Military Review

Naval Aviation of the Black Sea Fleet has replenished with three Su-24M aircraft

23
Composition aviation Squadron of a separate assault aviation regiment of naval aviation of the Black Sea fleet (Black Sea Fleet) replenished three front-line bombers Su-24M, reports press office Southern Military District.

Aircraft arrived in the Crimea after the completion of the planned factory repair in mainland Russia
- said in a statement

Naval Aviation of the Black Sea Fleet has replenished with three Su-24M aircraft


According to the military, the planes will be upgraded at the facilities of the military unit.

The Su-24М front bomber is intended for delivering missile and bomb strikes in simple and complex meteorological conditions, day and night, including at low altitudes, with targeted destruction of ground and surface targets.

Armament:

- rifle gun
- unmanaged aerial bombing weapons
- unguided aircraft missiles
- air-to-surface and air-radar guided missiles
- air-to-air guided missiles.

The aircraft has 8 suspension points: four ventral, two under the center section, and two - under the wing rotary consoles. The maximum combat load of the Su-24 is 7000 kg. To solve the problems of preparation and selection of species weapons, the on-board weapon control system (LMS) is designed to control the launch (discharge) of aviation weapons and fuses for various aircraft loading options.
Photos used:
http://stat.mil.ru/index.htm
23 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. HEATHER
    HEATHER 16 August 2017 15: 45
    +3
    planes are planned to be upgraded at the facilities of the military unit. Is it like this? PARM? Or is there a plant in the design bureau? I did not understand the news.
    1. mvg
      mvg 16 August 2017 16: 15
      +2
      An article (news) was shamelessly twisted. Like the performance characteristics of the aircraft. But the question is logical. Drying just from the factory, underwent a scheduled repair with modernization. They simply drove to the place of deployment in the Crimea.
    2. Laksamana besar
      Laksamana besar 16 August 2017 17: 05
      0
      There are technical and operational parts at the airbases that can carry out work on modernization / refinement as well.
      1. mvg
        mvg 16 August 2017 17: 27
        +4
        Will they change Avionics? To the level of Su-24M3? Put a new sighting and launch complex? Reflash software for new missiles and adjustable bombs? Do something with a glider? Do not make me laugh. Technicians work there, not engineers and IT specialists.
      2. HEATHER
        HEATHER 16 August 2017 17: 41
        +4
        which can also carry out work on modernization / completion. TECs cannot carry out modernization. Only regulations 12,24,36. On hours-50,100,200.
        1. okko077
          okko077 16 August 2017 21: 31
          +4
          Aircraft SU-24M with AL-21 engines is an absolutely flawed machine, which is not only morally obsolete, but died. Only severe necessity compels us to use these "bridges of the past." And the need is caused by the complete absence of ISA in our VKS and the meager pace of supply of SU-34. Well, at least 30 pcs. can you make the SU-34 per year? It seems that in the General Staff, everyone’s brains are completely frostbitten ... And when will the question of creating a light aircraft for working on the ground be raised?
          1. sailor52
            sailor52 17 August 2017 10: 56
            0
            In service around 180 Su-24 various modifications. Su-34 is a little over 100 ...
            16 Su-34 airplanes are produced per year, including unplanned 2, that is, 5 production years, including 2017 ...
            1. okko077
              okko077 17 August 2017 14: 19
              0
              In mathematics, "2", and in military mathematics, "0".
              180: 16 =?, Or do you think that only 180 such aircraft will be enough for the VKS? !! My opinion needs at least 300 .... And instead of hundreds of SU-17M4 and MIG-27?
              In Syria, the SU-24 and SU-34 are used for other purposes and due to the complete absence of IBA aircraft. It’s good that at least the SU-25 remained.
              Using the SU-34, not to mention the SU-24, to strike at tactical targets is expensive and stupid, you can stay without pants, but there is no other way. It’s a shame, but what can you do - a necessary measure from poverty and stupidity, and some localities are proud of this and consider it an achievement .....
              1. Vlad.by
                Vlad.by 17 August 2017 16: 29
                0
                Those. the American trinity F-16, F15 and F18 with the help of the remnants of A10, and with the tremendous efforts of stealth F22 and, of course, Fy35, the IBA works perfectly. But our Su and Migi, well? And where does the ancient one like the mammoth Su17?
                Regarding tactical goals - what do you command them to hit? And what do you dislike about Su24 and Su34 for these purposes? Expensive? so American is more expensive. And nothing, excavators and hospitals fly to bomb, with funeral processions.
                1. okko077
                  okko077 17 August 2017 18: 26
                  0
                  On the SU-17M4 there is the same Al-21F3 engine as on the Su-24M, only one. And the complex is newer than 24M, but not all-weather, for its tasks. You did not guess with mammoths ... And there is no better plane for Syria .... and for other similar conflicts.
