Alternative Sukhoi Su-25

M

Monk78

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
13 March 2024
Messages
76
Reaction score
22
I’m not sure which sub forum this belongs to put posting it here as I think it’s the best fit
In 1969, the Sukhoi OKB investigated options for a new battlefield close-support "mudfighter" aircraft, one option being a derivative of the Su-15 designated the "T-58Sh" -- where "Sh" stood for "shturmovik (storm bird)", a general Soviet name for a close-support aircraft. The T-58Sh looked like an Su-15 mated to a MiG-27 front fuselage, with broad wings featuring moderate sweep, eight stores pylons, heavy armor, and a built-in Gatling cannon. An all-new design was selected instead, resulting in the Su-25 "Frogfoot" mudfighter.

Just wondering if this version would have been a much better all round fighter for USSR and its allies. And not simply a A-10 like CAS platform
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6542.jpeg
    IMG_6542.jpeg
    38.6 KB · Views: 29
  • IMG_6544.png
    IMG_6544.png
    7 KB · Views: 28
I dunno.

I mean, you really have two very different "Fast Air in support of Army operations" missions:
1) Battlefield Air Interdiction (BAI), where you hit bridges, refueling points, marshalling areas, etc at a distance of several km from your troops. These targets will be well protected, so need organized strike packages with jammers and SEAD etc.​
2) Close Air Support (CAS), when the enemy is within a km or less of your troops.​

Those two missions need different kinds of planes.
BAI needs speed and maybe range to get to the target, the speed so you can get into and out of SAM/AAA bubbles as fast as you can. You can also carry less precise weapons for BAI, since the only things around your target is more enemies.
CAS needs weapons you can use very close to your own troops, and the time to aim them correctly. The 30mm cannons have a danger close range of about 30-50m, when even APKWS rockets have a danger close range more on the lines of 100-200m (bigger boom, despite the precision).
 
Monk78 said:
I’m not sure which sub forum this belongs to put posting it here as I think it’s the best fit
In 1969, the Sukhoi OKB investigated options for a new battlefield close-support "mudfighter" aircraft, one option being a derivative of the Su-15 designated the "T-58Sh" -- where "Sh" stood for "shturmovik (storm bird)", a general Soviet name for a close-support aircraft. The T-58Sh looked like an Su-15 mated to a MiG-27 front fuselage, with broad wings featuring moderate sweep, eight stores pylons, heavy armor, and a built-in Gatling cannon. An all-new design was selected instead, resulting in the Su-25 "Frogfoot" mudfighter.

Just wondering if this version would have been a much better all round fighter for USSR and its allies. And not simply a A-10 like CAS platform
Click to expand...

Not sure why you've posted pics of the Su-19M.

T-58Sh looked like this:

su-15sh-png.541268

t-58sh-two-view-jpg.192759


Your summary does no justice to the complex procurement process that led to the Su-25, but suffice to say the T-58Sh was competing with the MiG-23B / 27 as a derivative of an existing design with supersonic capability. It was not a general purpose design at all, it was a dedicated ground attack aircraft just like the MiG-27. Evidence suggests the Su-25 was generally superior to the MiG-27 - e.g. in Afghanistan.

So I don't see any real value in the T-58Sh over the MiG-27, and certainly not over the Su-25.
 
I didn’t know su-19M is a totally different aircraft design

can you please recommend any sources for su-19M
the aircraft I posted the pictures of
 
Looks to me like a cheaper, less complex MiG-27 and good competition for the Jaguar/Mirage 5. I could see it doing very well in the export market.
 
Desertfox said:
Looks to me like a cheaper, less complex MiG-27 and good competition for the Jaguar/Mirage 5. I could see it doing very well in the export market.
Click to expand...
Plus the Su-19M is twin-engined, so if the VVS subscribed to the theory that two engines is safer than one, it has some redundancy should one engine get shot out (in theory).
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom