VVS Russian Air Force: News #1

Stealthflanker wrote:L-band.. this RADAR is likely a part of the Flanker's MAWS(Missile Approach Warning System)

I'm thinking it has something to do the same as the passive radar on the wings of F-35.

Well its a radar designed to detect LO/VLO at greater distances from other.

Russian Air Force denies it violated British airspace

RIA Novosti

25/03/201020:46

MOSCOW/LONDON, March 25 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's Air Force has denied claims by Britain that Russian Tu-160 Blackjack strategic bombers violated UK airspace on March 10.

The U.K. Defense Ministry said on Thursday that two RAF Tornado F3 fighters took off on alert after the Russian bombers allegedly intruded the country's airspace northwest of Scotland. The statement said the planes accompanied the Russian bombers until they left British airspace.

"Tu-160 strategic bombers did indeed make routine flights over the Arctic and Atlantic oceans on March 10, but there were no airspace violations," Russian Air Force spokesman Lt. Col. Vladimir Drik told RIA Novosti.

Drik added that the Russian Air Force had distributed an official statement on March 12, which said that two Russian Tu-160s had carried out an 11-hour routine patrol mission over the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans and were shadowed by four NATO fighters - two NATO F-16 Fighting Falcons of the Norwegian Air Force and two RAF Tornados.

"All flights of Air Force aircraft were and are fulfilled in strict compliance with the international rules on the use of airspace over neutral waters, without violation of other states' borders," Drik said.

A similar patrol mission in September 2009 was shadowed by an F-22 Raptor, reportedly the first time the world's only fifth-generation fighter aircraft, which uses stealth technology, was sent out to keep an eye on Russian planes.

Russian strategic bombers resumed patrol flights over the Pacific, Atlantic, and Arctic oceans in August 2007, following an order from then-President Vladimir Putin, and are usually shadowed by less sophisticated NATO aircraft.

Russia has yet to develop a fifth-generation fighter and has just started testing a prototype, known as the T-50, which is not expected to enter service until 2015. A second U.S. fifth-generation fighter, the F-35 Lightning II, is due to enter service with the U.S. Marine Corps in 2012.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/russia/2010/russia-100325-rianovosti01.htm

I'm more inclined to believe RAF. It is well known Russian bombers try to test air defences. Tu-160s defeated their defences the last time, looks like RAF wasn't caught asleep now.

Vladimir79 wrote:I'm more inclined to believe RAF. It is well known Russian bombers try to test air defences. Tu-160s defeated their defences the last time, looks like RAF wasn't caught asleep now.

It was something like 80KM within airspace. This time it is 246km (give or take a few). But even then, at that range, UK would have been destroyed by the onboard weapons, that would have fired at around 2-5000KM away.

Vladimir79 wrote:I'm more inclined to believe RAF. It is well known Russian bombers try to test air defences. Tu-160s defeated their defences the last time, looks like RAF wasn't caught asleep now.

The pictures which were shown by the British seemed to have been taken at high altitude but if they had wanted to screw the Brits they would have made a high speed low altitude approach and then they would have popped up in a typical HI-LO-HI mission profile, I think. I also betcha that by the time the Brits showed up the Blackjacks could have evaded them but decided to stay and "show the flag".

I don't buy this "violation of airspace' business. I tend to think that this is yet another chapter in the long anti-Russian propaganda campaign by the Brits who have now been at it since 2000 or so...

And the Russians are just saying "yeah - we can reach you anytime we want. Good for them!

Pictures here - by British MoD

good planes

i really love those Tu-160's

hmm anyway yeah i kinda believe the RAF's

Russia plans to develop 5th-generation 'stealth' helicopters
RIA Novosti

18:3613/05/2010 MOSCOW, May 13 (RIA Novosti) - A Russian helicopter company is planning to develop the world's first fifth-generation combat helicopter, which experts say would be able to attack fighter jets and be invisible for radars, the Gazeta daily said on Thursday.

"We are working on the concept of the fifth-generation combat helicopter," the paper quoted the company's CEO, Andrei Shibitov, as saying at a news conference in Moscow.

Shibitov did not specify the characteristics of the helicopter, but said the company was going to spend some $1 billion on the project, with more investment expected to be allocated from the state budget.

The official said the Mil design bureau had been working on a classical rotor model, which features a large main rotor and a smaller auxiliary rotor, while the Kamov design bureau had been developing a coaxial rotor model.

Military experts believe that the coaxial rotor model is more stable and easy to fly while the classical model is more reliable and has a higher degree of survivability on the battlefield.

