Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Military Aviation Industry: News

    Share

    Berkut
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 191
    Points : 216
    Join date : 2015-05-05

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  Berkut on Sun Sep 06, 2015 4:11 pm

    IRST detecting F-22 from 110km and B-2 from 150km?!?! Haha. Yeah, right. And i wont be shocked if B-2 had a smaller IR footprint. Also, what plane is "Boeing B-2"? Wink

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  nemrod on Sun Sep 06, 2015 8:55 pm

    sepheronx wrote:I know you are being helpful, but please, post Chinese military products and news in the Chinese section of forums.  This isnt anything to do with Russia or Russian.

    If you read correctly my article, chineses only upgrade the russian version of these sensors. This is not an indigenous chinese invention. Moreover it is a cooperation between the countries, once they will be ready, these sensors will be integrated on russian fighters. Hence this article is the right place.

    mutantsushi
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 285
    Points : 307
    Join date : 2013-12-11

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  mutantsushi on Sun Sep 06, 2015 9:54 pm

    If this project involves Russian industry, then why does the article nowhere mention even ONE Russian OEM or Institute or MoD project?
    Maybe it's strange of me, but I assume anything on topic in this thread will have some connection to one of those entities.

    The article nowhere refers to them as upgrades, in fact it calls them "new".
    I mean, I don't think anybody is surprised if these in fact ARE "re-engineered upgrades" of Russian designs,
    but that doesn't necessarily involve Russian industry, any more than every AK-74 knock-off involves Russian industry.
    Likewise there is no substantiation of "cooperation" or that these "will be integrated" on Russian fighters.

    Sure, it's great that China is upgrading their Su-27 with local kit, but doesn't belong in RUSSIAN Aviation Industry News thread,
    any more than Polish or Israeli upgrade kits for MiGs belong here. If you know some other information that provides the data points
    which show this to belong in this thread, please go ahead and share, but the article you linked to does not do that.
    I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if this company had at some point cooperated with some Russian entity to gain ToT etc,
    that was wide-spread across many Chinese industrial projects, yet we don't see discussion of WZ-10 or L-15 etc
    even though those originally had involvement of Russian design bureaus, so it would seem the standard of relevance is higher.

    Thanks.

    (Incidentally, this whole thread hasn't stayed close to on-topic for quite a while, hopefully that episode has ended)

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4839
    Points : 4886
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  Militarov on Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:09 am

    GarryB wrote:During WWII the British and Americans would send 1,000 bombers day and night over several days just to hit one factory... quite often the nearby town was devastated but the factory sustained only minor damage and could continue production within hours and another attack needed to be mounted.

    With PAK FA the four bombs would be used against four separate targets and would hit the specific part of the target most vulnerable and therefore also the most difficult to fix/repair/replace.

    Modern aircraft wont need lots and lots of bombs... they will just need accurate ones.

    In comparison in the early 1980s the low level strike capability of the Soviet Union would consist of Su-17s, MiG-27s, and Su-24s. Today that same role could be performed by a single MiG-29SMT or MiG-35 or Su-35 or Su-34 or Su-30.

    In a few years time it will be a single PAK FA.

    The difference is that dozens of Su-17s would be sent to deal with a problem like a bridge... and today a single MiG-29SMT with a guided missile like Kh-29 could take out that same bridge. The PAK FA will take out the bridge and the bridge further down the river with its two Grom missiles in its front weapons bay, and also two enemy radars using two Kh-58s in the rear weapon bay and also shoot down a couple of enemy aircraft with its two AAMs in the wing mounted weapon bay...

    But you still have to agree that for prolonged CAS missions you will want to carry 3x250kg laser guided bombs on one hardpoint rather than just 1, amount paired with high accuracy of the platform (whatever that platform is, PAK FA if you like it) would increase efficiency couple times. That way instead of sending 6 SU34s on CAS mission you can send 2 coz they are not flying with half of max warload due to hardpoints being taken by single warheads (whatever they are bombs, missiles, gliding bombs).

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  max steel on Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:13 pm

    how American warmongers failed is an inaccurate wording (just like those bombardments of German towns by British and American planes). Secondly, it is somewhat naive to think that you can accurately bombard with a nuclear bomb. It is impossible, period. There were no significant military objects neither in Nagasaki nor in Hiroshima. So it is clear to everyone that it was an act of mass murder and a war crime. And by the way, the bombardment of Dresden had no military purpose as well - just murder. But there it would be at least meaningful to talk about "inaccuracy" since the UK and USA bombers were using conventional bombs, not nuclear.

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  nemrod on Mon Sep 07, 2015 4:25 pm

    mutantsushi wrote:
    ....even though those originally had involvement of Russian design bureaus, ....
    And hence...
    I don't surprise you, and I won't learn you with something new, if I say that most of the chinese's war's hardware is in fact soviet-russian- origin. This bullshit of Janes did not say all. As Russia and China are in active exchanges, and want to shift the balance of force -and they are successfully do- between them and US. The best way to accelerate the shift of balance of power, is the cooperation in all azimuth between Russia, China, and India. It seems that as China has much money, and are in advance in many areas such as satellites, space programs, radars, electronic, computer science, etc... Russia wants to profit in these fields. Many of the best US scientists and engineers are chinese origins, China is trying to attract them with +or - of success. Some western key technologies are between chineses hands, and as Russia is a leaders in many areas regarding military aircrafts the two contries found their benefits. I insisist all technologies regarding J-10, J-11, j-15, j-16, and even j-31 -russian design, and russian engines-, J-20, are near all russian technologies transferts, including the new powerfull chinese AESA's radars, and obviously, and chiefly IRST, where Soviet Union was the leader in the world.

    PapaDragon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3680
    Points : 3792
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  PapaDragon on Tue Sep 08, 2015 6:49 pm


    Advanced Heavy Lifter, future Russian-Chinese heavy-lift helicopter.

    Planned maximum takeoff weight 38.2 tons, top speed 300 km/h, service ceiling 5700 meters, range 630 km.





    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1465326.html

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Wed Sep 09, 2015 4:17 am

    But you still have to agree that for prolonged CAS missions you will want to carry 3x250kg laser guided bombs on one hardpoint rather than just 1, amount paired with high accuracy of the platform (whatever that platform is, PAK FA if you like it) would increase efficiency couple times. That way instead of sending 6 SU34s on CAS mission you can send 2 coz they are not flying with half of max warload due to hardpoints being taken by single warheads (whatever they are bombs, missiles, gliding bombs).

    Would never send Su-34s on CAS missions.

    Personally I think the solution on the Su-25TM with two wing pylons carrying 16 Hermes guided missiles with 20km range and 30kg HE warheads would be an ideal option for a range of point targets...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  sepheronx on Wed Sep 09, 2015 6:05 am

    You know, Herme's has been talked about and mentioned for years, and we have not seen a single piece of its existence. I am starting to doubt its existence and think that it is an abandoned project. Heck, I think mention of Hermes has been around longer than PAK FA's.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4839
    Points : 4886
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  Militarov on Wed Sep 09, 2015 12:38 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    But you still have to agree that for prolonged CAS missions you will want to carry 3x250kg laser guided bombs on one hardpoint rather than just 1, amount paired with high accuracy of the platform (whatever that platform is, PAK FA if you like it) would increase efficiency couple times. That way instead of sending 6 SU34s on CAS mission you can send 2 coz they are not flying with half of max warload due to hardpoints being taken by single warheads (whatever they are bombs, missiles, gliding bombs).

    Would never send Su-34s on CAS missions.

    Personally I think the solution on the Su-25TM with two wing pylons carrying 16 Hermes guided missiles with 20km range and 30kg HE warheads would be an ideal option for a range of point targets...

    SU25s wont be around forever, there will be most likely a stopgap where SU34 will be the only platfom for CAS till new dedicated CAS platfom appears (if any, since many people argue now if pure platforms like that are needed anymore due to drone expansion), also SU34 is partially made to be used for CAS same as F15E, US used it very often to suplement A10 in such missions.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  sepheronx on Wed Sep 09, 2015 2:24 pm

    There was talk a while back, Pak Sha, as replacement for Su-25's in service. I imagine due to budget constraints, that wont happen but a Su-25 restart production as the Ulan Ude plant apparently builds/built the dual seaters could. Add in tech from Su-25T program and you would have an advance cas aircraft.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Thu Sep 10, 2015 12:27 pm


    You know, Herme's has been talked about and mentioned for years, and we have not seen a single piece of its existence. I am starting to doubt its existence and think that it is an abandoned project. Heck, I think mention of Hermes has been around longer than PAK FA's.

