Russian Air Force News & Discussion

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
New UAV revealed, it's the Altius-M project Altair. The UAV supposedly has a ferry range of 10 000 kms, and autonomous flight time of 48 hours. Some sort of AESA radar is planned for it, but details are absent.

Первое поÑвление на публике БПЛРÐльтаир - Сделано у наÑ
bmpd - "

And the third serial A-50U has been handed over. The pace is not impressive.

ÀÐÌÑ-ÒÀÑÑ
 

weegee

Active Member
New UAV revealed, it's the Altius-M project Altair. The UAV supposedly has a ferry range of 10 000 kms, and autonomous flight time of 48 hours. Some sort of AESA radar is planned for it, but details are absent.

Первое поÑвление на публике БПЛРÐльтаир - Сделано у наÑ
bmpd - "

And the third serial A-50U has been handed over. The pace is not impressive.

ÀÐÌÑ-ÒÀÑÑ
Looking at the first link with the photos, is that a twin diesel engine UAV? Is this where the extensive long range comes from?
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Last edited:

Haavarla

Active Member
And the third serial A-50U has been handed over. The pace is not impressive.

ÀÐÌÑ-ÒÀÑÑ
Thats right. The grand plan of VVS is one A-50U per year.
One of the problems With the A-50U, is that VEGA is importing Foreign chipset and then put them onto their own configuration hardware.
Since Russia still has not domestic Production of such high standard Chipset.

There might even be some problems in the near future for this program, now that the west has pending trade embargo toward Russia.
Not sure if VEGA get it from France, Israel or China though..
 

vince24

New Member
Hi everyone

I have a question I am sure some of you are able to answer.

I have just finished reading the book "Russian Air Power" from Yefim Gordon, and I noticed that over the hundreds beautiful aircraft pictures contained in the book, only a handfull were showing aircrafts actually carrying weapons.

There was notably some Su 34 with unguided rocket pods (incredible, it seems, in French air force this kind of antique equipment has been withdrawn from use years ago...) and more importantly none of the fighters were carrying a fox 3 missile. I have just seen some R-27s carried by Su 27s.

My questions are the following: are there any fox 3 missile in real operational squadron service in Russia ? What about the R-77s that we have seen on airshow aircrafts for 20 years ? What about the R-37s ?

I can't believe that the Russian Air forces are still actually using the R-27 (an equivalent of the French 530D now withdrawn from French use) or the R33s, which never were as good as the AIM 54, which themselves were withdrawn altmost 10 years ago from USN service ?

I would be interested to know about the current operatuional use of the R-77 and R-37.

Without fox 3 missiles, all the sacrifices the Russians are doing to re-equip their Air Forces seem to be quite useless ?

Thanks !
Vincent
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
The R-77 is almost unheard of in regular service. The R-27 remains very common. Unguided rocket pods are the go-to option for air-to-ground missions, be they rotary or fixed wing. You can see even the newest Ka-52s, and Su-34s, flying lots and lots of training missions with S-8 rocket pods. There is an effort underway to improve this situation, but so far it has been less then impressive.
 

vince24

New Member
Hi Feanor

Do we know the official or unofficial reason why the R-77 has not entered into service yet ? This missile has been seen in airshows for altmost 25 years and I believe it has entered into service with some armies, e.g. India. So why not in Russia ??

Why on hell spending so much on revitalising the air force, and neglecting such an important aspect ?? They should rather try to make some savings by scrapping their fleets of useless (though very beautiful I must say) Mig 29/31 or Tu-22 and focus on improving the real combat efficiency of the remaining aircrafts. Sometimes it really seems that the defence policy of Putin exclusively consists in having nice headlines in the newspapers rather than in training an Airforce which could really match its opponents in the sky.

And what to say about Su 34 crews training with rocket pods ? This is just unbelievable... they should better scrap half of their fleet of Su-24 and improve the lethality of the remaining ones.

The US have never been able to produce aircrafts as charismatic as the communist ones (who would say an F-15 looks nicer than a Su-27 ?) but they have an amazingly good understanding of the combat/cost effectiveness realities. They have retired their incredible B-58 Hustler after only 10 years because it was too expensive to maintain. They have retired their Tomcats and F111, which were still very potent aircrafts, just because they were no longer absolutely at the top of the cost/effectiveness ratio.... the Russian should probably take example and rationalize their incredibly dispersed fleets of aircrafts, and reduce it to a sustainable size. Too many aircraft types !