First deputy head of the Russian Academy of Geopolitical Issues, Konstantin Sivkov, told the paper that fifth-generation combat helicopters have never been built before, although the United States has recently begun working on a similar project.

He said a fifth-generation combat helicopter must have a low radar signature, a high noise reduction, an extended flying range, be equipped with a computerized arms control system, be able to combat fighter jets (existing helicopters are generally only intended to hit ground-based targets) and reach a speed of up to 500-600 km/h (310-370 mph).

The project cannot proceed, however, unless it is backed by the government.

"If the government does not sign a contract, the idea will die on the vine," head of the Russian Academy of Geopolitical Issues Leonid Ivashov told Gazeta.

Ivashov said that with sufficient investment and good organization the new helicopter could be built within five years. Otherwise, the project may drag on for 20-30 years.

But he was somewhat skeptical about the chances of carrying out the project.

"We have been trying to tackle everything - fifth-generation planes, fifth-generation helicopters, but nothing of this have so far been supplied to the army - today the army still uses helicopters produced in 1970s," Ivashov said.

Russia's main combat helicopter, the Mi-24 Hind, is a third-generation helicopter, and a few Mi-28 Havoc, Ka-50 and Ka-52 Hokum, which have just started to arrive in the Russian army, are fourth-generation helicopters.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/russia/2010/russia-100513-rianovosti01.htm

I have the same problem with this as I had with commanche.
On most battlefields to date the greatest threat to helicopters has been ground fire in the form of small arms and man portable SAMs.
It really doesn't make much sense to go to the expense and effort to make an aircraft stealthy that will fly low and slow and can be damaged by small arms fire.
Stealth relies on materials and shaping... once you start punching holes in it it stops being so stealthy.
Increasing the speed and intelligence of helicopters is a big tick, I agree with that, that is a good idea, but if you want a stealthy aircraft to shoot down enemy fighters a large interceptor with a weapon bay full of long range missiles and a huge AESA with a tried and true low probability intercept mode of scanning for targets makes more sense than the equivelent helo.
A stealth interceptor can see further and reach further and see better and carry more and stay longer.
Helicopters are used against ground targets because that is what they are best at.

When the Hokum was first spotted it was considered to be an air to air fighter aircraft too, and the reality is that compared to even a 3rd generation fighter, or even a jet fighter trainer with a gun pod it would have problems.

A Mig-23 could detect it from relatively long range and take potshots at it from a distance with R-23 and R-24 missiles and there is little the Ka-50 could do about it.

Russian fighter jets make first ever nonstop flight across Russia to Far East

RIA Novosti

12:45 04/07/2010

VLADIVOSTOK, July 4 (RIA Novosti) - Russian fighter jets have performed the first ever nonstop flights from European Russia to the Russian Far East with in-flight refueling as part of the Vostok-2010 military drills, Chief of the General Staff Nikolai Makarov said on Sunday.

"For the first time ever, we have tested a possibility for fighter jets to fly from aerodromes in the European part of Russia to eastern airfields in the Far Eastern district without landing, with in-flight refueling and the delivery of strikes according to assignments received during the flight," Makarov said.

The exercises, which have entered their naval phase in the Sea of Okhotsk in the Russian Far East, are being overseen by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on board the heavy nuclear-powered cruiser Pyotr Veliky.

When asked by the president about how many refuelings had been required for the fighter jets, Russia's top military commander answered that it had taken Su-24M Fencer fighter-bombers three refuelings and for new Su-34 Fullback strike aircraft two refuelings.

The drills, Vostok-2010, began on June 29 in Russia's Far East training areas and involved some 10,000 troops and around 1,000 items of military hardware. The first phase of the drills ended on Saturday. The second, naval phase launched on Sunday, will see the involvement of several times more service personnel and military equipment. The exercises continue until July 8.

Apart from the Pyotr Veliky cruiser of the Russian Northern Fleet, the drills also involve the Guards guided missile cruiser Moskva of the Black Sea Fleet.

As part of the drills, the Armed Forces will practice the deployment of additional troops in Siberia and the Far East to reinforce the existing military contingent in the region in case of a military conflict.

Russia holds Vostok strategic command-and-staff drills every two years.


http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/russia/2010/russia-100704-rianovosti01.htm

Russian frontline, army aviation to be completely rearmed in 10 years

RIA Novosti

13:58 14/08/2010

MOSCOW, August 14 (RIA Novosti) - The Russian Air Force will entirely rearm its frontline aviation and army aviation within the next 10 years, Air Force Commander Colonel General Alexander Zelin told the Ekho Moskvy FM station on Saturday.

