Comparison of aviation of the Russian Federation and the USA. Comparison of fighters of the Russian Federation and the USA in reality. Overview of aircraft according to the results of the exercise Russian and American aircraft comparison
Throughout its history, mankind has been constantly modernizing the methods of conducting military operations. Soon after the conquest of the airspace, it became obvious that this environment could be effectively used in solving ground military tasks. According to experts, the use of combat aircraft can radically change the course of military operations on the ground. Today, the aviation of Russia and the United States are considered one of the most powerful.
Between these two states is constantly held tacit competition. Information about the best combat aircraft of the Russian Federation and the United States is presented in the article.
"Ilya Muromets"
This legendary Russian combat aircraft was created on the eve of the First World War. During the war years, 76 such aircraft were produced. "Ilya Muromets" is the world's first heavy bomber. This aircraft model was systematically modified during production. Released versions of "Ilya Muromets" were assembled into a special squadron. These heavy bombers could carry bombs weighing 1,500 kg, which at the time was considered unheard of power. As a defensive weapon, the combat aircraft was equipped with machine guns. Depending on the modification, their number varied from 2 to 6.
This combat aircraft became an aviation legend during World War II. "Concrete plane", "black death", "plague": this is what German pilots and infantrymen called the Soviet attack aircraft. Serial production of IL-2 was launched in 1941. In total, Soviet industry produced 36,000 combat vehicles. In order to facilitate the design of the aircraft, the developers introduced an innovative solution: unlike previous aircraft, the armor was not installed on top of the hull in the IL-2. Now the power circuit of the aircraft has become its location. However, despite this innovation, the IL-2 did not become more secure. Already a few months after the start of the war, the Soviet Union suffered heavy losses in the number of these combat vehicles.
About the MiG-15 fighter
This combat aircraft was created by Soviet aviation designers in the late 40s. Models of this fighter were produced in many countries. Before the advent of the MiG-15, Soviet aviation was considered obsolete. In order to carry out air strikes on the territory of the Soviet Union, the Americans assembled an armada of strategic bombers. The appearance of the MiG-15 in the skies over Korea made a splash among American and European strategists. Only the American-made F-86 Saber could compete with the Soviet fighter. However, according to experts, the US fighter was still inferior to the MiG-15.
B-17
This legendary US combat aircraft was released in 1934. The B-17 is an American serial all-metal strategic bomber. He received worldwide fame during the Great Patriotic War. Using this combat vehicle, the Americans successfully bombed German cities. The B-17 was also used in Pacific battles.
The bomber was equipped with four engines and could reach speeds of over 500 km / h. At first, the practical ceiling of the B-17 did not exceed 10 thousand meters. Later, this indicator was increased to 12 thousand meters. The combat aircraft was equipped with a 12.7 mm machine gun, which posed a serious threat to enemy fighters. High reliability is considered a characteristic feature of this bomber. American aviation documents indicate cases when a B-17 with a pierced fuselage returned back to base using only one working engine.
Su-27
On the basis of this Soviet fighter, manufactured in 1980, Russian combat aircraft Su-30 ... 35 and other models are being created today. Su-27 is the pinnacle of Soviet aviation. This fighter is currently used by the air forces of Russia, India and China. Despite the fact that this fighter has not yet had to face a serious enemy, it is regarded by experts as one of the best and most promising fourth-generation combat aircraft in the world. There are many positive reviews about the latest modifications assembled on the basis of the Soviet Su-27.
American "Eagle"
Despite the fact that the F-15 Eagle was assembled ten years earlier than the Su-27, today it is considered one of the best fourth-generation fighters. "Eagle" is used by America, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Japan. The F-15 Eagle has proven to be a real "killer" of enemy fighters. He has more than a hundred victories in air battles. "Eagle" performed its combat missions in the skies over Yugoslavia, Syria and Iraq. The American command, in its official statements, claims that US aviation has lost only ten such fighters in the entire history of the F-15 Eagle. However, it is not possible to verify the reliability of this information, since the leadership of the US Air Force did not provide the public with the wreckage of the downed fighters.
F-22 Raptor
This is a modern fifth-generation combat aircraft. It has supersonic speed even with the afterburner turned off. In the manufacture of the aircraft, stealth technology is used.
The American fighter is equipped with the most advanced on-board electronics and radar using a phased array. The price of a fighter far exceeds the cost of other US Air Force combat aircraft. It is 350 million dollars. The latest fifth-generation combat aircraft are also being developed by Russia and China.
performance characteristics
- Design work started in 1996.
- Country of origin: USA.
- In service with the Air Force since 2005.
- The length of the aircraft is 18.92 m.
- Wingspan: 13.56 m.
- The fighter weighs 19700 kg.
- F-22 is capable of reaching a maximum speed of up to 2410 km / h, cruising: 1963 km / h.
- The price of one aircraft: 350 million dollars.
PAK-FA
The T-50 is Russia's new combat aircraft. It is a promising aviation complex for front-line aviation. The car has a futuristic shape. This T-50 is very similar to the F-22. The T-50 made its first flight in 2010.
A year later, the general public saw it. The MAKS air show became the venue for the display of the modern Russian fighter. To date, this combat aircraft is under development. According to experts, very soon the T-50 will join the ranks of Russian aviation. Before comparing the Russian PAK-FA and the American F-22, it is necessary to have an understanding of fifth generation aviation and how it differs from previous combat aircraft.
The most promising and best are those aircraft models that are very inconspicuous for the radar and infrared wavelengths. In addition, fifth generation fighters must meet the following criteria:
- Be multifunctional.
- Possess high maneuverability and supersonic cruising speed. A similar speed should be available without switching to afterburner.
- Distinguished by the ability to carry out close combat operations from all angles and with the use of multi-channel firing of long-range missiles.
- Equipped with the most modern and advanced electronics.
