Flanker
Generally analogous to the F-15A/C Eagle, the Flanker is a heavyweight air-superiority fighter. First introduced in the 1980s the Flanker was only in service in rather modest numbers at the fall of the USSR, and many of them ended up in former USSR air forces, particularly Ukraine. Despite this, the Flanker became the backbone of the Russian Air Force and is seen by many as something of a design marvel.

Sukhoi developed a number of versions, now separated as Su-27, Su-30 and Su-35. The Su-27 is essentially an air-combat only version and the mainstay of the Russian Air Force’s Flanker fleet. The Su-30 an improved longer ranged air defence version with additionally improved strike capabilities, and lastly the Su-35 with generally upgraded capabilities across the board.

Although Russia operates a small number of Su-30s, it has left the long-ranged air defence niche to the MiG-31. The Su-30 is an evolution of the Su-27 family principally with greater endurance and a two-man crew to help cope with long range air defence missions. The aircraft’s air-ground capabilities were also improved although this is less of a factor for Russian Air Force.

The Flanker family has been a significant export success and for the first time since WW2, export variants are of equal or superior combat capability than those in operation with Russia’s own air force. Whilst Sukhoi was wowing air show crowds and foreign defence officials with its canard equipped 3-D thrust vectoring versions, the Russian Air Force did not purchase these enhanced versions. Consequently, although upgraded, the backbone of the Flanker fleet remains basic Su-27 versions.

Russia has ordered a relatively small number (48) of Su-35BM fighters to enter service over the next few years. In terms of combat capability, this is essentially an avionics improvement, with the Su-35BM, like the regular Su-27s in service, lacking the canards and thrust-vectoring many spectators expected.

The Flankers are deployed to offer the primary means of air-superiority covering the whole Western border adjacent to NATO-dominated Europe, and also in the Far East supplementing the Foxhounds covering technologically advanced and well equipped Japan and South Korea. No Flankers are normally deployed within range of Alaskan air space, which is guarded by USAF F-22s.

Foxhound
Although based on the famous MiG-25 Foxbat interceptor, the Foxhound is closer in role to the older subsonic Tu-28 Fiddler and Yak-28 Firebar heavy fighters it replaced in the long-range intercept and patrol role. Like those aircraft, it is massive, and although suited to long endurance and high speed stand-off intercept, it is correspondingly weak at close range combat. In Western parlance it could be seen as the land-based equivalent to the Gruman F-14 Tomcat, or a much larger Tornado F3.

The original weapons fit for the Foxhound was 4 AA-9 AMOS active radar homing missiles (similar to US Phoenix, maximum range an impressive 160km) under the fuselage and two IR guided AA-6 Acrid missiles inherited from the Foxbat (maximum range 50km) on the inner wing stations. The Foxhound can also carry twin AA-8 Aphid short ranged missiles on the inner wing pylons in place of the Acrid. Because the Acrid and Aphid are generally obsolete, some of the Foxhound fleet have been modernized to carry AA-11 Archer IR guided missile and AA-12 Adder medium range radar guided missiles, greatly increasing potency. Acrid is still deployed operationally on the Foxhound fleet however. The Foxhound can also carry outer wing pylons but these are rarely seen.

In current Russian Air Force service Foxhounds are concentrated at just six air bases.

The outer rings are 1200km from the bases an represent to typical combat radius without in-flight refueling. The inner rings represent the approximate combat radius for a quick-reaction supersonic intercept at around Mach 2.3.

Fulcrum
Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the MiG-29 Fulcrum fleet has been the most neglected of the three fighter types retained in service, clearly not favored by the Russian Air Force compared to the Flanker. The Foxhound too received funds for modernization and maintenance before the ailing Fulcrum fleet which consequently suffered a series of accidents and was grounded for part of the last few years. Finally funds for some degree of modernization materialized and some MiG-29s have been upgraded, and a limited number of more capable MiG-29SMTs have been inducted into service. The MiG-29SMT deal is actually controversial as 28 of Russia’s SMTs were originally destined for the Algerian Air Force who rejected the airframes on quality issues and rescinded the contract. Total upgrades to SMT standard in Russian Air Force are estimated at between 150 and 178 depending on whether the Algerian aircraft add to the original planned number or not. As of early 2010 about 40 SMTs seems realistic.

The Fulcrum is deployed principle in the Central-eastern and Southern-European areas, with just one base in the Far East facing China. The relatively short operational radius of the jet is a key factor in its usefulness following the collapse of the Soviet Union, with a war in Central Europe now unlikely. The SMT model has significantly better range but still no comparison to the Flanker and Foxhound. Fulcrum is not deployed to the key strategic areas of the Kola Peninsula (extreme north-west of Russia adjacent to Norway/Finland and a key naval area) or Vladivostok in the Far East. In both cases Flankers and Foxhounds are based there.

Air Defence black hole?
When the practical engagement envelopes of all operational SAM and Fighter bases are plotted together, there remains a massive portion of Siberia with no viable coverage:

There are some hardened airstrips in Siberia which fighters could be forward deployed to eliminate this gap but there does not appear to be any history of routine deployment in this manner and the air strips/air ports in question have limited military infrastructure.

The situation remains similar when known long-range air surveillance radars are plotted:

Thanks for the discussion guys, this has been veryuseful!

Planeman,

Nice job (again!). Now if we could compare this to the russian GBAD/SAM coverage, that would make a more complete picture. I believe SOC had done something to that effect. For all you know, where there are fighter coverage gaps, you may have S-300 types crawling all over the place.

USS>

Well of course that’s exactly what I’m doing :):):)

I just found it odd that there were no RuAF fighter bases up north covering, at the minimum, the area opposite NW Alaska. So I pre-posted before the Bluffer’s Guide to confirm I’m not missing some obvious bases and this is THE forum to ask that question.

Even with SAMs factored in there’s still a huge gap, but you’ll have to wait and see 😉

As for worth defending, what’s the stand-off launch range for B-52/B-1/B-2s? If less than say 80% the quick-reaction intercept range of the fighter bases then that makes sense, but if not….

Plus, there’s literally nothing in that open space that isn’t covered by air power.

Sorry, I’m confused. I think that, unless the Russian’s use IRF or redeploy fighters to more remote air strips, there absolutely is nothing covering that open space (save a few patches of SAMs)

And since only the US would have the capability to go in THAT way, it would be pointless to actually station fighters there.

Isn’t that exactly who they are supposed to be defending against? US has bases in Alaska, adjacent to the NE gap shown.

This deployment pattern is largely inherited from the Soviet era, so it seems it always was like this.