Military Review

Russia is developing a single engine for Sukhoi fighters

111

Experts from the A. Lyulka Design Bureau of the Ufa Engine-Building Production Association ("UEC-UMPO") are developing a universal engine for several types of fighters. This was announced by the managing director of the enterprise Yevgeny Semivelichenko.


According to him, the OKB is developing a single engine that can be installed on fighters without modifying the airframe. We are talking about the Su-27, Su-30 and Su-35 fighters. The order for the development of a unified engine came from the Ministry of Defense, it is planned that the introduction of a single propulsion system will reduce the costs of the military department. At the same time, Semivelichenko did not give any details on the work carried out and the approximate characteristics of the new engine.

Today we are considering the possibility of creating a kind of universal engine using AL-41F-1C units, as well as units of other previous engines. This is a kind of universal engine that can be installed on the Su-27, Su-30 and Su-35. There is such an order from the Ministry of Defense, we are carrying out this work

- he said.

The AL-41F-1S aircraft engine (product 117S) is a two-shaft by-pass turbojet engine of modular design with a controlled thrust vector. The engine uses a new low pressure compressor with increased air consumption and efficiency, as well as a new turbine with a more efficient blade cooling system. Installed on Su-35S fighters. At present, OKB "Sukhoi" is conducting R&D work on the creation of an upgraded version of the Su-30 - Su-30SMD, which will also receive the AL-41F-1S engine.
111 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 21 July 2020 08: 49 New
    -31
    It is planned that the introduction of a single propulsion system will reduce the costs of the military department.
    fool fool Universalism, the enemy of quality. The bubble can be saved a little during production, but the capabilities of the aircraft will decrease, definitely. The bubble can be raised not sickly when designing the engine. angry
    1. Insurgent
      Insurgent 21 July 2020 08: 51 New
      27
      Russia is developing a single engine for Sukhoi fighters
      Unification, as a phenomenon, is not only cost reduction, but in most cases it is also vital, especially during the war ...
      1. Vladimir16
        Vladimir16 21 July 2020 09: 27 New
        +4
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        Universalism, the enemy of quality.

        You set the emoticons right for yourself. fool fool
        laughing
        1. Mavrikiy
          Mavrikiy 21 July 2020 17: 18 New
          -1
          Quote: Vladimir16
          You set the emoticons right for yourself.

          Yes. He decorates you well. belay
      2. Mavrikiy
        Mavrikiy 21 July 2020 17: 16 New
        -1
        Quote: Insurgent
        Unification, as a phenomenon, is not only cost reduction, but in most cases it is also vital, especially during the war ...

        hi I agree. But ... a universal engine for 3 models of ready-made gliders? It would be nice, but I doubt it.
        You can develop a new engine for a specific aircraft or an aircraft for the engine.
    2. bayard
      bayard 21 July 2020 10: 31 New
      21
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      you can save a little in production, but the capabilities of the aircraft will decrease, definitely.

      Young man, are you out of your mind? Have you compared the characteristics of these engines?
      The modernization program of the Su-30 fleet "to the level of the Su-35" also implies the replacement of the AL-31F engine with a more POWERFUL and with a much longer service life AL-41F-1S.
      If the combatant Su-27s also re-equip (during scheduled repairs) on the AL-41F-1S, it will be just fine.
      If the modernized (they are working on) Su-34 will also receive such an engine, it will be just a song. This is not only convenience in maintenance, repair and training of aircraft technicians, but also a single base of spare engines of the same type, interchangeability.
      It is important .
      And very convenient.
      In terms of the price of the engines themselves, the savings will hardly come out - the AL-41F-1C is definitely more expensive than the AL-31F. But the savings will turn out on the resource (the new engine has twice as much), unification for the entire fleet of heavy fighters of the Su-27 family and the elimination of engines of different types for aircraft of the same family.
      1. Alex777
        Alex777 21 July 2020 11: 58 New
        +3
        Totally agree with you. drinks
        One thing is not clear: why is the Sukhoi Design Bureau just now thinking about it ???
        1. bayard
          bayard 21 July 2020 13: 08 New
          +5
          All these fighters were assembled at different factories, based on export samples. For the Russian Aerospace Forces, each plant offered its own version ... We ordered it from everyone at once in order to quickly re-equip and make the most of the available reserve. So it turned out to be a ragtag.
          God willing, after the expected modernization, they will still be brought to a single standard.
          drinks
      2. ancient
        ancient 21 July 2020 13: 14 New
        +9
        Quote: bayard
        hardly - the AL-41F-1S is definitely more expensive than the AL-31F.

        And do not tell me .... how many mm in diameter the CPV is larger in 41F than in 31FP, and 31FP than 31F? wink and how is it that you, without a constructive rearrangement of the engine nacelle and the air intake channels, will try to ... "pull the hedgehog onto the ... globus" wink
        In my flight life there were only two attempts to "shove" ... at no extra cost:
        1. On the Tu-22M3 instead of the NK-25, "shove" the NK-32 ... the result, you know ..... modified the air intake channels with additional feed flaps and ... that's all .... the engine did not fit into the nacelle. (The reason wrote above).
        2. On the Su-24M, instead of the AL-21F-3 (3A) (3AT), "shove" the AL-31F ... the result ... they made the 3rd air defense over the fuselage .. "blew" ... they were horrified and .... .. so it remained .. in the form of a "full-scale model".

        Therefore, without a specific re-arrangement of the airframe for a new engine (after all, you want it to be even more powerful), I doubt that it will work out.
        Well, how long have they been "working" on that. you know what to put 41 engines on the Su-34 and Su-30SM? bully And what are the "problems"? wassat
        So the idea, in principle, is not bad .. but only .. as an idea ... but before the embodiment of this idea in "iron2 ...... time will pass ..." start and end " wink
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 21 July 2020 14: 29 New
          +1
          Quote: ancient
          And do not tell me .... how many mm in diameter the CPV is larger in 41F than in 31FP, and 31FP than 31F?

          ".... Structurally, these engines are a deep development of the serial AL-31F using the fifth generation technologies. They use a new fan with a 3% larger diameter (932 mm versus 905 mm), new high and low pressure turbines, a new digital control system The engine provides for the use of a nozzle with a controlled thrust vector (as on the AL-31FP) .As a result of the modernization, the engine thrust in a special mode is increased by 16% - up to 14 kgf, at the maximum non-afterburner mode it reaches 500 kgf. with the current AL-8800F, the resource indicators will significantly increase - by 31-2 times: the overhaul life will increase from 2,7 to 500 hours (the resource before the first overhaul is 1000 hours), and the assigned one - from 1500 to 1500 hours ... . "
        2. bayard
          bayard 21 July 2020 14: 33 New
          +1
          Surely they will also refine the glider. The idea is not so much to add power (the AL-31F already has enough), but to put more resourceful engines. Still, the AL-41F-1S will be twice as impressive with a resource. Maybe economy in some modes will improve ...
          Or maybe they will just try to fit the AL-41F-1S blades on the AL-31F - for a better resource ... As it is very superficial everything in the article, you can guess about anyone.
          Quote: ancient
          Well, how long have they been "working" on that. you know what to put 41 engines on the Su-34 and Su-30SM? And what are the "problems"?

          They work - it's already good, but if for existing gliders ... it's difficult. He (the engine) needs air intakes from the Su-35 ... And in general, the entire fuselage, except for the cockpit.
          It's one thing to sculpt a new version of the Su-30 and Su-34 on the basis of the fuselage of the Su-35, and it's another to shove the unwashed into the finished glider.
          Maybe they will really make a new, improved, more resourceful version of the AL-31F with blades from the 41st, and what kind of unification ... Otherwise, the nacelles with air intakes will have to be redone anyway.
          And if they also want to cram the Irbis into the new modification, then it is necessary to completely change the onboard energy too ...
          But Hindus are asking for this.
  2. seti
    seti 21 July 2020 08: 49 New
    +7
    Unification in all this is certainly important. I hope our designers will achieve the maximum unification of spare parts for airframes.
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. Labrador
    Labrador 21 July 2020 08: 55 New
    -12
    creating some kind of universal engine

    In my opinion, a universal engine cannot be equally good for different cars, revealing the capabilities of each from the best sides.
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 21 July 2020 09: 02 New
      12
      Tell F15 developers with F16 about it. They will be surprised.
    2. Zeev
      Zeev zeev 21 July 2020 09: 07 New
      +3
      Well, actually it can. If the machines are of a similar design and purpose.
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 21 July 2020 09: 55 New
        +3
        Like heavy fighters ...
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 21 July 2020 12: 01 New
          +3
          Like heavy fighters ...

          Moreover, from one manufacturer.
    3. Krasnoyarsk
      Krasnoyarsk 21 July 2020 10: 36 New
      +4
      Quote: Labrador

      In my opinion, a universal engine cannot be equally good for different cars, revealing the capabilities of each from the best sides.

      What do you see as the cardinal differences between the SU-27, SU-30 and SU-35?
    4. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 21 July 2020 10: 42 New
      +1
      Quote: Labrador
      creating some kind of universal engine

      In my opinion, a universal engine cannot be equally good for different cars, revealing the capabilities of each from the best sides.

      The task of the aircraft designer is to make the plane for the engine, and not vice versa. There are always fewer engines than airplanes, so it is more convenient and cheaper. If the plane does not "reveal its capabilities," the aircraft designers are bad, that's all.
    5. Piramidon
      Piramidon 21 July 2020 10: 53 New
      -2
      Quote: Labrador
      In my opinion, a universal engine cannot be equally good for different cars.

      The AI-20 engine has been and is used with equal success on various types of transport and passenger aircraft. AL-7 was also installed on military and civilian vehicles. And here, in fact, the same planes.
  5. Livonetc
    Livonetc 21 July 2020 09: 01 New
    +1
    And what is the difference between the first stage engine installed on SU57 and engines installed on SU27, 30 and 35?
    1. bayard
      bayard 21 July 2020 10: 38 New
      0
      Quote: Livonetc
      And what is the difference between the first stage engine installed on SU57 and engines installed on SU27, 30 and 35?

      After the remotorization of the entire fleet - NOTHING. They are one and the same engine. Adaptation of a single engine for this entire family will greatly facilitate their maintenance, repair and training of aircraft technicians.
    2. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 21 July 2020 11: 51 New
      +3
      Quote: Livonetc
      And what is the difference between the first stage engine installed on SU57 and engines installed on SU27, 30 and 35?