    Oh yeah of little faith...

    http://www.kbptula.ru/en/productions/multi-service-weapon-systems

    SU25s wont be around forever, there will be most likely a stopgap where SU34 will be the only platfom for CAS till new dedicated CAS platfom appears (if any, since many people argue now if pure platforms like that are needed anymore due to drone expansion), also SU34 is partially made to be used for CAS same as F15E, US used it very often to suplement A10 in such missions.

    I don't know of any Army Aviation units operating Su-34s at the moment.

    The Su-25s are all getting upgrades and there are plans for a replacement aircraft, so i rather doubt they will transfer Su-34s to Army Aviation any time soon.

    The Su-34 would be too fast to operate with Mils and Kamovs anyway.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4839
    Points : 4886
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  Militarov on Thu Sep 10, 2015 12:36 pm

    SU25s wont be around forever, there will be most likely a stopgap where SU34 will be the only platfom for CAS till new dedicated CAS platfom appears (if any, since many people argue now if pure platforms like that are needed anymore due to drone expansion), also SU34 is partially made to be used for CAS same as F15E, US used it very often to suplement A10 in such missions.

    I don't know of any Army Aviation units operating Su-34s at the moment.

    The Su-25s are all getting upgrades and there are plans for a replacement aircraft, so i rather doubt they will transfer Su-34s to Army Aviation any time soon.

    The Su-34 would be too fast to operate with Mils and Kamovs anyway.[/quote]

    I thought Russian SU25s are in the Air force atm? Yeah i am aware they are getting update but still they will serve for how much after update 10-15 years max, i belive most of them were built 25 years ago? And replacement is just been in talks till now since Jak131 was refused some years ago.

    Well US didnt use F15E as low altitude CAS together with AH64s, but somewhat of a standoff platform using only high precision ammunition while A10s would go low, however on other hand SU34s have certain amount of armor on them so they would be more suitable to "get down there" than F15E is. I mean F35 is imo far less suitable for CAS missions than SU34 and still it is being marketed as A10 replacement to the USAF.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Sep 11, 2015 11:01 am

    I thought Russian SU25s are in the Air force atm?

    Army Aviation is currently part of the air force...

    Su-34 is part of long range aviation... DA... not FA or VVS.


    [quote]Yeah i am aware they are getting update but still they will serve for how much after update 10-15 years max, i belive most of them were built 25 years ago? And replacement is just been in talks till now since Jak131 was refused some years ago. [/qutoe]

    there was talk in Russia and the US about replacing their cheap simple CAS aircraft with already in service aircraft. The US went for the A-16, which was a variant of the F-16 and it failed miserably. The Russians explored using a version of the Yak-130 and it failed too.

    hense the current plan is upgrades of the Su-25 and later a brand new replacement model called PAK SHa.

    Well US didnt use F15E as low altitude CAS together with AH64s, but somewhat of a standoff platform using only high precision ammunition while A10s would go low, however on other hand SU34s have certain amount of armor on them so they would be more suitable to "get down there" than F15E is. I mean F35 is imo far less suitable for CAS missions than SU34 and still it is being marketed as A10 replacement to the USAF.

    What the F-15E does a MiG-29SMT could offer to do but at the end of the day the ground forces want their own aircraft coming in low and fast and dealing with the enemy... they don't want some high flying jock who delivers 500kg bombs close to the front line that could land on the enemy or friendly forces... they want smaller lighter weapons more accurately placed...

    Who knows... with modern guided artillery with each unit and attack helos they might not need CAS aircraft... some UCAV might perform the role... but so far we just haven't seen it.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4839
    Points : 4886
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  Militarov on Fri Sep 11, 2015 12:04 pm

    Army Aviation is currently part of the air force...

    Su-34 is part of long range aviation... DA... not FA or VVS.