Russia has a lower GDP than France, and yet a much more sizable air force (at least on the paper). This is simply not sustainable on the long term!

Why not
- disband immediately all Mig 29 units (including the Algerian SMTs to simplify logistics) - no replacement
- scrap all Mig 31 including the modernised BM to simplify logistics (anyway the R-33 is no more a threat in modern warfare) over the next 3 years and replace them a much lower number of R-77 equipped Su-35 in the most strategical spots
- immediately disband all non-upgraded Su 27 units, achieve modernisation of the surviving low-houred airframes units at a quicker pace, with R-77.
- immediately scrap all Su-24s to simplify logistics, accelerate deliveries of the Su-30/34 in various versions
- durably and deeply modernise the fleet of Su-25s (until they get an equivalent of the F-35)
- immediately disband the fleet of Tu-22M3 (this plane looks gorgeous, but seriously what is it doing in the 21st century ? In the US they would have been scrapped long ago...)
- disband the fleet of Tu-95 bears (too old, less weaponload than the B52 to justify their life prolongation)
- Focus on improving the capacities and serviceability (and maybe the number of) the remaining few Tu-160

I know I dream, they would never do that, but yet something around these lines would be the only sensible approach considering the financial and human capacities of Russia (should we remind that there are only 145 million russians, vs 310 million americans ?).

What do you think ?

Cheers
Vincent
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
What do you think ?
I think that you fundamentally under-estimate the significance of inertial thinking in Russian military and political circles, as well as the lobbying power of Russian defense industries. We will see a fairly massive (relatively speaking) induction of new munitions in the second half of this decade, along side the new PAK-FAs, and some of those munitions will trickle down to the older units.

I don't know if the R-77 is in service or not, I would not be surprised to hear that it actually is "in service" (i.e. passed state trials/experimental exploitation) but numbers are very low. The Russian air force does use the R-77 in practice, just very rarely. MiG-29s and MiG-31s will not be retired in the forseeable future. Quite the opposite. The MiG-31 fleet will continue to be upgraded, and a MiG-41 is in the works to replace it. Additional MiG-29SMTs have been contracted, and MiG-35s are in the works as well (which is just an upgraded MiG-29). That having been said, total fleet size will go down. The Tu-22M, with upgrades, can be a viable platform for some of the same missions that the US uses B-1s and B-52s for. That having been said the upgrades are still in the works, and it's not clear when we will see them in service. The same goes for the Tu-95 fleet. Non-upgraded Su-27 units are relatively few already, and their numbers will continue to shrink as Su-35S and Su-30SM are delivered. They will probably be gone by the end of this decade, if not sooner. The Su-24 unfortunately cannot be retired overnight. Right now they fill a role that very few other Russian aircraft can fill. They are still a go-to strike asset for much of the Russian air force. Retiring them immediately would create a huge gap. Deliveries of Su-34s and Su-30SMs can not be realistically accelerated. They're already going as fast as production facilities and finances allow. The Su-25 upgrade is proceeding just like you suggest, under the Su-25SM program.

Ironically a contract for MiG-29SMTs has just been signed. It was talked about earlier, now it's official.

bmpd -

And the Il-112V has officially been put back into development. It seems that this Ukrainian mess has given the Ilyushin project the edge it needed over Aviakor's An-140T project.

bmpd -

Now my opinion is this: the Russian air force should retire the entire MiG-29 fleet, and MiG-31 fleet within the next decade. They should instead increase total procurement numbers for the PAK-FA (I know it won't be 1 for 1 replacement) and the Su-34. The upgraded Su-27SM should either be brought up to the standard of the Su-35S or retired also, over the next 15 years. The Su-25 should be upgraded and remain in service, probably with an enlarged fleet size (production has already been started in Ulan-Ude) but with a bigger focus on integrating and making use of PGMs. The strategic bomber fleet should proceed as is, but the PAK-DA should serve as a replacement for the Tu-22M as well as the 95s and 160s.
 

Haavarla

Active Member
The Su-24 is all but gone from service. There is around +200 Su-24M/M2 version still in service. Not sure if VVS vill recieve any more upgraded Su-24M/M2 though..