      ".... The program for the creation of the Su-57 implies the use of the AL-41F1 engine, which is used, among other things, on the Su-35, at the first stage of testing, and the new engine at the second.
      It should be noted that this engine is a completely new development and not a modification. It has more traction, electronic control systems and lower fuel consumption. This will increase the aircraft's maneuverability and, in the long term, the range.
      ..... the second stage engine "Type-30" is created in the same dimensions as the AL-57F41 already installed on the Su-1. According to him, the engines will also be replaced on the planes that have already entered the troops .... "https://tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/20194231739-s5UpI.html
  6. Grazdanin
    Grazdanin 21 July 2020 09: 01 New
    10
    At last! You can't keep such a zoo of engines!
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 10: 35 New
      +1
      I cannot but agree ... In my mind, let the Al-31 engines on the Su-30SM and Su-34 fly off the resource from 2 to 3 thousand hours and then re-equip them on the Al-41.
  7. Pravodel
    Pravodel 21 July 2020 09: 01 New
    +1
    Obviously, sooner or later, a high-quality engine will be launched for all military aviation.
    Here's just one question: when will we learn to make high-quality engines for civil aviation?
    1. Angelo Provolone
      Angelo Provolone 21 July 2020 09: 07 New
      -5
      When will Brazil become a great hockey power?
    2. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 21 July 2020 10: 45 New
      +3
      Do we have our own civil aviation? We have a Boeing trash can, where they pour all used / y, and some Airbus. At least some planes will appear, then ...
    3. Hwostatij
      Hwostatij 21 July 2020 10: 48 New
      0
      What does PD-14M not suit you?
  8. APASUS
    APASUS 21 July 2020 09: 08 New
    10
    As I understand it, they simply adjust the Su-27, Su-30 under the engine from the Su-35 AL-41F-1C.
    1. barin
      barin 21 July 2020 09: 22 New
      10
      Such a fit has been asking for a long time.
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 21 July 2020 09: 58 New
        +2
        In the same place, it’s quite the opposite - they adjust the engine so that it can be installed without changing the airframe (I wonder what they meant at all).

        Such a fit has been asking for a long time.

        For the Su-30, which is still being produced, it is unambiguous, for the Su-27 it is not entirely clear why. How many more will they be exploited?
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 21 July 2020 10: 43 New
          0
          Quote: alexmach
          The Su-27 is not entirely clear why. How many more will they be exploited?

          In principle, we do not have enough fighters, if the resources of the airframe allow, it is better to modernize and unify with new aircraft. The MiG 29 is already under decommissioning, they need to be changed. Su-27, Su-30 and Su-35, which are maximally unified with each other, is a good solution.
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 21 July 2020 10: 51 New
            +1
            I read Wikipedia. Su-27 and Su-30 use engines based on AL-31F and they are usually all compatible and similar in design. All modern modifications are installed on both the Su-30 and Su-27 without modification. This means that in this case the Su-27 will "go as a trailer" to the Su-30. Having modified the AL-41F1S installation on the Su-30 without changing the airframe, it will be possible to install it on the Su-27 ... Provided, of course, that the old glider can withstand the load.
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 21 July 2020 11: 18 New
              +2
              The motor control is analog and digital. Therefore, a more modern engine will have to be installed in an old aircraft with the replacement of control systems with this engine (transition from analog to digital).
              I. I think that not all aircraft will be equipped with a controlled thrust vector. I mean, the engine is one for everyone, only for some aircraft it will come with additional buns, and for others it will be a standard option.
        2. bayard
          bayard 21 July 2020 10: 51 New
          0
          Quote: alexmach
          In the same place, it’s quite the opposite - they adjust the engine so that it can be installed without changing the airframe (I wonder what they meant at all).

          They will adjust the fastening elements, fuel supply lines, etc. It is easier to make changes to these elements of engines that have not yet been produced than to alter the gliders of combat aircraft.
          Quote: alexmach
          for the Su-27 it is not entirely clear why. How many more will they be exploited?

          Those Su-27s from the groundwork for China are still quite young - no older than the average Su-30SM. For China, a large number (about 100 unclaimed) Su-27 vehicle kits were produced, but they broke the contract, reducing the volume of purchases. It was from this groundwork that the Su-27SM was built for the Russian Aerospace Forces.
          So these swallows can still fly and fly.
          hi
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 21 July 2020 10: 59 New
            0
            Fitting elements, fuel supply lines, etc.

            If only the glider could withstand the loads, but probably it was still made with a margin for remotorization to more powerful engines.
            Those Su-27s from the groundwork for China are still quite young - no older than the average Su-30SM

            It is clear, then the business is really necessary. In general, the news is very positive. Would have waited for the same about the modernization and unification of avionics
            1. Alex777
              Alex777 21 July 2020 12: 09 New
              +2
              For the Su-30, which is still being produced, it is unambiguous, for the Su-27 it is not entirely clear why. How many more will they be exploited?

              Colleague bayard answered well. I will only add that remotorization can be offered for the foreign market as well. Aircraft capabilities will grow significantly.
              If only the glider could withstand the loads, but probably it was still made with a margin for remotorization to more powerful engines.

              Well, in the same place, the power will increase not many times. And the efficiency will be higher.
              1. bayard
                bayard 21 July 2020 12: 56 New
                +1
                Quote: Alex777
                Well, in the same place, the power will increase not many times. And the efficiency will be higher.

                With efficiency, there will hardly be any significant gain, but in the resource - about 2 times, and this is a huge savings.
                1. Alex777
                  Alex777 21 July 2020 13: 02 New
                  +3
                  Increasing power at the same consumption - saving.
                  Increasing the combat radius is also quite useful.
                  And the engine resource is one of the main problems of the Su-30 today.
                  IMHO, of course. hi
            2. bayard
              bayard 21 July 2020 13: 03 New
              +1
              Quote: alexmach
              Would have waited for the same about the modernization and unification of avionics

              And this is also planned in a new modification. The Indians have been persuading for several years to upgrade the Su-30 to the level of the Su-35 (engine, avionics, power engineering), so it was decided to link this program (modernization) with the average planned repair (planned remotorization) and modernize the entire fleet of Su-30 and Su- 27 to the level of the Su-35. Such unification will have a very beneficial effect on the convenience of future operation.
              The modernization of the Su-34 is also being prepared, but this is a separate story, although the engines, communications and electronic warfare, in theory, should also be unified.
    2. Polite Moose
      Polite Moose 21 July 2020 11: 07 New
      0
      Quote: APASUS
      As I understand it, they simply adjust the Su-27, Su-30 under the engine from the Su-35 AL-41F-1C.