    That is not much of an issue due to todays joint command.

    there was talk in Russia and the US about replacing their cheap simple CAS aircraft with already in service aircraft. The US went for the A-16, which was a variant of the F-16 and it failed miserably. The Russians explored using a version of the Yak-130 and it failed too.

    hense the current plan is upgrades of the Su-25 and later a brand new replacement model called PAK SHa.

    Yes, i remember that well, Mig AT derivate, Yak131 and that Sukhoi two cockpit monster i forgot its designation. I recall A16 it had huge issues with cannon, they used them during Desert Storm but only as missile platforms since cannon wasnt very safe to be used. This is first time i hear about PAK SH-a to be honest, i assume it will be something based on Jak130? US might start using Textan Scoprion in CAS role, it seems to be quite cheap platform, extremly cheap actually, somewhat of the JF17 Thunder price.


    What the F-15E does a MiG-29SMT could offer to do but at the end of the day the ground forces want their own aircraft coming in low and fast and dealing with the enemy... they don't want some high flying jock who delivers 500kg bombs close to the front line that could land on the enemy or friendly forces... they want smaller lighter weapons more accurately placed...

    Who knows... with modern guided artillery with each unit and attack helos they might not need CAS aircraft... some UCAV might perform the role... but so far we just haven't seen it.

    Mmm... yeaah i guess Mig29SMT could do so but SU34s armed with someting like Brimstone with dual seekers or that Russian future Hermes would be insane platform, it has 12 hardpoints i belive, but lets say 10 would be able to hold triple Brimstone launcher.. thats 30 missiles that wont just drop anywhere like 500kg bomb, but with 1m CEP, i am not saying it should be only CAS platfom, but it could be very good in this role in some bigger scale combat. Still some very cheap platform that would use unguded ammunition would be required. Well, there were talks about developing UCAV on the Jak130 platform, or if they ever finish Mig SKAT, those two could be used for CAS imo.

    JohninMK
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3383
    Points : 3426
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  JohninMK on Wed Sep 23, 2015 4:55 pm

    Not sure where to put this or why it was released today.

    Modern automatic aircraft cannons are a combination of artillery guns and rates of fire usually found on conventional machine guns. Some types of Russian-made canons can fire even faster than that.

    One of these wonder weapons is the Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-6-23 six-barreled 23 mm rotary cannon. The GSh-6-23 has an extremely high rate of fire, with maximum cyclic rates of 9,000 to 10,000 rounds per minute. Compared to the US M61 Vulcan, the GSh-6-23 fires 50-66 percent more rounds per minute, has a heavier projectile, but lower muzzle velocity. The weapon is also lighter and shorter.

    An updated version of the GSh-6-23 is standard equipment on the Sukhoi Su-24 bombers and the MiG-31 all-weather interceptor.

    A six-barrel version of the GSh-6-23 can also be mounted on the MiG-27 fighter-bomber, even though the plane already carries a 30mm automatic cannon capable of firing 6,000 rounds per minute making it the fastest such weapon around. The Tula armorers are also famous for their GSh-30-1 automatic aircraft cannon, which, at under 50 kg, is the world’s most lightweight 30 mm automatic cannon.

    Another thing that makes it so one-of-a kind is the use of an evaporation cooling system to prevent the detonation of a high explosive round inside a heated barrel. This cooling system consists of a cylindrical water tank around the rear end of the barrel.

    The GSh-30-1 is equipped with a unique pyrotechnic mechanism to clear misfires: a small pyrotechnic cartridge is located to the left of the 30mm cartridge chamber. This pyrotechnic cartridge fires a small steel bolt through the side wall of the 30mm cartridge. The hot propellant gases following the bolt into the dud 30mm round ignite the powder charge of that round and firing continues.

    The gun's maximum effective range against aerial targets is 200 to 800 m and against surface or ground targets is 1,200 to 1,800 meters. In combination with a laser rangefinding/targeting system, it is reported to be extremely accurate as well as powerful, capable of destroying a target with as few as three to five rounds.

    The GSh-30-1 is used by MiG-29, MiG-27, Su-30, Su-33 and Su-35 planes. It may also be mounted on Russia’s T-50 PAK FA fifth generation jetfighter.


