Russian Air Force numbers and procurement plans

Singular_Transform wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:If the plan is for 700 fighters (all in) it's a low number.
NATO, USAFE and one CBG provide a much larger fighter fleet that covers a much smaller geography.

Nato doesn't have air defence system.

So, it is a compromise.

It does, it's called an Air Force and Navy.

Not comparable.

S-400 radar cost as much as a fighter jet, and more capable than anything that you can fit onto an airplane.

And it can work for decades.







The navy can cover only fraction of the land mass,and it is pretty useless against stealth aircraft, due to the distance deficiency.

franco wrote:

eehnie wrote:This is not including other types of aircrafts, but also it includes not the numbers about the reserve fighters. According to the current numbers of decent public sources, with the ne production explained in the article, Russia can reach the saturation of their reserves of Air Superiority + Interceptor + Multirole Fighters. Russia would have then roughly another 700 aircrafts of these types in the reserve by 2025 (Su-33, Su-27. MiG-29/35, MiG-31, MiG-25 and MiG-23). While obviously would be older than the active aircrafts, all these models remain useful as combat concept if mantained properly.

PS1: I'm not sure about the Su-33 being totally removed from the active service.
PS2: Note that by 2025 it is possible to have the first unit of the MiG-41 (interceptor).

IMO you are being very optimistic concerning the reserve aircraft and the important point is "if maintained properly". They were not and now most are useless pieces of metal.

KiloGolf wrote:

It's the same if not better.
Tens of ships SM-3/6 or Aster 30 and nearly a thousand of planes with AIM-120, Meteor and so on. It works and spreads the risk quite well.

eehnie wrote:

franco wrote:

eehnie wrote:This is not including other types of aircrafts, but also it includes not the numbers about the reserve fighters. According to the current numbers of decent public sources, with the ne production explained in the article, Russia can reach the saturation of their reserves of Air Superiority + Interceptor + Multirole Fighters. Russia would have then roughly another 700 aircrafts of these types in the reserve by 2025 (Su-33, Su-27. MiG-29/35, MiG-31, MiG-25 and MiG-23). While obviously would be older than the active aircrafts, all these models remain useful as combat concept if mantained properly.

PS1: I'm not sure about the Su-33 being totally removed from the active service.
PS2: Note that by 2025 it is possible to have the first unit of the MiG-41 (interceptor).

IMO you are being very optimistic concerning the reserve aircraft and the important point is "if maintained properly". They were not and now most are useless pieces of metal.

I was not assuming a good condition of units in the reserve. Still it is necessary to take into account that 220 of the aircrafts in the potential reserve by 2025 (20 Su-33, 90 Su-27 and 110 MiG-29/35) are today in active service, which is not a bad start point to keep them in good condition. And the rest would not be as old as many people think. In overall terms the projected reserve for 2025 would be:

20 Su-23
176 Su-27
269 MiG-29/35
100 MiG-31
015+ MiG-25
200+ MiG-23

Russia would be able to reach 750 active aircrafts by 2025 with the projected rytm of production only keeping the Su-33 and some Su-27 more in active service. For a total of around 1500 Air Superiority + Interceptors + Multirole Fighters.

Singular_Transform wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

It's the same if not better.
Tens of ships SM-3/6 or Aster 30 and nearly a thousand of planes with AIM-120, Meteor and so on. It works and spreads the risk quite well.

Basic geometry: The ship on the sea is on sea level ,means the radar of the ship is on lower elevation the the land ( the land by definition has higher elevation than the sea : ) )

Means that a ship behind a peninsula can't see anything behind the land .

Means that the AB needs helicopters to deliver the targeting data, with rubbish/small radars, and the whole AB become an extremely expensive sitting duck rocket transporter ship.

So, inefficient, expensive .

And the long range rockets are useful against slow, big targets with random movements,or fast ,small targets with predictable trajectory.

The backfire big, fast and move randomly (because it has radar and electronics, and can "see" the interceptor missile)

Means that it is quite hard to kill.

As soon as it see the SAM it push down the nose of the aircraft, switch on the back-burner , speed up to 1.88 Mach , and start to pull high g manoeuvrers with chaffs .

An AWACS or anti submarine aircraft can't do this.

KiloGolf wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

It's the same if not better.
Tens of ships SM-3/6 or Aster 30 and nearly a thousand of planes with AIM-120, Meteor and so on. It works and spreads the risk quite well.

Basic geometry: The ship on the sea is on sea level ,means the radar of the ship is on lower elevation the the land ( the land by definition has higher elevation than the sea : ) )

Means that a ship behind a peninsula can't see anything behind the land .