      Or a set of adapters will be supplied with the motor. laughing
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 21 July 2020 11: 50 New
        +2
        Quote: Polite Moose
        Or a set of adapters will be supplied with the motor.

        Locksmiths kit .................
        1. Polite Moose
          Polite Moose 21 July 2020 11: 52 New
          +1
          Quote: APASUS
          Locksmith kit

          With files.
  9. evgenii67
    evgenii67 21 July 2020 09: 09 New
    +2
    "We are talking about Su-27, Su-30 and Su-35 fighters." Well, it's time to get rid of the Su-27 quietly. and the Su-30 well damn it is all similar machines. After all, they wanted to put a radar from 30 to 35, is it really difficult to put in 30 and an engine from 35, only then the question arises, what exactly, apart from the number of seats in the cockpit, will this aircraft differ from the Su-35?
    1. K-612-O
      K-612-O 21 July 2020 09: 14 New
      +3
      There all the same gliders differ, and noticeably.
    2. alexmach
      alexmach 21 July 2020 10: 01 New
      +1
      And what exactly, apart from the number of seats in the cockpit, will this aircraft differ from the Su-35?

      Do you really need to be different?
      After all, they wanted to put a radar from 30 to 35

      The idea is great, but the next question is - isn't it time to put a new radar on 35 itself?
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 10: 33 New
        +1
        Quote: alexmach
        Isn't it time to put a new radar on 35 itself?

        The radar itself is not. But it is necessary to do it as it was not done due to a falsely understood sense of economy 15 years ago. At the beginning of the modernization of the Su-27 in the Su-27cm, it was proposed, in addition to measures for the internal modernization of the N-001 Sword, to replace the Cassegrain antenna with a PAR Perot, as I recall, which would undoubtedly improve combat capabilities.
        So with regards to the Irbis - in my opinion, an obvious upgrade option is replacing the PFAR antennas with AFAR, provided, of course, that the game will be worth the candle
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 21 July 2020 10: 41 New
          +1
          So with regards to the Irbis - in my opinion, an obvious upgrade option is replacing the PFAR antennas with AFAR, provided, of course, that the game will be worth the candle

          Is it generally realizable? Just change the antenna of the HEADLIGHT to the AFAR? Does this require other changes to the radar itself? It seems to me that he is still not quite a "Lego constructor" just allowing one part to be changed for another? Even if this could be done with the H-001 Sword, it is not a fact that this can be done by Ibris.

          But the direction of thought is certainly correct, the radars on modern aircraft must also be unified and modernized to the maximum.
          1. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 10: 45 New
            0
            The United States did just that, changing the old antennas, not even the phased array for the AFR on its fighters ...
            Hence my proposal on the merits
          2. dauria
            dauria 21 July 2020 22: 31 New
            +2
            Is it generally realizable? Just change the antenna of the HEADLIGHT to the AFAR?


            Just like changing a gas stove for a microwave. Throw away one station, put another. At the same time, breaking the wall, cut the pipes and reinforce the electrical wiring. Don't listen to magicians. In AFAR, the antenna is whole locator. In a phased array, the antenna is only a piece of rectangular tubes with slots and phase shifters.
            1. Hexenmeister
              Hexenmeister 22 July 2020 08: 55 New
              +1
              AFAR antenna is the whole locator
              Well, you bent it! It is also necessary to collect signals from all PPMs, amplify them, drag them to a "good" intermediate, at least digitize, and then primary processing, secondary processing, combat use flew ... Is this all done in the antenna ???
              1. dauria
                dauria 22 July 2020 13: 08 New
                +1
                It is also necessary to collect signals from all PPMs, amplify them, drag them to a "good" intermediate,

                They also forgot that the three-story PPM must be cooled with air or an evaporative system and fed ... laughing This is a monoblock, I can't call it an antenna. And the BCVS with indicators and a common interface - well, you can refer to the locator if you like. Formally, the petrol station in the cockpit is part of the station.
                1. Hexenmeister
                  Hexenmeister 22 July 2020 13: 29 New
                  +1
                  This is a candy bar
                  A candy bar can be assembled from anything, but formally there remain the functions that the parts of this candy bar perform. And AFAR is just a type of antenna and, accordingly, the function of the antenna, and the functions of the radar are much broader than the functions that the antenna performs! This is to your words: "In AFAR, the antenna is the whole locator"
            2. Cyril G ...
              Cyril G ... 22 July 2020 10: 25 New
              0
              Replacing the antenna with AFAR is a reality. See modernized American fighters.
        2. Kolka Semenov
          Kolka Semenov 21 July 2020 13: 57 New
          -1
          IMHO, the train is gone. Still, the resource of the Su-27 is at its limit and the residual value makes the upgrade pointless - it's easier to buy new ones.
          1. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 14: 14 New
            +1
            I do not mean it. The point is that it is already necessary to modernize the Su-30SM, and soon it will be time to modernize the Su-35 radar. By the way, there are 12 new Su-27cm3.
            1. Kolka Semenov
              Kolka Semenov 21 July 2020 15: 51 New
              -1
              I don't mind here - it is necessary and desirable to modernize Sushki 30 and 35 series towards unification.
        3. Hexenmeister
          Hexenmeister 21 July 2020 22: 18 New
          +3
          This trick will not work! On the Irbis, and on the Leopard, too, there are rotary grilles. Who makes such a powerful rotary AFAR? And put the flat stationary AFAR canvases so that to repeat all the capabilities of the Irbis, you will need a couple of side grilles, as on the Su-57. Another thing is not to touch the Irbis, but to add a long-wave radar with antennas in the wing tips, in the image of the Su-57.
          1. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 22: 53 New
            0
            Quote: Hexenmeister
            Another thing is not to touch the Irbis, but to add a long-wave radar with antennas in the wing tips, in the image of the Su-57.


            And what can this radar station do? So in general, what is possible?
            1. Hexenmeister
              Hexenmeister 22 July 2020 09: 41 New
              0
              And what can this radar station do?
              In the clumsy language of a poster in a newspaper article it looks like this:
              The use of antennas operating in different bands practically negates all the stealth innovations of the F-22 and F-35.
    3. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 10: 27 New
      +1
      We don't need a two-seat fighter for sure? As for me. The production of the Su-30 should be curtailed, and the production of the Su-35UB should be expanded instead.
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 21 July 2020 10: 44 New
        +1
        As for me. The production of the Su-30 should be curtailed, and the production of the Su-35UB should be expanded instead.

        Even if this is done, the Su-30s still available have yet to be operated for a long time. This means that it is necessary to modernize them to meet modern requirements.
      2. Herman 4223
        Herman 4223 21 July 2020 10: 54 New
        -1
        The Su-30 needs to be modernized, such an aircraft is definitely needed. It can be controlled by air combat, but we have a problem with avaks, with their number.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 11: 01 New
          +3
          IMHO, we must leave the opportunity to make the Su-30SM for export, and adapt the rest of the capacity for the Su-35UB. Simply put, it is necessary to transfer the production of the Su-35 to Irkutsk. That is, in the future we will only make the Su-57 and Su-35UB. The Su-34 is a very difficult question. According to the mind, it is necessary to fulfill the contracts and Novosibirsk also reorient to the production of the Su-57.
          As a result, by the end of the 20s, Novosibirsk and Komsomolsk - Su-57, Irkutsk Su-35 / Su-35UB. Somehow it turns out.
          Well, we need a separate program for the modernization of the Su-34 and Su-30cm
          1. Herman 4223
            Herman 4223 21 July 2020 11: 13 New
            +1
            The Su-30/35 will be replaced in the production of the Su-57, it is obvious that the latter can perform the functions of both machines. We need a training version of this machine, it is late as always. The Su-34 will apparently be replaced by a hunter, but this will not happen before the end of the decade.
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 21 July 2020 11: 26 New
              0
              Su-30/35 will be replaced in the production of su-57

              Oh, not a fact. Even the United States continues to operate a mixed fleet of fighters of the 4th and 5th generations, and this is with their resources. It seems to me that this situation will persist for a long time and for all the leading aviation powers.
              1. Cyril G ...
                Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 11: 39 New
                +2
                I agree. I think that the Su-57 will go as a fighter for gaining air supremacy, and the two-seater Su-35 will be used as an IS.
              2. Herman 4223
                Herman 4223 21 July 2020 11: 52 New
                +1
                Of course, the fleet will be mixed, the production of the Su-30/35 is designed for at least 27 years, and the operation for 30 years. But after this period it is at least not reasonable to produce them. There will be many of them in videoconferencing, demand abroad will also fall, so there is no particular alternative.
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach 21 July 2020 12: 30 New
                  +1
                  There will be many of them in the videoconferencing

                  Where will there be a lot of them? There are now about a hundred of them, well, there will be one and a half hundred, if the rate of production remains. Is 300 boards a lot? There will be less of them for a long time than Russia needs.
                  1. Herman 4223
                    Herman 4223 21 July 2020 12: 58 New
                    0
                    I don't know how long it will be, it is planned from 2018 to 2027: su-30 180 machines, su35 100 machines. 24 instant 35. Quite enough for the base, VKS and the transition to the Su-57.
                    1. alexmach
                      alexmach 21 July 2020 14: 43 New
                      +3
                      300 cars are not enough for "quite enough".
            2. Orange
              Orange bigg 21 July 2020 12: 19 New
              -2
              Quote: Herman 4223
              The Su-30/35 will be replaced in the production of the Su-57, it is obvious that the latter can perform the functions of both machines. We need a training version of this machine, it is late as always. The Su-34 will apparently be replaced by a hunter, but this will not happen before the end of the decade.

              You have forgotten about the most numerous and main niche of aviation in any country in the world - the light multifunctional fighter MiG-29, F-16, JF-17 Thunder. We don't have a JF-17 class single-engine fighter, although they fly on our engines. Therefore, the release of the MiG-35D (two-seater) has no alternative for us, since we will not release many Su-57s (under a thousand).
              1. Herman 4223
                Herman 4223 21 July 2020 13: 07 New
                0
                I personally think the Mig-35 is a good addition to the Su-57. But nothing is clear about his future.
              2. Titus
                Titus 22 July 2020 01: 17 New
                0
                Here the dvigun is just there, let the Migovtsy build a single-engine light apparatus, after all, if the AL-41F-1C. there it will stand like this in the future and product 30 can be introduced ....... on the site the image of a single-engine MIG somewhere I liked it.
          2. Orange
            Orange bigg 21 July 2020 12: 07 New
            0
            That is, in the future we will only make the Su-57 and Su-35UB. The Su-34 is a very difficult question. According to the mind, it is necessary to fulfill the contracts and Novosibirsk also reorient to the production of the Su-57.