    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/russia/20150923/1027401181/russia-us-cannons.html#ixzz3mZckt8QZ

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  max steel on Wed Sep 23, 2015 10:01 pm

    Nobody Does It Better: Russian Aircraft Cannons Outgun America’s Modern automatic aircraft cannons are a combination of artillery guns and rates of fire usually found on conventional machine guns. Some types of Russian-made canons can fire even faster than that.

    One of these wonder weapons is the Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-6-23 six-barreled 23 mm rotary cannon.

    The GSh-6-23 has an extremely high rate of fire, with maximum cyclic rates of 9,000 to 10,000 rounds per minute. Compared to the US M61 Vulcan, the GSh-6-23 fires 50-66 percent more rounds per minute, has a heavier projectile, but lower muzzle velocity. The weapon is also lighter and shorter.

    An updated version of the GSh-6-23 is standard equipment on the Sukhoi Su-24 bombers and the MiG-31 all-weather interceptor.

    A six-barrel version of the GSh-6-23 can also be mounted on the MiG-27 fighter-bomber, even though the plane already carries a 30mm automatic cannon capable of firing 6,000 rounds per minute making it the fastest such weapon around.
    The Tula armorers are also famous for their GSh-30-1 automatic aircraft cannon, which, at under 50 kg, is the world’s most lightweight 30 mm automatic cannon.

    Another thing that makes it so one-of-a kind is the use of an evaporation cooling system to prevent the detonation of a high explosive round inside a heated barrel. This cooling system consists of a cylindrical water tank around the rear end of the barrel.

    The GSh-30-1 is equipped with a unique pyrotechnic mechanism to clear misfires: a small pyrotechnic cartridge is located to the left of the 30mm cartridge chamber.

    This pyrotechnic cartridge fires a small steel bolt through the side wall of the 30mm cartridge. The hot propellant gases following the bolt into the dud 30mm round ignite the powder charge of that round and firing continues.

    The gun's maximum effective range against aerial targets is 200 to 800 m and against surface or ground targets is 1,200 to 1,800 meters.

    In combination with a laser rangefinding/targeting system, it is reported to be extremely accurate as well as powerful, capable of destroying a target with as few as three to five rounds.

    The GSh-30-1 is used by MiG-29, MiG-27, Su-30, Su-33 and Su-35 planes.

    It may also be mounted on Russia’s T-50 PAK FA fifth generation jetfighter.

    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1516
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Wed Sep 23, 2015 10:24 pm

    max steel wrote:Nobody Does It Better: Russian Aircraft Cannons Outgun America’s Modern automatic aircraft cannons are a combination of artillery guns and rates of fire usually found on conventional machine guns. Some types of Russian-made canons can fire even faster than that.

    One of these wonder weapons is the Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-6-23 six-barreled 23 mm rotary cannon.

    The GSh-6-23 has an extremely high rate of fire, with maximum cyclic rates of 9,000 to 10,000 rounds per minute. Compared to the US M61 Vulcan, the GSh-6-23 fires 50-66 percent more rounds per minute, has a heavier projectile, but lower muzzle velocity. The weapon is also lighter and shorter.

    An updated version of the GSh-6-23 is standard equipment on the Sukhoi Su-24 bombers and the MiG-31 all-weather interceptor.

    A six-barrel version of the GSh-6-23 can also be mounted on the MiG-27 fighter-bomber, even though the plane already carries a 30mm automatic cannon capable of firing 6,000 rounds per minute making it the fastest such weapon around.

    Fastest true but very slow muzzle velocity below 700 m/s vs 1050 m/s Vulcan better advantage in aiming when you got very short time window in dogfight. 30mm gun with muzzle velocity 900m/s is mucxh better alternative IMHO.  is better option in this case

    Pls correct me if I am wrong but there were some problems with exploding ammo that's why those guns are not used in Russian AF anymore.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Thu Sep 24, 2015 10:23 am

    That is not much of an issue due to todays joint command.

    The Su-34 is not designed to operate over the front lines in any capacity... it is a medium range strike aircraft... not a combat air support aircraft.

    Yes, i remember that well, Mig AT derivate, Yak131 and that Sukhoi two cockpit monster i forgot its designation. I recall A16 it had huge issues with cannon, they used them during Desert Storm but only as missile platforms since cannon wasnt very safe to be used

    It was a failure because to get close enough to use the cannon meant ground fire became an issue and the A16 had no armour to speak of. Adding armour and it loses its flight performance.

    they didn't use them anywhere AFAIK.

