, Guided aerial bomb

Weight - 560 kg (including 195 kg - mass of explosives). Drop height from 500 m to 5 km. Targeting accuracy (Equo) 7 - 12 m. Warhead - high-explosive.

This is probably not a complete list of weapons, they write about 14 different types of weapons, but so far they decided to remove the secrecy only from this. However, in some places the X-35 anti-ship missile is also mentioned.

Onboard equipment

The main part, of course, is the nasal AFAR, in which there are 1522 transceiver modules (the Raptor has 1200). Two side-view AFARs. Two AFARs in wing socks. Two AFAR L-band in the slats. This is a decimeter range (somewhere from 15 to 30 cm), stealth is clearly visible in it, although the accuracy is worse than in centimeter. But the main thing is that the pilot is warned, he sees the target, and then - the problems of the RVV-BD missile, which has enough of its own guidance systems, and when it approaches it in order to see it, it will be more and more accurate and confident. The Raptor does not have such a decimeter radar, and is not expected in the foreseeable future. Of course, it is better to get closer to 120 km - the launch range of the Raptor missile, everything will be much more accurate there: there the Raptor will already see the conventional radar, and, most likely, even the optical system.

They prefer to remain silent about the rest of the antennas, although there is probably an antenna on the back, because it appeared on some versions of the Su-27. On it, part of the missiles could be hung "back to front". Surprise for the enemy chasing you :)