                  It was planned to create a new aircraft with AL-31 and without a rotary console, but the collapse of the Union buried these plans. All Su-17s in Russia were rotten, and now there is not enough aircraft of such a plan ... Su-24s and Su-34s are very expensive to operate, and the first one has an outdated, very uneconomical engine .... and they are designed for other tasks, but this is not for gray townsfolk ....
  2. Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 16 August 2017 16: 24
    0
    Novosibirsk taxis and taxis hi
  3. Msta
    Msta 16 August 2017 17: 25
    +2
    It is necessary to send members of the Ministry of Defense to fly these planes over the sea, maybe then they will start to think with their heads, and not with what they are now ... For aircrafts for almost 40 years and over the crew’s sea, the chances are close to zero, if that ... Su-24M - 1981 model.
    1. Vlad.by
      Vlad.by 16 August 2017 18: 54
      +1
      With a replaced engine, a refurbished glider and updated avionics? And what does the crew risk so much compared to the Su-27 or even the Su-30?
      Moreover, the MSS at the Black Sea Fleet is working normally, the flight area is not so large, and the pilots take a full set of rescue equipment on the flight.
      Have you looked at the wrong forum?
      1. Overlock
        Overlock 16 August 2017 20: 36
        +2
        under the Union, when in our Saki-4 Su-27 fell into the sea, so far the crew have not found it. Do you think that now MSS works better?
        04.12.85/22/XNUMX, Tu-XNUMX: when flying at night, on a small one, above the sea, the mark disappeared. They did not even find a place for the exact crash of the aircraft, the crew went missing (Osetnyanko from Hapoknysh).
        In the summer of 1986, searches in the area of ​​the alleged catastrophe were carried out! Searches were carried out by a mini bathyscaphe. Unfortunately, nothing similar to the plane was found.
        1991
        Saki, 1991, SU-25 (Major V. Lelyuk) - night flight over the sea. The plane and the pilot were never found.
        This is from memory ...
      2. okko077
        okko077 16 August 2017 21: 41
        +2
        And what about replaced engines? And where is the refurbished glider? Or maybe someone needs to replace the brains? The forum is the only storytellers and they will snatch a lot ...
        1. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 17 August 2017 16: 37
          0
          Poor, you poor. Probably rule the engine blades with a file, and fasten the pipelines with tape.
          And the engines for aircraft to develop a resource do not change at all. But at the factory, the glider was not inspected and it was not subject to repair. Again, with tape, chipped, cracked and dented and patched in the way? With brains it’s clear, that’s the point.
      3. Msta
        Msta 16 August 2017 23: 46
        +1
        And you read about the reasons for the refusal of the British Air Force from the Blackburn Buccaneer naval bombers, maybe then you stop asking similar questions
        1. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 17 August 2017 16: 44
          0
          I’ll tell you more - the Yankees have abandoned the relatively new F117 and F111 written off, and F14. But for some reason A6 and A7 still fly somewhere.
          Not weird?
          1. Msta
            Msta 17 August 2017 22: 00
            +1
            No, not strange. Fighter and subsonic attack aircraft experience different loads during operation. In addition, both the A6 and A7 are officially retired from the US Navy. In Syria and the MiG-21 fly ... not from a good life.
            1. Vlad.by
              Vlad.by 18 August 2017 08: 49
              0
              Well, in the first A7 was removed only in 2014. And not all are delivered to Nevada. The same thing about the A6, since 1999 even more than 10 on the wing.
              As for the loads, it is not a fact that low-altitude flights do not wear out gliders more than high-speed ones. The same example with the Bukanirs. While flying over the sea, hunting for ships - were considered excellent aircraft. As soon as they began to fly around the relief, problems began, which ended up being written off.
              By the way, Su24 and 34 are not fighters. So what is their state of colleagues so worried about?
              1. Msta
                Msta 20 August 2017 02: 14
                0
                The buccaneers were removed from service just after several bombers disappeared over the sea. The wreckage of some managed to find and pick up. The cause of the disaster is metal fatigue. Aircraft cannot be repaired forever. As for the loads, the supersonic cars also go around the terrain, experiencing much greater loads. Than subsonic ones. The Su-34 is declared as a fighter-bomber, and the Su-24M was designed taking into account air combat.
  4. Radikal
    Radikal 16 August 2017 18: 03
    +2
    Quote: VERESK
    planes are planned to be upgraded at the facilities of the military unit. Is it like this? PARM? Or is there a plant in the design bureau? I did not understand the news.

    Exactly.
  5. Bronevick
    Bronevick 16 August 2017 18: 19
    0
    By 2020, the SU-24 should be completely removed from service