Su-30, Su-33, Su-34 and Su-35 News thread, pictures and discussion

''A Su-34 bomber carrying five FAB-500 UMPK gliding bombs. Previously, a Su-34 was seen carrying 4 UMPK FABs and 2 UMPB gliding bombs.''

Maybe now it is possible to engage seven different targets at once ??? ( 5 UMPK + 2 UMPB).
 

Attachments

  • photo_2026-07-09_12-49-37.jpg
    photo_2026-07-09_12-49-37.jpg
    95.3 KB · Views: 219
Last edited by a moderator:
On that topic, in June alone Russia dropped over 8200 FABs of various explosive yields. The Su-34 obviously being the primary delivery platform. The type has proven utterly indispensable for the VKS, as the ability to drop glide bombs from high altitude at high speeds lends itself to increasing the useful range of such a cheap and high volume munition.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20260715_194151.jpg
    IMG_20260715_194151.jpg
    111.3 KB · Views: 287
Last edited by a moderator:
lancer21 said:
Certainly the moniker Hellduck proved appropriate.
Click to expand...

Maybe this capability came with that new sat-com antenna ? Hm, who knows but with five ( maybe even six UMPK ) and two UMPB ,Su-34NVO has possibility to engage 7/8 targets at once.Will see.
 
You don't need SATCOM to deliver satelite guided munitions...

SATCOM could at best help to get new target coordinates supplied through it.
 
Scorpion82 said:
You don't need SATCOM to deliver satelite guided munitions...

SATCOM could at best help to get new target coordinates supplied through it.
Click to expand...

There is issue with the inertial guidance and the satellite guidance/correction (UMPK).

''Унифицированный модуль планирования и коррекции (УМПК)''

''Unified Planning and Correction Module (UMPK)''

''Наведение бомбы на цель осуществляется при помощи навигационного модуля, использующего как сигналы с инерциального измерительного блока, так и спутниковую навигацию с применением помехозащищённой GPS/ГЛОНАСС антенны «Комета М»''

''The bomb is guided to its target by a navigation module that utilizes signals from both an inertial measurement unit and satellite navigation, employing the jam-resistant "Kometa-M" GPS/GLONASS antenna.''

In fact, we don't know the real type of antenna behind the cockpit of Su-34NVO.
 
Now this is something in the relation with the max possible weapon (bomb) load of the Su-35S. Value '8000kg' is the most common but is that has anything to do with the reality at all?

On the photo is the Su-27S '27 blue' ( pic from the middle of the 80's). We can see that there was about 30 bombs I think type OFAB-250-270 ( weight 268kg w/o the AVU-ET/TM fuse).Note: those multiple bomb racks for the 6pcs are 150kg heavy.

We can't see if there was sixth multiple bomb rack between the engine nacelles but this graph shows us that it is possible to attach it.Last but not least, we can see that those bombs could be attached even under the outer wing pylons.

If we suppose that there were really six multiple bomb racks ,that would be 36 bombs + those 2 under the outer wing pylons. In total 38 x 268kg is more than 10 tons of bombs only ( w/o the fuses of course).Possible fuel load, really don't know and it's never mind,we can see all those bombs attached.Suppose for the real test/combat mission,fuel load will be low (normal weight).In comparison with the older Su-27S ,Su-35S has strengthened airframe ,wings and there is six underwing hardpoints, thus the max bomb( weapon)load must be greater.

Of course this is something relative and to be honest, something like this will never happen during war time, especially like this ongoing war.Maybe it is possible to achieve during some test/exercise missions only.
 

Attachments

  • slr57n.jpg
    slr57n.jpg
    75.2 KB · Views: 78
  • su27-3.gif
    su27-3.gif
    262.3 KB · Views: 114
Last edited by a moderator:
There are two different photos of the Su-27 with a large number of bombs, if I'm not mistaken, one with 8,000 kg and the other with 7,500 kg.
Let me remind you that after strengthening the chassis, the Su-30 can carry 8,000 kg of bombs and 100% fuel.
 
34500 kg (maximum takeoff weight) - 19300 kg (empty) - 11500 kg (fuel) - 100 kg (pilot) - 150 kg (gun ammunition) = 3450 kg
it turns out that there is no

34500 kg-19300 kg-100 kg-150 kg-8000 kg (missiles and bombs) = 6950 kg of fuel
flight range with 6950 kg of fuel, approximately 2000 km, or a range of action of 700-1000 km
 
EmoBirb said:
On that topic, in June alone Russia dropped over 8200 FABs of various explosive yields. The Su-34 obviously being the primary delivery platform. The type has proven utterly indispensable for the VKS, as the ability to drop glide bombs from high altitude at high speeds lends itself to increasing the useful range of such a cheap and high volume munition.
Click to expand...
This would be indispensable only if you can prove, that dropping 4x 500kg stand off bombs requires only and specifically the su-34.
Which is a lot of proving to do.