Means that the AB needs helicopters to deliver the targeting data, with rubbish/small radars, and the whole AB become an extremely expensive sitting duck rocket transporter ship.

So, inefficient, expensive .

And the long range rockets are useful against slow, big targets with random movements,or fast ,small targets with predictable trajectory.

The backfire big, fast and move randomly (because it has radar and electronics, and can "see" the interceptor missile)

Means that it is quite hard to kill.

As soon as it see the SAM it push down the nose of the aircraft, switch on the back-burner , speed up to 1.88 Mach , and start to pull high g manoeuvrers with chaffs .

An AWACS or anti submarine aircraft can't do this.

A fighter or a UAV can deliver data to an SM-3/6. Anything can, it's efficient enough to bring some Backfires down before they know it.

miketheterrible wrote:No.  No it cannot.  It has to use its own radar system from the ship.

A Monday test pairing a Lockheed Martin F-35B Lighting II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) with an Aegis Combat System armed with a Raytheon Standard Missile-6 is the latest step in expanding how the Navy and Marine Corps will share data on future battlefields.Using targeting information transmitted from the Marine Corps F-35B, the Navy’s Aegis test site at the White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico launched an SM-6 anti-air missile and struck a Beechcraft MQM-107 target representing an adversarial fighter.



https://news.usni.org/2016/09/13/video-successful-f-35-sm-6-live-fire-test-points-expansion-networked-naval-warfare

Singular_Transform wrote:

eehnie wrote:

franco wrote:

eehnie wrote:This is not including other types of aircrafts, but also it includes not the numbers about the reserve fighters. According to the current numbers of decent public sources, with the ne production explained in the article, Russia can reach the saturation of their reserves of Air Superiority + Interceptor + Multirole Fighters. Russia would have then roughly another 700 aircrafts of these types in the reserve by 2025 (Su-33, Su-27. MiG-29/35, MiG-31, MiG-25 and MiG-23). While obviously would be older than the active aircrafts, all these models remain useful as combat concept if mantained properly.

PS1: I'm not sure about the Su-33 being totally removed from the active service.
PS2: Note that by 2025 it is possible to have the first unit of the MiG-41 (interceptor).

IMO you are being very optimistic concerning the reserve aircraft and the important point is "if maintained properly". They were not and now most are useless pieces of metal.

I was not assuming a good condition of units in the reserve. Still it is necessary to take into account that 220 of the aircrafts in the potential reserve by 2025 (20 Su-33, 90 Su-27 and 110 MiG-29/35) are today in active service, which is not a bad start point to keep them in good condition. And the rest would not be as old as many people think. In overall terms the projected reserve for 2025 would be:

20 Su-23
176 Su-27
269 MiG-29/35
100 MiG-31
015+ MiG-25
200+ MiG-23

Russia would be able to reach 750 active aircrafts by 2025 with the projected rytm of production only keeping the Su-33 and some Su-27 more in active service. For a total of around 1500 Air Superiority + Interceptors + Multirole Fighters.

Russian navy has 360 aircrafts as well .

KiloGolf wrote:

Sure it can.



https://news.usni.org/2016/09/13/video-successful-f-35-sm-6-live-fire-test-points-expansion-networked-naval-warfare

It's a brave new world

KiloGolf wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:No.  No it cannot.  It has to use its own radar system from the ship.

Sure it can.

A Monday test pairing a Lockheed Martin F-35B Lighting II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) with an Aegis Combat System armed with a Raytheon Standard Missile-6 is the latest step in expanding how the Navy and Marine Corps will share data on future battlefields.Using targeting information transmitted from the Marine Corps F-35B, the Navy’s Aegis test site at the White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico launched an SM-6 anti-air missile and struck a Beechcraft MQM-107 target representing an adversarial fighter.



https://news.usni.org/2016/09/13/video-successful-f-35-sm-6-live-fire-test-points-expansion-networked-naval-warfare

It's a brave new world

marat wrote:Are those Mig 29 SMT new or modernized old airframes?

franco wrote:Mig-29K/KUB
- 2 squadrons operational (Severomorsk)
- 23 in service, 24 ordered in total

KiloGolf wrote:

franco wrote:Mig-29K/KUB
- 2 squadrons operational (Severomorsk)
- 23 in service, 24 ordered in total

This is an example how cited squadrons and operational numbers don't add up across the board.
Why are they forming fast-jet fighter and strike squadrons with such low (12-15) numbers of aircraft?

Same for the Su-34, they seem to field severely under-strength squadrons as if they are Hungary or something.