            By the mind, no one in the world relies only on heavy fighters. Therefore, the Su-57 is needed as a heavy multifunctional fighter, the Mig-35D as a light multifunctional fighter and the Su-34M as a striker and carrier of long-range missiles (Kh-50, anti-ship missiles GZUR) .In the future, we need a PAK DP interceptor. The rest is duplication, I mean the Su-35 / Su-30SM. Their production is relevant until the serial production of the Su-57 is established.
            1. Cyril G ...
              Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 12: 24 New
              +1
              Quote: OrangeBigg
              MiG-35D as a light multifunctional fighter


              Why is it needed? The MiG-29 family will remain solely as a ship fighter and another coastal regiment in the same KOR. Mustache.

              Quote: OrangeBigg
              Su-34M as a striker and carrier of long-range missile defense systems (X-50, anti-ship missiles GZUR)

              Are you sure that the hypothetical Su-35UB / Su-30SMD, that is, a multi-role fighter combining both the qualities of the Su-35 and the Su-30SM, will turn out to be worse than the Su-34? Is it meaning to duplicate?
              In my opinion, by the way, it can and makes some sense to supply the Su-34 to the fleet, based on 2 squadron regiments (preferably 3) to the Pacific Fleet, Black Sea Fleet and Northern Fleet + a squadron to Kamchatka. Let BF fly on MiG-29/35

              Quote: OrangeBigg
              In the future, we need a PAK DP interceptor.

              Why is it needed? We have few types of combat aircraft? The fully serial Su-35 is then sufficient for the rearmament of the IAPs flying on the MiG-31, and better is its two-seater version.

              Quote: OrangeBigg
              I mean the Su-35 / Su-30SM. Their release is relevant before the establishment of serial
              release of the Su-57.

              This is not true. See above.
              1. Orange
                Orange bigg 21 July 2020 12: 41 New
                -1
                Why is it needed?

                No one in the world will pull the production of only heavy fighters. LMI is the most demanded niche of combat aviation in the world. So it's a very strange question. There is little demand for heavy fighters on the market for a reason. And having adopted the MiG-35D, you can serially supply the MiG-35D. Unfortunately, very few people are interested in the Su-35 / Su-30 on the market. Their capabilities are superfluous.
                Are you sure that the hypothetical Su-35UB / Su-30SMD, that is, a multi-role fighter combining both the qualities of the Su-35 and the Su-30SM, will turn out to be worse than the Su-34? Is it meaning to duplicate?

                The point is to duplicate the Su-34M, whose development is nearing completion, or the Su-57 of the second stage (ROC Megapolis) with the hypothetical Su-35UB / Su-30SMD? Why? The first two machines are of better quality.
                The fully serial Su-35 is then sufficient for the rearmament of the IAPs flying on the MiG-31, and better is its two-seater version.

                Nothing of the sort. The Su-35 was originally a temporary measure until the serial production of the 5th generation Su-57 heavy multifunctional fighter, and even more so, it does not pull the functions of the MiG-31BM and even more promising PAK DP.
                It is not.

                This is so. It is impossible to endlessly upgrade the platform from the Su-27. Everything in due time. We must give preference to newer technology.
                1. Cyril G ...
                  Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 12: 54 New
                  0
                  Quote: OrangeBigg
                  So it’s a very strange question. There is little demand for heavy fighters on the market for a reason. And having adopted the MiG-35D, we can supply the MiG-35D in series.

                  It's a normal question. We do not have a normal light fighter in our series. The MiG-29SMTR turned out to be at a price not much less than the serial Su-30SM. So the point? Can you tell? Even the Armenians and Belarusians bought the Su-30cm, although before that my father happily wrote off the Su-27, and said it was very expensive. Has it fallen in price now?

                  The Su-35 was originally a temporary measure until the serial production of the heavy multi-functional fighter of the 5th generation Su-57, and even more so, it does not pull the functions of the MiG-31BM and even more so the promising PAK DP.

                  Tell me what is not in the subject at all? Why is the MiG-31BM fundamentally better than the Su-35 not to tell the public?

                  There is little demand for heavy fighters on the market for a reason, and having adopted the MiG-35D, it is possible to supply the MiG-35D in series.

                  You have not forgotten yet that the MiG-29 was essentially not sold after 1991. Nobody needed it. We are now giving them.
                  Sold only to Malaysia. Mustache. Basta karapuziki. They sailed.
                  1. Orange
                    Orange bigg 21 July 2020 13: 20 New
                    -4
                    We do not have a normal light fighter in our series.

                    Soon there will be MiG-35. State tests will only be completed next year and in the troops.
                    Even the Armenians and Belarusians bought the Su-30cm, although before that my father happily wrote off the Su-27, and said it was very expensive.

                    They don't look a gift horse in the mouth. And at what price was it sold? Probably at a discount, since there were simply no other options at that time. And the demand for the Su-30SM is not great on the market. We need to sell somewhere. Better than nothing again. The Su-27, just like our decommissioned MiG-29, is in its fourth decade. Not surprising.
                    Tell me what is not in the subject at all? Why is the MiG-31BM fundamentally better than the Su-35 not to tell the public?

                    You are not in the subject if you do not see the difference between an interceptor and a heavy multifunctional. In vain, in your opinion, the MiG-31 was created specifically for high-speed interception, including the KR? Su-35, further development of the Su-27 - a heavy fighter of the 4th generation. The speed is not the same. The MiG-31 BM is a specialized interceptor.
                    You have not forgotten yet that the MiG-29 was essentially not sold after 1991.

                    Poland and Ukraine are all scouring in search of spare parts for the MiG-29, especially the first one that bought the MiG-29 from anyone possible at one time. India bought the MiG-29K / KUB. The MiG-29SMT was sold.
                    We are now giving them.