More so when it is not the actual mission of this aircraft; FBA is not a CAS force. They performed their actual role in the intended manner only in February-March 2022.

And note, that this level of bombing on actual Su-34 targets would've indeed likely thrown Ukraine out of the war.
 
paralay said:
34500 kg (maximum takeoff weight) - 19300 kg (empty) - 11500 kg (fuel) - 100 kg (pilot) - 150 kg (gun ammunition) = 3450 kg
it turns out that there is no

34500 kg-19300 kg-100 kg-150 kg-8000 kg (missiles and bombs) = 6950 kg of fuel
flight range with 6950 kg of fuel, approximately 2000 km, or a range of action of 70
Click to expand...

Thanks friend.For me it is questionable that Su-35S on the tarmac ( with full gun's ammo in the box) weighs more than 19t. Even one Su-30MKI ( MKA,MKM,SM/SM2) has not that empty weight. Btw ,we already commented about that detail.
 
I am aware that there are double-racks under fuselage for Su-35 - АКУ-170Е (however they were non-serail, just testing), but theoretically could they be installed on Su-30SM/2?
 
zovchik11 said:
I am aware that there are double-racks under fuselage for Su-35 - АКУ-170Е (however they were non-serail, just testing), but theoretically could they be installed on Su-30SM/2?
Click to expand...

I think we already commented that detail. Who knows, maybe one day we will see those double-rail launchers on the Su-30SM2.
 

Attachments

  • Su-35S R-77-1 ispod trupa.png
    Su-35S R-77-1 ispod trupa.png
    724.1 KB · Views: 128
Last edited by a moderator:
zovchik11 said:
I am aware that there are double-racks under fuselage for Su-35 - АКУ-170Е (however they were non-serail, just testing), but theoretically could they be installed on Su-30SM/2?
Click to expand...
They are serial - they were used early in SMO(and likely remain an ofca/LACM intercept configuration). @Squirrel video is from an operational sortie.
 
snne said:
Moreover, they still have a long way to go before they even begin replacing the Su-34, as it has performed well in the war and they continue to procure it. [...]

They aren't going anywhere; they'll simply be increasingly complemented by less and less observable/targetable wingmen (manned & unmanned)...
Click to expand...

Indeed, there will undoubtedly be a "Su-34M2" down the line. Broadly speaking, it's layout and size will lend itself to interoperability with strike and reconnaissance UAVs, which will complement it's initial role. Having a second crew member and plenty of airframe real estate will make that transformation easier in the future. Leaving the Su-34 to launching long range stand off munitions and directing unmanned formations in real time over the battlefield. In that sense, it's uniquely suited together with the Su-57/Su-57D and Su-30SM2 to integrate into such a network. And the VKS and Russian military in general has expressed and showcased a great desire for distributed, networked and especially autonomous and unmanned systems in war fighting. Tasks once carried out by dedicated reconnaissance and strike aircraft or large artillery formations are today fulfilled by a multitude of abundant unmanned systems that provide real time surveillance and near immediate strike options.

Investment into cheap stand off munitions like Banderol or the various powered and unpowered glide kits can give a glimpse at how Russian strike aviation will adapt to the current and near future threat environment. That is, by providing affordable mass munitions with sizeable effects on target delivered from mostly stand off ranges.

In that sense, it's beyond unlikely that the Su-34 will see a dedicated manned successor. When it will leave service, several decades into the future, it replacement most likely won't be a single airframe and it most certainly won't have a pilot or weapons system operator.
 
Finally! We got High Quality photo of "New" camo for indonesian Su-27SKMs
This camo also reminds me of T10BM-2/Su 35 Bort 902.
 

Attachments

  • 1000883185.jpg
    1000883185.jpg
    115.9 KB · Views: 125
  • FB_IMG_1786117381975.jpg
    FB_IMG_1786117381975.jpg
    59 KB · Views: 63
  • 902-russian-federation-air-force-sukhoi-su-35bm_PlanespottersNet_1586501_3dd3135274_o.jpg
    902-russian-federation-air-force-sukhoi-su-35bm_PlanespottersNet_1586501_3dd3135274_o.jpg
    104.2 KB · Views: 61
Last edited by a moderator:
Unconfirmed reports that Vietnam got a hold of Su-30SMEs.

Everything related to the acquisition for the VPA is extremely classified by the Vietnamese MoD, so take this piece of information with a grain of salt.
 