I agree about the Mig-29 linage.. Russia can do without them all together, but i suspect that while the Mig Rac still has an production line open(Mig-29K), i guess those Mig-29SMT was dirt cheap for the Russian MoD to pay for. Most likley, there was allready an stockpile of airframe parts on the shelfs.

Its not that easy to just upgrade all Flankers into Su-35S standard. You have different(competing) industry in Russian military Aviation. Irkut vs KNAAZ.
For what its worth, Irkut may have snatched a large slice of the cake when it comes to new Flankers for VVS.
 

colay

New Member
Can't find the article but a couples of months back I recall reading about Moscow giving the go-ahead to develop a new-gen lightweight fighter to complement PAK-FA. No specifics as I recall and my first impression it was a lifeline being tossed to keep MiG in business.
 

Haavarla

Active Member
Thrust me, there is none. It may just be Dimitri Rogozin brain fart all over the media..


Not sure if this has been posted before.

http://www.aviaport.ru/digest/2014/03/28/281027.html

Victor Polyakov answered a few questions about the Su-35S service.
The first six serial jets has returned to factory for further sensor and software upgrade. Mostly connected with weapons upgrade.

According to Viktor Polyakov, the Su-35S has no equall in VVS when it comes to system integrations.
They have picket up some "know how" from both Airbus and Thales whom Russia aviation sector has sub contracts with.

However the software had to be written by TsAGI and they did use several prossessor instead of one core, to ease the risk, time and cost.
 
Last edited:

ololosha

Banned Member
Our military forums say that the U.S. Air Force throughout the Russian aircraft loses. I would like to know here is objectively true? I try to read all about it, but it will take a lot of time
 

Haavarla

Active Member
Our military forums say that the U.S. Air Force throughout the Russian aircraft loses. I would like to know here is objectively true? I try to read all about it, but it will take a lot of time




Could you be more spesiffic, Any link or sources?

If you read the Forum rules, you'll find that comparison between AF or Jets are not applauded here.


There is a difference in how VVS and USAF is operated.
US have a Global AF service, while Russia do not.

There is also a clear difference in the various platform missions, which really tells us that they operate on slighlty difference Strategic and tactical Warfare Doctrines.

So to compair them in any way is very complicated, nevermind transparity, etc etc..
 
Last edited:

Haavarla

Active Member
If these sources are correct there are currently 53 Mig-31BM in VVS.

Djoker's journal -

Модернизированные МиГ-31БМ заÑтупили на боевое дежурÑтво в ЗВО | Ð*ИРÐовоÑти

MOSCOW, April 8 - RIA Novosti. Modern MiG-31BM have taken up on combat duty at the air base in the Tver region, and by the end of 2014 such fighters airfield is fully rearmed, told reporters Tuesday the head of the press service of the Western Military District, Colonel Oleg Kochetkov.

"In the Tver region pair modernized MiG-31BM Western Military District have taken up on combat duty," - said Kochetkov, recalling that in the district of these aircraft arrived in late 2013.

"Until the end of 2014 at the airport" Khotilovo "squadron of MiG-31 will be completely rearmed with upgraded fighters" - said the colonel.

MiG-31BM - double supersonic all-weather fighter-long-range interceptor. Developed in RAC "MiG". Has a modern management system, target detection range - 320 kilometers, destruction range is 280 kilometers. Onboard radar system MiG-31BM can simultaneously detect up to 24 air targets, eight of which can be simultaneously fired missiles R-33C".



Edit:
I'm not sure if this include the latest batch.. But something tells me the overhaul of the Foxhound will continue up to 100 units.
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Our military forums say that the U.S. Air Force throughout the Russian aircraft loses. I would like to know here is objectively true? I try to read all about it, but it will take a lot of time
I'm not sure what you mean here, but as has been stated, the USAF and indeed, western forces, operate their aircraft in different ways than the Russian A/F. There are a number of comments just earlier on this thread about some key capabilities that the Russian A/F is still trying to incorporate that the USAF has been fielding in combat for two decades however. Active air to air missiles and LO (stealth) for instance.

I'd suggest the differences between the two are more to do with communications, sensors, information gathering and what is described as "situational awareness" - knowing where you are and where the enemy are.
 
Top