    This is first time i hear about PAK SH-a to be honest, i assume it will be something based on Jak130? US might start using Textan Scoprion in CAS role, it seems to be quite cheap platform, extremly cheap actually, somewhat of the JF17 Thunder price.

    There was the same talk in Russia about what could replace the Su-25 and the Yak-130 was considered with the pilot flying the aircraft and the second crewman operating remote UAVs to find targets that could be engaged with missiles from standoff distances... it was a failure too.

    the decision seems to have been an upgrade of existing Su-25s followed by a brand new armoured stealth design manned aircraft.

    Lots of funny pics were shown but nothing official.


    Mmm... yeaah i guess Mig29SMT could do so but SU34s armed with someting like Brimstone with dual seekers or that Russian future Hermes would be insane platform, it has 12 hardpoints i belive, but lets say 10 would be able to hold triple Brimstone launcher..

    The Russians don't really have anything like brimstone, Hermes will likely be carried 8 to a pylon but likely with only two pylons able to carry the weapon like the Su-25TM with Vikhr.

    thats 30 missiles that wont just drop anywhere like 500kg bomb, but with 1m CEP, i am not saying it should be only CAS platfom, but it could be very good in this role in some bigger scale combat. Still some very cheap platform that would use unguded ammunition would be required. Well, there were talks about developing UCAV on the Jak130 platform, or if they ever finish Mig SKAT, those two could be used for CAS im

    I think a dedicated HALE UCAV designed to support ground operations would be the ideal solution orbiting 10km above the front lines carrying guided FAB-50s in large numbers and the odd heavier bomb for use when needed would be the most cost effective solution... with large numbers of light bombs it could loiter for hours or days and be able to deliver HE rapidly and precisely... not the same as CAS butrapidly available on call support ready when needed and in COIN situations relatively invulnerable. the key would be powerful sensors that can find targets and friendlies in all weathers and being able to hit targets 24/7 in all weathers.

    Fastest true but very slow muzzle velocity below 700 m/s vs 1050 m/s Vulcan better advantage in aiming when you got very short time window in dogfight. 30mm gun with muzzle velocity 900m/s is mucxh better alternative IMHO. is better option in this case

    The soviets and Russians have always had good aircraft guns.... muzzle velocity is no advantage when you take into consideration the increased recoil throws the aim off quicker and the higher muzzle velocity comes from much lighter projectiles that simply punch small holes through the target while the slower much heavier 23mm shells contain HE that blow enormous holes in the target and is much more effective at bringing down aerial targets.

    Think of what sort of weapon a hunter uses against fast moving birds.... it is not high velocity 223 ammo moving at almost a kilometre a second... it is subsonic shotgun pellets because lots of shots at the target all scattered around the aim point is vastly more effective at bringing down a manouvering target than a single fast projectile that does not manouver after being fired.

    Pls correct me if I am wrong but there were some problems with exploding ammo that's why those guns are not used in Russian AF anymore.

    there were issues with propellent gas building up and exploding, but revised external mounts tended to deal with the problem.

    Recently a land based platform with a 23mm gatling gun with the gun mounted externally would solve the potential problems... as would the mounting on the armata BMPT model in an external mount.

    The single barrel gun mount on the MiG-29 is even more efficient as it is computer controlled so during combat the pilot locks the target and pulls the trigger and manouvers the aiming pipper onto the target. When the computer calculates a likely hit it fires the gun and stops it when it thinks it has fired enough. the computer stopped the gun after 3-4 rounds had been fired but the targets were still getting destroyed. The designer is reported to have said if he had known the system would be so effective he would only have designed an ammo capacity of 100 rounds instead of 150.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Thu Sep 24, 2015 10:26 am

    Vulcan better advantage in aiming when you got very short time window in dogfight.

    Not true.

    The Vulcan is not only a heavier gun... it also needs a quite powerful electric motor to fire, which is heavy and takes a second or two to wind up to full speed, so a half second burst will not fire anything like the cyclic rate of the gun.

    the Soviet guns on the other hand are gas powered and accelerate much more rapidly to full speed leading to even more rounds on target...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4839
    Points : 4886
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  Militarov on Thu Sep 24, 2015 11:53 am

    GarryB wrote:That is not much of an issue due to todays joint command.

