Su-34 Tactical Bomber: News

SOC wrote:

TR1 wrote:Well, the grey Su-34s arrived. And they are uggggggggggggly.

Don't know about you, but I think the new paintjob is pretty damn slick.

I agree, my initial impression was based on those few first photos where it looked like ass. Much better in the high res.

George1 wrote:Kh-15 anti-ship cruise missile can be carried by su-34??

Kh-15 is not in the inventory any more .

It's interesting, that only last two dark gray 05 and 10 have modified tail stinger, while other four are in standard color and have standard stinger. Could this two are dedicated SEAD / DEAD version of Su-34 equipped with inside jammers, jamming pods, towed decoys and anti-radar missiles to have a plane like EA-18 Growler or EA-6 Prowler?

That is certainly possible... in fact considering experience in Georgia I would think their need for ELINT and Jammer aircraft is greater than it ever was.

It will be interesting to see in this and next years, how many dedicated SEAD Su-34 versions will be build. They need at least a squadron or two to replace old Mig-25 in this role.

And despite the Mig-25 being quite good in this role, it will benefit them to reduce the range of aircraft in service and hopefully remove another engine type from the maintainence schedule...

Don't expect any dedicated SEAD Su-34s throughout this decade, they first need to get adequate numbers of the aicraft into service. However given the pods available, a dedicated variant may not be needed at all.

MiG-25 hasn't been used in realistic SEAD role for years, they fly a few of them for reco at this point, but we can consider it gone for all practical warfighting purposes.

MiG-25 hasn't been used in realistic SEAD role for years, they fly a few of them for reco at this point, but we can consider it gone for all practical warfighting purposes.

Yet, as the conflict in Georgia showed SEAD is critical... and a dozen SEAD dedicated Su-34s would be worth rather more than 500 strike Su-34s right now.

With 12 Su-34s dealing with enemy air defences then even the Su-24M can perform the strike roles needed for now.

As shown in the conflict Tu-22M3s were used to bomb enemy airfields... with better SEAD the results would have been rather different.

Right now sophisticated SEAD is what they lack... and a decent fixed wing jammer aircraft wouldn't be a bad idea too.

Lets face it, the SEAD and jammer versions of the Su-24 will have aged more than the strike versions, and will need replacing first.

Just to nitpick, the 12 Su-30SMs for the BSF have not been ordered yet, but remain a possibility mentioned by Serdykov.


I was curious why the obvious contender for the Su-24 replacement, the Su-34, was not purchased for this role. Might have to do with production ability @ NAPO, might not. I have not heard anything about naval trials for the aircraft, maybe it has just not been adapted for the role. I still think it is likely we will see it in Navy colors before the end of the decade.

One thing I am very intersted in is the current state of the V004 radar, solid information on which is incredibly sparse. One would hope it is a much more potent unit for A2G than say Bars.

We know that 12 Su-30M have been ordered to replace black sea fleet Su-24 naval strike aircrafts. And possibly there will be the same replacement for the Su-24 of the former naval assault aviation regiment in Chernyakhovsk, Kaliningrad. (Does anyone have info?)

There was a news report where naval strike capability was being transfered to the Air Force. The Tu-22M backfires were going to DA and the land based fighters and interceptors and strike aircraft going to VVS and FA.

All they seemed to be keeping were ship based aircraft and maritime patrol aircraft types.

I was curious why the obvious contender for the Su-24 replacement, the Su-34, was not purchased for this role. Might have to do with production ability @ NAPO, might not. I have not heard anything about naval trials for the aircraft, maybe it has just not been adapted for the role.

Some of the first photos of the Su-34 were flybys of the kuznetsov, which led to the assumption that it was a two seat carrier aircraft... either a trainer or a two seat strike aircraft.

The slow production rate means other models will likely have higher priority for the moment, though if the K gets cats then a navy version could become a consideration. Imagine a model with a fixed radar antenna array on its back for navy AWACS use... I am sure Sukhoi has.

I think however that Su-30SM are better for that case because they can perform both air-defense and strike roles.

The Su-34 is no dogfighter, but would be a potent air to air opponent.

TR1 wrote:Don't expect any dedicated SEAD Su-34s throughout this decade, they first need to get adequate numbers of the aicraft into service. However given the pods available, a dedicated variant may not be needed at all.

MiG-25 hasn't been used in realistic SEAD role for years, they fly a few of them for reco at this point, but we can consider it gone for all practical warfighting purposes.

Those dark gray Su-34 are different than the rest of Su-34 and they are not recce version. They have different equipment in tail stinger, which could show on stronger jamming devise and towed decoy system, what could mean it is SEAD platform.

medo wrote:

TR1 wrote:Don't expect any dedicated SEAD Su-34s throughout this decade, they first need to get adequate numbers of the aicraft into service. However given the pods available, a dedicated variant may not be needed at all.

MiG-25 hasn't been used in realistic SEAD role for years, they fly a few of them for reco at this point, but we can consider it gone for all practical warfighting purposes.

Those dark gray Su-34 are different than the rest of Su-34 and they are not recce version. They have different equipment in tail stinger, which could show on stronger jamming devise and towed decoy system, what could mean it is SEAD platform.

Check it out, they discussed the tail stinger here. You read Russian right Medo? It just an APU. The grey birds have nothing in the way of stronger jammers or decoys compared to the other aircraft of the batch.

http://paralay.iboards.ru/viewtopic.php?style=12&f=5&t=114&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=1890

This page and the next.

Why would Su-34 need additional or stronger APU if it doesn't have more powerful electronics. Radar is the same, so the only other equipment, which need more power is jammer.

I have read that the new APU is to make the aircraft more independent of ground support and that it replaces an external APU on all new Su-34s.

I still think a SEAD and Jammer version of the Su-34 would be more useful now than more strike aircraft.

Strike aircraft without SEAD and Jammer support are very vulnerable, yet with a few SEAD/Jammer aircraft they are much safer and are able to do a much better job.

Perhaps they have a SEAD/Jammer suite of pods that can be fitted to the Su-34 so they can all be jammers/SEAD aircraft or strikers.

We have seen all sorts of jamming and sensor pods for the Su-30 and other members of the Flanker family.

This APU has intakes at the vertical tail surface roots near the fuselage, so they are clearly designed to operate in flight as well as on the ground... perhaps the extra power they generate is to power new jammer pods.

Obviously for the SEAD role they can already carry loads of ARMs and sensor pods and things and I would think all the extra onboard electronics is not just to find targets, but also to find threats and deal with them too.

http://orenburg.rfn.ru/archive/rnews.html?id=3094&date=06-01-2012

Work on universal reco containers for Su-34 underway.

http://aviaforum.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=291909&d=1327702857

http://aviaforum.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=291910&d=1327702857

Wow.......

Interesting that in low light conditions they actually look black, or perhaps even very dark Navy Blue, yet on the side you can clearly see the BBC or VVS of the Russian Air Force.

I would assume that in low light conditions looking black against a dark background would be effective camouflage, but the effect is largely ruined with the white nose and dielectric panels over antennas and sensors.

Does look cool though.

Regarding the article on the recon pod, it results in a very strange translation that seems to be a lot about nothing...

The Strela, or Arrow "Universal Intelligence Ventral container", should make a specialised recon or SEAD version of the Fullback redundant... with that pod on its centreline, and wingtip jammer pods, that would leave 8 free weapon pylons for 2 AAMs for self defence and 6 ARMs like AS-12, AS-11, AS-17, or the new anti radiation model of the new Kh-38... all very potent missiles. Other options of course include satellite guided bombs with glide kits to extend range, and of course various types of other jammer pods if necessary.

From latest Air International

Black Earth Fullback

Su-34-1
Su-34-2
Su-34-3
Su-34-4

Austin wrote:From latest Air International

Black Earth Fullback

Su-34-1
Su-34-2
Su-34-3
Su-34-4

Finally Izdeliye K-070 -UPAB-1500- (and hopefully UPAB-500) will see the operative light on the platform more suited to employ it.

Among the new weapons planned for SU-34 for tactical bombing mission it will be by far the most decisive and cost efficient ; thanks to its particular aerodynamic layout and its largelly augmented speed ,generated by its propulsion unique for a weapon in its class, it has not only widely greater penetration capabilties against hardened targets and obviously better operational tempo in complex operations but also far better chance to survive to SAM or aircraft interceptions.

The article says SU-34 has sting radar , once again raises some question.

Does Russia has any bomb with deep hardened bunker busting role ?

Recently the Air Chief stated that eventually the Su-34 will carry long range cruise missile ( X-101/555 ) giving it strategic capability.

None that I know of, though they do have armour piercing 1,500kg bombs of a variety of types using various guidance options, so I presume if they still have their 3,000kg and 9,000kg bombs in production their might be deep penetration models, but AFAIK they have not released any info about them.

The Father Of All Bombs they released info about is a fuel air explosive weapon so deep bunkers are clearly not the target of this weapon...

I remember reading about problems they had in Afghanistan hitting some mountain complexes and how in the end they resorted to using Tu-16s because their older design was optimised for the larger nuclear bombs so the FAB-9000 could be carried.
I believe the results were not as good as anticipated due to the location of the bases and the position of the mountains nearby not allowing a straight run at the target.

Some targets they ended up using laser guided 240mm mortar shells instead of air power.

As I know Russian air force have 15 Su-34. They have 9 Su-34 in 2010 from red 01 to red 09 in 2011 they receive 6 Su-34, four standard with red 01 to red 04 and two gray red 05 and red 10. Why they say they operate only 12 Su-34?