The frontline and army aviation will see 100% rearmament, and the military transport aviation will be updated by 70%, Zelin said.

He emphasized that the Air Force is higher-priority military service and the shaped plans would be unambiguously carried out.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/russia/2010/russia-100814-rianovosti03.htm

I have read somewhere recently that Frontal aviation and also army aviation will be directly controlled by the new districts they operate in and that they wont be at the bottom of the airforce chain of command anymore.

Kinda makes sense to me as such forces are very much more related to the Army as their role is to directly support the army on the battlefield.

The frontline and army aviation will see 100% rearmament

100% must mean reductions of 80%. There are only a couple hundred attack jets and helicopters slated for frontal aviation over the next 5 years. Don't see how they will increase that by much when they have to replace upgraded Soviet rust buckets in the same time frame. At the rate we are going we will have an air force of 300 attack craft. France couldn't even live with that.

The thing I have a problem with is that now they are going all multirole with their aircraft the separation of fighter and bomber is blurred.
For instance under the old system the Mig-29 was a short range interceptor. If there was nothing left to intercept then it could carry dumb bombs in a very basic mud mover role. The Su-27 was the same, it was a long range interceptor/escort fighter, that could use rocket pods and dumb bombs when there was nothing left to intercept.
Frontal aviation was mainly concerned with attacking ground targets and while it had interceptors and fighters that was mainly to protect the Army and itself from air attack. Its ground attack and Combat air support aircraft were supposed to support attacks by the army and included Su-25s, Su-17s, Mig-27s and the like.
Now the only dedicated ground support aircraft are helos and the Su-25 with the Su-34 used for deep strike and SEAD type missions.
What I am getting at is that most of frontal aviations aircraft used for ground attack are now withdrawn from service and the Su-25 remains but it alone cannot do the job.
The Mig-29SMT and Mig-35s and the Su-27SM and Su-35s will perform the role of fighter and bomber and would support the Army by hitting mid range targets on the battlefield.
Deep targets like HQs, comm centres, large SAM sites, etc would be hit by a mixture of Su-35 and Su-34s most likely, or indeed Tu-22M3s or even Tu-160s perhaps.

The thing is that there will barely be enough Su-27SM and Su-35 and Mig-29SMT and Mig-35s in service for both frontal aviation and the airforce... unless they upgrade a lot more Su-27s and Mig-29s to SM and SMT standard respectively for the job.
A Mig-29SMT can drop a satellite guided bomb from 8,000m on a guerilla base just as effectively as a Mig-35 could, but it would cost rather less.

Historic Russian Aviation


Discovery Channel - Wings Of The Red Star - Mig-25 Foxbat.rmvb
Discovery Channel - Wings Of The Red Star - Tu-95 The Bear.rmvb
w-Discovery Channel - Wings Of The Red Star - Mig-23 The Swing Wing Solution.rmvb
w-Discovery Channel - Wings Of The Red Star - Mi-24 The Hind.rmvb
w-Discovery Channel - Wings Of The Red Star - Mig-29.rmvb
w-Discovery Channel - Wings Of The Red Star - Sukhoi SU-25 Frogfoot.rmvb

Hello everybody, my first post, this thread needs to get back on track!

First of all great documentary on Su-27, 4th part especially has some great footage.



watch online

download

Latest 'Smotr' on T-50:

download

Su-34 update


It represents a succesfull develoopment of KAB-500S and its integration with Su-34 by GosNIIAS institute. The institute studies netcentric capability required for KAB-500S to work effectively(you need to discover enemy positions and transmit its coordinates to strike platforms to use sat guided bombs), as you can see they are seeking to develop a JSTARS like plane with broader ELINT,SIGINT and command post capabilities - pretty interesting.

The Russian Air Force will procure over 1,500 new aircraft and significantly increase the number of high-precision weapons in its arsenal by 2020, a deputy Air Force commander said on Wednesday.

"Overall, we are planning to acquire and modernize about 2,000 aircraft and helicopters by 2020...including more than 1,500 new aircraft and about 400 modernized," Lt. Gen. Igor Sadofyev told reporters in Moscow.

According to the general, in 2011 the Air Force plans to adopt Su-27SM, Su-30M2 and Su-35S multirole fighters, Su-34 fighter-bombers and Yak-130 combat trainers as well as Ka-52 and Mi-28N attack helicopters, Mi-8 armed assault helicopters, Ka-226 and Ansat-U light multipurpose helicopters.