    The Su-34 is not designed to operate over the front lines in any capacity... it is a medium range strike aircraft... not a combat air support aircraft.

    Yes, i remember that well, Mig AT derivate, Yak131 and that Sukhoi two cockpit monster i forgot its designation. I recall A16 it had huge issues with cannon, they used them during Desert Storm but only as missile platforms since cannon wasnt very safe to be used

    It was a failure because to get close enough to use the cannon meant ground fire became an issue and the A16 had no armour to speak of. Adding armour and it loses its flight performance.

    they didn't use them anywhere AFAIK.

    This is first time i hear about PAK SH-a to be honest, i assume it will be something based on Jak130? US might start using Textan Scoprion in CAS role, it seems to be quite cheap platform, extremly cheap actually, somewhat of the JF17 Thunder price.

    There was the same talk in Russia about what could replace the Su-25 and the Yak-130 was considered with the pilot flying the aircraft and the second crewman operating remote UAVs to find targets that could be engaged with missiles from standoff distances... it was a failure too.

    the decision seems to have been an upgrade of existing Su-25s followed by a brand new armoured stealth design manned aircraft.

    Lots of funny pics were shown but nothing official.


    Mmm... yeaah i guess Mig29SMT could do so but SU34s armed with someting like Brimstone with dual seekers or that Russian future Hermes would be insane platform, it has 12 hardpoints i belive, but lets say 10 would be able to hold triple Brimstone launcher..

    The Russians don't really have anything like brimstone, Hermes will likely be carried 8 to a pylon but likely with only two pylons able to carry the weapon like the Su-25TM with Vikhr.

    thats 30 missiles that wont just drop anywhere like 500kg bomb, but with 1m CEP, i am not saying it should be only CAS platfom, but it could be very good in this role in some bigger scale combat. Still some very cheap platform that would use unguded ammunition would be required. Well, there were talks about developing UCAV on the Jak130 platform, or if they ever finish Mig SKAT, those two could be used for CAS im

    I think a dedicated HALE UCAV designed to support ground operations would be the ideal solution orbiting 10km above the front lines carrying guided FAB-50s in large numbers and the odd heavier bomb for use when needed would be the most cost effective solution... with large numbers of light bombs it could loiter for hours or days and be able to deliver HE rapidly and precisely... not the same as CAS butrapidly available on call support ready when needed and in COIN situations relatively invulnerable. the key would be powerful sensors that can find targets and friendlies in all weathers and being able to hit targets 24/7 in all weathers.




    "In 1991, 24 F-16A/B Block 10 aircraft belonging to the 174th TFW, a New York Air National Guard unit that had transitioned from the A-10 in 1988, were armed with the 30 mm GAU-13/A four-barrel derivative of the seven-barrel GAU-8/A cannon used by the A-10A. This weapon was carried in a General Electric GPU-5/A Pave Claw gun pod on the centerline station, and was supplied with 353 rounds of ammunition. There were also plans to convert F-16Cs to this configuration and to incorporate the A-10s AN/AAS-35V Pave Penny laser spot tracker. The vibration from the gun when firing proved so severe as to make both aiming and flying the aircraft difficult, and trials were suspended after two days. Although the 174th's aircraft were employed for CAS during Operation Desert Storm, they did not use the gun pods in action, and the Block 10 F/A-16 was phased out after the war" Source: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article18.html

    So they kinda did get used but... no guns just Mavericks i guess.

    I personally find SU34 fine as CAS platform, its very agile, armored, has very high payload, good endurance and impressive range, if they didnt mean him to ever perform CAS they would not armor its cabin. Its replacing SU24 that spent most of its carrier actually just providing CAS with very rare actual long range strike missions.

    "The basic configuration of the intended production Su-32MF/Su-34 aircraft is a multirole deep strike fighter, intended to perform the battlefield interdiction, close air support and deep strike roles now performed by the Su-24 in Russia, the F-15E in the US and the F-111 in Australia."

    Now i cant remember or find, there was Sukhoi design for 2 cockpit CAS aircraft during 90s, i have to find it it was so unusual and weird.

    Well UCAV you are talking about could be Altius for start when it gets developed, even tho i am not really sure about its payload and endurance that is needed for UCAV.[/quote]

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:38 pm

    So they kinda did get used but... no guns just Mavericks i guess.

    Putting a gun pod on an F-16 does not make it a CAS aircraft, and does not make it an A-16.

    They call it an F/A-16 but it always had air to ground capability so they should all be called F/A-16.

    The comments I remember reading suggest the lack of armour made them unsuitable for the role.

    I personally find SU34 fine as CAS platform, its very agile, armored, has very high payload, good endurance and impressive range, if they didnt mean him to ever perform CAS they would not armor its cabin.

    It does not have great agility with a very high payload and impressive range, it is not armoured to stop small arms fire, that is to stop bomb fragments from bombing at very low level endangering the crew.

    Its replacing SU24 that spent most of its carrier actually just providing CAS with very rare actual long range strike missions.

    No it didn't. It didn't have the right radio equipment to communicate with troops on the ground, so its attacks were independent of friendly ground activity... unlike the Su-25 which was in direct communication with ground forces and whose pilots went to briefing meetings to discuss objectives and likely issues before hand.



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1516
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:50 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Vulcan better advantage in aiming when you got very short time window in dogfight.

    Not true.

    The Vulcan is not only a heavier gun... it also needs a quite powerful electric motor to fire, which is heavy and takes a second or two to wind up to full speed, so a half second burst will not fire anything like the cyclic rate of the gun.

    the Soviet guns on the other hand are gas powered and accelerate much more rapidly to full speed leading to even more rounds on target...

    You may spray lots of rounds but not necessarily you get them on target. In AA fight aiming due to high maneuvers is non trivial if your round has poor ballistic trajectory.  I wish I had comparison. The discussion would be easier Smile

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Sep 26, 2015 2:10 pm

    You may spray lots of rounds but not necessarily you get them on target. In AA fight aiming due to high maneuvers is non trivial if your round has poor ballistic trajectory. I wish I had comparison. The discussion would be easier

    In a high speed engagement the very short time from leaving the muzzle of the gun to impact the target can and will move so a bit of bullet scatter can improve the chances of connecting with a target actively manouvering.

    The problem is the big electric motor taking time to wind up and a gas powered gun that reaches peak firing speed almost instantly means the faster firing Russian gun will get more rounds on target in a shorter burst time than the slower firing american weapon.

    The fact that the velocity of the soviet rounds is lower is not important... over such short distances with laser rangefinding or radar tracking the chances of a hit are very high... the higher wind up rate of teh soviet gun means a cluster of rounds arrives almost at once like a shotgun blast instead of a string of rounds arriving in a line.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4839
    Points : 4886
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  Militarov on Sat Sep 26, 2015 4:33 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    So they kinda did get used but... no guns just Mavericks i guess.

    Putting a gun pod on an F-16 does not make it a CAS aircraft, and does not make it an A-16.

    They call it an F/A-16 but it always had air to ground capability so they should all be called F/A-16.

    The comments I remember reading suggest the lack of armour made them unsuitable for the role.

    I personally find SU34 fine as CAS platform, its very agile, armored, has very high payload, good endurance and impressive range, if they didnt mean him to ever perform CAS they would not armor its cabin.

    It does not have great agility with a very high payload and impressive range, it is not armoured to stop small arms fire, that is to stop bomb fragments from bombing at very low level endangering the crew.

    Its replacing SU24 that spent most of its carrier actually just providing CAS with very rare actual long range strike missions.

    No it didn't. It didn't have the right radio equipment to communicate with troops on the ground, so its attacks were independent of friendly ground activity... unlike the Su-25 which was in direct communication with ground forces and whose pilots went to briefing meetings to discuss objectives and likely issues before hand.


    In normal strike roles you wont be nowhere near explosing ordinance thats the problem. You are near only during CAS with gravity bombs or unguided ammunition. But still SU24 never actually performed any real long range strike missions like it was its real role, it was almost always doing sort of CAS, except maybe during Iran-Iraq war.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Military Aviation Industry: News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 5:07 pm


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 08, 2016 5:07 pm