RF CCS for 2020 g inclusive should have:
PAK FA - 12 pcs. These will be machines for trial operation in the troops, so it is hardly worth considering them in the total quantity.
Su-35C - 98 machines are tentative. The contract for 48 machines has already been executed, now the second one is being executed, on 50 aircraft until the end of 2020.
Su-30 M2 / CM - according to rumors, it is planned to bring to 180 machines to 2020.
Su-33 - not clear, let's leave 14 machines.
Su-27 CM / CM3 - 61 machine. In general, they initially said that at least 100 machines would be upgraded, but recently something has not been heard about Su-27CM3. Perhaps the program is minimized?
MiG-35 - 30 machines
MiG-29MT - 44 machines
MiG-29UBT - 8 machines
MiG-29KR - 19 machines
MiG-29KUBR - 4 machines
MiG-31 - 113 upgraded to 2020.
In addition, an estimated number of un-upgraded vehicles will remain as part of the Russian Air Force: 78 Su-27, 69 MiG-31 and 120 MiG-29.
As for the front aviation, then everything is more complicated:
Su-34 - 124 machines to 2020 g, but it is possible that their number will increase more. Given the fact that they are now being produced on board 16-18 per year, it is quite possible to bring the number of aircraft to the aircraft 142. So we count.
Su-24 - 0 machines. Alas, but according to existing plans, Su-24 to 2020 g should be completely written off from the composition of the Air Force. On the other hand, in case of aggravation of the international situation, this decision may be reconsidered. Yes, and, in fact, even in the event of a decision on the withdrawal, it can be assumed that the upgraded Su-24 will be mothballed, and not destroyed. Leave about half of the current number of Su-24 in the ranks - 120 machines approximately.
Su-25 - can be up to 200 machines.
Tu-22М3М - it is planned to modernize 30 machines. Strictly speaking, these are airplanes of long-range missile-bearing aviation, and not tactical, but they, with a high degree of probability, will be used to solve tactical aviation tasks, therefore we will take them into account here.
Of course, there are also Tu-95 and Tu-160, which theoretically could perform non-strategic functions, but in practice, in the event of a conflict with NATO, they are unlikely to play this role.
Thus, we counted:
Fighters - 458 pcs.
Interceptors - 113 pcs
Tactical bomber - 262 pcs.
Long-range missile carriers - 30 pcs.
All in all, it turns out, 863 new or upgraded aircraft and, in addition, 267 non-upgraded fighters and interceptors and 200 attack aircraft - all 1 330 machines.
It is clear that all these machines can not rise into the air at the same time, because the need for maintenance and repairs has not been canceled. But today we do not have 90 in the yard, so we can safely assume that the number of non-combat-ready aircraft at any given time will be within reasonable limits.
And what about our opponents? Calculate first the European countries of NATO
Germany. Formally, today the Air Force numbers 125 Eurofighters and 93 Tornadoes. In fact - able to perform combat missions 55 "Eurofighter" and 29 "Tornado." Generally speaking, Germany planned to purchase 180 Eurofighters, but for how long, and how many will be “on the wing” for 2020 g? It is unlikely that by that date the once mighty Air Force will be able to boast at least a hundred combat-ready or current aircraft repair.
France. 167 "Mirage-2000" of various modifications, approximately 115 "Rafale" in the Air Force to 2020 g and 44 "Rafale" in the Navy Aviation. Total - 326 aircraft. It seems to be a big force, but only the combatants from this number are about 40% of aircraft.
England - 141 Eurofighter (total 232 ordered), 76 Tornado. The delivery schedule of the Eurofighter is unknown to the author, for example, reaching for the 160 machines - the total will be 236 aircraft. But there is no reason to believe that the situation with combat-ready aircraft is much better than in France or Germany.
Italy - 83 "Eurofighter", 68 "Tornado" in the version of the fighter-bomber, 82 light attack aircraft AMX ACOL and AMX-T ACOL
Spain - 86 F-18 and 61 Eurofighter.
Greece - 156 F-16, 22 - Mirage-2000, 34 "Phantom II" and 34 attack aircraft "Corsair"
Turkey –260 F-16 various (including - quite modern) modifications, 51 “Phantom II”, 35 oldies F-5
Norway - 57 pretty old F-16.
Netherlands - 63 old F-16.
Belgium - 68 old F-16
Denmark - existing X-NUMX old F-30 should be written off to 16 g. Leave them all the same
Portugal - 30 old F-16
Hungary and the Czech Republic - on 12 Swedish SAAB, total - 24
Bulgaria - 15 MiG-29 and 14 Su-25
Romania - 12 F-16 and 36 MiG-21
Slovakia - 12 MiG-29
Croatia - 16 MiG-21
Poland - 48 F-16. There are also MiG-29 and Su-22, but they seem to be removed from the Air Force.
And all, it turns out, 2 177 aircraft, of which no less than 814 (rather - much more) - are already very old cars.
Since the 2 177 is noticeably larger than the 1 330, it seems that the Air Force of the European countries - members of NATO is much stronger than the Russian Federation Space Forces. But if you dig a little deeper, then everything becomes completely not so simple.
The first is, of course, the percentage of healthy machines in their total number. Unfortunately, this figure for the new aircraft of the Russian Air Force is unknown to the author. At the same time, there is data on the USAF where the readiness level of the F-15 and F-16 aircraft is 71-74% of the total number, and the A-10 attack aircraft even the 77% and there is no reason to believe that we are worse today.
Suppose that the% of the health of the RF VKS is at the level of 70%. At the same time, the owners of the most powerful European air forces equipped with the most modern aircraft - Germany, England, France - have extremely low percentages of serviceability at about 40%.
It turns out interesting. If we compare the total estimated number of the most modern aircraft of the Russian Federation (Su-35 / 30, MiG-35 / 29СМТ / К), which, even without taking into account the upgraded MiG-31BM, by 2020 g should be about 383 machines with the most modern NATO machines (440 "Eurofighter" maximum, plus 159 "Rafale", and all - 599 machines), it turns out that the European NATO countries more than one and a half advantage. But if we compare the number of combat-ready machines (with 70% for the Russian Federation videoconferencing and the way even 50% for NATO), then we get 268 versus 299, i.e. almost parity.
If we assume that the percentage of healthy cars on average in European NATO countries does not exceed 50-55% versus 70-75% RF, then the ratio of combat-ready aircraft will be 1 088 - 1 197 of NATO planes against 931-997 RF aircraft, that is, the superiority of European countries NATO is minimal.
But that's not all. After all, it is not enough to have airplanes, they must also be controlled. And if the Russian Aerospace Forces subordinate to a single command and are able to act as a single whole from the very beginning of the conflict, then the Air Force of the European members of NATO (we have listed the Air Force of 19 (!) Countries) does not represent anything of the kind. But this is very important. Of course, the NATO countries are conducting joint training of their air force, but it is unlikely that they are sufficiently intensive and massive to provide such coordination and interaction of aviation that is possible within the framework of the air force of one country.
Recall also that the training of NATO pilots is very heterogeneous. The author does not have accurate data on that score, but the preparation of Turkish or Bulgarian pilots is hardly equivalent to French or English.
It should also take into account the relationship of countries in NATO itself. It is not so easy to believe that in the event of a serious local conflict, the European countries of NATO, as one, will enter the war as a monolithic force. It is not easy to imagine the armed forces of Greece, fighting for the interests of Turkey to the last drop of blood.
Again, it is extremely difficult to expect that even those countries that nevertheless get involved in the conflict will throw all their aircraft into battle. One can be sure that it is not certain that in a large-scale clash, for example, in Eastern Europe, neither England nor France will throw all the power of their air force into battle, but limit themselves to sending a "limited contingent". Of course, Russia has the same problem, because it is impossible to fully expose the Far East and the southern borders, but on the whole the percentage of the total number of combat-ready aviation, which will be able to bring the Russian Federation into any conflict, may well be higher than the European ones NATO countries.
Logistics issues. No, of course, the airfield network of Europe is very large and has over 1800 airfields with hard surface. But the fact is that after the end of the Cold War, the Europeans save a lot on their military budgets, which will create certain problems for them when they try to concentrate the power of their air force, say, closer to Eastern Europe. Not that the Russian Federation did not have such difficulties, but to cope with them within one country is easier.
All of the above leads us to the fact that, despite the list superiority in the air of European NATO countries over the Russian Federation, the actual balance of forces in a conflict that suddenly flared up may turn out to be not so brilliant for Europeans as it looks on paper.
And if you go beyond the limits of the air force itself, and recall such an important factor as air defense?
The armed forces of the Russian Federation have a very strong ground defense, much higher than that of the European NATO countries. Not that NATO has absolutely no ground defense components, but earlier, in times of
The Cold War, they traditionally relied on their superiority in the air. And after the USSR collapsed and military budgets began to be cut everywhere in Europe, of course, they considerably saved on the development and updating of air defense assets. And did the NATO countries need new versions of the same air defense system at that time? In the "wonderful" 90-s, if suddenly there was a military conflict with the Russian Federation, the question was not how to break the Russian Air Force, but how to find them.
However, any disarmament policy is good only when the enemy is even weaker, and if he suddenly begins to grow, then ... Of course, no ground defense, no matter how powerful it may be in itself, is unable to resist the modern Air Force. But as one of the components of the balanced armed forces of the country, it can greatly complicate the actions of enemy aircraft and seriously increase its losses.
