• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Su-32FN and anti submarine role

Ronny

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
474
Reaction score
240
I heard that there is a Su-32 version that can take part in anti submarine mission. Rumor being told that it is equipped with a Magnetic Anomaly Detector and can carry 72 sonobuoys. But I have never seen any image of it, even the concept image. Does anyone have any photo of this su-32 version?
The Su-32FN Fullback Maritime Patrol/Strike Fighter


The Su-32FN is a unique maritime patrol, Anti-Submarine Warfare and maritime strike derivative of the T-10V design, designed to perform littoral and coastal maritime roles. The inclusion of an ASW capability in this aircraft created much debate during the 1990s, as this role in the West has traditionally fallen on specialised airliner derived airframes. The Soviet LRMP fleet comprised variants of the Tu-142M Bear F and Il-38 May, derived from the Il-18 Coot airliner.

To understand the reasoning behind an ASW equipped strike fighter it is necessary to explore latter Cold War Soviet maritime doctrine, and the concurrent US Navy maritime strategy. During this period the Soviets envisaged their ballistic missile armed SSBN fleet operating in bastions near to Murmansk/Polyarnyy and Vladivostok, and other fleet elements defending the Baltic and Black Sea ports. In the event of a full scale war with the West, the bastions, Baltic and Black Sea would be the hunting ground for US Navy and Royal Navy SSNs, while the airspace would be actively contested by F-14s from US CVBGs and land based US Air Force F-15 sweeps. This is an environment which is not conducive to the longevity of LRMP turboprops like the Bear and May. This presented the Soviets with genuine issues in performing maritime patrol and ASW tasks and a highly survivable airframe was a must. As the bastions and approaches to Baltic and Black Sea ports were close to existing land bases, a large strike fighter could provide credible on station endurance, where the station was perhaps 30 minutes of flying time from a runway. While a four hour on station endurance may be modest compared to a turboprop LRMP airframe, proximity to relief aircraft waiting to launch still makes this a viable concept.

The result of these pressures was the Su-32FN, devised for the AV-MF to absorb the roles of the AV-MF Su-24 Fencer regiments, and include the 'new' ASW role. It is essentially a supersonic, highly survivable land based equivalent to the Lockheed S-3 Viking.

The principal deviation from the baseline Su-32MF/34 was to be the addition of the 'Morskaya Zmyeya' (Sea Snake) maritime patrol avionic suite, since then to be fitted in the reported to be collapsed Indian Navy Bear F avionic upgrade, and a suite of maritime strike and ASW weapons. The suite is claimed to include an Electronic Support Measures receiver and Magnetic Anomaly Detector.

For 'classical' maritime strike roles, the Su-32FN is to be armed with up to six Kh-31A or Kh-31R ASMs, six Kh-35U ASMs, up to three Kh-59M/D stand-off missiles, the potent supersonic Kh-41 Moskit (Sunburn) and 3M-54 Alfa supersonic ASMs.

Photographs indicate that the centreline adaptor for the Kh-41, developed for the Su-33, would be reused, although one mid 1990s report claimed carriage of two rounds on wing stations. Original Alfa missile mockups were also photographed on the inboard wing stations, this missile has since evolved into the 3M-54/3M-14E (SS-N-27) Club series.

The more interesting stores are lightweight ASW torpedoes, carried in pairs on stations 8 and 9, for a total of 4 rounds, and a conformal centreline pod which can be loaded with up to 72 sonobuoys of various types. An ASW patrol weapons mix would probably involve a mix of these stores, drop tanks and depth charges.
 

GARGEAN

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
624
Reaction score
310
I like how almost none of missiles listed in author's infographic are fielded or even real.
 

FighterJock

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,847
Reaction score
648
Wasn't the Su-32 designation further used by Sukhoi for export purposes? And to date no orders have been forth coming, which is a shame.
 

GARGEAN

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
624
Reaction score
310
And to date no orders have been forth coming, which is a shame.
A little bit too specialized plane. Most foreigh customers are looking for air policing first and ground pounding second. And despite Su-34 being more than capable to do proper aircombat, Su-30 in current kitform is still better for that.
 

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
665
Reaction score
994
And to date no orders have been forth coming, which is a shame.
A little bit too specialized plane. Most foreigh customers are looking for air policing first and ground pounding second. And despite Su-34 being more than capable to do proper aircombat, Su-30 in current kitform is still better for that.

I remember there was a saying.. its easy to make a fighter a ground pounder than the other way around.

capabilities aside, which would have the cheaper operating costs? the Su-34 or the Su-30?
 

Similar threads

Top