Attachments

  • HJjdtQ0WcAYHVXw.jpg
    HJjdtQ0WcAYHVXw.jpg
    26.8 KB · Views: 114
  • HJkfLRMW8AYQ4-r.jpg
    HJkfLRMW8AYQ4-r.jpg
    32.5 KB · Views: 81
Last edited by a moderator:
Hm, but that image doesn't really show clearly a Su-34 with the said pod. There are some blurry stuff under the wings, but the centerline is not even visible. So, if there's pod under an actual plane there, does that mean there's still no image of the RL pod out there on the internet? Is the RL pod still in development?
 
No idea. I'm not even sure if it's valid conceptually. I just thought I'd see what the forum makes of it.
 
totoro said:
Hm, but that image doesn't really show clearly a Su-34 with the said pod. There are some blurry stuff under the wings, but the centerline is not even visible. So, if there's pod under an actual plane there, does that mean there's still no image of the RL pod out there on the internet? Is the RL pod still in development?
Click to expand...

This one is the best known, with M-55 working in U-2/MQ-4 role.
Su-34Ms are said to be flying with it, but no photos to date. Best source of these photos are NATO Baltic patrol, and they for obvious reasons mostly encounter the elint version (RT).
 

Attachments

  • 1000029870.jpg
    1000029870.jpg
    112.9 KB · Views: 107
Last edited by a moderator:
jeffb said:
Saw this and thought I'd see what you guys think of it. Not sure off the cuff whether it's serious or not:
https://twitter.com/x/status/2087198629958217805
View: https://x.com/i/status/2087198629958217805
Click to expand...

The pod is legit. Issues tho is the Su-34 platform doesn't have the flight endurance. Typical AEW mission may last anywhere between 5-12 hours or even more. The issue is not the aircraft but the men who fly them. As people get tired, bored, maybe hungry and desire warm food (good for morale) and stuff. Proper AEW platform will have galleys and relief crews.

Large HALE or to some extent MALE UAV can serve as good substitute if by any way, they cannot get large manned platform. Something which Altius can serve.
 
stealthflanker said:
The pod is legit. Issues tho is the Su-34 platform doesn't have the flight endurance. Typical AEW mission may last anywhere between 5-12 hours or even more. The issue is not the aircraft but the men who fly them. As people get tired, bored, maybe hungry and desire warm food (good for morale) and stuff. Proper AEW platform will have galleys and relief crews.

Large HALE or to some extent MALE UAV can serve as good substitute if by any way, they cannot get large manned platform. Something which Altius can serve.
Click to expand...
Indeed; by comparison, the Akinci (which is broadly comparable to the Altius) can be equipped with maritime radars, as well as various EW/ISR pods/equipment (even an X-band FCR, albeit somewhat unusual).

It makes complete sense that a drone with such long endurance and a non-negligible payload capacity would take over these missions from the M-55, even if carrying these pods on Su-34s could offer its own certain, unique set of advantages...
 

Attachments

  • 1776250954366.png
    1776250954366.png
    84.4 KB · Views: 28
  • 1778240950571.png
    1778240950571.png
    167.7 KB · Views: 24
  • IMG_8474.MP4_snapshot_00.08.399.jpg
    IMG_8474.MP4_snapshot_00.08.399.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 25
  • 1761647848662.png
    1761647848662.png
    3 MB · Views: 27
Last edited by a moderator:
stealthflanker said:
The pod is legit. Issues tho is the Su-34 platform doesn't have the flight endurance
Click to expand...
The Su‑34’s flight range with two external fuel tanks is 2,950 km, and the flight time is 4–6 hours. Mid‑air refuelling is possible. The crew cabin is equipped with everything necessary, including the ability to stand upright, hot food, and a toilet.
 
paralay said:
The Su‑34’s flight range with two external fuel tanks is 2,950 km, and the flight time is 4–6 hours. Mid‑air refuelling is possible. The crew cabin is equipped with everything necessary, including the ability to stand upright, hot food, and a toilet.
Click to expand...
This compares poorly to other flankers, even the two-seat ones.
Su-34 is one hell of a flying fuel crisis.
 
Su34 is much heavyer and huge cockpit adds shit load of drag. Honestly i am surprised they haven't slowly moved towards SU-30MKII or similar ,,could preform most if not all Su34 missions, given its now mostly stand off weapons they are using , the whole armored cockpit thing does not make much sense. i guess Su34 production is so well run in ........... no one wants to rock the boat
 
Data from the UAC about ferry ranges for Su-34 :

4500 km ( 100% internal fuel ,max 12 t).

7000km with three PTB-3000 (max 9000 lit) or one refueling during the flight.

This is interesting :

''Максимальная продолжительность полета (по возможностям летчика), ч. 10.''

''Maximum flight duration (limited by pilot endurance), h: 10.''

Some details about the cockpit ergonomics ,from 24 min :

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9TUQAiTkjs
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom