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

stealthflanker said:
God help them as there are over 200 Su-30MKI's to replace and some thousands of small sub contractors making parts of them and not to mention India does not have fighter engine in class of AL-31 or F-100/110. Their "Gangga" engine program (yeah India do attempt to make their own version of AL-31) didnt or havent produce result, while Kaveri still requires Russian assistance for testing it.

If India is seriously wish to retain any deterrence toward China or other power, they wont burn all the bridges and partnership with Russia. Or at least not in long term. So having R-37 will still on the table, India can either license produce the missile, then adding their own seekers and electronics.

---------

Anyway the UMPB-30, the new glidebomb for Russian forces. This glide bomb is perhaps the first "universal" guided weapons in Russian arsenal, as it can be airdropped or launched from MLRS (BM-30 Smerch as platform) Taking role of both JDAM and GLSDB at same time.

This weapon tho have about 3 meter in length and 30 cm diameter.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1793487271590785085
View: https://x.com/Archer83Able/status/1793487271590785085
Click to expand...
If those dimensions are indeed true, and judging by the images, its not really a sdb equivalent. It is something between a sdb and a compact jdam-er. Roughly 350-400 kg in weight. And obviously a bespoke design, unlike the steering kit+wing kit+ bomb that is the jdam-er.
It could actually have quite a bit of range.
Curiously, no double racks used for it yet.
 
totoro said:
If those dimensions are indeed true, and judging by the images, its not really a sdb equivalent. It is something between a sdb and a compact jdam-er.
Click to expand...
500lb JDAM-ER is the closest counterpart. And the most intersting and promising feature of UMPB, according to the rumours circulating in our media is that it can be used not only with air platforms but with a 300 mm MLRS Smerch too, in the same way as GLSDB is used with M270/HIMARS MLRS.

A cross-platform precision-guided stand-off munition. What's not to like? Whoever made it, they did a great job, IMO.
 
If those 3m length and 30cm diameter figures, cited earlier ,are correct then its positioned between gbu38 and gbu32.
Gbu38 weigh 253 kg and is just 2.35 m long and 27 cm in diameter.
Gbu32 is 3 m long like the russian bomb but is thicker, at 35 cm in diameter.

Part of the russian bomb body is however wings, which are more integrated into the weapon, and not bolted on like with jdam er. That thinner mid body likely takes away some weight.

So, the bomb without wings might weigh around 340 kg. Adding wings i get close to 370 kg.
(Gbu38 weight differemce between regular jdam and jdam er is 30 kg)
Of course, all that is give or take a dozen or two kilos.
But its not exactly a small and compact bomb by US standards, at 350 to 400 kg and 3 m in length. It can likely be carried by double or triple racks though. I expect those images of single bomb per pylon to change in coming months, as bomb matures further and as production increases.
Nose of the bomb also looks as if it can receive various seeker heads in the future.

The end part of the bomb also has this kink which might be useful for fitting the intake of a tiny jet engine in some future variant.

For russian pre-war standards , that bomb is almost a revolution.
 
ria.ru

В Северной Осетии потерпел крушение Су-34

Истребитель-бомбардировщик Су-34 разбился в Северной Осетии, экипаж погиб, сообщили в Минобороны. РИА Новости, 11.06.2024
ria.ru ria.ru
MOSCOW, June 11 – RIA Novosti.

A Su-34 fighter-bomber crashed in North Ossetia, killing the crew, the Ministry of Defense reported.
“In the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania, in a mountainous area, a Su-34 aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces crashed during a scheduled training flight ,” the statement said.
The preliminary cause of the plane crash is a technical malfunction.
Click to expand...
 
I wonder, where i can find a good description on Su-30SM2's particularly on changes. The first indication is appearance of the L-band "IFF/Radar" at the wing LE. But other than that, the news are conflicting. From the use of AL-41F1S or use of Irbis radar.

Recent imageries with R-37 however kinda lend credence to the use of Irbis-E. Although the presence of Pitot tube at the radome tip was similar as earlier SM's. This however at least in my view is not really an indication of what's inside. The "pitotless" radome also seen at Su-37 which also use Bars.
 
Irbis was tested in Flankers with radomes which had a pitot - its presence or absence is a function of the host aircraft's air data system, not radar specific.

Su-30SM2 also gets the new-gen S-107 data-link from the Su-35S (compare the dielectric panels on the nose). I further suspect the cockpit interface will be the same, as there was already an import substitution problem with the French hardware on the Su-30SM.
 
Last edited:
Brief Summary: Fighter bomber - a pro-Russian telegram channel - whines about how few Su-34 deliveries there have been in light of how many have been lost:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1803471959235113251
View: https://x.com/Archer83Able/status/1803471959235113251

t.me

Fighterbomber

Два дня назад ОАК передала в войска партию Су-34. Это безусловно прекрасная новость. Количество самолетов в партии не указано, но смело можно говорить, что в ней было 2 самолёта. Т.е. больше чем за полгода сделано 2 новых самолёта Су-34. А у нас только известных, "небоевых" потерь Су-34 с 5...
t.me t.me
1718960012477.png
 
Last edited:
paralay said:
Military acceptance. Su-30SM2. Working in a Special Military Operation zone

VK.com | VK

vk.com vk.com
Click to expand...
Ironic, su-30 went full circle.

Began as a interceptor for wast spaces, grown multirole capability to sell better, was procured by VKS as a multirole fighter... and when at war, ended up being most suitable for the very interceptor job it was born for.
 
Hi folks,

World in russian sites is that a Su 35S shot down a Mig 29 from 213km with a R37M. Is there anything behind that claim or is it just wishful thinking on their part?

Regards,

Nic
 
No way to know one way or another. 213 km is probably within the envelope, especially if the target was unaware it was fired upon.
 
Nicolas10 said:
Hi folks,

World in russian sites is that a Su 35S shot down a Mig 29 from 213km with a R37M. Is there anything behind that claim or is it just wishful thinking on their part?

Regards,

Nic
Click to expand...

hard to verify.. tho technically. Su-35 can do that. Nonetheless it can also be MiG-31 as the claim was kinda similar as this screenshot from Zaslon radar i found being posted around.

1722384355586.jpeg

It depicts detection range of some 270-300 km similar as claimed. the MiG carrying 4x R-37M and 2x R-77-1.
 
@stealthflanker How big is the energy difference for su-35s and mig-31bm launch?

Let's say for the former it's 33k ft M=1.25 on average, for the latter - 70k ft M=2.5.
 
There are no reports of a Ukrianian MiG-29 being lost, so it could be that this was the technical malfunction that the Russian Su-34 suffered over Volgograd, hard to verify.
 
Ainen said:
@stealthflanker How big is the energy difference for su-35s and mig-31bm launch?

Let's say for the former it's 33k ft M=1.25 on average, for the latter - 70k ft M=2.5.
Click to expand...

Not really sure what you mean but. In terms of range it's basically twice. Using some quick minizap application.

You forgot to specify target aspect and altitude tho. so I would assume head on and 5000 m altitude. The R-37 model is based on R-33 with "extra" propellant, increased wing area as i measure from available pics and reduced span. The trajectory would be loft glide, with Boost-sustain profile each lasted 10 seconds thus bring total motor burn to 20 seconds.

The high altitude high mach launch was phenomenal. Almost 500 km range Before the missile ran out of battery (that controlled flight time)
21000m.png

While one from 10K m altitude and half the mach is basically more modest

10000m.png
Where the missile basically ran out of energy.


If the Flanker can launch from 15000 m and Mach 1.5 it can engage the same target from 320 km.
 
stealthflanker said:
Not really sure what you mean but. In terms of range it's basically twice. Using some quick minizap application.

You forgot to specify target aspect and altitude tho. so I would assume head on and 5000 m altitude. The R-37 model is based on R-33 with "extra" propellant, increased wing area as i measure from available pics and reduced span. The trajectory would be loft glide, with Boost-sustain profile each lasted 10 seconds thus bring total motor burn to 20 seconds.

The high altitude high mach launch was phenomenal. Almost 500 km range Before the missile ran out of battery (that controlled flight time)
View attachment 735728

While one from 10K m altitude and half the mach is basically more modest

View attachment 735729
Where the missile basically ran out of energy.


If the Flanker can launch from 15000 m and Mach 1.5 it can engage the same target from 320 km.
Click to expand...
Thanks, that's indeed massive.
 
Ainen said:
Thanks, that's indeed massive.
Click to expand...

I have to add tho that the Mach 2.5 high altitude launch put the missile apogee at over 80km which might ot be the case due to limit of aerocontrol. Maybe the loft instead of 45 degrees, will be adjusted into shallower angle so the missile would remain within 30-35 km or at least below 50 km. Sorry i didnt pay attention the the apogee parameter.

Also i decided to redo some part and record it so one can see.


Still high in apogee but not near orbit. The other concern of very high apogee is need to take account for Re-entry phase.

Afaik Russian test on modified 48N6 reached 70 km apogee. The missile however seems to remain ballistic until 20 km where it was "re-captured" and guided
 
Warspotting site lists 22 lost since start of war. There are bound to be further losses though. Dur to accidents, damage, etc. This video speculated on ratios of further losses for total russian air losses.
View: https://youtu.be/PYxdHX8l-PA?si=I4uSAiYmRPLIlDjs


If similar ratios are applied to su34 losses, then roughly 40 su34 might have been lost or damaged so far. But in truth, no one really knows, outside russian MoD, and they're not likely to talk.
 
Haven't there been a total of ~140 Su-34s of all types built so far? If 40 have been lost since February 24, 2022 then that means Russia has only ~100 of them left.

Edit: Even taking into account aircraft that Russia has lost to accidents and "Own goal" shoot downs by Russian SAM batteries there will be other aircraft lost due them being permanently grounded due to using up their airframe life.
 
To date there might be some 155 su34 made ( not counting prototypes). Current production might be around a dozen per year but there is no way to know for sure.

Some of those damaged su34 i mentioned in my previous post might be repairable or might have been repaired, so it's not easy to just conclude 40 have been lost for good. If i had to guess, a figure somewhere in between of 22 and 40 seems more likely, but who the heck knows.

Unlike su24, which may've indeed been relegated to near retirement status due to increased wear of wartime missions, su34 fleet is largely still new and i'd say it's highly unlikely there have been imputed "losses" due to wear in the su34 fleet yet.

Also, i've found at least 3 crashes involving su34 before the war. With 3 more accidents resulting in substantial damage. Given that there were a few more accidental crashes during the war, but away from Ukraine, which were not all covered by Oryx count, it's plausible the total airframe lost count since induction of the type is closer to 35 than to 30. But again, no one really knows for sure.
 
Last edited:
totoro said:
Current production might be around a dozen per year but there is no way to know for sure.
Click to expand...

I've been led to understand that currently Russia produces just five Su-34s annually and while being able to produce about a dozen airframes (With engines) a year seems plausible I strongly suspect what determines the current production rate is the availability of avionics (Which would be problematic at the moment with the current western sanctions on Russia).

totoro said:
su34 fleet is largely still new and i'd say it's highly unlikely there have been imputed "losses" due to wear in the su34 fleet yet.
Click to expand...

Wartime flight rates greatly accelerate the use of airframe life also I understand that the fatigue life of Russian fighter/fighter-bomber airframes isn't as long as western equivalent designs. Something else that needs to be kept in mind is how many aircraft have been lost in accidents due to inadequate pilot training training? I've seen in a number of sources that Russian pilots only get about half the annual flight time a western fighter-pilot does.
 
Su-34s are unlikely to time out any time soon. Same for any Su-30/34/35. There is a cost to be paid for all the extra flying hours, but it is a long term one.
 
Josh_TN said:
Su-34s are unlikely to time out any time soon. Same for any Su-30/34/35*. There is a cost to be paid for all the extra flying hours, but it is a long term one.
Click to expand...

If the loss rate amongst these aircraft increases due to a combination shoot downs by Ukrainian SAMs, "Own Goal" shoot downs by Russian SAM battery (Theyseem to be very good at this), accidents (Through lack proper maintenance and pilot inexperience) and air-to-air losses (I suspect that the F-16s will start to make a big dent by year's end) which exceed the replacement rates of both new-build aircraft and new flight crews. Then what you'll see is increasingly fewer aircraft increasingly shouldering an ever increasing burden that will fatigue rapidly both airframes and flight-crew endurance (Leading to burnout of pilots).

* I think you meant Su-27/30/33/35.
 
NMaude said:
The AA-13 Axehead is no longer a mystery to the West as a near intact example was obtained by the Ukrainians in February 2023 and it was passed onto the West for analysis, no doubt the donated F-16s will have their internal ECM avionics set to deal with this missile.
Click to expand...
So apparently are amraams from nasams.

I wouldn't place too much importance onto this, for all those missiles it's an expected and long known outcome.

Ultimately, it's US who potentially loses the most from exposing it's weapons there.
 
Forest Green said:
www.twz.com

Russian Pilot Films His Flanker Falling Away After Ejecting During Combat Mission

The Russian pilot used a selfie video while parachuting to the ground to explain his jet had fallen victim to some kind of surprise attack. The Russian pilot used a selfie video while parachuting to the ground to explain his jet had fallen victim to some kind of surprise attack.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
https://twitter.com/x/status/1820357411149910035
View: https://x.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1820357411149910035
Click to expand...
Holy crap, imagine the footage we would've gotten if there were smartphones and small cameras during the Korean War when two of the biggest superpowers were duking it out...
 
He is flying a wartime mission with his Smartphone?!! :eek: :confused::D

Selfies can kill you, definitively.

Regarding the Su-25 filmed ejection in the story, I guess it was a collision with a power cable?

1722890930973.png
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom