Why, when heavier, bigger and the same engines?!

The Su-30MK carried a mere weaponsload of ~700 kg hi-hi-hi!!!!!
The same Su-30MK with ~700 kg lo-lo-lo is down to 1270 km or 686 nm distance in total.
We keep in mind, that the total distance flown is never the max possible to target, by cutting it into half for obvious reasons.
A mission is not flown in a strait-line all the way and as a single ship most of the time. In a pair/formation the second one/others has/have up to 5-10% higher fuel-consumption to keep station/formation.
So in a limited A/A configuration a Su-30MK in hi-hi-hi can go for < 750 nm or < 300 nm in lo-lo-lo.
The max weaponsload for the Su-34 in MTOW is ~ 8000 kg.
When it reaches an AR of 600 nm with 4000 kg in a hi-hi-hi without IFR it is still good. Low-low-low and the same conditions it down to ~300 nm AR.

http://www.sukhoi.org/planes/military/su32/lth/

See low-level flight distance of 1100 km given by Sukhoi, well below of Su-30MK!

The figures given by Sukhoi do not include external fuel tanks, and do not mention the warload carried by the Su-34 when it has a range of 2200km, we can speculate if it is 4000kg or 3000kg but basicly in ferry range it is 4000km and operational range is 2200km, if fully loaded flies 2200km and only fuelled and without weapons flies 4000km we can expect something decent for the Su-34.

Up to what i have read the Su-34 carries up to 12 tonns of internal fuel or 19 tonns with external fuel tanks and 8 tonns of weapons, its empty weight must be around 18 tonns, also i have read it has a range of 7000km with inflight refuelling
МАССЫ И НАГРУЗКИ , кг: нормальная взлетная 42 000, максимальная взлетная 44 360, топлива во внутренних баках 12 100, топлива с учетом ПТБ 19 300. Боевая нагрузка на внешних узлах подвески: нормальная 4000, максимальная 8000.
http://www.aviaport.ru/directory/aviation/468.html

No,more F-15E for USAF?!

Moseley turns down buying F-15s

Wanna buy a new F-15E Strike Eagle?

Maybe some would, but not the Air Force.

During a March 21 hearing on Capitol Hill, Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley was asked by Sen. Kit Bond, R.-Mo., if the Air Force wanted F-15Es to beef up the service’s fighter numbers. Bond’s home state, Missouri, is home to the Boeing Co. plant that is currently building variants of the F-15E to sell for foreign countries.

Moseley, an F-15 pilot, diplomatically turned down the idea.

“That airplane, as much as I love it, is not as survivable,” Moseley said, comparing the Eagle to the new fighters.

Only the F-22A and F-35 allow the Air Force to stay ahead of improving anti-aircraft missiles and fighters, Moseley said.

Air Force officials also don’t believe buying F-15Es would be much cheaper than buying a similar number of F-35s. The Air Force estimated it would cost $670 million to buy six F-15Es configured to the service’s specifications.

The F-22A has a “fly away” cost of about $132 million each, according to the Air Force.

If the development costs of the Raptor are included, the cost is more than $300 million each.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/03/airforce_f15e_eagle_070323/

thanks tango i really like this tread

Max range is going to be computed with no weapons and at best range speed, which isn’t going to be the maximum cruise speed. So it might be able to get 8000km, but that’s going to be with multiple IFR hookups.

SOC

You are supposing things, niether me or you can calculate range based upon preferences you trying to claim its range is shorter, me, trying to prove it has a long range, the figures given by NAPO says 4000km, the figures stated in the vast majority of russian news weapons outlets say 4000km, also it does not say ferry range or something similar, it simply says max range wth internal fuel, the Su-34 in order to be able to compete with the Tu-22M must have a range in the order of 4000km yes it is true, 4000km because the Tu-22M has a max range of 4400km

With a weaponsload the effective strike radius of the Su-34 is ~ 600 nm in hi-hi-hi profile and ~330 nm in lo-lo-lo profile.
With one top-up it goes ~ 900 nm in hi-hi-hi profile.
The other claims about the Su-34 are wild guesses at best.
Why do you not question your Russian sources about that?! It is not my task to hand it to you on a “silver dish”.

Sens

What do you think if we ask NAPO? well here is the answer

Максимальная дальность полета (с внутренним запасом топлива)
4000 км

Практический потолок
15 км

Максимальная продолжительность полета с дозаправкой в воздухе
10 час

It says

Max range with internal fuel capacity 4000 km
Practical ceiling 15 km
Max flight endurance with air to air refueling 10 Hrs

See that it is obvious 10 hrs at least means a cruise speed of 900km/h calculate its flight range with an air to air refueling;)

http://www.napo.ru/index.php?id=96

The Su-34 strait-line inlets give an excellent view on the frontal area of the engines. No S-duct like the modern European and American counter-parts and not even to speak about true stealth aircraft. Even with excessive RAM-coating it behaves like a light-house some way.
No real problem for a low-level intruder against an dated AD with single digit SAMs, but very well against the double digit ones, just to give an idea.
Despite their sleek lines and a high content of composites, from other aspects the Su-34 will show-up easily too. The Russuians are aware about the shortcomings very well. To enhance the endangered survival capability of the Su-34 the W005 radar in the stinger has to be introduced. But what a pity, it is still not available to be built in. Both series Su-34 are without and still have to wait some years to get it really. When a Tornado, Rafale or EF are vulnerable to be spotted by an AWACs, even at low level, the crew of a those can be shure that most AWACs above are friendly ones most of the time.
So far I can not see customers queing for the Su-34 alias Su-32FN/FM. It is big and it is cheap. A lot of aircraft by that. So what is wrong with the Su-34?! The people in several AFs around are no idiots, when not picking up the Su-34 as first choice and even the Russians do hesitate to do so. –
The Russians had learned it the hard way, when they rushed the Tu-160 into service. Now it takes several years to rework ~ 15 to a common standard to use it as a force. Something similar had happened with the MiG-31. But that goes far behind this topic. Problems and failures are not limited to the West.

Sens

The Su-34 has a range of 2000km without external fuel tanks, this makes it at least capable to replace the Tu-22M in some missions
Бомбардировщик имеет радиус действия до 2000 километров без подвесных баков и дозаправки, что позволяет ему при необходимости выполнять задачи дальней авиации

Has a rear facing radar that allows firing rearwards R-73s so basicly the Su-34 has an AMRAAM or Python V weapon system

Бомбардировщик имеет уникальное бортовое радиоэлектронное оборудование, включающее в себя радар заднего обзора, который не только позволяет обнаруживать воздушные цели «за хвостом», но и атаковать их с помощью ракет, не тратя времени на дополнительное маневрирование

Source
http://lenta.ru/news/2006/05/18/su/
Here they go as far as to claim the SU-34 has a RCS as small as a cruise missile, this has been a common claim, they even go as far as to say more stealthy than the american stealth program
Секрет невидимости элегантной машины стоимостью миллиард рублей на первый взгляд прост: “сушка” очень удачно окрашена – голубые и бирюзовые оттенки неправильных овалов. Но на самом деле этот самолет – трудная цель не только для человеческих глаз, но и для радаров. В режиме следования рельефу местности на экране РЛС он дает отметку, сопоставимую с отметкой от крылатой ракеты. То есть превращается почти в невидимку, даже менее заметную, чем американский “стелс”.

Remember the Russians did experiment with plasma stealth and RAM coatings.
http://www.rg.ru/2006/03/27/su-34.html

Another important thing to remember the Su-34 is only a USD $ 30 million dollars machine has a really low price tag and the Russians expect to build around 300 of this aircraft

По сведениям из ряда источников, в общей сложности Министерство обороны планирует в течение ближайших 15 лет приобрести не менее 300 самолетов этого типа,

source

http://lenta.ru/news/2006/12/14/su/

By the way sens how do you know they rear radar is not available? any russian source please would be welcome.
But as far as it is written the Su-34 is equipped operationally with a rear radar.

Flogger. I take it that you actually read AFM? You are aware that the Israeli’s retired the Peace Jack RF-4E (S) and all the airframes were accountable for? How did they manage to do that? You are aware what a Peace Jack Phantom is, I take it? If you had read the thread then you would have seen that.

Now if that article had been responsible in posting accurate data then it would have also contained reference to the retirement ceremony of the Peace Jacks in Israeli service.

How are the ‘Evil Zionists’ covering up the loss of an RF-4E(S) Peace Jack ?

http://www.thephantomshrine.co.uk/menu.htm

’12-05-2004 – 201 Sqn Israeli Defence Force/Air Force ceases F-4 Kurnass operations. 119 Sqn ceases ops in 2003. A/C 498 RF-4E(S) handed over to IAF Museum. 492 and 499 stored at Ovda AFB (Source AFM)’

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/1969.html

‘7567 converted to RF-4E(S) and to Israeli AF as 498.
WFU May 12, 2004 and to Israeli AF Museum at Hatzerim

7570 converted to RF-4E(S) and to israeli AF as 492.
WFU May 12, 2004 and stored at Ovda AB

7576 was diverted to General Dynamics for its F-4X project, then to F-4E(S) project. Also have this being convertedd to RF-4E(S) and to Israeli AF as 499.
WFU May 12, 2004 and stored at Ovda AB.’

TEEJ

Remember the article i gave is written by RUSSIAN JEWS, they have a picture of Gil Fogel, when he was realesed and they are quoting an Israeli Air force magazine and Air international, also they say Israel acknowledges the lost of two F-4s in 1982, one in June and another in October of 1982, they mentioned very likely it was an RF-4E, of course you think because the link it is in russian, you automatically think it is anti Israeli, but not it is written mostly by Russian jews.

There has to be a replacement of the Su-27 from the 70s at all. If it can cope in all areas is of secondary importance. For me it looks like a bigger Typhoon with similar capabilities at first.
The problems with the Su-34 showed that the Russians have real problems to bring a design from the 80s into service. The break-down of the SU and the resulting gap from that will be felt for some time to come.
We keep in mind that even the USA has not the money to field the F-22 in numbers or the F-35 alone. And not all integration-work for the F-22 is done till today and has to be done during service time to stretch limited funds related to that.
All that in mind someone exspects, the Russia can do that with less time and less money. When it comes to high-tech and related software and do not believe in miracles. For national feelings Russia is strechting the truth about real capabilities close to cheating.
The first two Su-34 presented as series example are a good example about that. 02 was not even fully equipped and had to stay another half year at NAPO for completion in summer 2007. When 01 has to do integration work. Not all main equipment is installed so far and is still not available or even mission ready before 2010. When all goes well, the first regiment with 20 Su-34 will work-up from 2010. For 2015 no more than 58 Su-34 in total are to be seen in GPW-2015. Just a mere 8 Su-34 per year and much less than the demand of the AF for 200 till 2020 to equip 10 regiments with that. The series Su-34 still has the old AL-31F.

Your analisys is a correct one Russia is buying weapons in very small quantities, a few Su-34, Mi-28 and Yak-130 a year and one or two Tu-160 every few years.

That is correct at the Current pace Russia is buying few new aircraft a year, however the PAK FA is expected to start deploment in 7 years from now and by 2020 it is expected few will be operational, that are the current Russian expectations.

If every goes accordingly, the Indian and Russian air forces by 2020 will be equipped with PAK FAs, it means in 15 years time that is not exactly many years after the F-22 and F-35.

Consider that the Su-34 is a unique aircraft and the Ya-130 a new generation trainer, Russia at this moment is like England and the US are, finding new partners to finance new projects, India has been the lucky partner to share the PAK FA development costs, so we can expect the Indians will field PAK FAs too.

The Su-34 is not exactly an old aircraft it is in the class of the Eurofighter and Rafale

The MiG-25 was meant an an interceptor for the Blackbird. And unless it got very lucky, it was not able to shoot one down. Apart of that, it was not a dogfighter, not did it have ant decent ground attack capabilities. So, apart of the speed edge over a Phantom or an Eagle, where was it superior?

As for the Flanker & Fulcrum, I think you misread what Tinwing posted. The Eagle & Tomcat entered service in the mid-80’s. The Flanker, which you could see as the direct opponent, entered service in the Mid80’s, because of all the trouble the prototypes had. They became very good planes (at least for the Flanker), but during the cold war, they sure could not compete.

As for Chinese cars… They tried introducing one here. In case of an accident (not even at high speeds), the driver had very high probabilities to die from its injuries. Tells a lot about the qualities that manufacturing :diablo:

No i am not misreading TINWING, he meant the MiG-25 as you also claim that the MiG-25 was not good that is not accurate, the MiG-25 was a good interceptor and perhaps you might not know it but the MiG-25 got missile locks on the SR-71, they never fired their missiles because the SR-71 never violated soviet air space when MiG-25s were present, when the MiG-31 were deployed the SR-71 stayed away from those areas patrolled by the MiG-31s.

Theroretically the MiG-25 can shoot down the SR-71 specailly considering the MiG-25 was much more numerous than the SR-71 and could outnumber it easily but also remember the MiG-25 was replaced by the more capable MiG-31.