totoroif we handwave some of numerics used in the game there are still some basic issues…
why su-24mp? it hasn’t really been modernized since the cold war. today’s jammer of choice would be su-30/34 with sap-14 pod.
why rvv-ae? it’s early 90s tech at best. why not rvv-sd? While it may not yet have entered ruaf’s service properly, neither has meteor. nor f-35b in british service for that matter.
why use a-50u, but put it whopping 600 km away from the meeting point? (as per available screen caps). while e-3d may have the luxury of staying 600 km away and still be useful against flankers, whoever uses su-35 and a50 and knows he’s going up against low rcs planes – would move those planes far closer if they wanted them to be useful. yes, that way a50 may get killed but it’d at least be useful up until it gets killed. at 600 km away – it doesn’t do squat and one shouldn’t get it airborne at all.
but the far, far, FAR biggest issue is the set up itself where su-35 are basically told to look for f-35, but not the other way around. at least one of su-35 (and in some instances all four) has its radar on, even with awacs support. while almost no scenario variant has f-35 actively looking for non-emitting su-35 and they don’t have radars on at all.
more equal set up would be a two-part scenario, where f-35 are silent and going off to bomb stuff. and su-35 are on cap nearby. then reverse the situation and su35 are silent and going off to bomb stuff and f-35 are on cap nearby. then compare results.
totoroif there is 100 mig35 ordered for ruaf, there will be very little room for pak-fa with all these other su30/35 contracts until 2030s.
on another note – is there any photo of active service ruaf combat aircraft carrying rvv-sd variant (or however it is called within ruaf)?
all these recent su-35 and even pak-fa images that feature r-77 seem to have the 3,6 meter long variant, pointing at old rvv-ae, not the lengthened rvv-sd.
totororuble pricetag. not dollar pricetag. inflation rate over the six years does seem to be close to 10 percent per year, so a 50% increase does seem normal.
as far as i can tell, domestic prices in rubles haven’t really spiked up in russia during the last year, despite the ruble/dollar rollercoaster.
totoroYes, that seems to be the case. Initial contract was perhaps a show of good will by UAC, coming at an discount, really, just to get the plane into active service with a domestic customer, perhaps enticing the export markets. But since 6 years have passed and no export order has been made, UAC seems to be pressing harder with the pricing, trying to recouperate its investment due to the development.
totoroso the ruble price went up 50% in span of 6 years? Even though the initial contract was the period where production line was being worked in and when most planes are at their most expensive point?
Have really all the prices in Russia (milk, bread, average wages, etc) gone up 50% during the same period?
totoroThat seems way too expensive. Old exchange rate from a year ago would suggest thats some 70s million dollars per plane. And thats for domestic customer, one that usually pays for ancillary stuff in separate contracts so the price should be flyaway price. Thats more than usn pays for superhornet.
totoroDoes ruaf pay value added tax to the state when buying planes? (like french armed forces do) or is it exempted? (like us forces’ purchases from us manufacturers are, i think)
totoroA new Su-30SM for Russian AF went for 1.86 bil RUB, which was approx. $47.3 mil at that time. Today it’s less than $33 mil. Given the amount of French and Indian content in the Su-30SM I guess the price in rubles must have gone up.
Su-35S went for 2.1 bil RUB, which was approx $52.1 mil. Today it’s less than $37 mil. No idea if the ruble price is still valid.
Su-34 was valued at 1.25 bil RUB (approx. $31 mil).
but is that price of fly away plane or plane with something else? usaf/usn, ada and/or royal air force for example usually pay for naked, fly away planes and all/most the supporting equipment and spares is contracted separately.
totorohaving two large, intercontinental bombers being produced almost side by side would be just silly.
so i would hope the russian air force leadership is the one pulling the strings here, not the industrial complex and that they know what they’re doing: either the whole tu160 restart is a ruse…. OR the whole pak-da being subsonic large flying wing was a maskirovka. and they really plan to make a 100-ish ton mtow, intermediate range bomber. possibly even as a replacement for tu22m. Though, supersonic tu160 could also be filling the role of tu22m replacement in some way…
totorobut realistically, contract for long lead items must’ve already been signed some time ago and kept secret. otherwise there’d be a pause in production between two orders for ruaf. (unless of course there’s an export buyer signed…)
totoroI’ve taken a look at the figures latest IISS’s military balance publication (2015) says about russian air forces and it’s the first time in years they’ve made some effort to take into account the retirement of the older types of planes. The numbers seem off here and there, and they’re evidently based around middle of 2014 situation (i can’t stress that enough)
but other than that – is the numerical situation concering older soviet legacy airframes more or less correct, having in mind it’s 2014 situation?
naval aviation:
4 mig29k/kub
18 su-33
5 su25ugt
28 su24m
3 su30sm
8 su24mr
18 su27s/ub
air force:
63 tu22m3/mr
62 tu95ms
16 tu160
120 mig29
36 mig29ub/ubt
28 mig29smt
100 mig31b
50 mig31bm
120 su27/ub
100 su24m
50 su24m2
80 su24mr
47 su27sm
14 su27sm3
14 su30m2
15 su30sm
46 su34
25 su35
150 su25
50 su25sm
15 su25ub
or do these figures still include stored aircraft that aren’t flown regularly but are perhaps rotated in and out of service? (legacy mig29 figures seem particulary off, knowing there are perhaps 3 active regiments of mig29, and that’s including the smt planes)
totoroVery fast measurements, using the person seen in image and j15 as size comparison, suggests to me height between 5-7 meters and length 17-23 meters. Wingspan is not really visible since the plane is at an angle, but measuring even this visible foreshortened wingspan gives some 35-45 meters.
totorosu-35 is quoted with 6000 hour airframe lifetime by sukhoi, and that is “a dramatic increase” over su27 in their own words. So what is su-27’s normal lifetime? 4000 hours? over 30 years? and then adding 10 more years should be something like 1330 hours, not 2000 as the news above say. And if 10 year addition IS 2000 hours then the original is supposed to last 6000 hours with the new total being 8000 hours. Which, again, doesn’t mesh with 6000 hrs being a dramatic improvement by su35.
totorobut I also don’t think Su-30M2 is obsolete. I think it’s rather current.
That’d be stretching the definition of “rather current” quite a bit. While it certainly may be competitive to the World’s average, if one wants to compare it with that – it’s far from being competitive with what World’s premier air forces are procuring right now.
So su-30m2 is being procured as we speak for Ruaf. Lets see what is being procured for other strong air forces:
US: F-35, Superhornet.
UK, France: Typhoon, Rafale
China: j10b, j11b
Israel: currently preparing to get f-35, last orders were of F-16I
India: su-30mki, Tejas
India is closest i guess, but even there su30mki should be quite visibly more capable. Only Tejas might be seen as less capable…
Issues i have with su-30m2:
Its airframe is based on su-30 dating from end of Cold war.
Its engines are, performance wise, not much better than initial al-31f. Yes, they have longer life and perhaps better selfdiagnostics but all in all they’re still old Al-31s.
Its weight to thrust ratio is behind the most planes listed above at something like 28 tons / 247 kn of thrust (with 4,5 tons of fuel and 3 tons of ordenance/pylons)
Its range is poor compared to most planes listed above at 3000 km of ferry range. Translating probably into something like 1000ish km hi-hi mission with a few tons of ordenance.
Its radar still has an antenna of very old design, superseded in the West back in the 1980s. The back end of the radar is probably much newer but still – antenna must be holding it back quite a bit.
It has no visible missile approach warning system, as opposed to most other planes on the list.
Of course, in case i’m misinformed on some of these points, please do point it out. And yes, some systems can be replaced with newer variants. But that’s beside the point. Currently they’re what they are. Just as f-22 had older weapons for years, just typhoon lacked/lacks proper air to ground capabilities etc. In theory lots can be modernized. In practice, that’s a process that often takes 10-15 years.
Anyhow, I understand the political need for su-30m2 within ruaf, and as long as their numbers stay at what has been ordered so far it’ll be fine, as ruaf needs some trainers as well. The above lists are written on plane v plane merit, without the broader context. I actually have a bigger beef against su-30sm, which, while more modern than su30m2, still shares a lot of the same issues and, what is worse, does seem to be procured in far larger numbers.
totoroOh, i actually do think there will be another manned combat aircraft. Anglo-french, no less. Twin engined and slightly more fighter oriented f-35 like plane, if you will. All this is just a hunch, of course. But there is really no other option for the European air forces 20-30 years from now. Unless they all want to be buying US planes.
Sign In
