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

Anduriel said:
Su-34 has MFD, SATNAV and laser-bases INS, if not as precise as Sigma-95 on Su-30SM or BINS on Su-35.
Click to expand...

I think bolded are the same one. Laser based INS ( strapdown INS ) or the BINS. It has three laser gyroscopes and three quartz accelerometers.

P.S.

From 0:10 we can see Su-34 armed with the bombs and equipped with PTB-3000 .

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVtHe54cIUM
 
Squirrel said:
3mx3m was the res in the SAR-mode of the premier N010 'Zhuk' from the middle of 1980's. Comparison, 5mx5m was the res in that mode of the N019M1 'Topaz' radar. Leninets V004 radar and the res in the SAR mode?

https://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/08.airborne2/pic/img082-009-01.jpg

Maybe in the range 1-1.5m but what about the radio-silence mode which is very important in the high-tech war like this one
Click to expand...

And what happened with Zhuk (not to mention that it was not an AESA radar until Zhuk-AE 20 years later)? From what I understand it was never fielded in numbers and Russia did not field any AESA radar until Su-57s Belka radar. Everything beyond that was/is PESA at most (like Zaslo and Irbis). And we're talking about early 1990s, First Gulf War era F-15Es, which means more than 30 years old. The whole point of my post is that Su-34s current specs are somewhat comparable to the F-15Es first modernization in the mid 1990s and that the current generation of sensors that F-15E/F-15EX utilizes are far better than the Su-34s, with centimeter-scale resolution so in terms of sensors the Su-34 appears to be around 20 years outdated.

Squirrel said:
What about the UMPK/UMPB ? What about the FAB-3000M54 UMPK? 60-100km range inertial guided bombs with the sat-corr. Nowadays Su-34M/NVO can carry 6-8 UMPK/UMPB bombs and can attack that same number of targets during one combat mission.
Click to expand...
Yes, I specifically mentioned the UMPK but also noted that it is a very recent development, they were integrated halfway through the Ukraine war.
Squirrel said:
Kh-65/Kh-SD? There is no more Kh-65 but the newer stealthy 'Izdeliye 715' or the real Kh-SD now. 1500km range cruise missile. Status ? Really don't know right now.
Click to expand...
So, if this is correct, then even now the Su-34 does not have genuine stand-off weapon. Meanwhile F-15E had a 400km range stand-off weapon back in the 1990s and has a 1000km class stand-off weapon now.
Squirrel said:
Gliding bombs? There was no use for them until this war happened, it is simple as that.
Click to expand...
Of course, whatever the Su-34 lacks or lacked until very recently is not needed, rather than a gap on the part of the VKS when they develop their requirements to the military industrial complex or a gap of technology...

paralay said:
Total radar production: According to data from the Deagel.com website, the total number of APG-82(V)1 radars produced is 283 units. This number includes both radars for the US Air Force and those for international customers.

Foreign modifications based on the F-15E with an active phased array:
  • F-15SA (Saudi Arabia):~152 aircraft (new and upgraded from F-15S) equipped with AFAR AN/APG-63(V)3.
  • F-15SG (Singapore): 40 AFAR aircraft AN/APG-63(V)3.
  • F-15QA (Qatar): 36 AFAR aircraft AN/APG-63(V)3.
  • **F-15K (South Korea):59 aircraft are in the process of being modernized with the installation of AN/APG-82(V)1.
283 - 152 - 40 - 36 - 59 = -4
Click to expand...

So we can accept that the USAF has decided (and has received the necessary budget and ordered and paid for the necessary radars) to upgrade its entire F-15E fleet with the latest AN/APG-82v1 radar and that by all accounts this modernization is mostly complete and that all new F-15EX (more than 20 out of nearly 280 ordered) come with this radar from the factory, which means that the USAF has around 220-250 F-15E/F-15EX with this radar

OR

We can trust some random website on the internet and come to the conclusion that they have -4 radars.
 
Last edited:
Idk how X-59M isn’t a standoff weapon, sure the M model isn’t modern but it has been upgraded, 200 km range variant introduced in 99, 320 kg warhead.

There’s X-59MK2 which is low observable and has 160 nm/285 km range, but idk if it’s been integrated. Would be odd to only integrate with Su-57.
 
Aeria Gloria said:
Idk how X-59M isn’t a standoff weapon, sure the M model isn’t modern but it has been upgraded, 200 km range variant introduced in 99, 320 kg warhead.
Click to expand...
It's stand off. It's just substantially inferior to any significant existing counterpart, being de facto first and oldest weapon of this kind.
Aeria Gloria said:
There’s X-59MK2
Click to expand...
There's no Kh-59mk2.
There's Kh-69 though.
And given how Kh-35 is only integrated into Su-34 but not other flankers, nothing surprising here...
 
Last edited:
Scorpion82 said:
Doubt so, have never seen one flying with one attached.
Click to expand...
I meant, flight trials with captive mockup mean little in RU practice until you see equipment in operational couple. Su-34 was specifically ordered(and financed) to have this integration.
Through the entire war we saw lots of su-35s kh-59m strikes. But all identified kh-35u ones came from su-34.
 
paralay said:
This is the location of the fuel tanks; perhaps the fuel pipelines were rerouted
Click to expand...
Why would they do that? Did they had to reinforce the wing to carry more load? Why didn’t they add MAWs to these birds it seems like a needed feature for an attack airplane
 
Or they increased survivability by removing the pipelines from the leading edge of the wing

The Kh‑31 is part of the Su‑34’s armament from the outset. Currently, the Su‑35S is engaged in countering enemy radar systems, while the Su‑34 flies with glide bombs.
 

Attachments

  • 3440.gif
    3440.gif
    528.6 KB · Views: 65
Last edited:
Life of Tyo said:
Likely Fire on Su-27M ???
Click to expand...

I'm talking about Su-35S (T-10BM).

Ainen said:
I meant, flight trials with captive mockup mean little in RU practice until you see equipment in operational couple. Su-34 was specifically ordered(and financed) to have this integration.
Through the entire war we saw lots of su-35s kh-59m strikes. But all identified kh-35u ones came from su-34.
Click to expand...

Doubt the Su-34 has been specifically ordered for that. That Su-34s are primarily used as delivery platform, doesn't mean that it's the only platform capable of it and I wouldn't necessarily bet on the Su-34 being the only Kh-35 shooter we only see a tiny fraction of the footage from the actual operations. Su-35 is not the only Kh-31P capable platform, but footage typically shows Su-35S performing the SEAD role. Ofcourse plain footage from test flights isn't a hard proof of a weapon fitted being actually fielded, but in this case I'd consider it likely as the weapon has been tested, has been repeatedly associated with the Su-35 in official public materials and both aircraft and weapon are operational.
 
Last edited:
Wotan said:
From the point of view of RCS reduction measures, the Su-35 and it`s family have a fatal design flaw: the turbines blades are exposed when watched from the front.
Click to expand...
I can't find the image, but actually, a grille could be installed at the expense of air intake volume to deflect radar waves entering the air intake.

Also, I remember hearing that the Su-35S uses a series of measures to keep its RCS around 3.
 
Ainen said:
Entirely different base and development path.
But, per my understanding, structurally and RCS-wise j-16 is rather basic (su-30mkk/j-11bs mix), despite the generous use of composite skin and stabilizers (area where China pulled ahead of USSR alre in mid 1980s).

I haven't been at zhuhai 2024 so I can't tell for sure, but my current impression is that first Chinese flanker with deep rcs treatment is j-15b.
Click to expand...
Chinese surface-to-air missile forces have discovered that the RCS (Radar Cross Section) of the J-11 and J-16 is roughly on the same order of magnitude.

Furthermore, the RCS of the J-20 is much lower, approaching its noise level.

“歼-16、歼-11B飞机目标回波在P显上显示状态基本一致，也可连续保障。歼-20飞机目标发现距离近,回波不连续.波宽较窄，在保障过程中存在着一次信号不连续的现象.”

“The target echoes of the J-16 and J-11B aircraft appear essentially consistent in their display state on the P-scope, and can also be continuously supported. For the J-20 aircraft, the target detection range is short, the echoes are discontinuous, and the echo width is relatively narrow. During support operations, there is an instance of intermittent signal occurrence.”

A narrower beamwidth on a P-scope means a lower echo rate = smaller RCS.
 

Attachments

  • Image_1788542956511_945.jpg
    Image_1788542956511_945.jpg
    62.8 KB · Views: 18

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom