Russian Air Force News & Discussion
- Thread starter Haavarla
- Start date
Haavarla
Active Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #882
Ups.. forgot about those
Six new Su-35S delivered from KnAAPO.
Sukhoi Company (JSC) - News - News
Well well.. up to a Sq size now, allmost.
I'm actuall a little surprised. But its about time.
Can't wait to see what kind of Camo paint.
alexkvaskov
New Member
alexkvaskov
New Member
The 35 seems to have a smaller number of hardpoints - only 3 on each wing and none under the engines, unlike the MKIs for India that has 12 hardpoints. I wonder why this is so.
India's MKI:
http://imageshack.us/a/img577/3151/sukhoisu30mki8.jpg
Russian Su-35:
http://www.knaapo.ru/rus/popup-100x...y/aircrafts/combat/su-35s/su-35s_25_hires.jpg
Iirc the An-70 will be produced in Voronezh, VASO.
What is the rationale for the acquisition of both the SU-30SM and SU-35S by the Russians?
Do the aircraft have different roles? They both appear to be multi-role fighters with overlapping capabilities to me...
Just curious as it doesn't seem the most efficient way to recapitalise their fighter fleet...
I understand that this limited order for Su-30SM is primarily for air cover for the Baltic fleet.The SU-35s has a more long term role.
Haavarla
Active Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #889
Agree with resolute.
The Su-30SM will rearm both in the RuN Aviation and VVS.
The Su-30 is a cheaper but clever way for Russian MoD to build up and replace old outdated units in VVS.
KnAAPO(Su-35S) cant do this alone it seems.
Anyway, both Flankers share much of the same pool of components and operational capabilities. Technical repairs and maintanance knowhow, etc .
It should make it cheaper, to operate on a long term time window.
The Su-30SM will rearm both in the RuN Aviation and VVS.
The Su-30 is a cheaper but clever way for Russian MoD to build up and replace old outdated units in VVS.
KnAAPO(Su-35S) cant do this alone it seems.
Anyway, both Flankers share much of the same pool of components and operational capabilities. Technical repairs and maintanance knowhow, etc .
It should make it cheaper, to operate on a long term time window.
There was a clean and well intended plan for the PAK-FA to replace everything. Then reality came along, and the Su-35 and Su-34 were to be almost a transition of sorts, as well as a way to augment numbers.
However both programs ran into delays, and the rate of production for them is less then impressive. So far only 5 Su-34 and 6 Su-35 were handed over this year. 5 more Su-34s are due early next year, but 10 airframes a year is less then one a month. So the Su-30SM came along, as an aircraft that already in mass production (MKI) and therefore could reliably deliver a large number of aircraft quickly.
There would be some sense in it, if the Su-30SM was exclusively for the AVMF, given their strike capabilities, they could even replace the Tu-22Ms in the anti-ship role, and the Su-24Ms that the BSF and BaltFleet fly, as well as AVMF Flankers. But now it's a giant mess. Especially when you consider that there are Su-27SM, SM2, and SM3 in service, and will remain in service for quite a long time.
Essentially it's a clusterfuck because the necessary numbers of Su-34 and Su-35S could not be procured in time. And of course IAPO has some political leverage, which they probably put to good use when it became obvious that the numbers of Su-35S and Su-34 were fairly small. It also helped that a Sukhoi owned Su-30 aircraft took part in the war in Georgia.
Haavarla
Active Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #891
I don't see how multiple different Flanker in the inventory should be of any problems. When they get rid of the last Su-24M, Tu-22M and a given numbers of outdated Su-27.
Then they are pretty much left with one big pool of Flankers(Su-34 included), that share very much of the same build up, components, systems and service procedures.
Different engines, radars etc, would cost a small fortune to sustain...
Interestng comments guys, thought it was something like that. Thanks.
Haavarla
Active Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #893
Small fortune to sustain, compaired to what
Compair to USAF inventory with how many different jet engines?
The Radars are not that different. They are pretty much of the same architecture build up. The BARS do have slightly different build-up, but i don't think the Su-30SM have BARS radar.
The engines are allmost identical, its the same engine core on all Flankers, only different forward Compressor fanblades, newer Hi/low pressure fuel pump and some different FADEC system.
This does not make them different engines.
There are two manufactors in Russia whom produce the same engine. Which also can't be bad.
Compair to USAF inventory with how many different jet engines?
The Radars are not that different. They are pretty much of the same architecture build up. The BARS do have slightly different build-up, but i don't think the Su-30SM have BARS radar.
The engines are allmost identical, its the same engine core on all Flankers, only different forward Compressor fanblades, newer Hi/low pressure fuel pump and some different FADEC system.
This does not make them different engines.
There are two manufactors in Russia whom produce the same engine. Which also can't be bad.
Compare budgets and fleet sizes. Not at all the same ball park.Small fortune to sustain, compaired to what
Compair to USAF inventory with how many different jet engines?
The Su-30SM does indeed have Bars. The Su-35S has Irbis. The Su-34 has Leninets. The PAK-FA will have Zhuk-AE. The Su-27SM/SM2/SM3 have god knows what for radars. The Su-30M2 also has a different radar. And this is JUST THE FLANKERS! Don't forget MiG-29SMT, MiG-29KUB, MiG-35, and MiG-31BM.
I don't think AL-31 (on Su-30 and Su-35), AL-41 (on Su-34), and the next-gen PAK-FA engines under development right now are the same.
Also, second batch of Su-34 has been handed over. Allegedly. There are rumors that this is a "handover", and really the aircraft will require more work before being sent to Voronezh. So far their transfer to Baltimore is planned "soon".
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/420952.html?view=10500696#t10500696
Compared to sticking with one or the other... If you have multiple types to fill the same role, your sustainment budget takes a hammering. It's much cheaper to buy one lot of spares, train your technicians on one platform with training devices ONLY for that platform and so on.Small fortune to sustain, compaired to what
Compair to USAF inventory with how many different jet engines?
I hope you are not going to compare Russian and US sustainment budgets now, but even the US is reducing overall platform types significantly...
As for the rest, what Feanor said. The Russian spares inventory must be a nightmare, as would the US no doubt...
They should have cancelled on the Su-34 and Su-35, and instead just bought the Su-30SM as the intermediate platform in the mid 2000s. By now they could've had a lot of them up and running, and they're sufficiently mutli-role to replace the Su-24, Su-27, and even Tu-22M in maritime strike.
And being a two-seater, it wouldn't require a dedicated training variant. It could also carry the EW pods current being developed for the Su-34. and the Super 30 MKI variant would do just find as a PAK-FA test-bed. It could even replace the MiG-31BM, given that it's in mass production, and can easily be integrated with all kinds of other current-gen gear (Brahmos for example).
They could have a high-low mix with Su-30SM, and MiG-35, which would have quite a lot of commonality with the MiG-29K. They would make a nice transition for the PAK-FA.
And being a two-seater, it wouldn't require a dedicated training variant. It could also carry the EW pods current being developed for the Su-34. and the Super 30 MKI variant would do just find as a PAK-FA test-bed. It could even replace the MiG-31BM, given that it's in mass production, and can easily be integrated with all kinds of other current-gen gear (Brahmos for example).
They could have a high-low mix with Su-30SM, and MiG-35, which would have quite a lot of commonality with the MiG-29K. They would make a nice transition for the PAK-FA.
Haavarla
Active Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #897
Feanor, do you have any source that Su-30SM have BARS radar installed?
Radars like N001V, N001VE, N001VEP and the Irbis-E is pretty much of the same architecture. And pretty much the same Radar array too.
The Engines on Su-34 are the AL-31FM series 42, it could see the AL-31FM2 at a later stage. But the similarities are very much alike to the whole Flanker engine park.
I think we can all agree that Russia and VVS should have done a lot of things differently over the past decade.
But reality and the situation dictate that VVS is in dire need to rearm its Fleet.
Su-34 has seen heavy delays over the years. Su-35S and Pak-Fa too.
Be that as it may, i think Russia MoD is doing a great job. They have done a lot of cuts and restructure to cope with a more modern situation, and to face future challanges and task.
I think Russia is doing the right thing, all things considered.
Forget about any Mig-35, stick with the Flanker Fleet.
Radars like N001V, N001VE, N001VEP and the Irbis-E is pretty much of the same architecture. And pretty much the same Radar array too.
The Engines on Su-34 are the AL-31FM series 42, it could see the AL-31FM2 at a later stage. But the similarities are very much alike to the whole Flanker engine park.
I think we can all agree that Russia and VVS should have done a lot of things differently over the past decade.
But reality and the situation dictate that VVS is in dire need to rearm its Fleet.
Su-34 has seen heavy delays over the years. Su-35S and Pak-Fa too.
Be that as it may, i think Russia MoD is doing a great job. They have done a lot of cuts and restructure to cope with a more modern situation, and to face future challanges and task.
I think Russia is doing the right thing, all things considered.
Forget about any Mig-35, stick with the Flanker Fleet.
Last edited:
I'm trying to find something solid in english right now. Russian forums/blogs have been convinced for a while now, and they've often said stuff that wasn't officially confirmed until later.
You want to tell me that N001, N011M, B004, and N035 are the same?
You can, accurately, claim similarity between the N011M, and N035, but even there the differences are significant. The N001 is a mechanically scanned array, and is very different from the PESA Bars family, similarly different is the B004, which is also PESA, but unrelated to the Bars.
If that was their main concern, they should've bought the Su-30SM years ago, and stuck with it. It was the fastest, cheapest, and most reliable way to get new planes into the VVS fast. Instead they wanted to have ambitious projects with high technology risks, and high costs. They could've even started up production of the Su-30SM at additional factories.
They have yet to figure what exactly it is they want from the VVS structure, not to mentioned the VKO instead of absorbing the VVS has essentially become a parallel structure, a mix of the PVO and the Space Troops, instead of the unified structure it was meant to be. Now there are rumors that instead of large centralized airbases they're going to go back to the system of 1 regiment, 1 airfield. How is this doing a great job?
Granted, they're doing something. Which is more then we can say for the MoD prior to Serdyukov, which was essentially doing nothing. And it's good that they're trying to figure out a way to move forward, but as is it's very very messy.
MiG-35 orders were mentioned earlier this year. I think I even posted a link in this thread. While I agree that it's not set in stone, there a good chance they will go ahead with them. It's not a good choice.
Pilots were having difficulties transferring from Mi-24P straight to Mi-28N, so the Mi-35M is used to ease the transition. You'll notice it's being deployed in small numbers to the same airbases that the Mi-28Ns.