Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7094
    Points : 7362
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Sep 03, 2015 4:09 pm

    People say a lot of stuff. Doesnt make them true. Laser guided munitions are neaely impossible to jam, so they could be talking about those. Radar guided are jammable. Optical guided are not. So on so forth.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  max steel on Thu Sep 03, 2015 4:18 pm

    sepheronx wrote:People say a lot of stuff. Doesnt make them true. Laser guided munitions are neaely impossible to jam, so they could be talking about those. Radar guided are jammable. Optical guided are not. So on so forth.


    ok but does usa uses laser guided munitions ? I heard they use gps guided munition .


    Your thoughts on my 3rd doubt ?
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7094
    Points : 7362
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Sep 03, 2015 4:28 pm

    max steel wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:People say a lot of stuff. Doesnt make them true. Laser guided munitions are neaely impossible to jam, so they could be talking about those. Radar guided are jammable. Optical guided are not. So on so forth.


    ok but does usa uses laser guided munitions ? I heard they use gps guided munition .


    Your thoughts on my 3rd doubt ?

    Dont know what you are saying on last part, as I cant view youtube videos at work, but yes, US does use laser guided munitions, and TV guided ones too. So does Russia. I remember when during the bombings of Serajevo, the US were dropping gps guided bombs and Chinese embassy used cheap gps jammers that messed with the US bombs big time.

    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 4778
    Points : 4899
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  kvs on Fri Sep 04, 2015 5:44 am

    Militarov wrote:
    kvs wrote:Bombs are so obsolete.  Having 4 of them is just inane.  It would be better if they mounted some cruise missiles instead.  
    Hypersonic or subsonic.

    It does not look like those mounting points could hold 500 kg or higher bombs.  

    Price of cruise missile 0,8-2mil USD, 500kg bomb - 10.000 + GPS/laser guidance 10-20k. Amount of smart ammunition used in war, even modern one is just a fraction of total gravity bombs dropped.

    Those are US prices and totally irrelevant. Also, what sort of idiots would use hard points to mount four small bombs.
    If they are going to use such bombs then they need a proper bomb bay where they can have dozens of them in cassettes.
    Even some sort of cassette system on the hard points would make more sense but it would be too heavy if it held a
    good number of bombs. An aircraft like that truly requires missiles on its hard points.
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 4778
    Points : 4899
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  kvs on Fri Sep 04, 2015 5:49 am

    sepheronx wrote:People say a lot of stuff. Doesnt make them true. Laser guided munitions are neaely impossible to jam, so they could be talking about those. Radar guided are jammable. Optical guided are not. So on so forth.

    In principle you can jam a laser guided device by sending a laser beam into its optics. This requires a rather sophisticated dynamic
    aiming system sitting close to its target point. I guess high value assets could have such systems. But I have not heard of any
    such systems actually built.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  Guest on Fri Sep 04, 2015 6:57 am

    kvs wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    kvs wrote:Bombs are so obsolete.  Having 4 of them is just inane.  It would be better if they mounted some cruise missiles instead.  
    Hypersonic or subsonic.

    It does not look like those mounting points could hold 500 kg or higher bombs.  

    Price of cruise missile 0,8-2mil USD, 500kg bomb - 10.000 + GPS/laser guidance 10-20k. Amount of smart ammunition used in war, even modern one is just a fraction of total gravity bombs dropped.

    Those are US prices and totally irrelevant.   Also, what sort of idiots would use hard points to mount four small bombs.
    If they are going to use such bombs then they need a proper bomb bay where they can have dozens of them in cassettes.
    Even some sort of cassette system on the hard points would make more sense but it would be too heavy if it held a
    good number of bombs.  An aircraft like that truly requires missiles on its hard points.

    That depends alot on enemy that you fight, cruise missiles are expencive no matter the origin and you will try to preserve them to be used aganist high value targets, while i do agree that mounts for multiple bombs should be used on such platform and bombs should be of gliding design. US is using triple-ejector racks for a B-52 to drop GBU30s for an example applying one 250kg bomb per hardpoint doesnt make much sense but thats what Russians mostly do, i still havent seen multiple ejector racks on Russian platforms in widespread use meanwhile on the West they use them on almost every platform.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21987
    Points : 22531
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 06, 2015 2:55 am

    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...
    flamming_python
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3550
    Points : 3634
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  flamming_python on Sun Sep 06, 2015 4:08 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...

    Right.

    Actually it's not a well-known fact, but much of the devastation seen in Nagasaki was due to that same inaccuracy. The Americans were targeting a military factory of some kind; however the bomb landed several km's from its target... smack in the middle of the most populated area of the city.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5252
    Points : 5455
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Sep 06, 2015 10:26 am

    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.

    Mig29/35, Su-35/30 and especially Su-34/24 already can destroy several bridges with guided and unguided weaponary, no need for a PAK-FA, actually they can destroy more bridges than a PAK-FA ever could if its internal bay weapons limit.
    higurashihougi
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2269
    Points : 2360
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  higurashihougi on Sun Sep 06, 2015 1:38 pm

    flamming_python wrote:
    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(...)

    Right.

    Actually it's not a well-known fact, but much of the devastation seen in Nagasaki was due to that same inaccuracy. The Americans were targeting a military factory of some kind; however the bomb landed several km's from its target... smack in the middle of the most populated area of the city.

    Rather than technical issues named "accuracy", the core problem which caused the tragedy of Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Khâm Thiên, Bạch Mai... is the inhuman and savage doctrine of killing as many human as possible, to instill terror and fear into the people's heart by causing unimaginable war crimes and mass killing.

    That is the reason why the U.S. continued to use carpet bombing in Vietnam, while in the USSR people started to put guided missile on strategic bombers.

    It is clear, carpet bombing is ineffective against military fortification due to the high scattering and inaccuracy. Even A-shape tunnels can be designed to withstand the power of carpet bombing. But civillian settlements are vulnerable and countless amount of civillians are killed by carpet bombing.

    In other words, the Pentagon was using the tactics which is ineffective to destroy fighting positions, but very effective in killing normal civillians and causing horrible war crimes.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  Guest 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).
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21987
    Points : 22531
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    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...
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7094
    Points : 7362
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    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.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  Guest 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
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7094
    Points : 7362
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    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
    GarryB

    Posts : 21987
    Points : 22531
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    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.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  Guest 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
    GarryB

    Posts : 21987
    Points : 22531
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    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.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty russian air force

    Post  Guest 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.
    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1929
    Points : 2040
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Sun Sep 13, 2015 1:16 am

    Hopefully not a repost:


    http://saidpvo.livejournal.com/447810.html#cutid1
    mack8
    mack8

    Posts : 953
    Points : 1009
    Join date : 2013-08-02

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  mack8 on Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:56 pm

    Very nice pictures of Sukhois old and new during recent live-fire exercises:
    http://warlock-fe.livejournal.com/17947.html
    franco
    franco

    Posts : 3229
    Points : 3261
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  franco on Sun Sep 20, 2015 1:35 pm

    Photos of aircraft participating in training out of Dzemgi;

    https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://topwar.ru/82676-v-gosti-na-poligon.html&usg=ALkJrhhjF8QMM7UsF5QheL5i8hMEHj1N-Q
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21987
    Points : 22531
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    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.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  Guest 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
    GarryB

    Posts : 21987
    Points : 22531
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    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.


    Sponsored content

    VVS Russian Air Force: News #2 - Page 5 Empty Re: VVS Russian Air Force: News #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Oct 13, 2019 11:35 pm