                    Now, of course, otherwise they will soon be written off and thrown away in essence. Time does not save anyone. Old Su-27s are also written off, but what does the analogy with the newest MiG-35 have to do with it? request
                    1. Cyril G ...
                      Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 14: 06 New
                      +3
                      Quote: OrangeBigg
                      But what does the analogy with the newest MiG-35 have to do with it?

                      Direct nafig is not needed by anyone.
                      Quote: OrangeBigg
                      MiG-29K / KUB was bought by India, MiG-29SMT was sold.

                      Right. So what? And that's all .. And where did we sell SMT, can you tell? I don’t remember that. The old Hindus were modernized according to the UPG program. And how many Su fighters were sold, remember? So only Su-30x 500 pieces are probably assembled and in kits for assembly.
                      You are not in the subject if you do not see the difference between an interceptor and a heavy multifunctional.

                      I can't see from the word at all. The radar is worse than the MiG-31, even the modernized one. The Su-37 carries R-35 missiles by the way. Adequate specialists in the Air Force apparently add two and two can

                      What remains is more cruising supersonic. All. So this is negligible enough to do a separate interceptor from scratch today and operate it. The extra hundreds of billions of rubles will be burned up aimlessly. Money has nowhere to go? And you have not thought about it .... Yes?
                      And at what price was it sold?

                      At prices for our Air Force, then bish domestic.
                      Soon there will be MiG-35. State tests will only be completed next year and in the troops.

                      How about an AFAR radar for the MiG-35? But no ?! Who needs it then! By the way, this is not a light fighter. I'm repeating myself, right?
                      1. Orange
                        Orange bigg 21 July 2020 14: 16 New
                        -2
                        How about an AFAR radar for the MiG-35? But no ?! Who needs it then! By the way, this is not a light fighter. I'm repeating myself, right?

                        AFAR BEETLE-AM is optional, that is, at the request of the customer. In your opinion, the MiG-29 is also not a light fighter? Only by a ton it is heavier than the F-16 due to the second engine. The MiG-35 is a further development of the MiG-29. Its modern counterpart.
                      2. Cyril G ...
                        Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 15: 30 New
                        +2
                        Quote: OrangeBigg
                        AFAR BEETLE-AM is optional, that is, at the request of the customer.

                        So Zhuk-AM in the series is absent from the word at all. They did not bring it to mass production .... And pushing the MiG-35 into series with Topaz, albeit modernized, is just a mockery of common sense.

                        Quote: OrangeBigg
                        ... In your opinion, the MiG-29 is also not a light fighter?

                        MiG-29SMT normal takeoff weight is about 17 tons, Su-27cm3 normal takeoff weight is 22 tons. The range, armament, radar of the MiG, to put it mildly, are much worse.
                        Now about easy or not. No, not easy, rather average. The SMT is heavier than the F-16 in terms of normal takeoff weight, but lighter than the Hornet. After all this is it easy !?
        2. Kolka Semenov
          Kolka Semenov 21 July 2020 16: 12 New
          +1
          The export potential of the Su-30 is almost exhausted - the potential of its avionics passes along the lowest border of what is necessary and needs modernization. All potential buyers (except for the poorest ones) will prefer to buy the Su-35, while for the very poor and the Yak-130 will be a fighter. It may make sense to continue production if AFAR is supplied to it, but IMHO, this will definitely not happen in the next 5-6 years, and it is pointless to delay production without modernization.
          1. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 16: 23 New
            +2
            Quote: Semenov Kolka
            It may make sense to continue production if AFAR is supplied to it, but IMHO, this will definitely not happen in the next 5-6 years, and it is pointless to delay production without modernization.


            It is necessary to make a two-seater Su-35 and change it in the Su-30SM series, or something else, but combine the best that is in these machines.
            and launch a modernization program for the Bars airborne radar for the Su-30SM
          2. Orange
            Orange bigg 21 July 2020 17: 54 New
            -1
            All potential buyers (except for the poorest ones) will prefer to buy the Su-35, while for the very poor and the Yak-130 will be a fighter.

            Rather, the MiG-35 will be preferred with the Zhuk-AME. Or, at worst, the Yak-130, but definitely not the Su-35.
            1. Cyril G ...
              Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 22: 34 New
              0
              No bad ends. In fact, if there is even a little bit of money, they prefer a heavy fighter. China bought 24 aircraft, Egypt signed a contract for the Su-35s, and only Egypt appeared on the MiG-29. Egypt's Rafale and MiG-29 did not stop them from deciding to buy the Su-35.
              There is no Zhuk-AME for serial boards at the moment.
  10. Herman 4223
    Herman 4223 21 July 2020 11: 01 New
    0
    The Su-30 is distinguished by the ability to control air combat, a control operator for this. And a radar with a 300 ° field of view. Not a single fighter has such a review.
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 11: 02 New
      +3
      The leopard is no match for the Irbis.
      1. Herman 4223
        Herman 4223 21 July 2020 11: 28 New
        +1
        In terms of average radiation power, but in terms of review it is superior. As for me, I need to put a squirrel on both planes, it solved the problems of both of them. The view is like a leopard thanks to the side panels, the power is more than that of the snow leopard, judging by the declared characteristics.
  11. Bad_gr
    Bad_gr 21 July 2020 12: 16 New
    0
    Quote: evgenii67
    And what exactly, apart from the number of seats in the cockpit, will this aircraft differ from the Su-35?

    The fact that he is sharpened for work on the ground. To do this, he has both electronics and a glider with PGO (at low altitudes it reduces the load on the airframe of the aircraft and the pilot, including). And the Su-35s works better in the air. Although both aircraft are station wagons.
  • zwlad
    zwlad 21 July 2020 09: 17 New
    +5
    are developing a universal engine for several types of fighters

    And it is right. An increase in the volume of one type of engines will reduce their cost, plus a decrease in the cost of maintenance, which will ultimately lead to a decrease in the cost of a flight hour. Plus the unification of spare parts.
    And this is an improvement in the competitive advantages of export aircraft modifications.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 21 July 2020 09: 42 New
    +1
    Versatility has its pros and cons ... however, it is up to the customer to decide what suits him best.
  • Cyril G ...
    Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 10: 24 New
    0
    This should have been done yesterday ......... For, for example, Comrade Vlad writes correctly
    An increase in the volume of one type of engines will reduce their cost, plus a decrease in the cost of maintenance, which will ultimately lead to a decrease in the cost of a flight hour. Plus the unification of spare parts.
    And this is an improvement in the competitive advantages of export aircraft modifications.
  • Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 21 July 2020 10: 39 New
    -1
    Let them translate more carefully from blue to autocad. If too many errors are stuck during the conversion of scans, the piece of iron will not fly at all ...
  • Herman 4223
    Herman 4223 21 July 2020 10: 49 New
    +2
    I wonder how this will be achieved, because 41 and 31 have different diameters as far as I heard. And so the news is good, an old Su-27 with such an engine will add agility, and Su-34 will add loads.
    1. agond
      agond 21 July 2020 11: 46 New
      +4
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Universalism, the enemy of quality.

      But large-scale production is a friend of quality
  • Cyril G ...
    Cyril G ... 21 July 2020 11: 44 New
    +1
    Quote: Herman 4223
    By the average radiation power,


    And the detection range is one third more.
    1. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 21 July 2020 12: 00 New
      0
      I wrote about this. The radiation power just affects the range. But the snow leopard looks at 240 °, and the leopard at 300 °. If the snow leopard begins to look a little wider like a leopard, then the average power will also decrease, and with it the detection range.
  • 501Legion
    501Legion 21 July 2020 11: 51 New
    +2
    seemingly an idea on the surface
  • Eug
    Eug 21 July 2020 11: 55 New
    +3
    It is right. Especially if the air intakes of the Su-27 provide the air consumption of the AL-41. And if the AL-41 enters the engine compartment of the Su-27 and 30.
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 22 July 2020 20: 35 New
      0
      Especially if the air intakes of the Su-27 provide the air consumption of the AL-41. And if the AL-41 enters the engine compartment of the Su-27 and 30.

      I think I understood something. They most likely will not adapt the Su-27 and Su-30 for the AL-41, but as they wrote above, they will create a version in the AL-31 dimension using technologies from the AL-41 ... it can optionally be installed on the SU-35 ...
      1. Eug
        Eug 22 July 2020 21: 02 New
        0
        It will no longer be AL-41. Even an engine made according to his technologies, even with a slightly changed diameter (for the Al-31 it is smaller than that of the Al-41), will not give out the parameters of the original. The only option is a reserve in size for the engine compartment on the Su-27-30. But usually planes tend to "squeeze" to the maximum, so this is unlikely. Perhaps there is an option to reduce the thickness of the thermal insulation, change the size of the shells, etc. But this is just guesswork ...
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 22 July 2020 21: 16 New
          0
          It will no longer be AL-41

          Exactly. Most likely, we are talking about a new engine, otherwise it is not clear how it can be installed on "older" aircraft without changing the airframe.
  • igor.borov775
    igor.borov775 21 July 2020 13: 15 New
    +2
    HELLO!! I have long ceased to attract VO, I’m probably too old for the Internet, I’m just offended that now specialists who do not know history at all are showing their full strength. There are archives, they are open, secrets are removed, For what purposes the SU-27 was created. The main order was for the USSR air defense, The biggest problem was the air defense, All heavy vehicles were created with an eye on the air defense, military equipment was lighter, many machines were single-engine, It was in the 80s that the MIG-29 battle machine appeared And here the Machine of Conquest of Supremacy is being discussed with might and main, These arguments cause a smile, About what they talk, the North must be closed by air patrol,
    The Far East also requires attention, too, large spaces where there are neither people nor garrisons, And those that were abandoned, Only now they are beginning to re-create new garrisons on a completely different basis,
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 21 July 2020 15: 50 New
    +4
    Here it is right!
    This will also increase the overall production of fighters.
  • Charik
    Charik 21 July 2020 20: 05 New
    0
    And in the photo is the Su35 "? Too new for the 27th, but the 30th has a larger cabin?
    1. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 21 July 2020 21: 09 New
      +1
      Quote: Charik
      And in the photo is the Su35 "? Too new for the 27th, but the 30th has a larger cabin?

      Not the Su-30, for sure, as it is single. Su-35 - there is a refueling rod, I have not met it on the Su-27.

      Su-27
      1. Charik
        Charik 21 July 2020 21: 35 New
        0
        I also did not hear that the 27th refueled in the air - today I flew 2 times nearby - I think the 35th - judging by the "anthropometric" data
  • Charik
    Charik 21 July 2020 20: 19 New
    0
    I won't say for sure, but in my opinion I saw the same today 2 times-the first time from below-metallic shine-high-but the contours are clearly visible-for sure-without pgo-from Borisoglebsk towards Voronezh-and the second time I watched the horizon but already close -right cockpit clearly shows that single
  • viktor_ui
    viktor_ui 22 July 2020 05: 03 New
    -1
    More like an idea given out by the inflamed brain of a defective manager-optimizer ... especially that we will save a lot of money right away as a result - we've heard it more than once. The output will be 0 with the development of the next allocation of funds.