Until recently, NATO aviation had a certain superiority in tactical control, missile weapons and electronic warfare equipment, and in addition - in the training of pilots. But it is well known that in the GPV 2011-2020. a lot of attention has been paid to communications and command and control, so you can count on the fact that if we did not equalize on this issue, then at least reduce the backlog. In terms of missile weapons, the situation is also gradually stabilizing, for example, by 2020 we should expect a noticeable amount of RVV-SD to enter the troops. As for the EW funds, the lag has been completely eliminated here, and we can most likely assume that now NATO is catching up. On the issue of combat training, the situation also improved significantly - not only did the Russian Aerospace Forces begin to spend significantly more resources on training, but also the war in Syria allowed many pilots to gain combat experience. And although the “barmalei”, of course, are not a serious opponent for the Air Force, nevertheless, at least, one can speak of “exercises close to combat conditions”.
In view of the foregoing, the author of this article may conclude that the Russian Federation Air Force (with a sufficient number of trained pilots) in the very near future can get not only parity with the Air Force of the European NATO countries, but even good chances of gaining air superiority at the initial stage hypothetical military conflict.
Of course, all this is true exactly until such time as we remember the US Air Force. Even without taking into account the F-35, which, most likely, as at 2020 g and will remain in a semi-capable state, the US Air Force has 1 560 fighters (184 F-22; 449 F-15 and 957 F-16 various modifications) and 398 attack aircraft, including 287 A-10 and 111 AV-8. And that's not counting the 247 F-18, and the 131 AV-8In the Marine Corps Aviation, and the 867 F-18 carrier-based aviation. The United States has at its disposal 3203 tactical aircraft, and in terms of US air power, perhaps, it surpasses the European countries of NATO and the Russian Aerospace Forces together.
Thus, we can say that the United States in the air have an overwhelming superiority. But ... as one very wise proverb says: “if your pistol lies a millimeter further than you can reach, then you don’t have a pistol”.
Currently, the US has deployed F-136 and F-15 combat aircraft on European 16 bases, not counting transport and reconnaissance aircraft. This air group can not fundamentally affect the balance of power in Europe. Ensuring air superiority will depend entirely on the speed of the transfer of US air forces from US territory to Europe.
It would seem, but what’s wrong with that? I refueled, sat at the helm, and flew over the Atlantic ... But this happens only in third-rate action movies. Even the most unpretentious combat aircraft require maintenance at the rate of 25 man-hours for one hour of flight. We need people, we need equipment, we need cover for the airfields, on which the flying wings will be deployed, we need fuel, ammunition and much, much more. And the problem is that the Americans in Europe do not have this now. And the Europeans, somehow maintaining the percentage of healthy machines at the level of 40-50%, do not exist either. And to deliver all this from the USA to Europe is not at all such a simple matter as it may seem.
Recall the operation "Desert Shield"
Transportation continued from the beginning of August 1990 g to mid-January 1991. 729 tactical aircraft and 190 naval infantry aircraft were deployed, and the 900 ground-based tactical aviation aircraft (729 + 190 = 919 airplanes, but part of the "Harrier" of the sea infantry operated from the decks of amphibious ships), as well as 5 divisions, 4 brigades and 1 separate regiment of the ground forces and marines. By the beginning of the “Storm in the Desert”, this contingent was provided with all the necessary supplies for one month of warfare. This is undoubtedly an outstanding result. But the creation of this group took more than five months - the transfers were from 7 August 1990 g to 17 January 1991 g!
Of course, we are talking not only about the transfer of aviation, but also about large contingents of ground forces, but in the event of a large-scale conflict, these very ground forces will be badly needed by the United States on the continent. The fact is that the European NATO countries have about the same problem with the ground forces as with the Air Force - it seems like a lot on paper, but as long as you concentrate in the right place, the war will be over three times. We have already mentioned the state of the once formidable Bundeswehr, which today has only three divisions with 95 combat-ready tanks... France has two tank divisions with three regiments of special operations forces and also a foreign legion, but in the event of a sudden conflict, it will be very problematic to retrieve its parts from Tahiti, Djibouti and similar places. Italy has three divisions, two (and several brigades) - Great Britain ... In aggregate, the European NATO countries have very impressive ground forces by the standards of the XXI century, but only on one condition - if all of them are collected in one place, and with this in the event of a sudden military conflicts will be very big problems.
If the above reasons are true, then in the foreseeable future, the Russian Federation may achieve parity in the air with NATO in the event of a sudden large-scale conflict. And it will take the USA not even weeks, but months to realize its military air superiority. It is quite another thing if the conflict is preceded by a long (several months) period of aggravation of relations - in this case, the war can start with a half or even twice the advantage of NATO in the air.
Продолжение следует ...