"The priority for the strategic aviation is the modernization of 80 percent of existing Tu-160, Tu-95MS, Tu-22M3 bombers and Il-78M aerial tankers...and the extension of their service life," Sadofyev said.

He also said that the share of high-precision weaponry in the Russian Air Force arsenal would increase by 18 times, including the unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) - by six times.

"In addition to a thorough upgrade of the aircraft fleet, the measures planned until 2020 will allow us to increase the share of high-precision weaponry to 70 percent of the total, or by 18 times," the general said.

Sadofyev added that the number of all-weather aircraft, capable of carrying out day and night missions would increase almost five-fold, and the share of UAVs would constitute about 30 percent of the total by 2020.

However, Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for military aerospace at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies told RIA Novosti that Russia's ability to fund and manufacture 1,500 military aircraft over the next decade is "questionable."

"The defense aerospace industry suffered from a decade plus of serious under-investment following the collapse of the Soviet Union, and only in the past few years has there been any appreciable improvement in the flow of cash," Barrie said.

"With regard to increasing the percentage of precision guided-weapons in the Air Force inventory, Russia's Tactical Missile Systems (TRV) has been designing and developing a range of 'precision' munitions, including the Kh-38 family of air-to-surface missiles, since at least the early 1990s," Barrie continued.

He said these projects had been hampered by the lack of adequate state funding until recently. He noted, however, that funding has been "noticeably improved," which will likely increase the pace of development on the Kh-38, as well as other weapons projects.

MOSCOW, December 1 (RIA Novosti)
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20101201/161580969.html

Russia has been planning to procure hundreds of aircraft now for the last ten years. Two GOZ have gone unfunded. Why will the third be any different?

South Ossetia conflict Mostly.

Plus the Government seems to have realised that the military industrial complex needs to be repaired and engaged whereas before it was just looking at the military.

GarryB wrote:South Ossetia conflict Mostly.

Plus the Government seems to have realised that the military industrial complex needs to be repaired and engaged whereas before it was just looking at the military.

MoD's biggest problem is cost. Cost escalation in the MIC is almost twice as bad as it is in NATO. MoD put down the first payments for GOZ orders, then the producers come back and say it will cost 50% more than stated. This is why the first two GOZ never got funded. Now the state has to fund not only the order, but also the reequipping of MIC. They waited so long to do it, it will cost trillions of USD to do the job. Russia doesn't have those kind of funds. The industrialists are so greedy, the little money they do get will disappear as it did before.

Cost escalation and obsolescence are the two reasons why they have gone unfunded. Watching all those projects get canceled revealed alot. Now we are waiting on retooling and reogranisation so cost escalation will go down for the large orders about to come. The rest we will have to buy abroad.

Volume will reduce the cost but developing new models and sourcing western components not available in Russia will also drive up costs.

With a modern high tech production plant most of the costs are not labour costs so the low cost labour advantage Russia once had is now gone so prices are going to climb dramatically.

That is why I have been suggesting that alternative solutions to all brand new should be sought.

The plan of paying for 2,000 aircraft in the next ten years where 400 and something are upgrades is silly. A plan to make 1,200 all new aircraft, plus about 1,000 upgrades makes much more sense and would probably be much cheaper.

The problem is that the leadership have locked themselves into the delusion that only the latest and best will do.

The reality is that for the majority of its work the Air force doesn't need T-50s. For the majority of its work the Navy doesn't need carriers. It has been made known that for the majority of its work the Army doesn't need 22,000 tanks.

The point is that a country the size of Russia does need numbers in certain areas, and aircraft and ships are the two main ones.

The important thing is to have things in service and to give them regular and proper upgrades.

The changes made to the Army sound to a layman as drastic cuts, but they include the removal of lower readiness units and a slight increase in the highest readiness units so in practical terms instead of having about 1,800 odd tanks ready to roll they will actually have about 2,200. The enormous reduction in tanks sitting in storage should lead to those tanks getting regular upgrades etc so the Army will actually be a much leaner and meaner force with this reduction.

For the air force and the navy the situation is the opposite in that they do need numbers and it is often cheaper and easier to upgrade an existing aircraft or ship to an acceptable level than to make new ones from scratch.

With better command, control, communications, computers, Intel, and Recon the Army will find that it can move on the battlefield much more efficently and react to the enemy to maximise the damage they can deliver and the lease cost, with an improved air force hitting important enemy assets they can start planning for attacks like Desert Storm and the like.