I thought that’s wot the SU-25 was developed for. Similar to the US A-10. Surely the Mig – 27 and Su-22 were designed for battlefield inderdiction, which yes, does include elements of close air support, but is meant to destroy and distrupt enemy (NATO) positions just behind the front line.

The Su-17 and MiG-27 certainly are not slow, they can fly slow and low if required, but they have a sea-level dash capability too; Mach 1.1 clean, or nearly Mach 1 if loaded. They would have born the brunt of interdiction in Europe. The Su-25 Frogfoot was concieved, I believe, to fill a dedicated fixed-wing CAS gap left by the Il-10 Beast.

isnt the Su-27-SM enough of a upgrade to last it till 2015 when Su-27’s service life will run out?

Ah, but yes, who is to say the Su-27 will not live on beyond 2015? I mean look at the F-15 in the USAF. The F-15C, in reduced numbers will be around for quite a while yet, possibly 2020 I think the figure was, and the F-15E is expected to serve for another 20-30 years at least. If the Russians are going to fund a futher FLANKER upgrade over the next few years, why would they then retire them by 2015?

Fair enough PL. http://www.ww2aircraft.net/ and http://www.warbirdpix.com/

🙂

That’s because the Ukraine hasn’t got a shore on the Caspian Sea 🙂 It’s some 300km from the Caspian to the Ukrainian border (closest would be the Mariupol-Taganrog border crossing).

Whoops wrong bit of water! Sorry. I was thinking of the Black Sea with regards to the Ukraine. 😮

Please, call me Glenn. 🙂

Let’s not forget the Italians, while we are at it!

Hungarian 109s! 🙂 🙂