MarcellogoHere is a snap from Sputnik .. Posting picture of Su 34 with Kh 29, but the Pic is from MAKS 2015
http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20151004/1027991355/russian-aviation-syria-kh-29l-missile.html
Original photo from : http://anashina.com/maks-2015/
NOT.
Two Kh-31 and a Kh-59M.
Just a or better two completely different league of weapons.
MarcellogoBut why would you carry 500 kg bombs with a CAS plane if you have tactical bombers at your disposal?
I highly doubt that you can be precise enough with dumb bombs from 6000 m altitude. Weren’t there videos showing dumb bombs hitting way off the mark? I suppose these are the Gefest upgraded Su-24M2’s which should be much more precise with dumb ordnance, but I’d imagine it was envisaged to be used for low altitude release (e.g. one of the advertised features was that the airplane can now maneuver while closing to the target before release without jeopardizing the release calculations) whether direct or even toss.
There’s nothing subjective about any of this – it’s a no-brainer since the SMT is a poor man’s upgrade of the plain MiG-29 (compared to e.g. the newer M/M2) and since they didn’t go for the bigger wing developed for the M/K series (with two additional heavy pylon points) is of very limited use as a multi-role fighter. It’s more like an interim solution to keep the fighter numbers up before some true replacement is procured (it remains to be seen what that would be in the end – there are resurgent rumors that a new lightweight fighter is being developed by MiG).
6000 mtrs? SU-25 can’t even reach such a quote, almost when carrying weapons!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-25
Also SU-24 get rid of their variable intakes ramp so cutting their own maximum speed from 2.1 mach to 1.35 and max altitude to 11000 mtrs in order to increase performance at low altitude.
They are simply not designed to operate from such quotes.
CAS is not about just bombing more or less precisely, is about staying close to fighting troops and support them from air.
You can perform this kind of mission regardless from the the kind of ordnance you carry.
It can also happen (and it was the case of our AMX in AFG) to perform it even with all the weapon on board, gun included, depleted, just by making passes to scare Talibs and make them duck down while others assets (Mangustas and F/A-18) would come.
Deep Strike planes was instead designed to fly almost Nap of Heart at high speed so to avoid AD radar detection.
Mass introduction of airborne look down/shoot down radar and later on of Jdam bomb changed radically this approach in favor of high quote bombing, but given the Syrian scenario they can still work almost perfectly in the way they was designed for.
Although both this specialized attack planes are designed for operating at low altitude, there are still important differences between them given that the CAS ones are intended to operate quite close to their bases and to stay on target for a long time at low speed while the Deep Striker are just designed to do just the opposite: hitting distant targets after a very low altitude cruise at high speed and run away immediately.
MarcellogoI am well aware of what Su-24/25 is and its capabilities. You are totally missing both my point the original post I’ve answered:
To summarize, I’ve said, bringing in air-to-air *only* types like Su-27 or MiG-31 would upset US and regional players like Turkey and Israel among others, which Russia doesn’t need, or may not even afford right now.
So in this case Su-30SM, which can be readily identified as Russian, is the best choice for reinforcing the current Russian expedition. Got it?
Happy to hear it, you have to excuse me, it is the problem of intervening in a thread discussion, you read just the latest posts and so miss the beginning of it.
Su-30SM has also the advantage of having greater ECM and networkcentric capabilities, so they can with all probabilities offer a multiple kind of support in just one platform.
Obviously this is just one more good reason to deploy them in the first phases of an intervention, not contradicting ANY of the good thing you said.
MarcellogoBS, terrorists already have the most modern MANPADs in Syria like Igla-S from Libya, Stingers, Strelas and Chinese MANPADs from Gulf Arab states. With what you think they shot down Syrian jets and helicopters? Russian jets fly too high that they could reach them.
And THIS is the real advantage of using JDAM type bombs instead that unguided ones, more than the greater precision itself : you can drop it from 15000 mts and hit at almost the same precision of conventional ones at 150mts.
So you get rid not only of MANPADS but also of almost all the SHORADS systems, no matter of how much advanced they are.
Knowing that Russian turned their own latest ones in a sort of land based CIWS, aiming more toward striking the arrows than the archer itself.
MarcellogoSo does MiG-25, including virtually all Russian aircraft. Question is to what extent? I find MiG-29 to be several times more suitable.
I am pretty curious about the exact action Russians are planning. Surely mere bombing of a few camps and trucks will not win them this war.
Su-24 & -25 are IIIgen specialized strike planes, respectively for Deep Strike and CAS, so they are the best for their respective roles, above all if you are using conventional weaponry and not JDAM ones (so also to get rid of gergal terms like dumb.or all encompassing term like PGM).
Multirole fighters are instead basically A2A planes able, usually with an extensive use of said JDAM, to cover also the role of the old IIIgen generic/BAI attack planes, like SU-17, Jaguar, A-7 or Jastreb/Orao.
So, given that SyAAF just have the latter in good numbers but only an handful of Su-24, Russia has send this more capable workhorses + an handful of more modern Flankers and Fullbacks for when the high tech stuff are really needed.
Mig-29 would instead be good in a future perspective of a permanent deployment in Syrian or Iraqi territory, after rebellion would be hopefully crashed.
MarcellogoI’m not so sure that 0.57 was correctly derived. The only official information I’ve read says that 57% of the air goes through the bypass stream (KeyPubs F-35 Special 2014, page 34). Now that equates to a BPR of 57/43 not 0.57.
It would so be >1 bypass ratio, something quite uncommon.
As far I know only Mig-31 have such type of turbofans.
MarcellogoPutin says there will be no Russian air strikes unless approved by the UN in other words approved by America.
Just arrived:
The upper chamber of the #Russian parliament has unanimously given a formal consent to President #Putin to use the nation’s military in #Syria to fight #terrorism at a request from the #Syrian President Bashar #Assad.
Consent was necessary for deployment of troops for foreign combat missions under the Russian constitution.
The request for use of force was sent by the president after considering the large number of citizens of #Russia and neighboring countries, who went to join terrorist groups fighting in Syria, head of the presidential administration Sergey #Ivanov told media. There are thousands of them, and Russia’s national security would be under threat, should they return home, he added.
“This is not about reaching for some foreign policy goals, satisfying ambitions, which our Western partners regularly accuse us of. It’s only about the national interest of the #Russian Federation,” the official said.
Ivanov stressed that no ground operations are planned in Syria. Russia would use its warplanes to hit terrorist targets when requested by the Syrian government. He stressed that unlike the #US-led coalition of countries that bombs militant troops in Syria, Russia was invited to do so by the legal authorities of Syria and thus follows international law.
“The military goal of the operation is strictly to provide air support for the [Syrian] government forces in their fight against Islamic State,” he said.
The bombing campaign is time-limited, Ivanov said, not revealing a clear deadline for it. He said he was not authorized to disclose details of the operation such as the number of warplanes involved.
“All our partners and allies will be informed about our decision today through corresponding military channels. Specific military information will be provided as well, I believe,” he concluded.
Previously, Russia provided the Syrian government with advanced weapons and military instructors to teach the Syrians how to use them.
MarcellogoIt’s more like:
Assad government
Moderate Rebels
Terrorist Faction 1
.
.
.
.
Terrorist Faction 99
ISIS
More like:
Russia
Iran
Pasdarans
Al Quds Force
Hezbollah
NDF
SyAAF
SAA
Baath party
Assad government
The rest like in the original
Marcellogo[QUOTE=Captain Ouuf;2260873]So Russia don’t need American approval to bomb jihadists?[/QUOTE
I must have been away for a while.
When exactly the Almighty is dead and the USA have taken His/Her/Its place?:confused::confused:
MarcellogoInner bays of the PAK-FA are quite good, above all if compared with the f-22 ones.
Still with a little more effort and the availability of new materials and of the izdelye-30 there is still a lot of possibilities to enhance it.
An additional sidebay or also the reshaping of the existing one to carry medium range missiles would allow to use the main ones for carring a full A2G load and still being able to defend itself against BVR menaces.
MarcellogoJust as Russian troops are not in the Ukraine.
Or british/US troops for that matter.
Nic
May I ask you to give another read to this old classic before posting such comments?:eagerness:
http://www.amazon.it/Il-principe-Niccol%C3%B2-Machiavelli/dp/8818018973
MarcellogoYes, I do.. Frankly speaking, the design of the F-35 proves complete ignorance of the LM towards the needs to Euro NATO users.
They will reward this ignorance by reduced procurement numbers.. There is no way around it..
I’ve to disagree with this one, as far as we refer to the two main european customers.
In a certain sense F-35 suits their needs WAAY better than the US ones.
UK would take them as substitutes for Harriers, so no big deal as ANYTHING would perform better than those hokums.
Italy, apart the MMI’s AV-8+, for which the former also appy, will use them to replace Tornado and AMX in AMI i.e. a specialized Deep strike and a CAS/BAI plane.
AND the F-35s are precisely this: Strike and CAS/BAI planes of 5th generation. Albeit more similar to Jaguar, Su-17 or Orao that to these two to say it all.
Until they are used as so , there are few problems, it is instead the pretension of them being truly able to cover all the others roles that is under heavy criticism.
MarcellogoJust to note that the journalist claims that this information is coming from the Syrian regime media. Since he’s not in Syria, it’s basically hear-say information only. I’m not saying that it’s not true, just that the linked article is just an opinion peace.
Journalist is
Hassan Haidar Diab, the first western correspondent to enter in reconquered Al Qusair, enough as a credential?
MarcellogoTo put some sense in this bickering, I had read on a non-english newspaper that Syria has closed its own aerospace to civilian flight for one day to allow the low pass of those formations over Homs in order to raise morale of population.
Now, I can’t find the news anymore on the site, i’ll try further but if someone other can crosscheck the fact it would explain the apparent oddity of such a move.
Found it.
http://www.vecernji.hr/svijet/assad-zestoko-po-sredistu-kalifata-uz-putinovu-pomoc-1026335
It is at end of page, so to ease use of translator.
And it also have a precise confirmation about what CNN said.
MarcellogoI was referring to Su-27 with the first part. The F-22 has a higher TWR compared to all variants of the Su-27 incl. the Su-35S (assuming the same fuel fraction). If we go with public figures (which I’m very sceptical about), the F-15 has a greater g-limit in at a specific speed and altitude (its roughly achieves corner velocity there). But across a broader span of flight regimes, I don’t see it keeping up with the F-22 with its lower effective wing loading (body-lift) and TVC.
Anecdotal, but comes from the other side – Ex. Taufan: Turning and burning with the best. Most other accounts of BFM against the F-22 run on a similar theme.
The Rafale/Su-30 can perhaps match it in the subsonic region, F-15 in the transonic and the F-16/EF would come close when flying Mach 1.2+. But as a whole, its only peer will be the PAK FA.
Your thrust to weight ratio extimation doesn’t take into consideration S-shaped duct, box shaped exhaust and fixed air intakes.
There is a reason no other 5-gen plane in testing or development, even western ones doesn’t even try to replicate those features and generally speaking the idea of a 360° sthealth effectiveness.
It simply cost too much in terms of performances and has no more (if even had) the tactical usefulness it was intended to.
Sign In