Compared to the F-22, the PAK-FA is larger. The wingspan of the T-50 is also larger, which is why aviation experts believe that the Russian fighter is more maneuverable. The maximum speed of the PAK-FA is higher than that of the American fighter. However, the F-22 has a higher cruising capability. Also, the T-50 has a greater practical range and lower takeoff weight. However, the Russian combat aircraft is not as stealthy as the F-22.
Since one of the requirements for fifth-generation aircraft is the availability of the most modern electronics, at this point the Russian combat vehicle is inferior to the American one. This is due to the fact that this area in the aircraft industry is quite problematic. This was known back in the days of the Soviet Union. According to military experts, a similar situation is now observed in Russia. Thus, the radar, armament and aerodynamic properties of the T-50 are no worse than those of the F-22, but the electronic equipment leaves much to be desired. A photo of combat aircraft is presented in the article.
Characteristics of the T-50
- The beginning of design work - the 80s.
- Country of origin: USSR.
- The aircraft entered service in 2014.
- Length - 22 m.
- Wingspan - 14.2 m.
- The combat aircraft weighs 17500 kg.
- The T-50 has a maximum speed of up to 2600 km/h, cruising: 1400 km/h.
- The price of one aircraft is 250 million dollars.
About the Russian Su-47 Berkut
For the needs of the Russian Air Force, the staff of the Experimental Design Bureau named after P. O. Sukhoi designed a prototype of the fifth-generation Su-47 Berkut combat aircraft.
Wishing to provide the aircraft with high maneuverability and new combat capabilities, the designers equipped it with reverse sweep wings and improved the control system in the cockpit. The aircraft is made of high quality composite materials.
Today, the Berkut is in a state of refinement, since it does not meet all the requirements for fifth-generation combat aircraft: the Su-47 cannot reach supersonic speed without using afterburner for this. To correct this shortcoming, the designers are going to continue to use a new engine for the combat vehicle, for which a variable thrust vector is provided. Equipped with such an engine, the Berkut will easily overcome the supersonic barrier without using the afterburner. The Su-47 was first tested in 1997. In total, only one copy was made, which is currently used as a test.
About characteristics
- Wingspan - 16.7 m.
- Su-47 length: 22.6 m.
- Height: 6.4 m.
- The aircraft is equipped with a 2TRDDF D-30F6 engine.
- Su-47 speed: 1400-2200 km/h.
- It has a practical range of up to 3300 km and a ceiling of up to 18 km.
F-15E Strike Eagle
This long-range combat aircraft was developed by the American company McDonnell Douglas in the 1980s. The F-15E Strike Eagle is an all-weather multirole fighter whose mission is to isolate a war zone.
Escort and electronic support for this aircraft is not required. The fighter has a dark camouflage color scheme. Fuel tanks are located along the air intakes. The aircraft was used by the US Air Force to perform combat missions in countries such as Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. With the help of the F-15E, important targets were attacked from long distances, and airspace was patrolled. In addition, the F-15E was used to provide close air support to coalition forces. At the moment, this combat aircraft is in service with the US Air Force, and is also being produced for export to other countries.
prospects
Today, aviation engineers of the design bureau. Mikoyan, a fifth-generation fighter is being developed on the basis of the MiG-35 combat aircraft. The designers plan to create an aircraft that will surpass the T-50 in its characteristics and will be used to perform advanced tasks.
In addition, in the future, aviation designers plan to replace the M-160 and Tu-95 aircraft with a promising long-range aviation complex. Work on a new strategic bomber is being carried out at the Design Bureau. Tupolev since 2009. Since 2014, the Russian Ministry of Defense has been the customer for the new aviation combat vehicle. At the moment, very little is known about the type and characteristics of the future aircraft. Presumably, this aircraft will be subsonic, designed according to the "flying wing" type. The first release is scheduled for 2020. Serial production will start in 2025. Similar work in the framework of the Next Generation Bomber project is currently underway in the United States. According to available data, the American aircraft will be subsonic and designed for a huge range (presumably 9 thousand km). The United States will allocate half a billion dollars for the production of one aircraft.
Finally
Aviation for Russia and the United States is the leading branch of the armed forces. The United States is the first country in the world to use stealth aircraft and fifth-generation fighters. Today, American fighters and strategic bombers, numbering at least 5,600 aircraft of various types, are successfully used to combat ISIS militants.
After the collapse of the USSR, Russia became the owner of the main part of the aviation of the former state. The country is armed with 1,500 combat aircraft. However, most of them are outdated. The collapse of the USSR had a negative impact on the aviation industry in Russia. Many projects have remained unrealized. Russian designers today have to catch up.
It's been over a year since this post was first published. During this time, I learned a lot about myself and listened to a certain amount of "flattering and witty" reviews. Fortunately, among them there were many constructive ones, thanks to which I corrected the data on the quantitative composition of aviation. Our and incredible ally.
But before moving on to the post itself, I want to say this:
A) In modern warfare, there are no single "ubercrafts" capable of destroying everyone and everything. War is multimodal mutual destruction. Aviation, air defense, motorized infantry, reconnaissance, artillery, etc. take part in it. Even more space in it is given to the will of chance, combat coherence, weather conditions, and the morale of the troops. Therefore, there is not and will not be such a situation when the F-35 will fight only with the Su-35S or FA, and everything else will not interest him. "And everything else" will not be interested in the F-35. There are no autonomous individual duels in the air. There are opportunities to shoot down someone, bomb them, fight off someone, get away from something.
B) I do not care about the quantitative composition of the US fighter and attack aircraft. The reasons are as follows: 1) we can only exchange MRNU with the United States with subsequent attacks by "strategists", if, of course, something remains by that time; 2) The United States will not be able to concentrate such a number of aircraft near our border. Aircraft carriers carry only certain types of aircraft. You also need to swim without incident. Suitable airfields in Europe, located within the combat radius of their aircraft, may simply not be enough to accommodate such a number of vehicles. Do not forget about the "gifts with surprises" from our OTRK (maybe with tactical nuclear weapons), army intelligence and, possibly, ICBMs. What these “fields” will turn into, I think, is clear. Plus, the issue of supply and maintenance of all this pornography equipment is acute.
Let's start. For those who value their time, I give conclusions at the very beginning:
1) The US Air Force outnumbers the Russian Air Force by about 4 times in total numbers. And 2 times in terms of the number of combat aircraft in operation;
2) the trend for the next 5-7 years is the capital modernization of the Russian aviation fleet;
3) PR, advertising and psychological warfare is a favorite and effective method of US warfare. An adversary who is psychologically defeated (by disbelief in the power of his own, leadership, etc.) is already half defeated.
So, let's begin.
Air Force/Navy/Guard USA is the most powerful in the world.
Yes this is true. The total number of US aviation in 2013 was 2960 (1593 in operation) fighters, 162 (95) bombers, 424 (255) strike aircraft, 1795 tankers and transporters and more than 1100 trainers. Total ~ 8 250 cars.
For comparison: the total strength of the Russian Air Force as of May 2013 is 897 (760) fighters, 321 (88) bombers, 329 (153) strike aircraft, 372 transport aircraft, 18 tankers, 200 trainers. Total ~ 2,200 cars.
However, there are nuances, the main of which is that US aviation is aging, and its replacement is late.
Let me explain what I mean by "obsolescence". If you look at the table, you will see that the F-15/16 accounts for just over 50% of the entire US aircraft fleet. These were good aircraft for their time, but even then they were inferior to our MiG-29 and Su-27 in a number of indicators (especially in terms of operation in front-line conditions), which greatly "puzzled" the American colleagues.
What do we see now? Our country 20 years ago took the path of democracy and capitalism with the Su-27 and MiG-29. Thanks to a competent export policy, the machines were able to survive, and then increase their potential to the Su-35S and MiG-35. Those. engineers and designers did not have to create aircraft literally from scratch. Of course, any letter in the index can mean that we have a completely different car, surpassing its predecessor at times. But the gliders of the MiG-29SMT and the Su-27SM3 or Su-35S remained the same. And this is a completely different cost.
And what about the USA? They entered the crisis with the F-22 (all new car) out of production, and the unfinished F-35 (all new car), as well as a massive fleet of good, but already obsolete F-15/16s. I lead my nonsense to the fact that at the moment the US does not have a relatively cheap backlog, which would allow them to maintain a quantitative (and in some ways qualitative) superiority over the Russian Federation without multi-billion investment in new developments. In 5-7 years they will have to write off about 450-500 F-15/16s, and by this time we will have about 250 new Su-27SM and SM3, 64 MiG-29SMT, 96 Su-35S and 60 Su-30SM.
That is the aviation fleet of the Russian Federation will be actively modernized over the next 5-7 years. Including due to the creation of completely new aircraft. At the moment, until 2020, contracts have been concluded for the production / modernization of:
MiG-31BM - 100 units;
Su-27SM - 96 units;
Su-27SM3 - 12 units;
Su-35S - 95 units;
Su-30SM - 60 units;
Su-30M2 - 4 units;
MiG-29SMT - 50 units;
MiG-29K - 24 units;
MiG-35 - 37 units. (?);
Su-34 - 124 (184) units;
FA - 60 units;
IL-476 - 100 units;
An-124-100M - 42 units;
A-50U - 20 units;
Tu-95MSM - 20 units;
Yak-130 - 65 units
In fact, by 2020 a little over 850 new cars.
In fairness, I note that Carthage should be destroyed in 2001. The United States planned to purchase about 2,400 F-35s by 2020. However, at the moment, all deadlines have been disrupted, and the adoption of the aircraft has been postponed until mid-2015. In total, the United States currently has 63 Lightning-2s.
We only have a few 4++ aircraft and no 5th generation, while the US already has hundreds of them.
Yes, that's right, the US has 141 F-22A in service. We have 48 Su-35S. PAK-FA is undergoing flight tests. But you need to consider:
A) The F-22 aircraft have been discontinued due to 1) high cost ($280-300 versus $85-95 for the Su-35S); 2) shoals with tails (fell apart during overloads); 3) glitches with the FCS (fire control system); 4) the absence of a threat to the United States from someone's aviation (we will fight strategic nuclear forces with them), problems with ventilation and the impossibility of selling it to anyone.
B) F-35 with all its PR is very far from the 5th generation. Yes, and there are enough jambs: either the EDSU will fail, then the glider will break, then the FCS lags.
C) By 2020, the troops will receive: Su-35S - 150 units, FA - 60 units.
D) Comparison of individual aircraft outside the context of their combat use is incorrect. Combat operations are high-intensity and multi-modal mutual destruction, where much depends on the specific topography, weather conditions, luck, training, teamwork, morale, etc. Separate combat units do not solve anything. On paper, a conventional ATGM will tear apart any modern tank, but in combat conditions everything is much more prosaic.
Their 5th generation is many times superior to our FA and Su-35S.
This is a very bold statement.
A) You should start with the fact that the F-22 was created to fight our Su-27 and MiG-31. And it was quite a long time ago. The FA is being created to confront the 4th generation, which it will meet in Europe, and the F-35, which, in terms of its parameters, is far from the most formidable “flyer”.
B) If the F-22 and F-35 are so cool, why are they: 1) So carefully hidden? 2) Why are they not allowed to make EPR measurements? 3) Why are they not satisfied with demonstrative dogfights, or at least simple comparative maneuvering, as at air shows?
C) If we compare the performance characteristics of our and American machines, then we can find a lag in our aircraft only in terms of EPR (for the Su-35S) and detection range (20-30 km). 20-30 km in range is not so critical for the simple reason that the missiles that we have surpass the US AIM-54, AIM-152AAAM in range by 80-120 km. I'm talking about RVV BD, KS-172, R-37. So, if the F-35 or F-22 radars have the best range for inconspicuous targets, then how will they shoot down this target? And where is the guarantee that the "contact" will not fly "low-low", hiding in the folds of the terrain?
C) There is nothing universal in military affairs. There are multi-purpose aircraft capable of both air targets and ground operations, depending on the armament. An attempt to create a universal aircraft capable of performing the functions of an interceptor, bomber, fighter and attack aircraft leads to the fact that the universal becomes synonymous with the word mediocre. The war recognizes only the best models in their class, sharpened to solve specific problems. Therefore, if an attack aircraft, then - Su-25SM, if a front-line bomber - Su-34, if an interceptor - MiG-31BM, if a fighter - Su-35S.
And even more so, the F-22 is not a universal aircraft. It was created to gain air supremacy. To destroy the Su-27 and MiG-31, which posed a considerable danger to American strategic and strike aircraft. Its main task is to control the airspace. And in this category, the development of aircraft is subject to a single slogan - "not a gram (not a pound) on the ground." So there is no need to talk about any "superpowers" of the F-22.
D) War is not a comparison of who has a longer spear. More importantly, who will have these spears better in terms of price / quality / quantity. Our potential friend’s planes cost a lot of money, and I don’t even want to remember how much they spent on R&D: $ 400 billion for the F-35 (and the program has not yet been completed) and $ 50 billion for the F-22. For comparison, we are planning to spend $10 billion of budget money on the FA.
The United States has a significant superiority in strategic air forces.
This is wrong.
The US Air Force already has 95 strategic bombers: 44 B-52H, 35 B-1B and 16 B-2A. B-2 - exclusively subsonic - from nuclear weapons carries only free-falling bombs. B-52N - subsonic and old, . B-1B - is no longer a carrier of nuclear weapons (START-3). Compared to the B-1, the Tu-160 has a 1.5 times greater takeoff weight, 1.3 times greater combat radius, 1.6 times greater speed and a greater load in the internal compartments. By 2025, we plan to commission a new strategic bomber (PAK-DA), which will replace the Tu-95 and Tu-160. The United States, on the other hand, extended the service life of its aircraft until 2035, and the development of a new "strategist" and a new ALCM was postponed to 2030-2035.
If we compare their ALCMs (cruise missiles) with ours, then everything turns out to be quite interesting. AGM-86 ALCM has a range of 2400 km. Our Kh-55s are 400-4500 km, and Kh-101s are 7000-8500 km. Those. The Tu-160 can shoot at the territory or AUG of the enemy without entering the affected area, and then calmly leave on supersonic sound (for comparison, the maximum operating time at full thrust with afterburner for the F / A-18 is 10 minutes, for the 160th - 45 minutes). It also raises deep doubts about their ability to overcome the normal (not Arab-Yugoslav) air defense system.
Summing up, I want to note once again that modern air warfare is not about individual battles in the air, but the work of detection, target designation, suppression, etc. systems. And it is not necessary to consider an aircraft (be it an F-22 or FA) as a proud celestial horseman. There are a lot of nuances around in the face of air defense, electronic warfare, ground-based RTR, weather conditions, flares, LTC and other joys that will not even allow the pilot to reach the target. Therefore, there is no need to add up sagas and sing hymns to single fantastic winged ships that will bring laurels of victories to the feet of those who created them, and destroy everyone who dares to "raise a hand" against their creators.
I was provoked to create this article by regular disputes and measurements of various "bodies" in topics about our aviation. In general, the audience of these discussions can be divided into those who believe that we are hopelessly behind, and those who, on the contrary, are subject to unprecedented enthusiasm and firmly believe that everything is wonderful. The argument basically boils down to the fact that "nothing flies here, but everything is cool with them." And vice versa. I decided to single out a few theses around which frequent disputes flare up and give them my assessment.
For those who value their time, I give conclusions at the very beginning:
1) The US Air Force and the Russian Air Force, both in quantitative and qualitative terms, are approximately equal, with a slight advantage for the United States;
2) The trend for the next 5-7 years is the achievement of almost complete parity;
3) PR, advertising and psychological warfare is a favorite and effective method of US warfare. An adversary who is psychologically defeated (by disbelief in the power of his weapons, hands, etc.) is already half defeated.
So, let's begin.
Is the US Air Force / Navy / Guard the most powerful aircraft in the world?
Yes this is true. The US Air Force strength as of May 2013 was 934 fighters, 96 bombers, 138 strike aircraft, 329 transport aircraft, 216 tankers, 938 trainers and 921 other aircraft.
For comparison, the strength of the Russian Air Force as of May 2013 is 738 fighters, 163 bombers, 153 strike aircraft, 372 transport aircraft, 18 tankers, 200 trainers and 500 other aircraft. As you can see, there is no “monstrous” quantitative superiority.
However, there are nuances, the main of which - US aviation is aging, but it has no replacement
.
| Name | In operation (total number) | Percentage of number operated | Average age (as of 2013) |
| Fighters | |||
| F-22A | 85 (141) | 9,1% | 5-6 years |
| Su-35S | 18 (18) | 2,4% | 0.5 years |
| F-15C | 55 (157) | 5.9% | 28 years |
| Su-27SM | 307 (406) | 41,6% | 3-4 years |
| F-15D | 13 (28) | 1,4% | 28 years |
| MiG-29SMT | 255 (555) | 34,6% | 12-13 years old |
| F-16C | 318 (619) | 34% | 21 years old |
| MiG-31BM | 158 (358) | 21,4% | 13-15 years old |
| F-16D | 6 (117) | 0,6% | 21 years old |
| F/A-18 (all mod.) | 457 (753) | 48,9% | 12-14 years old |
| F-35 (all mod.) | n/a (71) | n/a | 0.5-1 year |
| US total | 934 (1886) | ~ 17.1 years old | |
| Total RF | 738 (1337) | ~ 10.2 years | |
| Bombers | |||
| B-52H | 44 (53) | 45,8% | 50 years |
| Tu-95MS | 32 (92) | 19,6% | 50 years |
| B-2A | 16 (16) | 16,7% | 17 years |
| Tu-22M3 | 115 (213) | 70,6% | 25-26 years old |
| B-1B | 36 (54) | 37,5% | 25 years old |
| Tu-160 | 16 (16) | 9,8% | 20-21 years old |
| US total | 96 (123) | ~ 34.2 years | |
| Total RF | 163 (321) | ~ 31.9 years | |
| Stormtroopers | |||
| A-10A | 38 (65) | 34,5% | 28 years |
| A-10C | 72 (129) | 65,5% | 6-7 years old |
| Su-25SM | 200 (300) | 100% | 10-11 years old |
| US total | 110 (194) | ~ 13.4 years | |
| Total RF | 200 (300) | ~ 10-11 years old | |
| attack aircraft | |||
| F-15E | 138 (223) | 100% | 20 years |
| Su-24M | 124 (300) | 81% | 29-30 years old |
| F-111/FB-111 | 0 (84) | 0% | over 40 years old |
| Su-34 | 29 (29) | 19% | 0.5-1 year |
| US total | 138 (307) | ~ 20 years | |
| Total RF | 153 (329) | ~ 24.4 years | |
| AWACS | |||
| E-3 | 24 (33) | 100% | 32 years |
| A-50 | 27 (27) | 100% | 27-28 years old |
At the same time, the aviation fleet of the Russian Federation over the next 5-7 years will be actively modernized . Including due to the creation of completely new aircraft. At the moment, until 2017, contracts for the production / modernization MiG-31BM- 100 units; Su-27SM- 96 units; Su-27SM3- 12 units; Su-35S- 95 units; Su-30SM- 60 units; Su-30M2- 4 units; MiG-29SMT- 34 units; MiG-29K- 24 units; Su-34- 124 units; MiG-35- 24 units; PAK FA- 60 units; IL-476- 100 units; An-124-100M- 42 units; A-50U- 20 units; Tu-95MSM- 20 units; Yak-130- 65 units By 2020, more than 750 new machines will be put into operation.
In fairness, I note that in 2001 the United States planned to purchase more than 2,400 F-35. However, at the moment, all deadlines have been missed, and the commissioning of the aircraft has been postponed until mid-2015.
We only have a few 4++ aircraft and no 5th generation, but the US already has hundreds of them?
Su-35
Yes, that's right, the US is armed with 141 F-22A. We have Su-35S - 18 pieces. PAK FA - undergoing flight tests. But you need to consider:
a) Airplanes F-22s out of production
due to 1) high cost ($280-300 vs. $85-95 Su-35); 2) overlooked the issue of the tail unit (it fell apart during overloads); 3) glitches with the FCS (fire control system).
b) F-35, with all his PR, very far from 5th generation
. Yes, and there are enough shortcomings: either the EDSU will fail, or the airframe will not work as it should, or the FCS will fail.
c) Until 2017, the troops will receive: Su-35S - 95 units, PAK FA - 60 units
.
d) Comparison of individual aircraft outside the context of their combat use is not correct. Combat operations are high-intensity and multi-modal mutual destruction, where much depends on the specific topography, weather conditions, luck, training, teamwork, morale, etc. Separate combat units do not solve anything. On paper, an ordinary ATGM will tear any modern tank, but in combat conditions everything is much more prosaic.
Is their 5th generation many times superior to our PAK FA and Su-35S?
This is a very bold statement.
and if F-22 And F-35 so cool, why are they: 1) So carefully hidden? 2) Why are they not allowed to make EPR measurements? 3) Why are they not satisfied with demonstrative dogfights, or at least simple comparative maneuvering, as at air shows?
b) If we compare the performance characteristics of our and American cars, then we can find a lag in our aircraft only in terms of EPR (for Su-35S) and detection range (20-30 km). 20-30 km in range is garbage in vegetable oil for the simple reason that the missiles that we have are superior to the US ones AIM-54, AIM-152AAAM in range to 80-120 km
. I'm talking about RVV DB, KS-172, R-37. So if radar F-35 or F-22 have a better range for inconspicuous targets, then how will they shoot down this target? And where is the guarantee that the "contact" will not fly "low"?
c) There is nothing universal in military affairs. An attempt to create a universal aircraft capable of performing the functions of an interceptor, bomber, fighter and attack aircraft leads to the fact that universal becomes synonymous with mediocre
. The war recognizes only the best models in their class, sharpened to solve specific problems. Therefore, if an attack aircraft, then - Su-25SM if a front-line bomber, - Su-34 if interceptor, - MiG-31BM if the fighter, - Su-35S.
G) “America spent $400 billion
in R&D to create the F-35, and $70 billion
for the F-22. Russia spent only $8 billion
to create the T-50. Doesn’t anyone realize that if Russia would spend $400 billion on a research project, they would probably produce an aircraft capable to conquer the world in a second…”(c) War is not a comparison of who has the longest X. More importantly, who will have these X better in terms of price / quality.
Does the US have a significant superiority in strategic air forces?
This is wrong. The US Air Force has 96 strategic bombers: 44 B-52N, 36 B-1B and 16 B-2A. B-2- exclusively subsonic - from nuclear weapons it carries only free-falling bombs. B-52N- subsonic and old as a mammoth. B-1B- at the moment it is not a carrier of nuclear weapons (START-3). Compared with B-1, Tu-160 It has 1.5 times greater takeoff weight, 1.3 times greater combat radius, 1.6 times greater speed and greater load in the internal compartments. By 2025, we plan to commission a new strategic bomber ( PAK YES), which will replace Tu-95 And Tu-160. The United States has extended the life of its aircraft until 2035.
If we compare their ALCMs (cruise missiles) with ours, then everything turns out to be quite interesting. AGM-86ALCM has a range of 1200-1400 km. Our Kh-55- 3000-3500 km, and X-101- 5000-5500 km. Those., Tu-160 can shoot at the enemy’s territory or AUG without entering the affected area, and then calmly leave in supersonic (for comparison, the maximum operating time at full thrust with afterburner for the F / A-18 is 10 minutes, for the 160th - 45 minutes ). It also raises deep doubts about their ability to overcome the normal (not Arab-Yugoslav) air defense system.
Summing up
, I want to note again that modern air warfare is not individual combat in the air, but the work of detection, target designation and suppression systems. And consider the plane (whether F-22 or PAK FA) as a proud lone "wolf" in the sky - no need. There are a lot of nuances around in the face of air defense, electronic warfare, ground-based RTR, weather conditions, flares, LTC and other joys that will not even allow the pilot to reach the target. Therefore, there is no need to add up sagas and sing hymns to single fantastic winged ships that will bring laurels of victories to the feet of those who created them, and destroy everyone who dares to "raise a hand" against their creators.
| PAK FA | F-22 | F-35 | Su-35S | |
| Maximum takeoff weight, kg | 37 000 | 37 600 | 31 750 | 34 500 |
| 394 | 487 | 606 | 556 | |
| Maximum speed, km/h | 2500 | 2100 | 1900 | 2400 |
| Cruise speed, km/h | 1300-1800 | 1570 | 850 | 850 |
| Range without PTB, with combat load, km | 2700 | 2500 | 2520 | 3000 |
| Joint thrust, kgf | 2 at 17,600 | 2 at 15,810 | 1 in 19 500 | 2 per 14,000 |
| Rate of climb, m/s | 230 | n/a | n/a | 280 |
| Maximum operational overload | 10-11G | 6G | 7.5G | 10g |
| EPR | from 0.005 to 0.3 m² | from 0.0001 (?!) to 0.3—0.4 m² | 0.005 m² | 0.5-2 m² |
| Working ceiling, m | 20 000 | 20 000 | 20 000 | 18 000 |
| up to 10 000 | n/a | up to 7 700 | up to 8 000 |
I was provoked to create this article by regular disputes and measurements of various "bodies" in topics about our aviation. In general, the audience of these discussions can be divided into those who believe that we are hopelessly behind, and those who, on the contrary, are subject to unprecedented enthusiasm and firmly believe that everything is wonderful. The argument basically boils down to the fact that "nothing flies here, but everything is cool with them." And vice versa. I decided to single out a few theses around which frequent disputes flare up and give them my assessment.
For those who value their time, I give conclusions at the very beginning:
1) The US Air Force and the Russian Air Force, both in quantitative and qualitative terms, are approximately equal, with a slight advantage for the United States;
2) The trend for the next 5-7 years is to achieve almost complete parity;
3) PR, advertising and psychological warfare is a favorite and effective method of US warfare. An adversary who is psychologically defeated (by disbelief in the power of his weapons, hands, etc.) is already half defeated.
So, let's begin.
Air Force/Navy/Guard USA is the most powerful in the world.
Yes this is true. The US Air Force strength as of May 2013 was 934 fighters, 96 bombers, 138 strike aircraft, 329 transport aircraft, 216 tankers, 938 trainers and 921 other aircraft.
For comparison, the strength of the Russian Air Force as of May 2013 is 738 fighters, 163 bombers, 153 strike aircraft, 372 transport aircraft, 18 tankers, 200 trainers and 500 other aircraft. As you can see, there is no “monstrous” quantitative superiority.
However, there are nuances, the main of which - US aviation is aging, but it has no replacement.
I also want to highlight the following point. Our country 20 years ago was part of a "democracy" with Su-27 and MiG-29, which, thanks to a competent export policy, were able to survive and then increase their potential to Su-35S and MiG-35. The US entered the crisis F-22, out of production, and with unfinished F-35, as well as a massive fleet of good, but outdated F-15/16. I lead my rhetoric to the fact that at the moment the United States no relatively cheap backlog, which would allow them to maintain a quantitative (and in some ways qualitative) superiority over the Russian Federation without multi-billion investment in new developments.
At the same time, the aviation fleet of the Russian Federation over the next 5-7 years will be actively modernized. Including due to the creation of completely new aircraft. At the moment, until 2017, contracts have been concluded for the production / modernization of the MiG-31BM - 100 units; Su-27SM - 96 units; Su-27SM3 - 12 units; Su-35S - 95 units; Su-30SM - 60 units; Su-30M2 - 4 units; MiG-29SMT - 34 units; MiG-29K - 24 units; Su-34 - 124 units; MiG-35 - 24 units; PAK FA - 60 units; IL-476 - 100 units; An-124-100M - 42 units; A-50U - 20 units; Tu-95MSM - 20 units; Yak-130 - 65 units. By 2020, more than 750 new machines will be put into operation.
In fairness, I note that in 2001 the United States planned to purchase more than 2,400 F-35s by 2020. However, at the moment, all deadlines have been missed, and the commissioning of the aircraft has been postponed until mid-2015.
We only have a few 4++ aircraft and no 5th generation, while the US already has hundreds of them.
Yes, that's right, the US has 141 F-22A in service. We have 18 Su-35S. PAK FA - undergoing flight tests. But you need to consider:
a) Airplanes F-22s out of production due to 1) high cost ($280-300 versus $85-95 for the Su-35); 2) overlooked the issue of the tail unit (it fell apart during overloads); 3) glitches with the FCS (fire control system).
b) F-35, with all its PR, is very far from the 5th generation. Yes, and there are enough shortcomings: either the EDSU will fail, or the airframe will not work as it should, or the FCS will fail.
c) Until 2017, the troops will receive: Su-35S - 95 units, PAK FA - 60 units.
d) Comparison of individual aircraft outside the context of their combat use is not correct. Combat operations are high-intensity and multi-modal mutual destruction, where much depends on the specific topography, weather conditions, luck, training, coherence, morale, etc. Separate combat units do not solve anything. On paper, an ordinary ATGM will tear any modern tank, but in combat conditions everything is much more prosaic.
Their 5th generation is many times superior to our PAK FA and Su-35S.
This is a very bold statement.
a) If the F-22 and F-35 are so cool, why are they: 1) So carefully hidden? 2) Why are they not allowed to make EPR measurements? 3) Why are they not satisfied with demonstrative dogfights, or at least simple comparative maneuvering, as at air shows?
b) If we compare the performance characteristics of our and American machines, then we can find a lag in our aircraft only in terms of EPR (for the Su-35S) and detection range (20-30 km). 20-30 km in range is garbage in vegetable oil for the simple reason that the missiles that we have surpass the US AIM-54, AIM-152AAAM in range by 80-120 km. I'm talking about RVV BD, KS-172, R-37. So, if the F-35 or F-22 radars have the best range for inconspicuous targets, then how will they shoot down this target? And where is the guarantee that the "contact" will not fly "low"?
c) There is nothing universal in military affairs. An attempt to create a universal aircraft capable of performing the functions of an interceptor, bomber, fighter and attack aircraft leads to the fact that the universal becomes synonymous with the word mediocre. The war recognizes only the best models in their class, sharpened to solve specific problems. Therefore, if an attack aircraft, then - Su-25SM, if a front-line bomber, - Su-34, if an interceptor, - MiG-31BM, if a fighter - Su-35S.
d) “America spent $400 billion in R&D to create the F-35, and $70 billion for the F-22. Russia spent only $8 billion to create the T-50. Doesn’t anyone realize that if Russia would spend $400 billion on a research project, they would probably produce an aircraft capable of conquering the world in a second…” (c) War is not about who has the longest X. More importantly, who will have these X better in terms of price / quality.
clickable
The United States has a significant superiority in strategic air forces.
This is wrong. The US Air Force has 96 strategic bombers: 44 B-52H, 36 B-1B and 16 B-2A. B-2 - exclusively subsonic - from nuclear weapons carries only free-falling bombs. B-52N - subsonic and old, like a mammoth. B-1B - at the moment it is not a carrier of nuclear weapons (START-3). Compared to the B-1, the Tu-160 has a 1.5 times greater takeoff weight, 1.3 times greater combat radius, 1.6 times greater speed and a greater load in the internal compartments. By 2025, we plan to commission a new strategic bomber (PAK DA), which will replace the Tu-95 and Tu-160. The United States has extended the life of its aircraft until 2035.
If we compare their ALCMs (cruise missiles) with ours, then everything turns out to be quite interesting. AGM-86 ALCM has a range of 1200-1400 km. Our Kh-55s are 3000-3500 km, and Kh-101s are 5000-5500 km. That is, the Tu-160 can shoot at the territory or AUG of the enemy without entering the affected area, and then calmly leave on supersonic sound (for comparison, the maximum operating time at full thrust with afterburner for the F / A-18 is 10 minutes , for the 160th - 45 minutes). It also raises deep doubts about their ability to overcome the normal (not Arab-Yugoslav) air defense system.
Summing up, I want to note once again that modern air warfare is not about individual battles in the air, but the work of detection, target designation and suppression systems. And it is not necessary to consider an aircraft (be it an F-22 or PAK FA) as a proud lone “wolf” in the sky. There are a lot of nuances around in the face of air defense, electronic warfare, ground-based RTR, weather conditions, flares, LTC and other joys that will not even allow the pilot to reach the target. Therefore, there is no need to add up sagas and sing hymns to single fantastic winged ships that will bring laurels of victories to the feet of those who created them, and destroy everyone who dares to "raise a hand" against their creators.
Throughout its history, mankind has modernized the ways of warfare. This has led to the fact that in the 21st century there are military technologies that, due to their power, pose a rather serious threat to the whole world. But, as we understand, such a level of development of the combat sector has not always existed. Some in certain states have a long and rich history of formation and development. In most cases, these are the air forces.
Today, countries such as the Russian Federation and the United States of America can boast of powerful aviation. For several years in a row, these states have been tacitly competing in terms of the best military equipment and power. In a similar question, the Air Force is very often compared, because it is this branch of the army in the modern world that has a large number of tasks and functions. But in order to conduct a comparative analysis of the aviation of Russia and the United States, it is necessary to consider these military sectors separately. This will highlight their strengths and weaknesses, as well as answer the question of which country occupies air supremacy today.
What is aviation?
For a long time, many states consisted of artillery, infantry and cavalry. At the same time, some types of troops had a fairly high level of development. But the appearance of aircraft completely changed the idea of the structure of the armed forces. Already in the First World War, aviation was used as one of the ways to defeat the physical strength of the enemy. With the technical evolution, this military sector has evolved. By the end of the 21st century, aviation had become the main element of the armed forces of any state. At the same time, the technical equipment of this type of troops has become much more powerful and deadly.
Types of aviation
The technical development of military equipment, which began at the end of the 20th century and continues to this day, has largely affected the air forces of all states. A large number of technical means of aviation makes it possible to distinguish its individual types, namely:
1. Strategic aviation - used in most cases for reconnaissance and special operations.
2. Frontline - these are short-range forces. They are used, as a rule, to defeat the main enemy forces in the course of hostilities.
3. The transportation of equipment, personnel, provisions and other objects lies with military transport aviation.
4. An important role is played by air ambulance, through which the wounded are delivered to the places of medical care.
And the United States, the comparison of which will be presented in this article, is endowed with the elements of the mentioned type of troops. However, in each of these states it has its own specific features. It is on their basis that one can compare the Russian and US Air Forces, which has been happening very often lately. After all, these countries are the most powerful militarily. For a detailed comparison, US and Russian aviation must be analyzed separately. Because the types of troops of these powers have their own characteristics.
Air Force of the Russian Federation
Aviation of the Russian Federation is a well-equipped branch of the armed forces, which is part of the general Armed Forces. Up until 2015, it underwent numerous structural reorganizations. The result was the creation of the Aerospace Forces, which included aviation and air defense troops. The presented part of the army has a fairly rich structure. In the process of formation of independent Russia, aviation was not a novelty.
The Air Force has been in existence since Imperial times. They were formed in 1910. All aviation at that time was divided into separate units. During the existence of the USSR, the Air Force reaches the peak of its power.
The baptism of fire of the new Soviet aviation took place in Spain, during the civil war. The collapse of the Soviet Union marked the beginning of a new era. Russian aviation has become a priority area of state funding, which, of course, affected the technical equipment of this type of troops.
Tasks and structure of the Russian Air Force
And the United States, the comparison of which will be presented below, has its own structures and functional tasks. The Air Force of the Russian Federation in this case implements the following areas of activity of the armed forces, namely:
1. Reflection of air aggression.
2. Protection of the state from attacks from the air.
3. Air support for infantry.
4. The defeat of enemy manpower and other objects.
5. Protection of the most important objects of the internal infrastructure of the state.
As for the structure of Russian aviation, it consists of the previously presented elements that are inherent in the systems of many states, with classical air forces.
General information about the US Air Force
One should take into account the fact that today the United States of America is the most numerous, judging by the number of people and aircraft involved. As a separate branch of the military, the Air Force began its existence in 1947. Until that moment, they were part of the US Army. In fact, the Air Force is aviation, because in America these concepts are related. belongs mostly to the army. Aviation has established itself well throughout its existence as one of the most combat-ready branches of the armed forces.
US aviation structure
Given the large number of equipment and physical forces involved in the activities of aviation, this type of troops has a fairly branched structure. To date, it includes, in addition to the Ministry of the Air Force, 11 more commands. During its existence, the aviation of the United States proved to be excellent in the following campaigns, namely:
- in an operation to bring homeless children out of Vietnam;
- delivery of humanitarian aid to the CIS;
- delivery of humanitarian aid to countries affected by the 2004 tsunami;
- delivery of Somali humanitarian aid.
However, even taking into account the presented features, US and Russian aviation can be compared solely on the basis of technical equipment, which is responsible for combat power.
Outnumbering
The number of military equipment is one of the criteria on the basis of which the aviation of Russia and the United States is analyzed. A comparison of the air forces of these countries showed that America has been the dominant state in the sky for several years in a row. The number according to the summary for 2015 is about 2,700 units of military equipment. At the same time, Russian aviation lags far behind in this regard. The gap is calculated not in hundreds, but in thousands of pieces of equipment. Thus, the US Air Force in a real war can cause a lot of trouble for Russia. In simple terms, American pilots will "crush by numbers."
To date, there are 1,400 aircraft in the Russian Federation, which brings the state to third place after the United States in the world aviation ranking. At the same time, such a gap in numbers was observed almost always. For example, the aviation of Russia and the USA in 2013 was also compared. The number indicator testified to the advantage of the Americans in two times.
Aviation efficiency
The aviation of the Russian Federation and the United States, the comparison of the numbers of which showed the advantage of the latter criterion, should also be analyzed from the standpoint of efficiency. The cumbersome arsenal of US military equipment would not be such a formidable weapon if America did not have a large number of air bases around the world. That is, the level of operational response of American aviation is quite high due to an extensive network of military points. This positive moment is determined by America's participation in the NATO bloc. Oddly enough, but the Russian Federation is also not far behind in this regard. At the same time, the absence of air bases around the world is compensated by the presence of a large territory of the state itself. In fact, Russia is the largest country in the world in terms of area, which has a positive effect on its military sector.
Strategic aviation of Russia and the USA: comparison
One of the most significant advantages of the US Air Force is the strategic sector, which is represented by fighters. Today, machines of this type are the basis of the combat power of US aviation. Their main feature is that almost all American strategic equipment is designed to carry out ultra-precise strikes against targets on the ground. That is, in the conditions of performing special operations, US fighters are indispensable.
Russian aviation cannot boast of such scope. Such capabilities are mainly assigned to front-line bombers, for example: Su-24, Su-34, Su-25. Thus, the strategic aviation of Russia and the United States, which they are trying to compare everywhere, shows the advantage of America in this case. However, it is worth noting that back in 2010 Russia began an active program of modernization and rejuvenation of its Air Force. As a result, by 2025, the Russian Federation is expected to "arrive" new strategic bombers of the PAK-DA type. At the same time, the United States of America extended the operation of its military equipment until 2030. This indicates the gradual aging of the US aviation sector.
Thus, the strategic aviation of Russia and the United States is characterized by the presence of a large amount of equipment and the gradual renewal of the Russian Air Force, which will certainly give us an advantage over the Americans in a few years.
Gap in quality today
The aviation of Russia and the USA, the comparison of which often speaks of the superiority of the latter, shows the backwardness of domestic technology in terms of the quality and novelty of aircraft. Even despite the fact that the Air Force “rejuvenation” program launched in 2010, as already mentioned earlier, American aircraft are several times superior to Russian aircraft at the technical level. This is an extremely negative factor, because it threatens the outcome of any hostilities with America for our country. The problem is that today in Russia all aviation is represented by 4th generation aircraft. The United States achieved this technological progress back in the 80s of the last century.
Thus, the aviation of Russia and the USA in comparison shows the advantage of the quality of American aircraft. In addition, on the territory of the Russian Federation, the development of technical means has long been underway, which should become an analogue of the well-known American "B-2" ("Stealth"). At the same time, new equipment is being developed in the United States on the basis of the already presented aircraft.
"Stock" in case of war
It is worth noting the fact that all the technical developments that have begun - both in the USA and in Russia - require huge sums of money. Their absence significantly slows down the process of fleet renewal. Therefore, in the event of full-scale hostilities, the main confrontation will take place using 4th generation aircraft on both sides of the barricades.
The Americans will use F-15, F-16, F-18 class fighters, and the Russian Federation will use Su-2 attack aircraft 5 and fighters, etc. When the aviation of Russia and the USA in 2014 was compared, the analysis showed the same characteristics of the fleet . Therefore, as far as we understand, no significant changes are expected in the near future. All shifts are designed for a minimum of 5 years.
Conclusion
So, the article analyzed the military aviation of the United States and Russia, taking into account different - qualitative and quantitative - criteria. In conclusion, it should be noted that the presented characteristics are based on dry statistics and individual episodes of the combat use of aircraft from both countries. The main comparison will only be possible in a direct confrontation between the United States and the Russian Federation, which, hopefully, will never happen.
